So, as of this weekend, four of my closest female friends have been raped. Not by strangers, but by friends. In all instances, the female in question has been with a group of friends, and had alcohol in her system. In all instances, the rapist intended to take advantage of a drunk female friend. In all instances, the female thought she was in a safe place, with safe people, who would protect her in case she DID drink more then was good for her.
[ February 14, 2005, 04:39 PM: Message edited by: Paul Goldner ]
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
How are your friends to whom this happened a while ago doing now? (or are they all recent?)
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
The ones from a while ago, its hard to tell. I'm not physically around them anymore (1000 miles is tough) and when it happened to them, I was. So what they tell me sounds different, you know? One seems ok, one is still struggling with it, as far as I can tell. The third I really don't know.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Oh no! Did they report it?
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
[This post has been excised because, in the words of one Hatracker, it is "insensitive, misogynistic, and condones rape by implying that it occurs when a woman changes her mind after the fact." That's a good enough reason as far as I'm concerned.]
[ February 15, 2005, 06:45 AM: Message edited by: KathrynHJanitor ]
Posted by J T Stryker (Member # 6300) on :
Well if I were you, I wouldn't be posting on here, I would have lost my cool and introduced the guys knee caps to my tire iron. I mean Girls who are my freinds are my family, and I have my mothers temper, a Texan temper, and messing with family is messing with me.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"So if the woman was drunk and isn't totally satisfied with the outcome of the activities once she returns to her senses, it's rape?"
"Well if I were you, I wouldn't be posting on here, I would have lost my cool and introduced the guys knee caps to my tire iron."
Mind if I start with the tire iron on skillery? The girl didn't even LIKE the guy that way! this has nothing to do with liking the sex, and EVERYTHING to go with sex she didn't consent to, was incapable of consenting to, and wouldn't have wanted had she been sober, and probably said "no" to while drunk.
Tire iron planning for the perpetrator is happening.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Don't get stupid, Paul, and get yourself in trouble, too. As much as a tire iron might be momentarily satisfying, legal repurcussions from a succesful rape conviction are much more painful in both the short and long term.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:A good rule of thumb for men would be to never have sex with a drunken woman.
Yes, that is a good rule of thumb, because unless there's pre-existing consent given explicitly or by virtue of the relationship, it's sex without consent. In many states that's rape. And any resistance, even resistance made highly ineffectual by her drunken state, would be revocation of that consent.
I see enormous difficulty prosecuting such offenses, but that doesn't make them less illegal.
And regardless of the law, it's still wrong.
Dagonee
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
quote:a safe place, with safe people
There is no such place, especially when it comes to drinking or drugging. You don't want to be out in public when you're impaired.
Everybody in this little scene is equally pathetic...all cut from the same piece of cloth.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Skillery, your response to this situation worries me very much.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Ah yes, the woman getting drunk among friends is clearly as pathetic as someone who rapes a drunk woman.
*rolls eyes*
I think you've made it very clear who is pathetic around here, skillery.
Posted by J T Stryker (Member # 6300) on :
I retract my defense of Skillery
[ February 14, 2005, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: J T Stryker ]
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
skillery, it would be nice if you could deal with this a little more sensitively, please. Paul was good enough to include the information that alcohol was involved -- he didn't have to, and we certainly would have all be sympathetic.
Regardless of whether alcohol was involved, if a guy pursues sex when it's unreciprocated, it's still wrong.
I was raped twice. (Both times were a long time ago, so it's not difficult for me to talk about, okay.) Neither time alcohol was involved...but my own behavior contributed to what happened. And still, the two men were *wrong* to do as they did. One of those men died this past summer. He wasn't scum...I knew him very well and loved him for years. But his attitudes about sex were completely, totally wrong. It was okay to him that I was underage while he was 28. And a part of me is relieved that he's dead...relief because he's not going to be able to teach those same stupid sex values to his young son.
A man who would have sex with an intoxicated woman should review his values about sex. She's not in a position to give informed consent, IMO. And that makes it rape.
[ February 14, 2005, 05:38 PM: Message edited by: jeniwren ]
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
Either the guy dragged her, kicking and screaming away from the group of friends while they watched, or he did the deed right there in front of everbody.
The whole lousy group gets tire ironed!
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Yes, clearly people among groups of friends never go off to talk to each other more privately, especially not easily manipulated drunk people.
Have you never, ever met a drunk person? Try extrapolating from fact instead of shooting BS fiction out of a place I can't name here.
Posted by Irami Osei-Frimpong (Member # 2229) on :
So what does the tire iron do, again? Or is it just how real dudes solve problems. This whole mess is too bad.
I'm in the men are scum camp. We rigged society for scumminess.
[ February 14, 2005, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: Irami Osei-Frimpong ]
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Huh?(meant for Skillery's last comment)
[ February 14, 2005, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: Elizabeth ]
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
The problem adam, is that there isn't that kind of problem prosecuting assault and battery cases, and that someone who uses the tire iron, no matter how well justified, may find themselves getting punished by the legal system, which in this day and age follows you around forever.
There is also a little problem that things often don't go as we expected in violent situations. One lucky blow, and Paul could suffer severe trauma to various parts of his body.
And don't forget that the next day this guy may just round up a bunch of his friends and come pay a visit to the person who beat him....
Is beating the crap out of this guy really going to accomplish anything? Is it going to teach this guy a lesson? Doubtful. Heal the girl of the effects of the rape? No. The only purpose to this is a brief moment of satisfaction.
I totally, totally, totally understand the impulse to inflict bloody justice on this jackass, but at the very least pursue legal channels first before doing something rash.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
quote:go off to talk to each other more privately
Well, none of us was there, and even she wasn't there. So we'll never know.
You're at a party, and some creepy guy is trying to sweet-talk your girlfriend. You know she hates the guy and would never sleep with him, but you let him lure her away from the crowd anyway. Forget tire irons on kneecaps. There isn't a single knee in this crowd that isn't made of rubber.
I despise the whole drinking, partying, sexing lot!
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
While I find skillery's post offensive I would wager that there are cases where his scenario is dead-on accurate. There are reprehensible men out there that will take any advantage that they can find and not suffer a moments remorse. There are also reprehensible women out there that will file false reports in an effort to punish someone that they know didn't rape them. This isn't a men are bad, women are good world. This is a some people are moral and some are not world. Skillery needs to temper his tone because he doesn't know the particulars, not because he stated an impossibility.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Yeah, I'm not going to tire iron anyone. I'd LIKE to, but its dumb.
Skillery, please go the hell away.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
You just can't stop from inventing situations and then trying to use them to show how everyone is scum, instead of talking based on what we know.
First there's this utterly ridiculous doozy:
quote:Either the guy dragged her, kicking and screaming away from the group of friends while they watched, or he did the deed right there in front of everbody.
As I pointed out, people aren't always "dragged away kicking and screaming" when they go off together. Say the guy told her he wanted to talk to her (he is supposedly a friend, after all) and they went off. See how your description is completely inane?
Then we have this elaborate bit of tripe:
quote:You're at a party, and some creepy guy is trying to sweet-talk your girlfriend. You know she hates the guy and would never sleep with him, but you let him lure her away from the crowd anyway. Forget tire irons on kneecaps. There isn't a single knee in this crowd that isn't made of rubber.
