[RD] Feminism

[Timsup2nothin]

I don't think you're very well-positioned to declare the feelings of people who have been raped and feel they would rather have been killed invalid

An inherent aspect of "nobody is" which was most likely being blithely ignored.

 

[Ryika]

I don't think you're very well-positioned to declare the feelings of people who have been raped and feel they would rather have been killed invalid

I'm not declaring their feelings invalid. I can emphasize with the idea that a person who has been raped feels like they would better off dead.

But that doesn't mean they're actually in a position of making the judgement of whether rape is worth than death. The only people who can do that are people who have both, been raped, and died at some point during their life. Those people usually don't have the capacity to talk. Because they're dead.

 

[Akka]

Thing is that it isn't the same so isn't going to be considered the same.

One person does something that could be considered a criminal act should the victim opt to press charges. Another person does the same thing. This could be addressed as two similar situations.

But when you add onto the two comparable foundations the situations are no longer similar. In one the victim feels, for whatever reason, that the invasion was egregious enough to merit pursuing the charges. In the other the victim just puts it in their back pocket for future use in an argument on an internet forum. Okay, now the situations are different, even if they only differ in how serious the victim considers the affront to be.

On a personal note I encounter this sort of variable regularly. If some little punk starts spouting off it's just hyperbole from a harmless idiot. I can say the exact same things and be looking down the gun barrel of a terrorist threat charge, or even a literal gun barrel in the hands of some scared gun nut that thinks they might finally get away with the killing in self defense that has given them wet dreams for however long. In itself this isn't fair, but in the bigger picture I get more than enough benefits from my size and appearance to believe that I benefit, on balance, so I take the unfairness of some details that cut against me as just part of the package.

How people react is up to people. It changes from person to person and obviously you won't get the same result from the same act with different people.

How the LAW see an act is different. You might opt to press charges or not, but if you can it means the law defines what the person did as a crime. That is the part which is relevant.

I don't think you're very well-positioned to make that judgment.

It doesn't take any "position" to make that judgement, it's self-obvious. We're talking about "death" here, not "scratching my knee".

 

[Lexicus]

I'm not declaring their feelings invalid.

You absolutely are.

It doesn't take any "position" to make that judgement, it's self-obvious.

Oh

 

[Ryika]

You absolutely are.

Nope. Like I said, I totally agree that they might feel like that, and their feelings are completely valid.

 

[Akka]

Oh

Yes it is. If you don't see it, then take the time to think about it.
Also check the previous posts in the thread which explains just that.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

How the LAW see an act is different. You might opt to press charges or not, but if you can it means the law defines what the person did as a crime. That is the part which is relevant.

Absolutely. There may be some philosophical value in "if the crime goes unreported is it still a crime?" as a replacement for the classic tree in the forest, but I'm not that into philosophy.

The argument Civver presented is fairly typical in form. That form is "when I was a victim I didn't report the crime, so you shouldn't accept a report of a similar crime from some other victim." That argument is totally without legal merit.

 

[Akka]

Absolutely. There may be some philosophical value in "if the crime goes unreported is it still a crime?" as a replacement for the classic tree in the forest, but I'm not that into philosophy.

The argument Civver presented is fairly typical in form. That form is "when I was a victim I didn't report the crime, so you shouldn't accept a report of a similar crime from some other victim." That argument is totally without legal merit.

I think you're seeing him in an excessively negative way.
I have more of a "if I wasn't considered a victim when it happened to me, why are they considered victims when it happen to them ?". It's a rather valid feeling of injustice.

 

[JollyRoger]

How the LAW see an act is different. You might opt to press charges or not, but if you can it means the law defines what the person did as a crime. That is the part which is relevant.

So, should touching someone in a sexual manner without their consent be legal?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I think you're seeing him in an excessively negative way.
I have more of a "if I wasn't considered a victim when it happened to me, why are they considered victims when it happen to them ?". It's a rather valid feeling of injustice.

Except that as you pointed out the only source of that difference is that he himself opted against reporting the crime. That doesn't make it not a crime, legally speaking. That doesn't make him not a victim, legally speaking. It does severely limit the ensuing consequences, since an unreported crime is extremely unlikely to generate any consequences, or sympathy, at all.

Again, the crux of his argument is "I didn't report it so you shouldn't when it happens to you."

 

[Synobun]

I think you're seeing him in an excessively negative way.
I have more of a "if I wasn't considered a victim when it happened to me, why are they considered victims when it happen to them ?". It's a rather valid feeling of injustice.

Is it a valid feeling? Based on the story shared, no effort was made towards receiving justice. It is difficult to shake one's fist at the unfairness of a situation if the person involved made no effort to reveal the events to an applicable party that could do something about it.

A woman that was raped cannot complain that her rapist isn't in jail if she did not report the crime and told no one about it. For a crime to be acknowledged or acted upon, people need to know about it. There is no injustice in keeping something hidden or reserved as a talking point.

 

[Akka]

Except that as you pointed out the only source of that difference is that he himself opted against reporting the crime. That doesn't make it not a crime, legally speaking. That doesn't make him not a victim, legally speaking. It does severely limit the ensuing consequences, since an unreported crime is extremely unlikely to generate any consequences, or sympathy, at all.

