Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 3:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2015 21:08:44 GMT -5
Had a gun to my head once. It was at a "night drop". He got the theater's money, didn't get mine.
(I didn't have to "fight" though... he never asked for the wallet)
ETA: It's also possible you care more about living than I do (I'm not suicidal, so don't worry about me... LOL). I care more about my honor and integrity and not personally being a victim than I care about my life.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,719
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 3, 2015 21:21:48 GMT -5
I have never put anyone ignore before. But life is too short to read you Virgil. Goodbye. My guess is reply #183 was too much. You post as if stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception. Most of what you propose is going to be helpful to less than 20% of those assaulted.
rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders
The Perpetrator's not Hiding in the Bushes
Approximately 50% of all rape/sexual assault incidents were reported by victims to have occured within 1 mile of their home or at their home.2 •7% take place in a school. •13% take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. •18% take place in a public area, such as a commercial venue, parking lot, or park.
82% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger.1 47% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance.1 25% are an intimate.1 5% are a relative.1
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 3, 2015 21:40:30 GMT -5
Had a gun to my head once. It was at a "night drop". He got the theater's money, didn't get mine. (I didn't have to "fight" though... he never asked for the wallet) ETA: It's also possible you care more about living than I do (I'm not suicidal, so don't worry about me... LOL). I care more about my honor and integrity and not personally being a victim than I care about my life. I don't think of self-defense in terms of honour or dishonour. I simply impute greater severity to crimes against person than to crimes against property (the courts do the same), and the "resist when facing mortal peril" line falls in between the two. If I died with my brains blown out over the sidewalk and my wallet stolen, or even if I managed to wrest the gun from my assailant, I wouldn't consider the resistance honourable nor would I expect anyone else to. The same is true for rape. Although I'd resist in that case, it's because I believe resistance is prudent and because I consider the risk of injury/death to be the lesser of two evils, not because I'm striving to preserve a sense of honour. I suppose it's fair to say that resisting rape would be a matter of personal integrity for me. Not the same for crimes against my property. Or I should probably say: not the same for isolated crimes against my property. I wouldn't tolerate multiple offenses by the same offender(s).
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 3, 2015 21:53:15 GMT -5
My guess is reply #183 was too much. You post as if stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception. Most of what you propose is going to be helpful to less than 20% of those assaulted.
rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders
The Perpetrator's not Hiding in the Bushes
Approximately 50% of all rape/sexual assault incidents were reported by victims to have occured within 1 mile of their home or at their home.2 •7% take place in a school. •13% take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. •18% take place in a public area, such as a commercial venue, parking lot, or park.
82% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger.1 47% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance.1 25% are an intimate.1 5% are a relative.1
I'm very familiar with the statistics, Optimist. I've acknowledged them several times in my posts. I don't understand what about my posts implies "stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception", or why the statistic is even relevant. If, God forbid, an acquaintance or relative were to sexually assault me, it would have no effect on my willingness to resist. I don't understand why it would be different for a woman. If circumstances were a husband forcing himself on his wife, I could see the ease of conceding "Just let it be over." out of a sense of love and devotion, but otherwise I just don't see how rape by a familiar is any different than rape by a stranger, or why it should mitigate one's willingness to resist.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 3:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2015 21:56:09 GMT -5