Now apparently the girl was with her boyfriend, not just among a group of friends, and the guy who raped her was trying to sweet talk her, which could be true but definitely isn't necessarily (see: tricked her into going off together under other pretenses). You can only make your gibbering accusations seem even mildly reasonable by fabricating fictional worlds which add considerable information we just don't know.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
The whole idea of leaving a party with someone you didn't arrive with is wrong. (unless you're being rescued) Any "friend" would know that.
Posted by J T Stryker (Member # 6300) on :
And any freind of a freind would have hit you by now.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Ok, I need to clarify some facts, here.
She was at the home of two of her friends (including the rapist). There were a couple other people over. They all had a couple drinks. My friend, who does not drink much, depending on the drink, can have 5 and be fine, or have 1 and be smashed. She had two drinks, and thinks one of them may have been drugged, because her memory of the event is worse then it would have been had she only been drunk. This is not certain. She was planning on spending the night on the couch at the location (and has done this about a dozen times previously), for a variety of reasons. He raped her, and apparently had planned on doing so. He knew it would be rape, because my friend has rejected his offers before.
Was the drinking a problem? Yes. Does it excuse rape? No. Was it rape? Unquestionably.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Edit: To skillery.
I leave parties with people I didn't come with all the time. I did Saturday, in fact. Claudia gave me a ride there, and Ryan & Kari gave me a ride home. It was in the interest of minimizing the number of people driving. I wasn't drunk, and I wasn't involved with any of the people mentioned.
How about you can the blanket statements? The world is not black and white.
[ February 14, 2005, 06:05 PM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
I'm curious why you (skillery) are continuing to pursue a line of posting that implies that the women were at fault. It is becoming apparent that you have a particular axe to grind and without knowing why you feel this way most folks will become tired and disgusted with your boorish outlook.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
quote:and has done this about a dozen times previously
So the scum bag knew this was her pattern and built his scheme around the fact that her friends have left her sleeping on the couch before.
What a sicko.
Sorry, but this isn't my scene, and I obviously don't understand. I go to parties where punch and cookies is served, and everbody goes home before midnight to sleep in their own beds. This other kind of party you're talking about...what kind of built-in protection do you have against sickos?
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote: She had two drinks, and thinks one of them may have been drugged, because her memory of the event is worse then it would have been had she only been drunk. This is not certain.
I don't suppose she went to a hospital as soon as she realized what happened and had a blood test to see if they could find traces of a drug in her system? I really, really wish more people would do this. (In these situations.)
[ February 14, 2005, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
quote:I leave parties with people I didn't come with all the time.
You know what I'm talking about.
Plenty of people go to parties with the intention of hooking up with the right girl or guy, and in their minds, there is a possibility of leaving the party with that person. What kind of built-in safeguards does a person with that mindset rely upon?
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
" and everbody goes home before midnight to sleep in their own beds. This other kind of party you're talking about...what kind of built-in protection do you have against sickos?"
Skillery, she's stayed there because she trusts the two men... they are (were) good friends, has known them for a while, and she builds up trust in people only as they prove themselves worthy of that trust.
She stayed there for a variety of reasons, one of which is that she trusts them, and felt safe with them. She wrote to me once before about them "Its cool, I have friends that I know I can trust to protect me if I get drunk." These men WERE her safegaurds, against sickos. Unfortunately, one of them turned out to be a sicko himself, and managed to hide it very well.
Eventually, we trust people. If we don't, we live our lives in isolation. If we do, the opportunity exists to be burned, and burned badly. but trusting people who ahve shown themselves worthy of trust is better then the alternative.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"Plenty of people go to parties with the intention of hooking up with the right girl or guy, and in their minds, there is a possibility of leaving the party with that person."
The problem is, you've suggested from the beginning that this girl intended to hook up at this gathering, and even stated she chose to hook up with this guy.
That, in my book, makes you almost as bad as the guy who raped her.
Posted by Bella Bee (Member # 7027) on :
Okay, I guess this kind of party is kind of my scene, as I have got extremely drunk in my time and even woken up, (fully clothed, I might add) next to a guy I had never met before. I wasn’t attacked and two of my friends were also sleeping in the room so I know that nothing happened. I was however, amazed at my own stupidity.
The truth is that alcohol makes you less cautious, it makes you do and say things that you never would in ‘real life’. In this weakened state, you have to rely on your friends for protection. You have to rely on them to stop you making a mistake and you have to trust that they are good people. I know that, to those who do not drink, among which I currently number myself, drunk people can easily be scorned and looked down on. It’s very easy to throw stones. But the fact is, this woman clearly trusted this guy. She’s stayed on the couch before, she knows from experience that it’s safe, she thinks that she knows who this guy is, just as you or I think we know our friends. We think that we can be sure that if we were incapacitated for whatever reason, they would not hurt us or take advantage of us. So, sure, drink makes you make choices that you wouldn’t make normally. Now imagine the same scenario with a girl injured or in a coma. Would you ever suggest that she was asking for it? That she led them on somehow by being out of it? Stories like this make me so sad because it just shows that you can’t trust anyone and I really want to believe that I can trust people. That this was a friend, someone who should have taken care of her, kills me.
People have got to get past their moralistic problem with drink and see the real issue.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
quote:chose to hook up with this guy
Well, I implied that she may have hoped for a satisfying outcome. As you have indicated, all she hoped for was a place to rest her weary body.
quote:we live our lives in isolation...but trusting people who have shown themselves worthy of trust is better than the alternative.
And that is where our viewpoints diverge.
Isolation is an acceptable alternative in my mind, which is why I can shoot my mouth off amidst a group of seemingly friendly people without fear of having my kneecaps busted.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote: Plenty of people go to parties with the intention of hooking up with the right girl or guy, and in their minds, there is a possibility of leaving the party with that person. What kind of built-in safeguards does a person with that mindset rely upon?
You want an honest answer? In an ideal situation: You go with friends. If you decide you're leaving with someone else you go over to your friends and tell them you're leaving with so and so, and will call them in the morning. If they notice you're missing, they go looking for you. If they see you leaving without checking in, they come and check on you and make sure you're going voluntarily and aren't too drunk to make that decision.
It's not something I do, but I've been the friend who gets checked in with. And if it's in a club or something and you just met the guy you're leaving with you get his card and give it to your friend, and make sure your friend gets a good look at him. Not that he can't have a fake card, of course, but in the event that you're not there when your friend calls to check on you in the morning, at least she has somewhere to start and a description for the police.
Is it 100% fool-proof? No. But it's a way of mitigating the risks.
I also don't accept a drink from anyone but a bartender/waiter when I'm out, and if I'm at a party at someone's home I pour it myself or it's poured in front of me. Yeah, if someone is good at slight-of-hand they could probably slip something in my drink while they're pouring it, but that at least protects against the casual rapists. Oh, and you never leave your drink unattended, at a bar or houseparty.
That about covers the basics.
Paul:
quote: These men WERE her safegaurds, against sickos. Unfortunately, one of them turned out to be a sicko himself, and managed to hide it very well.
That's why your safeguards should be women.
I don't necessarily follow that myself, there are men I trust. But they're pretty few and far between.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Well, I hope you live the rest of your life without friends, then.
