You deserve this!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
It does follow. Poetic justice for smearing poo all over your prison cell would be stepping in your poo, falling and actually wounding your own pride. Not getting murdered by angry prison guards for it.

I don't think poetic justice has to be so strict and literal. It's sufficient that there be some kind of reasonable proportion between the misdeed and the "penalty" that one incurs.

Now you changed the goalposts. I said a woman who has not raped cannot be raped as poetic justice. Agreed?

I don't agree at all. It could well be the case that rape conceivably be "proportionate" to some misdeed or defect on said woman's part.

Consider the case of a man guilty of domestic abuse who subsequently gets beaten and sodomized in prison.

When discussing predators, they pick on easy prey. Since easy can be a bell curve based on location and population, some easy prey might cover their drinks like everyone else but be distracted just that one time by a text on their phone while opening their car in a parking lot. The predators will just wait for the right vulnerable moment. That's why we have laws against stalkers.


You're not disagreeing with me. I'm saying that a woman should take reasonable measures to protect herself against possible assailants, whereas you are saying that at least some assailants will do whatever they can to commit the assault, regardless of what the potential victim does.

I agree with you, of course, but it doesn't really counter my point.

A woman should not leave her drink unattended.
She should not go to frat parties.
She should not go out at night alone, and most especially not to a bar; she should have friends accompanying her.

It's foolish for her not to take reasonable measures to protect herself. Yes, those reasonable measures may fail. But then, so what? Yes, an intruder might find other ways into your home...but you should still make sure that your doors and windows remain locked.

If you fail to take those measures, even knowing that you are more likely to be victimized, then shame on you.

It's twisted to be teaching women that they must always have their guards up or they will share culpability with a predator.

I never said that, and neither has, so far as I have seen, Ok_Dozer.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
the definition i use is the one kmo gave me:

to earn by one's actions

Based on that definition, if the man hadn't defecated on himself and the guards put him in that shower for no reason other than to kill him by scalding, would the man have deserved being scalded to death?

Will you call that undeserved, and if so on what basis?
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I'm hoping not! Men participating here are caring people....

:think: I don't agree that any male who participated in the thread "On Deservedness" and stated that some women deserve to get raped are caring people.

Thankfully the decent ones (who are the majority) didn't.
 

1PeaceMaker

New member
I don't think poetic justice has to be so strict and literal. It's sufficient that there be some kind of reasonable proportion between the misdeed and the "penalty" that one incurs.

Getting raped for being momentarily distracted or gullible is no reasonable proportion.

Getting murdered over a feces mess is no reasonable proportion.

I don't agree at all. It could well be the case that rape conceivably be "proportionate" to some misdeed or defect on said woman's part.

Name a defect that a non-rapist woman would show rising to the level of rape. It isn't going to be looking away from a drink.

Consider the case of a man guilty of domestic abuse who subsequently gets beaten and sodomized in prison.
You mean a domestic rapist getting raped?
I'm saying that a woman should take reasonable measures to protect herself against possible assailants

To say "shame on you" for not taking "reasonable" measures is wrong. The only reasonable measure that can be taken to effectively protect against predation is to catch and punish the predator. Otherwise we are in an arms race, loading up with mace and chastity belts, always going out in a militant troup, etc.

Virtue isn't granted via superior defenses. It just ensures the perp will choose a more vulnerable target instead. So it shifts the problem to another woman.

Trad, do you think that we could reduce the rape rate by little things like watching drinks, or do you think rapist tactics would just continue evolving to find new chinks in the armor of women?
A woman should not leave her drink unattended.
She should not go to frat parties.
She should not go out at night alone, and most especially not to a bar; she should have friends accompanying her.

Why not add twenty other things to that list? Why not insist she wear no perfume, in case it incites a violent radical Muslim to rape?
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Another example of "you deserve this!"

People who keep responding to me even though they know they are on ignore ...

You deserve to have your time wasted!

:)
 

Rusha

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Getting raped for being momentarily distracted or gullible is no reasonable proportion.

Getting murdered over a feces mess is no reasonable proportion.

Name a defect that a non-rapist woman would show rising to the level of rape. It isn't going to be looking away from a drink.

You mean a domestic rapist getting raped?

To say "shame on you" for not taking "reasonable" measures is wrong. The only reasonable measure that can be taken to effectively protect against predation is to catch and punish the predator. Otherwise we are in an arms race, loading up with mace and chastity belts, always going out in a militant troup, etc.