Had a gun to my head once. It was at a "night drop". He got the theater's money, didn't get mine. (I didn't have to "fight" though... he never asked for the wallet) ETA: It's also possible you care more about living than I do (I'm not suicidal, so don't worry about me... LOL). I care more about my honor and integrity and not personally being a victim than I care about my life. I don't think of self-defense in terms of honour or dishonour. I simply impute greater severity to crimes against person than to crimes against property (the courts do the same), and the "resist when facing mortal peril" line falls in between the two. If I died with my brains blown out over the sidewalk and my wallet stolen, or even if I managed to wrest the gun from my assailant, I wouldn't consider the resistance honourable nor would I expect anyone else to. The same is true for rape. Although I'd resist in that case, it's because I believe resistance is prudent and because I consider the risk of injury/death to be the lesser of two evils, not because I'm striving to preserve a sense of honour. I suppose it's fair to say that resisting rape would be a matter of personal integrity for me. Not the same for crimes against my property. Or I should probably say: not the same for isolated crimes against my property. I wouldn't tolerate multiple offenses by the same offender(s). Since death is the end (as far as has been proven, anyway)... if you died there'd be nothing for you to consider anyway... nor would I expect you'd care, at that point (being dead and all), what others thought.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 3, 2015 22:19:30 GMT -5
I don't think of self-defense in terms of honour or dishonour. I simply impute greater severity to crimes against person than to crimes against property (the courts do the same), and the "resist when facing mortal peril" line falls in between the two. If I died with my brains blown out over the sidewalk and my wallet stolen, or even if I managed to wrest the gun from my assailant, I wouldn't consider the resistance honourable nor would I expect anyone else to. The same is true for rape. Although I'd resist in that case, it's because I believe resistance is prudent and because I consider the risk of injury/death to be the lesser of two evils, not because I'm striving to preserve a sense of honour. I suppose it's fair to say that resisting rape would be a matter of personal integrity for me. Not the same for crimes against my property. Or I should probably say: not the same for isolated crimes against my property. I wouldn't tolerate multiple offenses by the same offender(s). Since death is the end (as far as has been proven, anyway)... if you died there'd be nothing for you to consider anyway... nor would I expect you'd care, at that point (being dead and all), what others thought. I'm saying that if at this present moment I witnessed my future in a life-or-death struggle for my wallet, I wouldn't consider the resistance honourable. Reasoning about what we should do "in advance" is one of the profitable things about these discussions. Here we're at liberty to reasonably judge what we ought to do. When a crime is in progress, our heart rates jump, our brains shift into fight-or-flight, and our ability to reason is severely diminished. At that point, assuming we have control of our faculties, we want to commit to our predetermined decisions with as much clarity and as little hesitation as possible. Do we fight, flee, submit, or negotiate?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 3:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 1:02:12 GMT -5
Since death is the end (as far as has been proven, anyway)... if you died there'd be nothing for you to consider anyway... nor would I expect you'd care, at that point (being dead and all), what others thought. I think you're talking very hypothetically since it hasn't happened to you and probably won't. You said your honor was more important than your life? Really? You would fight some crackhead for your wallet because your honor was involved? I'm not judging you man, I'm just questioning your line of thinking...you can replace everything in your wallet. Your wallet doesn't define you, it's just credit cards and stuff.
I think to some degree a person's sexuality does define them. It's not a possession like a wallet, but that's a "part of you" that you invite other people into. Comparing the two is like apples and oranges.
It's not the "credit cards and stuff". It's the "I would be a victim then" issue. A bad guy will make me, personally, a victim over my dead body. I differentiate personal and work though, that's why I didn't fight the robbery that took the night deposit. I was a representative of the company. The company was the victim since I was unharmed.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 4, 2015 3:28:58 GMT -5
I'm compelled to point out that what you gentlemen are calling "being a victim" clearly refers to "acquiescing to the demands of an assailant". Richard is otherwise liable to be flayed senseless by a legion of angry posters for equating "being a victim" with personal dishonour come the morrow. Of course I agree with Ratchets that "personal honour" becomes "personal liability" all too quickly if we're indiscriminate in which hills we're willing to die on. I've witnessed people throw their lives away in unwinnable lifelong legal battles because they refused to "be a victim". There wasn't the least thing honourable about it.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 3:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 5:18:22 GMT -5
I should say that just because I will die before becoming a victim, that's not a stance that I suggest everyone take.
Everyone has their own "threshold" of where they draw the line. For some it's "survival at all costs" for some others (like me) it's "never be a victim, no matter the cost" for most, it's probably somewhere between the two.