Posted by prolixshore (Member # 4496) on :
Paul, I am sorry to hear about your friends, I know what it is like to be friends with someone who this happens to.
But really, I must say that I respect and admire the restraint you have used in dealing with skillery in this thread. You are clearly a mature and admirable person.
--ApostleRadio
Posted by narrativium (Member # 3230) on :
skillery, this is what adam was talking about when he said
quote:It's enormously difficult to prosecute any rape case, because the accused will almost invariably put his accuser on trial.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
That's not the only reason it's difficult. When the defendant's defense is that the sex was consensual, the prosecutor must prove a negative (lack of consent). It's difficult without some kind of corroboration.
Dagonee
Posted by Jay (Member # 5786) on :
So my question is if you wake up, don’t remember anything, how do you know you were raped? Why couldn’t both have been drunk? How does one not know that they might have initiated things? You don’t remember right? I’m not trying to condone anything here. I’m just saying they personally don’t know. And I guess I just get confused.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I do have problems with the rape charges against the guy by the woman who got up, left the room, and fetched condoms - twice. But those weren't criminal charges, they were collegiate disciplinary charges, and she remembered her actions.
I see what your saying, but I don't think that's an issue here.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
While I don't agree with some of what skillery said, I do understand (even if I don't agree) what he is getting at...that those types of situations are fraught with danger.
Times change, and it might not be the same type of situation that you might be thinking of, though. My sister has some very good male friends, and she trusted them implicitly in situations like that a lot...not so much the drunk part, but she would stay, along with other girlfriends, at peoples house to avoid drinking and driving, or because it is just too late to drive and my family lived in the boonies. People do things now that would have been unthinkable to my parents, like sleep over male friends houses.
I remember, when I first got into pool, and my parents were sure that I was going to get mixed up with drugs or something....because they didn't realize that pool halls weren't the same as they had been when they were growing up. I told them that over and over again, but they never really believed me. Then my Dad got stuck in town, so my wife and I took him to the pool hall I use to hang out at for some snacks and a drink or two. He was completely amazed that the p[lace was more than half filled with tables of women playing pool with their girlfriends...he had heard me say it, but he didn't believe it, not really, until he saw it for himself.
Are there still losers and drunks that go there...yes. Is there still some danger? Possibly...but no more than anywhere else these days.
Nothing excuses what happens to those girls, regardless of where they slept..
I have been on the other end of that, were someone tried to accuse me of something I had not done to get out of trouble herself....and thank god for modern forensic science, which proved me right and her story a lie. I had been drinking, so I wasn't even sure what happened; but I was sure I didn't make a pass at her.
So even guys should think twice about allowing girls to sleep over, even if they are just friends. There is risk to both of their reputations.
(Paul, I am NOT saying that is what happened with your friends, just so you know.)
Kwea
[ February 14, 2005, 08:03 PM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote: I go to parties where punch and cookies is served, and everbody goes home before midnight to sleep in their own beds. This other kind of party you're talking about...what kind of built-in protection do you have against sickos?
I could be wrong, but it's not simply that skillery is unfamiliar with this particular 'scene' and therefore feels free to make uninformed judgements, but that he takes a large measure of pride in his unfamiliarity. It's part of his self-definition and sense of self-worth.
Unfortunately, skillery, while I don't think it's wrong to feel proud of yourself for living a lifestyle you believe is healthy and that (considering the peer pressure of teenage/young adult culture in this country) is sometimes difficult to maintain, I believe you're abusing any appropriate sense of pride and self-worth into a feeling of superiority over others. Instead of protecting yourself, you're actually damaging your ability to see the world correctly and, worse, hurting the feelings of others in the process.
These girls are facing something you can't even begin to imagine. Yes, it may be that you've prevented yourself from situations where you would be vulnerable to an assault like this and it could just be arbitrary, dumb, blind luck. But regardless of circumstances, people who go through this sort of thing deserve only your sympathy and pity for the gambit of emotions and scar tissue they will invariably be facing for a long time to come, and definitely not your derision or censure.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
This thread came on the heels of a discussion I had with some co-workers this morning. An older gentleman was telling of his first-hand knowledge of an LDS lady who couldn't deal with the guilt after having sex with her boyfriend, and couldn't face her bishop with the truth. So she told the bishop that the guy raped her. She only recanted her story after the guy was in jail.
That may explain why I was so quick to heat up.
Sorry that I twisted this thread. I did learn a lot during the course of the discussion. Thanks Mr. Goldner, for remaining civil even though I wasn't.
Posted by Fyfe (Member # 937) on :
((((Paul & friends))))
Jen
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
I appreciate teh apology, skillery.
This is one of the reasons I don't drink, myself. (there have been a couple excpetions, primarily my step sister's engagement party when I had 7 sangria's and wasn't phased). And me and my friend had a huge row about 3 months ago when I got concerned with her drinking, which isn't really a lot. She had TWO drinks. She's only been at parties where she has drank at all twice in the last month and a half. But, its dangerous stuff... probably more so then marijuana, and I don't like when people drink. But one has to remember that, if one wouldn't give consent before drinking, then its impossible for that person to give consent. And if there is no legal assumption of consent, then not giving consent is rape. Even if the person is drunk, or high, or unconscious.
Posted by MaydayDesiax (Member # 5012) on :
My two close friends who were raped (by the same guy, I might add) were dating him at the time.
They said 'no'. He did it anyway. His justification was since they were dating, he could do it.
I swear, when they told me, they had to take my keys away or else I was going to go and make sure he'd never do that to another woman ever again. With my bare hands and some fire, just for starters.
Ever since then, I've been the protector. One of them has a great boyfriend, one I trust with my life. He's one of the only three men I trust if I were to be incapacitated: the other two being my father and Bernard.
The other refuses my help, although I try to do my best.
Another thing about drinks and drugs: none of us do drugs and my close friends learned our drink limits among women, in a locked apartment.
Posted by Allegra (Member # 6773) on :
quote: That's why your safeguards should be women
I had almost this exact thing happen to me less then a year ago. I went to a friend’s apartment her and her male roommate were the only ones there. It was the first friday of spring break and I was ready to relax and drink a little. I normally have a couple drinks and leave it at that, but there was mostly whiskey and I really didn't get a good feel of how much I was drinking. I blacked out. I can to semi-consciousness with him on top of me. I knew what was happening but I couldn't get my thoughts together to do anything. The last time I had been there he had kissed me and tried to have sex with me. I firmly told him no. I do not think that he was plotting a planning for it to happen, but I do think I was taken advantage of, but luckily I had a "friend" right there to help me when I needed her.
By the way Skillery, you are part of why I wasn't able to get anything to happen to the B******, you make me physically ill.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote:. . . there are men I trust. But they're pretty few and far between.
-o-
This sucks, Paul. I'm so sorry for your friends, and I hope against hope that the jerks responsible someday face justice.
-o-
But I don't think this can really be about one gender's moral inferiority to another. Rapists are more likely to be men, sure. But there are destructive things that are more often done by women, as well. To decide to hold one gender to a higher standard before trusting than another . . . well, it not only seems misguided, but, frankly, it seems dangerously naïve.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Hey Allegra, I understand that you're pissed, but he backed down. Let him do so with grace, and maybe he has been educated in this thread. Get his defenses up, and he will be inclined to reject out of hand all that he hears here.
