(chortle!)
Randwolf said:
So attitudes are easier to change than behaviors, right, tiassa?
There are myriad factors affecting the relationship between attitudes and behaviors.
This pretty much makes the women in question powerless, doesn't it? Let them await the omnipotent do-gooder who can "better educate" the rapist.
That's quite a desperate leap, Randwolf. And, to a degree predictable.
How do you know "a tremendous portion of acquaintance and marital rapes, at least, could be prevented if the rapist had a better education in relevant matters.", now mind you tiassa, before you go off on one of your pompous tirades, I am not saying it isn't true, but how do you know it to be fact? Don't you also hold that the rapist is ultimately responsible, as I do? Therefore, aren't rapists responsible, whether they are educated or not?
The misogyny that contributes to acquaintance and marital rape, for instance, is an acquired behavior. Pretending that every rapist—or every criminal in general—is inevitable is a dangerously convenient presupposition.
That a rapist is responsible for his decisions does not mean he would not have made a different decision under different circumstances.
Why do you believe this, Tiassa? Childhood memories?
Adolescence, to be sure. And adulthood. It is not impossible to find some variation on the theme.
To the degree that we all take personal reponsibilty. To what do you owe your enlightened attituded, tiassa? Are not men and women bound up in this quest for a better world? In your universe, are women second class?
As you demonstrate, not all men and women are bound up in a quest for a better world. As to my enlightened attitude, such as you call it? Well, you already complain about the length of my posts, so I'll simply leave it at a lifelong interrelationship with communities of human beings who, for better
and worse, and each in their own way, give a damn about people other than themselves and ideas that go beyond mere greed.
Do they not have the right, and the responsibilty to do what they can to ameliorate the effects of rape? Just as men have responsibility for their own actions?
It is very telling that facing the question of men's conduct, the best you can come up with is to continually turn and point at women. You've had your chance to tell rape survivors what they should have done.
No, tiassa, (patiently explained for the 50th time) it is not the "woman's obligation to figure out what turns a man on", although women spend a great deal of time doing just this, in a different context, but rather, what would be prudent and reasonable to avoid assault.
(
chortle!)
That's awesome, Randwolf. What is your problem with women, anyway? I mean, you seriously can't actually be so stupid as to realize that, in deciding not to wear something that might turn a man on, she might end up wearing something that turns another man on. At some point—well behind us in the course of these debates—your whole act seems at once deliberate
and ridiculous.
Again, I ask you straight out, do you take issue with the behavior of the women on "Girls Gone Wild"? If so, why?
No. Why do you keep asking?
Ahhh, tiassa, I believe this was your contribution to a thread dedicated to that topic. Nor, unless one takes it out of "context" could you be led to believe that this was any less a man's responsibility than a woman's.
There are three errors in that paragraph, Randwolf:
(1) The thread was not dedicated to that topic, except by the insistence of misogynists incapable of perceiving any other point to the discussion. (
See posts #
1868190/1,
1869513/13)
(2) It was a counterpoint to saddling women with the obligation of calculating and predicting men's conduct, which relates to the original theme of the topic. The point was offered originally in response to Gustav, and reiterated in response to Gustav. (
See posts #
1884538/251,
1884557/253,
1890776/465,
1890817/470)
(3) To quote
you, Randwolf: "
Got it, consider it added to the list." (
#1890823/471). Now what list is
that, exactly? As Simon Anders noted, "
We are making a list of suggestions to help women cut down on the liklihood of them being raped." (
#1888484/346) And as
you replied to that point specifically, "
Thanks for the benefit of the doubt there." (
#1888497/347) Now, are you going to try to put that one onto Simon? Because you shouldn't. After all, you did make the point, "
If every woman followed every one of these precautions every time, would one or more sexual assaults be prevented or avoided? Probably .... However, there are a lot of very smart people on this forum, and I'm sure we could come up with some more suggestions to add to this laundry list." (
#1888363/341) And appealed, only a couple posts later, for more suggestions: "
Anyone else with comments on the tactics presented by the members, or maybe some addional precautions to add to the list?" (
#1888463/345)
There is very little question about your context. Bottom line, Randwolf, if you're going to be dishonest, do a better job. Better yet, do it somewhere else.
Aren't you the preeminent advocate of context?
I wouldn't go so far as
that. But perhaps you would be better served by focusing on the topic at hand, and not dedicating so much attention to me. As your lament in the prior paragraph reveals, your grasp of context is dubious at best, and a good part of that could well be the result of your egocentric pursuit of one person—in this case,
me—instead of giving the discussion serious address.
To put it into as few words as possible, so as not to confuse you:
Your disrespect is your undoing.
What, in the final analysis, is wrong with assigning the "burden" of one's existence and consequences on one's own actions? Where do we deviate so much tiassa?
In your definition of being responsible for oneself, you are assigning the burden of predicting other people's behavior while resisting the proposition that those other people should make any effort toward civility. Where we deviate, as such, is in your dishonesty, Randwolf.
No. There is nothing "after the fact" that should have been done. This is where the hysteria comes into play. Very simply, we all do what we can to reduce our risk of assault, sexual or otherwise, and then deal with what happens.
So your precautions are just a roll of the dice? Something arbitrary? Maybe we should put "carrying a rabbit's foot" on the list?
There are no "sure things", sucks, right Tiassa? Even if we devoted all our efforts to social education, that doesn't mean it would be totally effective, should we throw up our hands if there is an isolated case in which it doesn't work?
No there aren't, yes it does, and as near as I can guess from that second sentence, of course not.
One is a solution based on "I", the other a solution based on "we". I think that this differentiates our basic philosophies as well as anything possibly could.
I do not pretend that I exist in some kind of vacuum. I am not Dwayne Hoover.
Welcome to civilized society, Randwolf. We're all in this together.