There's nothing wrong with having your (general) personal "line in the sand" wherever it works best for you (general).
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 4, 2015 5:22:24 GMT -5
It is false to imprint your personal choices in such situations upon the preferred responses of all women (or all of humanity for that matter) to the serious threat of rape and/ or bodily harm. You can't do that any more than Richard can convince Virgil that he should fight to the death over the ten dollars in his wallet. Yes and no. As I said to Richard earlier, my advocacy for resisting rape stems not only from personal priorities but also from pragmatism. Resisting rape isn't categorically futile or anywhere close to it, and in many (most?) cases it's the only hope of proving non-consent beyond a reasonable doubt. Hence even if one judges submission preferable to the risk of injury/death, one also has to factor in the potential loss of the opportunity to escape, attract attention, dissuade the rapist, etc., as well as forfeiture of justice in the courtroom. Neither of these ought to be lightly dismissed.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 4, 2015 5:43:41 GMT -5
I should say that just because I will die before becoming a victim, that's not a stance that I suggest everyone take. Everyone has their own "threshold" of where they draw the line. For some it's "survival at all costs" for some others (like me) it's "never be a victim, no matter the cost" for most, it's probably somewhere between the two. There's nothing wrong with having your (general) personal "line in the sand" wherever it works best for you (general). "Right" and "wrong" implies a moral obligation. It's not about "right" and "wrong", it's about actions and probable consequences, and whether our predetermined actions reasonably align with our personal values. It's only when an individual values escaping mortal peril above all else or values non-submission above all else that we get into moral issues of recklessness, cowardice, etc.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 3:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 6:10:41 GMT -5
I should say that just because I will die before becoming a victim, that's not a stance that I suggest everyone take. Everyone has their own "threshold" of where they draw the line. For some it's "survival at all costs" for some others (like me) it's "never be a victim, no matter the cost" for most, it's probably somewhere between the two. There's nothing wrong with having your (general) personal "line in the sand" wherever it works best for you (general). "Right" and "wrong" implies a moral obligation. It's not about "right" and "wrong", it's about actions and probable consequences, and whether our predetermined actions reasonably align with our personal values. It's only when an individual values escaping mortal peril above all else or values non-submission above all else that we get into moral issues of recklessness, cowardice, etc. That made less sense than most of your posts Virgil...
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,327
|
Post by swamp on Sept 4, 2015 7:03:24 GMT -5
My guess is reply #183 was too much. You post as if stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception. Most of what you propose is going to be helpful to less than 20% of those assaulted.
rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders
The Perpetrator's not Hiding in the Bushes
Approximately 50% of all rape/sexual assault incidents were reported by victims to have occured within 1 mile of their home or at their home.2 •7% take place in a school. •13% take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. •18% take place in a public area, such as a commercial venue, parking lot, or park.
82% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger.1 47% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance.1 25% are an intimate.1 5% are a relative.1
I'm very familiar with the statistics, Optimist. I've acknowledged them several times in my posts. I don't understand what about my posts implies "stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception", or why the statistic is even relevant. If, God forbid, an acquaintance or relative were to sexually assault me, it would have no effect on my willingness to resist. I don't understand why it would be different for a woman. If circumstances were a husband forcing himself on his wife, I could see the ease of conceding "Just let it be over." out of a sense of love and devotion, but otherwise I just don't see how rape by a familiar is any different than rape by a stranger, or why it should mitigate one's willingness to resist. Submit to to forced sex by your husband out of love and devotion? How about because he is going to beat the snot out of you?
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,510
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 4, 2015 7:18:06 GMT -5
A woman I worked with years ago once told me when her husbsnd forced sex upon her, she would whistle the Battle Hyme of the Republic to take her mind off of the fact he was forcing himself into her.