Posted by Allegra (Member # 6773) on :
In his posts he put all of the hateful ignorant things that I have been trying to push out of my mind since it happened. Even the police officer I talked to spouted this crap to me. It brings back everything I have gone through.
I didn't see the apology before. I cannot say I entirely regret what I said, but I do regret the way I said it and I apologise for it.
Posted by MyrddinFyre (Member # 2576) on :
I'm sorry, Paul. That sucks for everyone involved Posted by Chris Bridges (Member # 1138) on :
While I'm sympathetic to the women raped, and in no way mean to excuse the actions of the men involved, I object strongly to "men are scum."
No, they're not. A lot of them are, sure. But blanket statements such as that do us all a disservice, both by placing preconceived blame on all men -- guilty until proven innocent -- and by implying an excuse for the behavior -- suggesting that all men are like that, although some can be trusted. Maybe.
Please avoid blanket statements. Men are not scum. Rapists are. The two are not and never have been equal.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
skillery, that was well done. As I said, it cuts both ways. I was drunk when the events that I was accused of supposedly happened, and sine I was drunk I almost believed her story. Thanks god she had a friend who heard about what she was saying, and knew better....and thanks god the police listened to me and her, and tested me.
I am not the only guy that that has happened to, I know, but the fact is that it is far more likely that a woman suffers the repercussions because of something like this.
Allegra, I am sorry it happened to you, but I am glad that you woke up when you did. That cop was way off base, plain and simple, and I would have gone to his Sargent over it.
Kwea
[ February 15, 2005, 08:06 AM: Message edited by: Kwea ]
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
You could even demand to talk to a female cop. They are more likely to listen with more sympathy and understanding, especially compared to dumb cop. And I'd be loud until I got someone to listen.
I'd also probably show up in emergency and demand a rape kit be done with a blood test for rohipnol or other such substances. It's one way to get a police report filed.
Most rape is caused by friends/acquantances. The last time I read the stats, it was in the neighborhood of 90% plus (sorry, I don't have links right now. If it's that important to anyone, I'll dig some up later.) It sucks.
I'm with Chris on the whole blanket labelling men as scum bit. While there are men who are scum, and rapists definitely fall under that category, there are a whole lot of men who are not, and labelling them all as scum does a disservice.
Having said that, I can also understand the sentiment. I felt that way for a long time, too. Good luck and may the healing be as speedy as possible.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote:But I don't think this can really be about one gender's moral inferiority to another. Rapists are more likely to be men, sure. But there are destructive things that are more often done by women, as well. To decide to hold one gender to a higher standard before trusting than another . . . well, it not only seems misguided, but, frankly, it seems dangerously naïve.
Icarus, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply women were morally superior to men. I just meant that on that particular issue I felt more comfortable trusting women, in general, because a woman is less likely to rape me. So it's easier to trust one to watch my back.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"Men are not scum. Rapists are. The two are not and never have been equal."
Yes. And this is why it is so very importanat that we, as parents, talk to our children about sex, and what is appropriate/OK, and what is dangerous.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
I have serious trouble believing anyone's remaining calm over this -- least of all you, Paul.
The tire iron's the right way to go. If he gets away with this, he'll do it again. Try the legal path first, but if that doesn't get him put away, I don't see an alternative -- nor how anyone here could tolerate the idea of this piece of shit going unpunished. Make sure he'll never be able to harm anyone again.
Posted by Fyfe (Member # 937) on :
Are you serious?
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
So me going to prison for 25 years is a good solution?
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Just to clarify, I do not think all men are scum.
Frankly, I think 90% of PEOPLE are scum, but thats a different story.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
Of course I'm serious. Is this really so rare? If you can't get this bastard put away for rape, then do what the law should have.
I realize I'm probably in the minority of Hatrackers on this issue, but that doesn't mean I'm not right. It's not a question of his guilt -- if you can't prove him guilty in court, that doesn't mean he's not. And if he gets away clean this time, he'll do it again -- maybe to her, maybe to someone else. Your friend deserves vengeance, whether or not she'll take it -- and this bastard deserves punishment. Be smart about taking him, but if you can't get him in court, get him out of it.
I can't believe anyone would seriously disagree with me, distasteful as the thought of vigilante justice might be.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
It's the same logic people use to justify shooting abortion doctors, Lalo. It says, "regardless of what the law says, I will use violence to make sure people I think have done evil are punished."
Dagonee
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
Sturgeon's Law: Sure, 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Your friend deserves vengeance
Nobody deserves vengence.
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
In my view every circumstance has a variable of uncertainty. I would be very hesitant to exact some sort of retribution unless I personally witnessed the whole event. I'm not impugning the veracity Paul's friends but I couldn't take a person's life or beat them senseless unless I was 100 percent sure.
[ February 15, 2005, 06:59 PM: Message edited by: punwit ]
Posted by Allegra (Member # 6773) on :
Beating someone senseless does not bring back the girl's sense of security, or change the damage it has done. Even if you do not have to evidence to put the scum behind bars, you can file a complaint. It will be on file and might help if he does it to another girl.
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
I was being less than honest, I guess. I can hardly envision a scenario that would allow me to assume the right to be judge, jury, and executioner. Under almost every circumstance I would allow the laws of society to follow thier course.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
I depends...if it was my sister or wife, I imagine I would agree mor with Lalo than my earlier post...but that is because I have a bad temper, and I know it.
I rarely let it out, but if I get mad enough to do so then I could end up killing someone....and I don't want that to ever happen.
I would try the legal route, it will probably give her more closure than beating the guy up. And it is safer for you.
Kwea
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
If the guy needs a beating, it should be his victim who does it.
Paul, it sounds like you're trying to be a good friend. I don't speak from personal experience, but it seems to me that your friends will need your emotional support. They will probably need to be reminded that it is not their fault that someone else chose to take advantage of them, even if they did make a choice that allowed the situation to occur in the first place. I hope they are able to press charges and put the guy in jail.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
Right, Kwea. If it were someone in my family, I'm not sure what I would do if the legal system failed. I would hope there would be people around who would help me to see reason.
Posted by dkw (Member # 3264) on :
quote:If the guy needs a beating, it should be his victim who does it.
Bingo. She doesn't need to feel more powerless, and that's exactly what will happen if some well-meaning friend decides to take control of the situation by beating the guy up. Violence might make you feel better (generic "you," not Paul specifically), but this shouldn't be about your needs, it's about hers.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
I can't speak as a raped woman, but if I were, I'd much rather know my rapist were punished -- even if I couldn't deliver it personally -- than allowed to walk, waiting for his next opportunity to strike at me or someone who doesn't know to keep her guard up against him. How many lives does this shit need to destroy before we decide he deserves punishment?
And I'm not talking about beating him up. Not giving him a black eye he can show off to his friends, or knocking out a tooth or two for him to wear around his neck. He relies on force to rape women -- so rob him of that. Break his elbows and/or wrists so he can't throw punches ever again. If the victim feels he merits it, crush his genitals so he won't be able to work up an erection again. This is a horrific crime -- it deserves a strong response.