I think his whole point was more to point that he was on the receiving end of abuse, and that being a man, society would shrug at his complaints and just say "man up". That's more or less the main subject of this thread, isn't it ? And as much as I disagree with many things he said, I have to admit that it's pretty true on this one.

 

[Traitorfish]

I don't see how not.

"Privilege", in this sense, doesn't describe a given preference or advantage, it's a mechanism which purports to explain social, political and economic inequality. It's like how referring to the notion of class doesn't make somebody a Marxist, or referring to the notion of an elite doesn't make a person an Elite theorist.

 

[Akka]

Is it a valid feeling? Based on the story shared, no effort was made towards receiving justice. It is difficult to shake one's fist at the unfairness of a situation if the person involved made no effort to reveal the events to an applicable party that could do something about it.

A woman that was raped cannot complain that her rapist isn't in jail if she did not report the crime and told no one about it. For a crime to be acknowledged or acted upon, people need to know about it. There is no injustice in keeping something hidden or reserved as a talking point.

Come on, please, if a woman doesn't press charges against a rapist, nobody will tell her "don't complain about it, you haven't reported him". I mean, nobody who isn't a jerk. People might encourage her to do it, but they will respect her feelings if she just can't bring herself to go through the ordeal of putting all this in the open and comfort her about being a victim of an ugly crime.

Also, the valid feeling is more about feeling injustice at how society consider he "can't really be a victim" and that whatever happens he will be seen as the one in fault, than actually feeling a victim in itself.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I think his whole point was more to point that he was on the receiving end of abuse, and that being a man, society would shrug at his complaints and just say "man up". That's more or less the main subject of this thread, isn't it ? And as much as I disagree with many things he said, I have to admit that it's pretty true on this one.

So, we're supposed to condemn society based on his assumptions about how his complaint would be met, while acknowledging that he had a valid legal case and that the law, which is a tangible aspect of that society, would consider a crime to be a crime regardless. If he was betrayed it is by his own sense of "manning up," not anyone else's.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Yeah, well, it's not that clear-cut. Technically, of course, it's easier. In reality, human interactions don't work that way, we're not machine and we work with understanding the nuance of context and subtle cues.
Obviously it's what's used in bad faith defense ("she didn't technically said 'no' !"), but it doesn't mean we stop being humans and will start to use signed receipts when we are in the mood and wish to attempt to kiss someone.

I'm not sure what you mean. The laws are pretty clear. Putting hands on someone in an aggressive or sexual manner without consent is very much a crime. Is there an argument that it shouldn't be a crime? Yeah humans are imperfect and make mistakes. In most cases a verbal warning or "stay away from me" is all that is needed and sometimes people will take advantage of the system to make up false accusations. That why we have DAs. courts, public defenders, presumption of innocence, due process of law, etc, etc.

 

[Synobun]

Come on, please, if a woman doesn't press charges against a rapist, nobody will tell her "don't complain about it, you haven't reported him". I mean, nobody who isn't a jerk. People might encourage her to do it, but they will respect her feelings if she just can't bring herself to go through the ordeal of putting all this in the open and comfort her about being a victim of an ugly crime.

A nice attempt at rephrasing what I said to be sure, but you'll note that I specifically said that complaining their rapist isn't in jail isn't a valid complaint if no effort was made towards pursuing that end. The heavens won't intervene on your behalf.

 

[Lexicus]

"Privilege", in this sense, doesn't describe a given preference or advantage, it's a mechanism which purports to explain social, political and economic inequality. It's like how referring to the notion of class doesn't make somebody a Marxist, or referring to the notion of an elite doesn't make a person an Elite theorist.

Yeah I dunno about this, the way I see privilege used is mostly just descriptive so *shrugs* YMMV I guess

 

[Akka]

So, we're supposed to condemn society based on his assumptions about how his complaint would be met, while acknowledging that he had a valid legal case and that the law, which is a tangible aspect of that society, would consider a crime to be a crime regardless. If he was betrayed it is by his own sense of "manning up," not anyone else's.

I doubt there would be an actual legal case - two drunk people in a relationship going at it, and one asking for a threesome, is NOT, in any way, shape or form, possible to interpret as "rape". If it does, then we can scrap "rape" as a meaningful word.

For the rest, condemning societal mores which pressure people from one gender to conform to unjust expectations is pretty much what feminism is fighting about now and what is defended by its proponents (legal equality has been won a long time ago). I hope you appreciate the irony

A nice attempt at rephrasing what I said to be sure, but you'll note that I specifically said that complaining their rapist isn't in jail isn't a valid complaint if no effort was made towards pursuing that end. The heavens won't intervene on your behalf.

Yeah, but I don't remember Civver complaining that his ex-GF is not in jail. I remember him complaining of the double-standard when it comes to abuse, and the several previous posts kind of confirm this impression on this very specific point.

 

[Traitorfish]

Yeah I dunno about this, the way I see privilege used is mostly just descriptive so *shrugs* YMMV I guess

Well, that's what I meant when I originally said that "society broadly favours men". Civver interpreted that as an assertion of the phenomenon of "male privilege", which isn't unreasonable, because privilege theory is the prevailing wisdom on the left, but it's not a wisdom I subscribe to.