Print

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

[Vector]

Why shouldn't we try to understand them?

I meant "we should understand them" as in the usual "poor boy, just made a mistake, don't make him accountable for his actions!" sort of apologia.  Not true understanding of the creation of a circumstance, but sympathy and a sort of white-washing.

[G-Flex]

Okay, that's more reasonable. To be fair, though, while I don't believe that we should excuse the crime, I still think compassion for the person should exist, and that external factors contributing to the crime should be examined. Obviously, if someone commits rape, there's something rather wrong with the person psychosocially no matter how you slice it, whether chronic or acute.

[Vector]

I'll feel better about advocating compassion for the perpetrator after our society has begun to provide compassion for the victim.

I think it's a difference between short-term and long-term goals.  Long-term, I agree with you completely.  In the short-term, I kind of don't.

[Virex]

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.

It may also result in unfairly low punishments and show-trails because the poor guy was just "following his nature" and the woman in question was "asking for it"...


 

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.

If you teach people that rape is something people do and that the ones who do it are not monsters then what is there to keep them from doing it themselves but fear of punishment? It's not that monsters are the only ones that commit these atrocities but people become monsters by committing them and the fear of becoming a social outcast, a monster if you will, is much more powerful then the fear of punishment.

[Fenrir]

It may also result in unfairly low punishments and show-trails because the poor guy was just "following his nature" and the woman in question was "asking for it"...

G-Flex is suggesting that we base our compassion on understanding, not fanciful nonsense.

If you teach people that rape is something people do and that the ones who do it are not monsters then what is there to keep them from doing it themselves but fear of punishment? It's not that monsters are the only ones that commit these atrocities but people become monsters by committing them and the fear of becoming a social outcast, a monster if you will, is much more powerful then the fear of punishment.

I would have said something similar, but I think G-Flex meant “monster” as something that was not natural or human rather than something that was morally repulsive and frightening.

[Virex]

It may also result in unfairly low punishments and show-trails because the poor guy was just "following his nature" and the woman in question was "asking for it"...

G-Flex is suggesting that we base our compassion on understanding, not fanciful nonsense.

He's unfortunately not the only one who claims to know what understanding means.

[Mindmaker]

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.

What?
I was adressing Virex posts.
You apprarently read a lot between the lines. Opinions which I neither uphold, nor express.

[Vector]

I think the point is that everyone is a potential X, but it's not anything to get excited about.

[Fenrir]

It may also result in unfairly low punishments and show-trails because the poor guy was just "following his nature" and the woman in question was "asking for it"...

G-Flex is suggesting that we base our compassion on understanding, not fanciful nonsense.

He's not the only one who claims to know what understanding means.

I do not see your point. Understanding means only to perceive the true nature of something, so, if we have compassion for the reasons you have suggested above, we can not say that we have understanding, and, thus, we can not say that our compassion is based upon understanding, as G-Flex was suggesting that it should be.

[Virex]

No, but a lot of people will claim it is and use his reasoning as a free card to acquit beasts because "it wasn't their fault". You can say that they shouldn't but you can't prevent them from doing it, it will happen and it will become standard practice. It's just too dangerous to breed understanding for beasts and monsters, because they do not understand us.

[Vector]

A person who commits rape is still a person.

[Virex]

A person who commits rape is still a person.

True, unfortunately. We can't and shouldn't treat them like beasts, if I am giving that impression, but I don't think treating them as just a fellow being is OK. That means we shouldn't take their basic rights but it should be made clear that they no longer have a place in society if they refuse to respect the most basic of rights in existence.

[Vector]

I imagine we're agreed, then.

[SalmonGod]

It's just too dangerous to breed understanding for beasts and monsters, because they do not understand us.

And this style of thinking is the shortest line to becoming a monster oneself.  Every societal injustice and most individual acts of cruelty operate under the justification that those who suffer are at best lesser humans anyway.  It is the ultimate slippery slope.

A person who commits rape is still a person.

True, unfortunately. We can't and shouldn't treat them like beasts, if I am giving that impression, but I don't think treating them as just a fellow being is OK. That means we shouldn't take their basic rights but it should be made clear that they no longer have a place in society if they refuse to respect the most basic of rights in existence.

Ok, I basically agree with this.  I'm just saying be careful how you frame things, especially to yourself.  You mentioned a cynical awareness of your own potential to betray your morality, and this is exactly where that cynicism is well placed.

Don't feel singled out.  This is one thing that always sets off alarms to me when I see it, and I give everyone who sets off those alarms the same lecture.

[Mindmaker]

I think the point is that everyone is a potential X, but it's not anything to get excited about.

Yes, I know that. But he could have posted it without quoting me, which looks like a "Oh, silly you. Let's get you educated".
I am perfectly aware that this problem is multilayered. I just wanted to express my disagrement with Virex.