I speak envisioning my girlfriend raped in my mind's eye. If she were, her rapist wouldn't be alive now, much less permitted to escape with a few broken bones. I don't know how you feel about the victim, Paul, but if you're any sort of friend, you won't deny her at least the chance to consider revenge. Make it her decision to make -- or don't, if you think she'd have guilt over it -- but let her know he didn't get away with it. Let her know she doesn't have to live in fear, let her know she has friends who'll protect her, let her know the bastard who raped her suffered nearly as much as she did.
I don't see how anyone here could deny her justice. Be there for her emotionally, but all the nurturing in the world won't keep this shit from raping again, or let her go on with her life without living in fear of men everywhere. Vengeance may not be able to do that latter, either, but if done right, it might at least keep him from the former. If you can't get him to prison for his crimes, at least ensure he can't repeat them.
To that end, along with this punishment, print up flyers with his color picture, name, address, and phone number -- and the story of what happened, telling the world of what he did and what he is. Distribute them all over campus if he goes to college -- to his professors, all over his dorms, stapled to every bulletin board and taped to every wall you can find. Show his employer and his landlord, mail copies to his family, distribute them at parties and frats/sororities. Let them know what's walking among them.
Do that first -- it further complicates any investigation into who assaulted him. It might've been a boyfriend, a friend, an indignant citizen who saw the flyers, anyone. Just don't let this bastard get away with rape, or he will commit it again. Maybe next time on my girlfriend. Or someone here's wife, or their daughter.
Run the legal gamut, and get him put away if you can. If you can't, though, what matters is that he's stopped. I can't believe anyone here would disagree.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Sometimes I think that when a close friend or relative of a male is raped by another male, that close friend/relative male feels that he has failed in protecting his friend or relative. And then he must make up for that.
Or something.
Fathers and brothers in particular.
Posted by ghost of dkw (Member # 4046) on :
And I think that sort of response is more about your ego than about her needs.
Edit: that wasn't to mac. But it goes along with what she said.
[ February 16, 2005, 01:10 AM: Message edited by: ghost of dkw ]
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Ya know, besides probably all the women. Who are the ones affected by it.
Edit: And that wasn't to mack or dkw. But you knew that.
[ February 16, 2005, 01:12 AM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by Bob the Lawyer (Member # 3278) on :
Sometimes, hard as it is to accept, the path to healing is to move on. Vengeance requires dwelling on the act which, to some, is the last thing they want or need.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Exactly. Vengeance against the perpetrator is an act of ego fulfillment by those who feel that they have failed the victim.
And the victim needs to move on, and wouldn't want the assault to affect more lives that it already has.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
I'd put money that this isn't the rapist's first crime. Imagine how much pain and fear and emotional baggage Paul's friend would have been spared if the his first victim's friends had disabled his ability to rape again? This woman will carry this around for the rest of her life -- you'd let that happen to another woman if a court decides a man Paul already knows to be guilty, isn't?
Telling the victim to suck it up and move on is among the cruelest responses I can imagine. It insults her pain, the suffering she went through -- and lets him escape, unpunished? Let her see some resolution to this. Let her know men aren't free to assault her at will, that there is some element of justice in the world.
Monstrous crimes are to be punished, not ignored. I would much rather know my rapist were punished than go my life wondering who he's raping now -- and if he's coming back after me. Give the woman some closure, and save his future victims from his attacks -- which, I promise you, he'll repeat again if he gets away with them this time.
I'd love to see this reaction to a child molestation case. Tell a kid to suck it up and move on -- that it's okay that his or her rapist got away without any punishment for their crimes. Christ.
Posted by ghost of dkw (Member # 4046) on :
Lalo, I'm not telling someone else to suck it up and move on. I'm telling you that if my friend who offered to kill the guy who sexually assaulted me when I was 19 had done it I would have been furious with him. It would have been the end of our friendship and it would not have helped me in the least.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
Nor am I suggesting Paul kill this rapist. I am suggesting he first show the world what this bastard's done and what he is, then later cripple his ability to rape again. Perhaps this would cost me your friendship -- but I'd rather you hate me and know you can't be hurt without crushing repurcussions than have your affection and know you're in constant pain and fear.
Also, more to the point, this isn't just about Paul's friend -- this is about the woman the rapist will assault next. And the next woman, and the next woman. Rapists aren't going to stop if their victims don't respond -- and if what responses they give garner no punishment, he'll rape again.
Again, I speak with my girlfriend in my mind's eye. She is a stunningly beautiful woman, and gets a ridiculous number of proposals each day. What happens the day this rapist approaches her and doesn't like her rejection? Why wasn't he stopped before he got to her? And do you really imagine I'd let him get away with touching her?
I would kill him. I'm not suggesting Paul do the same, but at least ensure this bastard can't rape the next woman he wants to assault. Give her vengeance, protect the next woman, and end this bastard's career of sexual assault. I fail to see any alternative.
Posted by ghost of dkw (Member # 4046) on :
You might ask if she wants vengence. Because having you assume that you know what she wants/needs and using violence to provide it in spite of her wishes, could be like being raped all over again.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote: Perhaps this would cost me your friendship -- but I'd rather you hate me and know you can't be hurt without crushing repurcussions than have your affection and know you're in constant pain and fear.
My goodness, talk about a paternal complex. Lalo, tell me how taking this choice away from your girlfriend is any different from the rapist taking the choice of whether or not to have sex with him away from her? Yes, the actions are different, but the attitude is exactly the same. You need to accept that some decisions aren't yours to make.
And give a girl a little credit. Constant pain and fear? For the rest of her life? We are stronger then that. Yes, it's a terrible thing. No, it's not something that can't be gotten over. That doesn't make it any better, but what you're proposing could very well make it worse. Not to mention being insulting and demeaning.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Oh, and imagine what it's going to be like for your girlfriend to be the star witness for the prosecution at your murder trial, while you're busy considering the effect of your actions on her.
Posted by ghost of dkw (Member # 4046) on :
Assault trial. He's clarified that he doens't want to actually kill the guy.
[ February 16, 2005, 01:59 AM: Message edited by: ghost of dkw ]
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote: And do you really imagine I'd let him get away with touching her? I would kill him. I'm not suggesting Paul do the same...
If it's a friend, assult. If it's his girlfriend, he kills. He was quite clear on that.
I'm off to bed... any further ludicrous statements by rash youth are up to others to respond to for tonight.
Posted by ghost of dkw (Member # 4046) on :
My mistake. Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
'Salright. It makes up for you saying what I wanted to say faster and better multiple times in this thread. Posted by whiskysunrise (Member # 6819) on :
I was molested from the time I was 8-10 by one of my brother's best friends. I didn't tell anyone about it until much later. My husband knows about it, but he doesn't know the guys name or anything else about him. He doesn't want to see the guy and end up doing something stupid. I would much rather have my husband with me in our home than having vengence.
Before you go and do something stupid like killing or beating someone up because of what they did to someone else you should find out how that someone else wants you in their life.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
There is a distant family acquaintance that killed his wife's father after she told him that he molested her when she was young.
Now he's spending the rest of his life in jail, because he was middle aged when he killed her father.
So, now the poor woman is basically without a husband and a father. She will never get a chance to find some kind of reconciliation with her father. I'm sure she blames herself.
I hesitate to bring this up, but if it makes you feel any better, Lalo, if this guy gets sent to prison, in all likelihood he will suffer much more thoroughly, for a longer period of time, than he ever would jsut at the hands of one guy in one night.
