Re: #426
Your statistics are thirty-three years old. Gustav's number, suggesting an even lower proportion of stranger rapes, is only eleven years old.
Gosh, you're right. I missed one of Gustav's statistics, namely:
# 77% of rapes are committed by someone known to the person raped. (Bureau of Justice Statistics 1997)
implying of course that only 23% are commited by strangers not 30% as it was 30 years ago. This, of course proves your point, I mean after all, if only a little more than one in five rapes are perpetrated by strangers, it is not worth discussing. Who is trivializing rape now? Do you know how ludicrous this is?
Let me see if you will answer a direct yes or no question, Tiassa:
Do you feel that 23% of rapes is statistically insignificant?
We might infer from this that as rapes per capita have been decreasing, and rapes by stranger per capita have declined proportionately, the rise of feminism to prominence in the culture has had certain impacts on rape that go beyond mere
children's chants.
Also, perhaps the decrease from 30% to 23% may correlate with an increase in women taking self defense classes? A better awareness of how and why rapes happen? I mean 30 years ago, many people felt you shouldn't even mention the word rape in mixed company. Now there are tons of books, educational courses, etc. addressing the subject
and its prevention
What you are attributing to me in order to ask your angry question is, in fact, another one of your own inventions.
And what was your answer to that question? I thought so...
Are you suggesting that everyone has the same idea of what constitutes "reasonable" and "rational"?
Actually I was referring to your statement / question:
"The problem with that sentence is that the rapist could say the same thing. You know, like the pedophile teaching a child how to "love"?"
In your opinion is "[a] pedophile teaching a child how to 'love'" a reasonable assertion? Please, please, Tiassa, just a yes or no...
Quite clearly, I don't agree that the proposition that you are fulfilling some obligation to society by laying the burdens of other people's behavior onto women while seeking to excuse yourself from making any more productive contribution is reasonable or rational.
I'm sorry, what was it you had contributed as an idea to reduce / eliminate rape? Links please?
You're right. Someday circumstances might come about in which there are no rapes. I can actually think of one course to achieve that goal: extinction.
Productive, as usual....
What? You already responded to it. Okay, attempted to respond. The thing about Sufi tales is that they're thematic. You cannot cling too closely to any one meaning. If you want to compare the woman to the shoe, you can, but it's not particularly useful. If you wish to compare the temptation of the thief to steal the shoes with the temptation of a rapist to commit rape, you certainly can. There is, indeed, a theological debate about whether one participates in another's sin by providing the opportunity for sin. And we can take all the precautions we want against other people's sins, but sin will still occur. And it will still find us, in one form or another.
I wasn't asking for a list of ways to interpret it, but rather only one - yours. What was it you were intending to convey?
For instance, how many women do you actually know?
Try this: every sixth individual woman you encounter tomorrow—speak to in person, talk to on the phone, get an e-mail from, walk past on the street, see driving in traffic, and so on—as you go about your day, make a mental note in your mind. That woman represents a rape survivor.
Now if you're lucky enough that no woman of your acquaintance has been raped, the reality is that they probably just haven't said anything to you about it.
No, Tiassa, I'm not that lucky.
Some of us have been called upon directly by rape survivors, and some by circumstance of proximity. What is your Randian motivation for giving a damn in the first place? Has your "property" been violated?
Well, you digress somewhat, but I will try to answer you in the most honest manner possible, something that you are so fond of asking me to do, which of course implies that I haven't been, etc., etc.
Anyway, it actually has to do with my motivation to be on SF period. I have a personality quirk (one of many, as you would no doubt be willing to attest to). I'm passionate about logic. Now that may seem like a contradiction, but it is the best I can do at explaining. Prior to registering here, I had been lurking primarily in the math and science subforums for a few weeks. Trying to learn something new, ya know?
I enjoyed reading the debates, as debating is something that has intrigued me since my high school days. So, finally I decided to join. At this point I started looking for an interesting (and contentious, I might add) thread to participate in. I pulled up the New Posts search, and started hunting. Now here is where I will give you another opportunity to pull the sexist card again, if you want. I noticed the title of this thread, and thought "WTH is
that about"? So I pulled it up and read it from the beginning, not knowing, mind you, the previous history here on the topic.
Now, to come to the point. I noticed what I considered to be an illogical inconsistency, and thought I would throw my two cents in. I think my first post started "Come on people, if you stop and think, there are some valid points here", or something to that affect.
I had absolutely no idea what I was walking into.
Now Randian or not, I have as much intellectual interest in abstract topics as the next person, and contrary to what you apparently think, I do feel very sad for the victims of sexual assault. I'm not trying to say I understand or that I can empathize, because I can't. The closest personal experience I had ocurred when I was maybe ten, and I managed to escape by running away before anything at all actually happened. So that is not the reason for my posting here. Of course, I know women who have been raped, and that probably contributed in a way to my selection of this topic, but that still is not the primary motivation.
To me, and without comparing a woman to a car or a bank in any way, if this topic had been about "It is impossible to reduce the chances of car theft or bank robbery through sensible and prudent precautions", I would have dived in just as I have here. Now, obviously, property crimes do not have the emotional impact of sexual assaults, so the arguments would not be poarized as much.
Bottom line: joined to debate, the title caught my eye, I read the posts, spotted what I considered (right or wrong) to be fallacies, put up a post, got friggin ambushed out of left field (from my point of view) and dug my heels in.
Honest enough for you?
You used quotation marks, suggesting you were, well, quoting someone. I searched for the term "arguing for" and did not find it on page twenty-one or twenty-two.
Upon a more careful reading of "Try again, Randwolf. You've wasted enough of our time attributing your own arguments to other people" (post 425), I suppose it could be interpreted in a slightly different manner than I did. What did you mean by this?
Maybe when we're eighteen, we need to be reminded of this absolute pabulum, but that in itself is a bit scary at least. Why isn't this sort of stuff already clear to us when we arrive at "manhood"?
Maybe we do, I honestly don't know. But this would actually be a means of perhaps improving the status quo, and if this thread expands in the direction simon keeps trying to take it, or a new thread is started, this would seem to be a valid suggestion for the topic of "What can men do stop rape, besides tell women what to do?". Now you may ask why I don't go start it, and to be honest, I don't really have the desire, but probably not for the reason you think. First of all, at this point, I can barely keep up with this thread, and my disposable time is about to get cut in half shortly. Rest assured though, if and when the thread does start, and if and when I start seeing irrational or unreasonable suggestions, or logical fallicies, I'll be there with a vengeance in what time I do have.
Oh thank God, I have reached the end of another reply to Tiassa