Virtue isn't granted via superior defenses. It just ensures the perp will choose a more vulnerable target instead. So it shifts the problem to another woman.

Trad, do you think that we could reduce the rape rate by little things like watching drinks, or do you think rapist tactics would just continue evolving to find new chinks in the armor of women?

Why not add twenty other things to that list? Why not insist she wear no perfume, in case it incites a violent radical Muslim to rape?

:thumb:
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Getting raped for being momentarily distracted or gullible is no reasonable proportion.

I never said that it was. Again, you are conflating senses 1, 2 and 3. I'm saying that a woman who leaves her drink unattended at a frat party and gets raped "deserves it" in the sense of 3 (i.e., she should have known better; she should have seen it coming). You are talking as though I said that she deserves it in sense 2.

Getting murdered over a feces mess is no reasonable proportion.

I haven't commented on the feces mess. Why do you insist on bringing it up?

Name a defect that a non-rapist woman would show rising to the level of rape. It isn't going to be looking away from a drink.

If a woman goes out to commit adultery and is raped on the way, I would consider that poetic justice. :idunno:

You mean a domestic rapist getting raped

I wasn't thinking in terms of sexual abuse. I simply had in mind the man who beats his wife.

To say "shame on you" for not taking "reasonable" measures is wrong. The only reasonable measure that can be taken to effectively protect against predation is to catch and punish the predator.

I'm inclined to think that you are just wrong. I fully grant that there are no absolute safeguards for a woman to avoid being raped. But there are concrete things that she can do to make sure that it's substantially less likely.

And, again, women know this. I'm not saying anything controversial. It's common knowledge.

Otherwise we are in an arms race, loading up with mace and chastity belts, always going out in a militant troup, etc.

There's reasonable vs. unreasonable measures. That said, I do think that you should carry mace. It's probably a good idea. :idunno:

Virtue isn't granted via superior defenses. It just ensures the perp will choose a more vulnerable target instead. So it shifts the problem to another woman.

So what? That's like saying that I shouldn't be considered foolish if I leave my doors unlocked and my valuables in the front seat of my car. Had I done these things, the thief simply would have chosen another car instead. It just shifts the problem to another car owner. :rolleyes:

Trad, do you think that we could reduce the rape rate by little things like watching drinks, or do you think rapist tactics would just continue evolving to find new chinks in the armor of women?

You're misunderstanding me. My point has nothing to do with "the rape rate" in general. I'm simply saying that there are common sense things that women can and should be doing to protect themselves, and they are foolish if they don't.

You are foolish if you leave your drink unattended at a frat house party.

Can you be raped if you don't? Sure. But that's no excuse not to take what reasonable precautions you can.

Why not add twenty other things to that list? Why not insist she wear no perfume, in case it incites a violent radical Muslim to rape?

Again, "reasonable" vs. "unreasonable." That said, if a woman were living in an area in which it were common to for radical Muslims to rape perfume-wearing women, I would strongly urge the women living in that area to avoid wearing perfume.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
I used to hang out at a night club in the 80s known as, The Hop. It
was located in Fountain Valley California and owned by, The Righteous
Brothers
singing duo. It no longer exists however, my point is, that a
rule of hand was not to leave your drink unattended. Either a friend guarded
your drink or, if you had to go to the restroom, you take your drink with you.

This was one way to safeguard your drink. I'm a guy however, there was still a
danger of falling victim to a crazy person. Women ought not to walk out of a
club with somebody they just met. In conclusion, steps should be taken to
protect oneself from the predators that are all around us.
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned
Did you rape your wife often, or just that once?

He doesn't think that he actually raped his wife. What he's claiming is that, according to the DOJ, any inhibition to consent leaves you open to a rape claim. His wife was intoxicated and therefore could not offer the kind of consent which meets DOJ standards; therefore, it was rape.

The conclusion here which should be drawn is, not that Ok_Dozer is a rapist, but that the DOJ standards, if Ok_Dozer is representing them accurately, are positively asinine.
 

Traditio

BANNED
Banned

I'll simply leave my previous comments as they stand:

What Ok_Dozer wants us to conclude, and rightfully so, I think, is that the standard in question is just asinine. No rape actually occurred by any reasonable definition of the term.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top