[ February 16, 2005, 02:53 AM: Message edited by: Storm Saxon ]
Posted by Shigosei (Member # 3831) on :
quote:Lalo, tell me how taking this choice away from your girlfriend is any different from the rapist taking the choice of whether or not to have sex with him away from her? Yes, the actions are different, but the attitude is exactly the same.
Right, Eljay. Though I think if a man hurts or kills someone who raped his girlfriend/daughter/sister/wife, I don't think that's on the same level as rape. One is just misguided, the other is malicious. But I think it does show disrespect to disregard a woman's wishes. It also implies that the woman is too weak to take care of it herself. I'm serious about the victim doing the beating. The act itself will probably feel good (at the time), so why take that pleasure for yourself rather than letting the woman do it? I'm not advocating violence, but if it's going to happen I think it's not your [general you] place to do anything but offer to hold the rapist down while the victim hurts him. And under no circumstances should you push it if the woman doesn't want violence.
Lalo, your argument that the rapist needs to be stopped from doing it again in the future has merit. Plaster warning posters all over town if you like (but watch out for libel). Encourage the victim to go through the legal system, and support her through all the mud that will get thrown her way. But remember that there will always be those out there who will take advantage of others. The best way to prevent rapes is to make sure that women are aware of situations where they can be vulnerable. All women should be careful about their drinks at parties, for example, and should have sober friends they can trust nearby when they get drunk. Women should prepared to defend themselves physically, whether that's learning to use a weapon, training in a martial art, or carrying mace. Or even just knowing the basics of what to do in a physical confrontation. Finally, it's very important that women have enough self-confidence and self-esteem to be firm when saying "no." That, not vigilante castration, will be what keeps women safe.
[ February 16, 2005, 03:06 AM: Message edited by: Shigosei ]
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
Heh. Kids, I'm as feminist as it gets -- if you were raped and asked me not to attack the rapist, it'd be difficult, but I'd probably acquiese to your wishes. This isn't a matter of the little lady not knowing what's best for her, or me deciding what she wants -- but for her to decide what's best. As I said, Paul should at least offer her a chance for some sort of revenge. Let it be her decision whether she'll let him go after her rapist, but at least give her that decision. The insult lies in insisting her rape's excusable and forgettable, not in offering her the justice she deserves.
And again, you ignore the crux of my argument -- this isn't just about her, this is also about his future victims. Read Mayday's post -- do you really think the second friend would've been raped if friends of the first had stopped him after his first assault? Do you really imagine this rapist will stop after Paul's friend? Do you really believe another woman won't be raped if he escapes this without any punishment of consequence?
quote:quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Perhaps this would cost me your friendship -- but I'd rather you hate me and know you can't be hurt without crushing repurcussions than have your affection and know you're in constant pain and fear. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My goodness, talk about a paternal complex. Lalo, tell me how taking this choice away from your girlfriend is any different from the rapist taking the choice of whether or not to have sex with him away from her? Yes, the actions are different, but the attitude is exactly the same. You need to accept that some decisions aren't yours to make.
Eljay, I have no idea why you're trying to turn this into a chauvinistic-male argument. Read more carefully -- I've suggested only what you've suggested, that Paul offer himself to her, never that he act against her will. I don't think putting power back in the hands of the rape victim is somehow disrespectful or chauvinistic. Would you like to explain how it is?
quote:And give a girl a little credit. Constant pain and fear? For the rest of her life? We are stronger then that. Yes, it's a terrible thing. No, it's not something that can't be gotten over. That doesn't make it any better, but what you're proposing could very well make it worse. Not to mention being insulting and demeaning.
I base "constant pain and fear" off friends of mine who have been raped -- as children and as adults. I've witnessed firsthand what sexual assault does to friends of mine -- and from my experience, I don't think it's all that off to say that rape, especially if brutal, will haunt a victim all her life, profoundly affecting her emotional and sexual health. If you think it's disrespectful (much less anything similar to rape, christ) to offer rape victims a chance for some sort of punishment, then it's your judgement call, and your decision whether or not you want rapists punished. But if you'll insist that I'm disrespecting this woman by telling Paul to offer himself for justice, then stop disrespecting her in turn by letting him offer, and letting her decide whether or not she wants her rapist punished. This isn't your decision any more than it's mine -- and if you'll notice, I've never suggested he go against her will, only that he make the call himself if she's too wrecked to make the decision. If she's opposed to pursuing justice on her rapist, it's her decision. But let's at least offer it to her instead of pretending the choice is somehow disrespectful of her.
And again, and again, you ignore the primary effect of disabling a rapist -- if he's incapable of future rape, there won't be any future victims. If you consider it disrespectful to act on behalf of those he's already raped, then act to defend those he hasn't yet. Or at least stop declaring an offer of justice to the victim chauvinistic.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
quote:I hesitate to bring this up, but if it makes you feel any better, Lalo, if this guy gets sent to prison, in all likelihood he will suffer much more thoroughly, for a longer period of time, than he ever would jsut at the hands of one guy in one night.
And if he doesn't go to jail?
Your story has a strong point, but I'm not sure it's representative of Paul. Will he commit assault before witnesses? Will he leave evidence behind? Will he identify himself? I'm hardly a criminal mastermind, but I can think of a dozen situations where I would neither be identified nor proven responsible for starting a fight even if I were.
I'm not trying to sound sinister, but this doesn't seem terribly difficult to pull off, nor unjustified. A friend of mine was raped and beaten for years at the hands of an abusive boyfriend -- I'm still waiting for him to be on the same continent as me, and I doubt I'll have much trouble once he is. Isn't the risk worth the tradeoff? I'm certain the bastard's beating another young girl now, and will another after her -- he was convicted by a court and ordered to pay a pittance as a pretense of retribution for the youth he robbed from her, and may have to do the same for the women he'll abuse in the future. Is this punishment enough?
Yes, I'm aware of the if-you're-a-part-of-society-you-follow-society's-laws argument, and yes, I know I would be virulently opposed to vigilante justice in response to almost any other crime. But sexual and physical assault against those who can't defend themselves isn't to be tolerated or dismissed -- I've seen how badly this wrecks people for the rest of their lives, especially if the rape is brutal or the victim young. There's no shit more deserving of incapacitation than a rapist or child molester -- and I don't think I'm in the wrong for suggesting Paul take action into his own hands (with his friend's permission) if the law fails her. Do you? Will this rapist's next victim?
Posted by Space Opera (Member # 6504) on :
Lalo, I appreciate your strong feelings on this - I really do. But besides the problem that I have with taking justice into your own hands I also have a problem with the idea that assaulting a rapist will make him stop raping.
Sure, break his elbows or his wrist so he can't punch. He'll just get the girl drunk or drug her; there's no fight then. Sure, crush his genitals. Do you really think a man needs a penis to penetrate and rape a woman?
Assaulting him might make him stop for awhile, and it might even make you feel better, but it *does not* take away his ability to rape again.
space opera
Posted by Scott R (Member # 567) on :
Lalo-- are you willing that the same standards of proof be set up society wide?
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Do you?
Yes, I do. You are in the wrong for suggesting it.
