Rape Trial Coverage Fiasco

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YorkNecromancer

Firstly, Eldargal, *highfive*

Secondly, here's a handy graphic looking at American rape rates. It makes the statistics startlingly clear. It's depressing as all get out.

http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18as...g/original.jpg

These are two individuals who gangraped an underage girl, made images of it, joked and laughed about it, felt absolutely no remorse... Do i need to go on?

Their "punishment" is a joke. If they were 45 and ugly, I strongly doubt there'd be any defense of them at all. But they're young, successful, blah blah blah, whatever. They need to be in prison, and for a longer stretch than they've been given, but they won't be, because rape culture exists.

As for the rape apologists on this thread:

If the likelihood of rape depends on how revealing a woman's clothes are, the number of rapes would increase significantly in summer. But they don't.

If rape only happens to women who have had consensual sex in the past, virgins wouldn’t get raped. But they do.

If rape is more likely to happen to attractive women based on conventional standards, obese women wouldn’t get raped. But they do.

STOP VICTIM BLAMING. The moment you start to say "yeah, but..." YOU ARE A RAPE APOLOGIST, AND YOU ARE PART OF THE FRAKKING PROBLEM. There is never an excuse for rape. Never.

---

That's a meaningless graphic without the actual numbers represented and the source.

Now you mention it, that happened when I first joined. Give it a bit :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Earl Harbinger

I have had multiple posts not post directly. I get a little window that says my post will be posted pending moderator approval. It doesn't happen to every post but it's happened.

*I just tried to submit a post and got the same message regarding moderator review, it seems that if I use Advanced instead of Quick Reply the post goes into review limbo.

---

Your first couple of posts/threads require approval, then once you have had enough sucessful posts then you won't need to. If in doubt message one of the mods :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Mystery

Now you mention it, that happened when I first joined. Give it a bit :)

---

I'm not mad bro, I just didn't want to have to retype everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Mystery

Now you mention it, that happened when I first joined. Give it a bit :)

---

Weird... that never happened to me.

That's be because you're a bunghole. Bunghole!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElectricPaladin

While it's all well and good to feel a little sorry for a 16 year old kid who will spend years in Juvenile Hall and the rest of his life marked by America's draconic sex offender laws

---

I don't really have much to add to this conversation that hasn't been expressed in one way or another, except to comment to this. Recently I ran across [url=http://suzzan-blac.deviantart.com/]this woman's[/url] art gallery on DeviantArt. Her paintings reflect the emotions in her that resulted from years of sexual abuse. Looking at these images, and given all the high profile rapes we've been hearing about all over the world, involving both men and women, I can only conclude that the world's sex offense laws aren't nearly draconian enough, not even by half. This crap has gone on way too long, and it needs to stop! If people are going to act like barbarian throw-backs, they should be punished like barbarian throw-backs. Personally, I feel live gibbeting should be involved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr Mystery

That's be because you're a bunghole. Bunghole!

---

It's... it's true. I am. *sob*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Necron2.0

If people are going to act like barbarian throw-backs, they should be punished like barbarian throw-backs. Personally, I feel live gibbeting should be involved.

---

So, I kind of have a problem with this.

Look, if we're going to view raping people as "cheating" as "getting ahead undeservedly," then it makes sense to do this. What do you do when someone gets something they don't deserve? You take it back, of course, or somehow punish them. So, when Moneybags T. Jerkbutt steals a bunch of money from his company, you take the money away from him and give it back to the people he took it from, and then you put him in a position where he won't be trading anything but cigarettes for a while.

(Oh, wait, we don't do that with people who steal billions of dollars from corporations? Oops. Oh, well - I'm talking about an ideal legal system, anyway).

Right, so, the thing is that I don't view someone who rapes someone else as getting ahead. They're not getting something good at the expense of someone else and need to suffer in order to "balance the books." In my opinion, they're expressing a deep psychological flaw. They're in pain, and they have the bad judgment to express that pain by hurting others.

Remember: rape isn't about lust. It isn't about sex. It's about power, violence, and anger. Depression can manifest that way, as can PTSD, which is a common side effect of... being the victim of abuse one's self.

Now, I'm not saying that rapists should get slapped on the wrist and sent on their way. I think that the first step should be to isolate them away from normal people where they can't do anymore harm. That's basic triage - first you prevent further harm, then you treat the harmed. However, I would be a lot more comfortable if after that, we viewed sex offenders as humans in need of healing, rather than tried to dehumanize them so we can hurt them without feeling bad about it. Even these two douche-battleships from Ohio.