Her way of removing herself from a loveless act.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,901
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 4, 2015 7:25:07 GMT -5
My guess is reply #183 was too much. You post as if stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception. Most of what you propose is going to be helpful to less than 20% of those assaulted.
rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders
The Perpetrator's not Hiding in the Bushes
Approximately 50% of all rape/sexual assault incidents were reported by victims to have occured within 1 mile of their home or at their home.2 •7% take place in a school. •13% take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. •18% take place in a public area, such as a commercial venue, parking lot, or park.
82% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger.1 47% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance.1 25% are an intimate.1 5% are a relative.1
I'm very familiar with the statistics, Optimist. I've acknowledged them several times in my posts. I don't understand what about my posts implies "stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception", or why the statistic is even relevant. If, God forbid, an acquaintance or relative were to sexually assault me, it would have no effect on my willingness to resist. I don't understand why it would be different for a woman. If circumstances were a husband forcing himself on his wife, I could see the ease of conceding "Just let it be over." out of a sense of love and devotion, but otherwise I just don't see how rape by a familiar is any different than rape by a stranger, or why it should mitigate one's willingness to resist. The difference is, when a stranger approaches you in a dark alley, if you're a woman, you know it's going to either be rape or robbery or both. Fight or flight kicks in. Unless the woman is cornered, she's probably going to fight or run. Rapes from non-strangers aren't so black and white. You may not realize the man's intentions until he's on top of you. For instance, you're camping with a bunch of friends and wake up in the middle of the night with one of the guys on top of you, his hand over your mouth, his body pinning you to the ground. Or your college roommate lets a few guys into your apartment and you wake up in the middle of the night with one of them on top of you. Or you're working late at the office and Ted comes in to offer you a coke and suddenly he has you pinned in the corner with his hand up your skirt, and no one is around to hear you scream for help. Then the woman has to argue that she didn't agree to have sex with this guy, while the guy claims 'she came on to me' 'she was into it' etc, and if the guy has gotten close to you and on top of you before you realize what he's trying to do, you may not be able to fight or flight. Then you have to go to the cops to explain how you were camping out with friends from college and the guy you'd known for five years waited until you fell asleep and then pinned you down and forced himself on you, but you have no evidence that it was a rape and not sex between conscenting adults, and of course the guy is saying you agreed to it. Much, much different from a stranger rape.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,901
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 4, 2015 7:26:37 GMT -5
I have never put anyone ignore before. But life is too short to read you Virgil. Goodbye. I won't ignore you, Virgil, I don't agree with you a lot but I do like arguing with you.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 3:00:32 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 4, 2015 7:48:36 GMT -5
When your body is on the slab, they are still going to call you the victim... So everyone quotes Virgil and its the same thing... Rape is so horrible that a woman should die before allowing it to happen... Or, you know, submit to it out of love and devotion... Ive heard Virgil has a wife. I guess this means he'd rather her dead than violated, unless well, he's in the mood and she isn't.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 4, 2015 8:38:10 GMT -5
Submit to to forced sex by your husband out of love and devotion? How about because he is going to beat the snot out of you? I'm saying that I could understand a woman's love for her husband being a possible factor in her willingness to submit to forced sex. Optimist's (and presumably Dr. Lees') thesis is that women are less likely to resist rape by a familiar. But barring the one circumstance I just mentioned, I see no logical basis for this behaviour. The difference is, when a stranger approaches you in a dark alley, if you're a woman, you know it's going to either be rape or robbery or both. Fight or flight kicks in. Unless the woman is cornered, she's probably going to fight or run. Rapes from non-strangers aren't so black and white. You may not realize the man's intentions until he's on top of you. For instance, you're camping with a bunch of friends and wake up in the middle of the night with one of the guys on top of you, his hand over your mouth, his body pinning you to the ground. Or your college roommate lets a few guys into your apartment and you wake up in the middle of the night with one of them on top of you. Or you're working late at the office and Ted comes in to offer you a coke and suddenly he has you pinned in the corner with his hand up your skirt, and no one is around to hear you scream for help. ... Much, much different from a stranger rape. I'm not saying there aren't significant differences between the different kinds of rape. I'm saying that victims should resist rape regardless of circumstances. Some circumstances--in particular, those linked to whether or not the rapist is a familiar (you give some examples)--can certainly mitigate the likely effectiveness of resisting, but if somebody is generally willing to resist an attack, I fail to see why they wouldn't (or shouldn't) resist due to familiarity-linked circumstances. You could enlighten me by giving me an example of circumstances that are more likely to be present in rape by a familiar than rape by a stranger that you believe make "submit without resisting" the wiser option. Exclude spousal rape, since I can already picture why conditional submission might come into play there.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,719
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 4, 2015 10:38:35 GMT -5
My guess is reply #183 was too much. You post as if stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception. Most of what you propose is going to be helpful to less than 20% of those assaulted.
rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders
The Perpetrator's not Hiding in the Bushes
Approximately 50% of all rape/sexual assault incidents were reported by victims to have occured within 1 mile of their home or at their home.2 •7% take place in a school. •13% take place at the home of a friend, neighbor, or relative. •18% take place in a public area, such as a commercial venue, parking lot, or park.
82% of sexual assaults were perpetrated by a non-stranger.1 47% of rapists are a friend or acquaintance.1 25% are an intimate.1 5% are a relative.1
I'm very familiar with the statistics, Optimist. I've acknowledged them several times in my posts. I don't understand what about my posts implies "stranger rape is the norm instead of the exception", or why the statistic is even relevant. If, God forbid, an acquaintance or relative were to sexually assault me, it would have no effect on my willingness to resist. I don't understand why it would be different for a woman. If circumstances were a husband forcing himself on his wife, I could see the ease of conceding "Just let it be over." out of a sense of love and devotion, but otherwise I just don't see how rape by a familiar is any different than rape by a stranger, or why it should mitigate one's willingness to resist. You have a misguided belief that willingness to resist will protect you, stop the assault(s) or even help get convictions. I have read about too many cases where this hasn't been true. It generally seems to be the least true when the victim is young and it is a family member or a trusted associate. Wives, husbands, adult friends find denial easier than believing a child. I remember one unfortunate child who had to film her own sexual assault by her Dad, so the courts would finally believe her.
Have you forgotten all the stories of kids being forced to spend time with relatives they don't like only to discover they were sexually assaulted multiple times? It often takes a long time for adults in positions of trust like Sandusky, priests, and boy scout leaders to be outed because most folks do not want to believe bad things are happening.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,267
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 4, 2015 11:40:12 GMT -5
Wow just wow. So if you don't risk death and fight with everything you had you must have secretly in some part of your mind wanted to do it and therefore it isn't rape?
Next up "If her body responded physiologically she must have wanted it" followed by "Well if she got pregnant she must have secretly wanted to have sex with that man since her body would have rejected the pregnancy otherwise".
JFC.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Sept 4, 2015 11:50:59 GMT -5
Just a reminder: Please keep the discussion on the issue not on other posters. We cannot speculate what another feels with regard to that person's own family members simply by reading what that person posts on a message board. Therefore, to keep the discussion civil, please don't target another poster directly with your posts. Thanks.