Dagonee
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
quote: Eljay, I have no idea why you're trying to turn this into a chauvinistic-male argument. Read more carefully -- I've suggested only what you've suggested, that Paul offer himself to her, never that he act against her will. I don't think putting power back in the hands of the rape victim is somehow disrespectful or chauvinistic. Would you like to explain how it is?
Because I am addressing your hypothetical case involving your girlfriend, not the actual case involving Paul's friend. Yes, when you talk about Paul's friend you say he make it an offer once... but never when you're speaking of your own girlfriend do you say you would give her any choice in the matter whatsoever.
quote: I speak envisioning my girlfriend raped in my mind's eye. If she were, her rapist wouldn't be alive now, much less permitted to escape with a few broken bones.
quote: Again, I speak with my girlfriend in my mind's eye. She is a stunningly beautiful woman, and gets a ridiculous number of proposals each day. What happens the day this rapist approaches her and doesn't like her rejection? Why wasn't he stopped before he got to her? And do you really imagine I'd let him get away with touching her? I would kill him.
And if you want to talk about reading carefully, how about reading your own posts carefully? You've never suggested that he act against her will?
quote: Your friend deserves vengeance, whether or not she'll take it -- and this bastard deserves punishment.
In your five posts on the topic prior to the one of mine you quoted, four of them make no mention at all of checking with the woman, and in the one that does you negate it in the very next sentence.
quote: Make it her decision to make -- or don't, if you think she'd have guilt over it
That doesn't say "if she's too wrecked to make the decision." That says if he makes the decision that her poor delicate sensibilities couldn't take the responsibility of deciding such a thing for herself so he should just do it for her.
And then you also imply that even if she says she doesn't want it it's Paul's responsibility to do it anyway, for the benefit of future women the man may rape anyway. There's many, many quotes for that point, I don't think I need to go pull them all, do I?
So I am "turning this into a chauvinistic-male argument" because you are acting like a chauvinistic-male. Or are you telling me that you've already had this conversation with your girlfriend and you know in advance that if she ever gets raped under any circumstances she wants you to go kill the guy?
-------
quote: And again, and again, you ignore the primary effect of disabling a rapist -- if he's incapable of future rape, there won't be any future victims.
Last I checked we do not punish preemptively for possible future crimes in this country. And while you've said repeatedly that if it was you're girlfriend you would kill the guy, you have said that if someone else doesn't want to go that far they can just make him incapable of future rape...
There is no way short of killing a man or leaving him in a coma to make him incapable of future rape. Okay, maybe as a paraplegic, I haven't considered all the possibilities involved.
Crush his genitals and he can rape someone with a broomstick, the barrel of a gun, or any number of other objects. Rape isn't about sex, it's about power. Make the man feel less powerful by ambushing and beating him and I believe you're making it more likely that he tries to regain that sense of personal power by attacking someone else less able to defend themselves than you -- another woman.
Use the tire-iron to break his elbows and he'll use a gun or knife to subdue his victim next time.
I believe that violence begets violence. If you go out and hunt someone down and hurt them you are reacting to the violence done with violence. And if you stop short of killing the person, his reaction when he recovers is probably going to be violence. Maybe he figures out who you are and hunts you down and takes it out on you. Maybe he goes out an assaults more women. However it happens, there will be more violence. Yes, maybe if you don't do it, he continues attacking other women. And maybe the next one will fight back and stop him, or maybe he'll get caught and dealt with by the justice system. You can't know. The only decision you can make is if you are going to react with violence. I don't believe that doing so in the way you are describing adds value to the world. I think it makes the world a worse place, in the aggregate and in the specific -- I think you and your loved ones will be happier in the long run if you do not take the vigilante action.
Okay, so what if I was the one attacked? I would do everything within my power to fight back, hurt the attacker, and escape. I believe that if I hit someone, it should be with the intent that he is going down, and if he goes down I need to make sure he is not able to get back up and follow me and attack again from behind. I have no problem whatsoever with using violence in the heat of the moment. What I am objecting to is the pre-meditated vigilante type of violence you are advocating.
Oh, and I'm sure you're a very capable potential felon, Lalo, but everyone who commits a crime thinks they can get away with it. They wouldn't do it otherwise, ya know? So all those people sitting in prison right now also thought the could do their crime in a way that couldn't be traced back to them. Yep, I think you're probably smarter than the vast majority of the people in prison right now. But do I think you're smarter than every single police officer who could possibly be assigned to your case? Ooooooo, that's a toughie. I'm gonna have to go with "No."
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
quote:And I'm not talking about beating him up. Not giving him a black eye he can show off to his friends, or knocking out a tooth or two for him to wear around his neck. He relies on force to rape women -- so rob him of that. Break his elbows and/or wrists so he can't throw punches ever again. If the victim feels he merits it, crush his genitals so he won't be able to work up an erection again. This is a horrific crime -- it deserves a strong response.
This goes way beyond the bounds of just being illegal. This kind of action is just plain evil. True, it's answering evil with evil, but it's still evil.
quote:I don't see how anyone here could deny her justice.
That's not justice. It's just revenge.
quote:Just don't let this bastard get away with rape, or he will commit it again.
I don't see how you can know that. Is it possible for him to realize the evil that he has done and change? Or is he past redemption? I don't believe he is.
But let's assume that he *will* rape given the right opportunity.
If we can take you at your word, you will murder given the right circumstances. Are we justified in killing you because of your future murders?
quote:Monstrous crimes are to be punished, not ignored.
But not by you. After seeing what you've posted here, you are one of the last people I would want to see deciding the fate of others. Especial someone who you have a personal stake in seeing punished.
quote:And do you really imagine I'd let him get away with touching her?
I would kill him.
I really hope that this is hyperbole. If not, then you are the sort of person that I don't want on my streets. You decide that the law is inadequate, so you take it upon yourself to assasinate those who have wronged you.
Knowing that there are people like you out there makes me want to go check to make sure that my shotgun is loaded.
[ February 16, 2005, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: AntiCool ]
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Not to mention -- What if she fingered the wrong guy? What if she's lying to you? What if she's not lying but was unclear in her refusal, and the guy honestly thought it was consentual? I'm not saying that excuses his behavior, but I think it's a mitigating factor... do you only break one kneecap then, instead of both, since it's a somewhat lesser crime?
Even in court with professional prosecution and defense, mistakes can be made. But you're absolutely positive you know what happened and won't make a mistake in serving out your punishment.
Yeah, I know, you trust your girlfriend, and you're sure she'd never lie to you, and you'd only do it if you were absolutely sure you got the right guy. But the thing is, I don't trust your girlfriend. I don't know her, I have no reason to trust her. And when you come swinging for my boyfriend or brother in revenge, you'll excuse me if I prosecute you to the fullest extent of the law. Even if I believe there's a chance he did it, because you didn't give him the chance to prove his innocence.
[ February 16, 2005, 10:41 AM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
Trust and How We Think of Our Bodies
Before I get in more trouble, I'll agree that rapists are scum and should be punished.
This incident has me thinking about how we view our own bodies and other people's bodies. American society in general has been led by the media to view bodies as objects. We see people in print and on film who display their bodies and allow things to be done to their bodies for money. They seem to be less human and more like twisted Gumby dolls.