What bothers me about about the coverage isn't that there's a thread of sympathy for the rapists. There's a time and a place for that. It's two things:

Firstly, there was no sympathy for the victim. I mean, however much I feel sorry for how screwed in the head you've got to be to do that to someone, I feel sorrier for the person who was victimized, and I always will.

Secondly, the sympathy for the rapists was in terms of how this conviction would effect their lives. Not how their own choices will effect their lives. Not how screwed up and pained they were to have done this in the first place. You know, I feel this way, too, sometimes. When one of my students hands me what looks like a beautiful piece of work, but I gradually realize that it's riddled with flaws and plagiarisms, I have a moment of regret for the thing it could have been - the thing I thought it was. However, that's in the context of realizing that this thing never really existed.

The talking heads are experiencing grief for what the world thought these boys were, but weren't. For fine, upstanding young men with the world ahead of them. In fact, they were damaged, cruel, vindictive time bombs. It's delusional to say "what a shame that bomb exploded, it was so pretty" - what you mean is "damn! I thought that bomb was a work of art. I really wish it hadn't been a bomb."

And to say that to exclusion of "OMG, that girl got her fingers blown off!" is just... inexcusable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wildeybeast

Thanks for the response Nab. Not sure my cold-addled brain fully comprehended it, but I appreciate your efforts to explain.

---

Cliff's Notes - according to Ohio law:

1. I have compel a woman to have sex with me by force. Rape, even if the woman is my spouse.
2. I have sex with a woman after threatening to use force. Rape, even if the woman is my spouse.
3. I have sex with a woman after deliberately getting her drunk. Rape only if the woman is not my spouse.
4. I have sex with a woman who happens to be drunk. Rape only if the woman is not my spouse.
5. I have sex with a woman is drunk, whether I got her that way or not. She asks me to have sex with her. Rape only if the woman is not my spouse.

As to Earl Harbinger's general point about personal responsibility ... I guess I agree, but only in a fairly trivial sense. I think it's true, as a point of criminal law philosophy, that nobody deserves to be victimized by crime. Nevertheless, I agree that one can recklessly expose oneself to a crime. For instance, suppose there's a neighborhood in my city known to be haunted by a robber who mugs people for cash between the hours of 3:00 and 4:00 AM. If I go into that neighborhood at 3:30, talking loudly on my cell phone about how I really have to get to an ATM because I have $10,000 cash in my wallet. The robber mugs me.

Did I recklessly expose myself to that crime? Yes.
Did I deserve that crime? No.

Same thing is true of rape, but the real question is, what constitutes recklessly exposing oneself to rape? Dating people? Having sex with people? Getting drunk? Wearing revealing clothes? Walking alone? Walking alone at night? No, no, no, no, no, and no. I suppose if there was a neighborhood known to be haunted by a rapist who attacked people between the hours of 3:00 and 4:00 AM, and a woman walked into that neighborhood during that time talking loudly to herself about how nobody knows where she is right now, she has no self defense skills, and golly gee she hopes she doesn't get raped ... sure, I could call that recklessly exposing herself to rape.

But she still wouldn't deserve it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nabterayl

As to Earl Harbinger's general point about personal responsibility ... I guess I agree, but only in a fairly trivial sense. I think it's true, as a point of criminal law philosophy, that nobody deserves to be victimized by crime. Nevertheless, I agree that one can recklessly expose oneself to a crime. For instance, suppose there's a neighborhood in my city known to be haunted by a robber who mugs people for cash between the hours of 3:00 and 4:00 AM. If I go into that neighborhood at 3:30, talking loudly on my cell phone about how I really have to get to an ATM because I have $10,000 cash in my wallet. The robber mugs me.

Did I recklessly expose myself to that crime? Yes.
Did I deserve that crime? No.

Same thing is true of rape, but the real question is, what constitutes recklessly exposing oneself to rape? Dating people? Having sex with people? Getting drunk? Wearing revealing clothes? Walking alone? Walking alone at night? No, no, no, no, no, and no. I suppose if there was a neighborhood known to be haunted by a rapist who attacked people between the hours of 3:00 and 4:00 AM, and a woman walked into that neighborhood during that time talking loudly to herself about how nobody knows where she is right now, she has no self defense skills, and golly gee she hopes she doesn't get raped ... sure, I could call that recklessly exposing herself to rape.

But she still wouldn't deserve it.

---

This is exactly what I was trying to say a few pages ago - thank you.