mmhmm, Administrator
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 4, 2015 12:12:31 GMT -5
Wow just wow. So if you don't risk death and fight with everything you had you must have secretly in some part of your mind wanted to do it and therefore it isn't rape? Next up "If her body responded physiologically she must have wanted it" followed by "Well if she got pregnant she must have secretly wanted to have sex with that man since her body would have rejected the pregnancy otherwise". JFC. "wow" is not the reaction i had. i don't think that rape can be adequately prosecuted in our legal system, and i have no idea what to do about it. i am thinking about it constantly.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,267
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 4, 2015 12:14:10 GMT -5
Well what I WANTED to say would get me banned, so wow is all I could come back with.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,353
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on Sept 4, 2015 12:15:14 GMT -5
Wow just wow. So if you don't risk death and fight with everything you had you must have secretly in some part of your mind wanted to do it and therefore it isn't rape? Next up "If her body responded physiologically she must have wanted it" followed by "Well if she got pregnant she must have secretly wanted to have sex with that man since her body would have rejected the pregnancy otherwise". JFC. "wow" is not the reaction i had. i don't think that rape can be adequately prosecuted in our legal system, and i have no idea what to do about it. i am thinking about it constantly. George Orwell figured it out.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 4, 2015 12:25:09 GMT -5
Opti: I am by no means claiming that resistance is always effective or that it always proves to be the superior course of action given the benefit of restrospection. I'm saying that practical strategies can never be cherry-picked with the benefit of hindsight and our advice should reflect this. The best we can do is select an optimum "one-size-fits-all" strategy and stick with it in spite of its shortcomings. All things considered, "fight back" is this optimum strategy. I make this same argument here. NomoreDramaQ1015: I appreciate rhetoric as much as the next guy, but if your sole interest in a debate is to twist an opponent's arguments into something he clearly isn't saying, you're not doing anyone any favours. Take some cheap shots and score some 'likes' if you're so moved, but to insinuate that "you must have secretly in some part of your mind wanted to do it" is somehow buried in my arguments is BS and you know it.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,135
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Sept 4, 2015 12:29:57 GMT -5
"wow" is not the reaction i had. i don't think that rape can be adequately prosecuted in our legal system, and i have no idea what to do about it. i am thinking about it constantly. George Orwell figured it out. don't be cynical. it doesn't match the shorts.
|
|
ArchietheDragon
Junior Associate
Joined: Jul 7, 2014 14:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 6,353
|
Post by ArchietheDragon on Sept 4, 2015 12:30:20 GMT -5
George Orwell figured it out. don't be cynical. it doesn't match the shorts. I still have those shorts. I was wearing them just yesterday.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 4, 2015 12:33:46 GMT -5
I'm going to take the opportunity to repost the following questions (buried in Reply #183) for anyone willing to answer:
And from #209:
These are fair, pertinent questions, and everyone should be able to answer them. I can provide more info if needed.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,719
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 4, 2015 13:00:59 GMT -5
Opti: I am by no means claiming that resistance is always effective or that it always proves to be the superior course of action given the benefit of restrospection. I'm saying that practical strategies can never be cherry-picked with the benefit of hindsight and our advice should reflect this. The best we can do is select an optimum "one-size-fits-all" strategy and stick with it in spite of its shortcomings. All things considered, "fight back" is this optimum strategy. I make this same argument here. NomoreDramaQ1015: I appreciate rhetoric as much as the next guy, but if your sole interest in a debate is to twist an opponent's arguments into something he clearly isn't saying, you're not doing anyone any favours. Take some cheap shots and score some 'likes' if you're so moved, but to insinuate that "you must have secretly in some part of your mind wanted to do it" is somehow buried in my arguments is BS and you know it. The bolded is your belief, not mine. I do not think we need a one-size-fits-all strategy. I think the optimum strategy really depends on circumstance. Fight back generally does not work IMO when its under 18 years old versus adult or any big size mismatch. For example HS teens with 6'4" BFs usually are not successful with the fight back strategy.
I think whoever is in the situation has the right to choose whatever strategy they think best as they have to live with the consequences of it working, not working, how assaulted they might get, etc. Sometimes there is no good choice. And I think each individual should be allowed to decide whether death is preferable to rape. Why should we make anyone feel guilty for choosing to live? Should we make people feel guilty for surviving an extreme beating as well for not choosing to fight enough so they die too?
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,327
|
Post by swamp on Sept 4, 2015 13:03:51 GMT -5
The requirement of fighting back is called "earnest resistance" and that requirement got tossed in the legal system years ago.
Instead of telling victims they should have fought back, you let them decide the best course of action since, you know, they are there, and probably know the guy?
|
|