Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Sheb]

Isn't he basically saying that all men are rapists waiting to happen? While I can't disagree with him on that, it seems a bit unfair to cry misogynist! and not misandrist! at the same time.

Well, to be fair, nobody called him mysoginist, they just say he was an ass. There's plenty of way to be an ass (including this one) that are not strictly mysoginist.

[Fenrir]

It happens so often that someone who's seemingly fine just... snaps and kills/rapes/destroys someone. Why should I be above that? I'm not some special zen-master who can control those things.

You shall need to provide some good sources that indicate that ordinarily healthy people suddenly lose their humanity and commit atrocities in an instant, and it shall need to show that such a thing occurs often.

[Virex]

Virex, if you honestly believe you can't prevent yourself from doing things you see as morally wrong, then I think you need to see a doctor.

I don't know, I've never had any problems with self-control. Can a doctor cure one of nagging feeling of cynicism and insecurity?

It happens so often that someone who's seemingly fine just... snaps and kills/rapes/destroys someone. Why should I be above that? I'm not some special zen-master who can control those things.

You shall need to provide some good sources that indicate that ordinarily healthy people suddenly lose their humanity and commit atrocities in an instant, and it shall need to show that such a thing occurs often.

There hasn't been a study towards it because no study is going to be conducted for a non-explanation like "he just snapped". But first of all, I have never seen a study indicate that it doesn't happen and secondly there is plenty of anecdotal evidence, to the point where a crime pasionel is legal terminology for "he just snapped."

[Fenrir]

There hasn't been a study towards it because no study is going to be conducted for a non-explanation like "he just snapped".

Is it not a lack of an explanation that makes mankind conduct studies?

But first of all, I have never seen a study indicate that it doesn't happen...

A lack of evidence is not evidence to the contrary, so this statement does not support anything.

...and secondly there is plenty of anecdotal evidence, to the point where a crime pasionel is legal terminology for "he just snapped."

You would need to present these anecdotes, and we would need to be able to determine that the conclusion “he just snapped” was reached after sufficient thought and investigation.

[Vector]

Oh, my god.

Derail -> not in this thread.  Some of the derails were at least tangentially related, but this one isn't.  So please, if you'd like to talk about this, do it in PMs or elsewhere.

[Mindmaker]

 
And I just planned on joining in...

Is it even a derail? It does discuss what Adams said in that article.

[Fenrir]

Well, I know the following is on topic.

Mr. Adams is right. Rape is natural. It is natural because everything is natural. If one does suppose that evolution be truth, and we are born of it, would that not mean that mankind is born of the same natural processes as those things we deem natural? Would not our behaviour, built by natural minds in natural environments, be as natural as the habits of the beasts? Would that not mean that everything we do and think is natural? Would not our hate for rape be as natural as the rape iteslf, and would it not be equally justified? Thus, to say someting is natural is meaningless, for what does it mean to say something is unnatural?

[Vector]

Meh.  Keep it snappy, but yeah, talk about it if you like.  I don't think it exactly addresses Adams' point, though, which is that men come into the world pre-snapped and the problem is that society doesn't support them and their penises.  "Rape is natural" is meaningless only if you bend the definition of the word natural.  Colloquially, there's an implication of "so we should understand rapists, because they're just doing the natural thing."

[Fenrir]

"Rape is natural" is meaningless only if you bend the definition of the word natural. Colloquially, there's an implication of "so we should understand rapists, because they're just doing the natural thing."

Implication is a rather different thing from definition. When I wrote that Mr. Adams is right, I meant only that he was right in that rape is natural, unless one supposes that mankind was forged by a rather different set of rules than the rest of existence.

[G-Flex]

"Rape is natural" is meaningless only if you bend the definition of the word natural.  Colloquially, there's an implication of "so we should understand rapists, because they're just doing the natural thing."

Why shouldn't we try to understand them? Murder, rape, and all kinds of awful things very obviously fall under natural human behavior patterns, even if they're destructive and should be discouraged or punished. Rapists, murderers, kidnappers and so forth are still human, and demonizing them only tricks everyone else into thinking they're less capable of it than they are, that other people they know as people aren't capable of it, and prevents any proactive measures against it. Obviously rape is a pretty awful thing, but even awful things happen for a reason, and the people who do it are still human beings, ergo people don't have to be "monsters" (tip: those don't exist) in order to be at risk for committing it.

[Virex]

"Rape is natural" is meaningless only if you bend the definition of the word natural.  Colloquially, there's an implication of "so we should understand rapists, because they're just doing the natural thing."

Why shouldn't we try to understand them?

Because understanding can lead to compassion and the last thing we need is compassion for rapists.

[G-Flex]

Is that sarcasm? I can't tell.

In case it's not: Having compassion for the individual does not equate to liking what they do. At all. It does not prevent you from trying, convicting, or punishing rapists. It may, however, serve to make those trials and punishments more reasonable or effective or fair, and may lead to better proactive measures against rape to begin with.


If you raise people to believe that only monsters are capable of something, then nothing will be done to make sure people don't do it.

[Mindmaker]

It happens so often that someone who's seemingly fine just... snaps and kills/rapes/destroys someone (think crime passionel but also the columbine shooters and Karst T, who one day decided to take his car and try to ram the buss containing the Dutch Royal house with it on Queens Day). Why should I be above that? I'm not some special zen-master who can control those things. I may be normal now, but who can tell where I'll be a few years from now.

The Keyword is "seems".
Just because they look/behave fine in public, doesn't mean there isn't something brewing on the inside.

If you have moral principles, which you are adamant about, it's unlikely that you just suddenly snap and break them all.
I've kept all my current ones, even if breaking them wouldn't be shunned or looked down upon (except by myself), since they are more socially acceptable behavious.

So yeah, no. I'm not a potential rapist/killer/domestic abuser/whatever, no matter what way you put it.

[G-Flex]

If you have moral principles, which you are adamant about, it's unlikely that you just suddenly snap and break them all.
I've kept all my current ones, even if breaking them wouldn't be shunned or looked down upon (except by myself), since they are more socially acceptable behavious.

So yeah, no. I'm not a potential rapist/killer/domestic abuser/whatever, no matter what way you put it.

There's a huge gap between "moral principles are always upheld perfectly and never change" and "people can suddenly snap and turn from moral superheroes into evil, conniving, bestial rapemongers". Hell, the gap isn't even one-dimensional.

First, people can be just fine in some ways, yet have severe problems in other ways. No, this is not the same as "he seems fine on the outside, but on the inside he's fucked-up". On the inside or the outside, people can be both. People can have horrible problems or inclinations that cause them to do horrible things, but otherwise be pretty okay people. When we don't have any sort of compassion or understanding of this, then these people won't seek help, and will be encouraged, in a way, to act more monstrous (identify people as monsters, and you encourage them to act as such).

Secondly, the psychosocial state of a person can degrade over time. People don't just "suddenly snap" and become completely different people, but people do change. Nobody is constant.

[Fenrir]

...also the columbine shooters...

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/keeping-kids-safe/200905/columbine-bullying-and-the-mind-eric-harris

Based on this research, I concluded that Eric had a disturbed personality with prominent antisocial, narcissistic, and sadistic traits.

I wish I could remember the other articles I read about the Columbine shootings, but I am fairly sure that the shooters did not go from ordinary people to mindless killers overnight.