I don’t know if there is much that we can do at this point to reverse the dehumanizing effects caused by the media, and especially by pornography. I’m not saying that all rapists are motivated by media or by pornography, but I suspect that they are. And I’m thinking that in the rapist’s mind, and in many media junkies’ minds, women are viewed as objects to be used, abused, and brutalized.
Assuming that there is little that can be done to alter the minds of these violent criminals, I’m wondering if we need to alter our thinking about our own bodies. If others are viewing our bodies as objects, how valuable are those objects/bodies, and how much should we trust others with our bodies?
Would you leave a hundred dollar bill on your friend’s couch? Would you leave a rare and exotic pet that only you knew how to care for in the care of your friend? Would you loan your Lamborghini to your friend?
Maybe like the One Ring in The Lord of the Rings, there are some objects that are so valuable and potentially powerful that they should never be trusted to anyone.
Posted by whiskysunrise (Member # 6819) on :
ElJay I like what you have to say.
Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
quote:Because I am addressing your hypothetical case involving your girlfriend, not the actual case involving Paul's friend. Yes, when you talk about Paul's friend you say he make it an offer once... but never when you're speaking of your own girlfriend do you say you would give her any choice in the matter whatsoever.
So your interpretation of my position is that I want rape victims offered the chance to take revenge on their rapists, because I'm a chauvinistic male, but I apparently won't offer my girlfriend the same choice, again because I'm a chauvinistic male?
Seriously?
No, LJ. My apologies if I haven't made this clear enough, but my position is that women deserve the chance for retribution after rape. If a court decides there's no way to prove it wasn't willing, and I trust the victim absolutely to be accurate and honest, I have very few moral qualms about giving a rapist what he deserves -- with the victim's permission. I realize I'm in the minority on this -- still, I doubt many people would stand by and watch their friends' or families' rapists walk away without any repurcussions for what is in many cases destroying the victim's life.
It's absolutely adorable, said the chauvinistic male, that the you want to make this a personal fight -- but it isn't. I'm not the bad guy here, this rapist is. Punishing this rapist with the victim's consent still doesn't make me the villain, no matter how loudly or often you proclaim that violence begets violence, so no harm should come to those who harm those incapable of defending themselves, and let's maybe kinda hope that someday he's careless with one of his victims. Who will she be, LJ? Your sister again? My girlfriend? Rapists destroy lives, even if some women manage to pull through relatively unscarred by the experience. How many would Paul's rapist need to destroy before you decide that the law won't stop him, so someone else should?
I do, however, owe your sister an apology. I misread one of her posts:
quote:Lalo, I'm not telling someone else to suck it up and move on. I'm telling you that if my friend who offered to kill the guy who sexually assaulted me when I was 19 had done it I would have been furious with him. It would have been the end of our friendship and it would not have helped me in the least.
Nor am I suggesting Paul kill this rapist. I am suggesting he first show the world what this bastard's done and what he is, then later cripple his ability to rape again. Perhaps this would cost me your friendship -- but I'd rather you hate me and know you can't be hurt without crushing repurcussions than have your affection and know you're in constant pain and fear.
I read this as "if my friend who offered to kill the guy who sexually assaulted me when I was 19 had done [offered] it I would have been furious with him." Hence my promise to offer if it ever happens to a friend I trust, even if "this would cost me your friendship." I wasn't threatening to kill or cripple anyone against Dana's will.
I'm very aware of how inconsistent my position on sexual assault is with the rest of my politics. No, Scott, I don't think this is any standard of proof for all of society, but I'm willing to trust my judgement and that of those I trust absolutely if they tell me they've been raped -- and yes, I'm very aware of how flawed this position is when applied to anyone else.
I understand and agree with Dagonee's arguments that people use the same rationale to kill abortion doctors -- it's the same principle, but applied to a different crime. If I have no doubt that a man raped a person I trust to tell me the truth, then I have an unforgivable crime, certainty of guilt, and escape from legal repurcussions despite it. Yes, many people believe the same of abortion doctors -- again, I'm keenly aware of how little this policy should apply to any other crime, or any other person for that matter.
But I trust myself, if nobody else, to act on solid evidence that may not be accepted in court (a trustworthy friend's word against his, for example). I wouldn't accept this reasoning from anyone else, but I trust my own judgement. I have faith in very few people to speak truth, but if I'm certain those few are -- and I'm not asking you to accept it, LJ -- I have very little trouble with the idea of punishing a rapist. If a wife or daughter here were raped, I doubt any spouse or sibling or parent here would disagree with me. Maybe it is criminal, but I can hardly call it immoral.
Believe me, I would be arguing your argument for you if a) it were someone else suggesting vigilante justice or b) it were a different crime. I support the ACLU, I consider vigilante justice a crime and often a terrible one, and brutality goes against every belief I have -- except in this case. If a friend, a girlfriend, a wife, a daughter I trust or love is raped, and I trust her when she tells me she identified and refused him, then I have very little problem with finding the bastard who did this to her. Forgive me for bringing a personal example into this, but if Dana were willing to let you go after hers (and for the sake of consistency, say this is shortly after the crime) -- would you doubt her word? Would you let the bastard walk away if she were willing to let you go after him, even if you couldn't definitively prove to me that he were guilty?
If my mother or my girlfriend were raped, do you seriously expect me to watch the rapist walk away because we couldn't prove it was unwilling?
The puzzling quality of your argument, LJ, is that you seem to be willing to dismiss a rapist's crimes post-trial in hopes that he won't return for more and maybe the victim can move on with her life -- but you're aghast at the idea of anyone punishing a monster who attacks innocent women. Her-word-against-his arguments are useless in court, but if it came down between, as an example to make it personal, your mother and a sleazy co-worker, who do you think's telling the truth? Even if you couldn't prove it in court? Would you seriously just turn away and wait to hear news of his next victim -- or don't, because the next victim's a fifteen year old girl too ashamed to tell anyone? Or a mother who doesn't want her kids to know? Or a sister who promises to continue servicing him so long as he doesn't go after her baby sister?
No, I don't have many problems with going after rapists if they manage to evade the law, despite the inconsistencies this position may have with everything I believe in. The ends justify the means. The crime justifies the ends. Nothing justifies the crime.
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
quote:But I trust myself, if nobody else, to act on solid evidence that may not be accepted in court (a trustworthy friend's word against his, for example). I wouldn't accept this reasoning from anyone else, but I trust my own judgement.
And because we don't trust your judgment, your actions would rightly be called murder, and you would deserve to be punished accordingly.
quote:Believe me, I would be arguing your argument for you if a) it were someone else suggesting vigilante justice
Why do you feel that you are qualified to mete out vigilante justice, but the rest of us aren't? I fail to see how this is anything but the height of arrogance.
quote:If my mother or my girlfriend were raped, do you seriously expect me to watch the rapist walk away because we couldn't prove it was unwilling?
I expect you to not break the law.
quote:The ends justify the means.
And thus I see the foundation of our disagreement. I consider this to be an evil idea.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Skillery, your argument pre-supposes that rape is more common now then it was prior to widespread visual media.
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
My sister was abducted at gunpoint from the convenience store where she worked. She was then raped and thankfully, released. At the time I was filled with anger, dread and a feeling of helplessness. I wanted justice and I would call my sister asking for updates on the search for the perp, but it was obvious from her reticence that she was more focused on putting the episode behind her.
I truly can't imagine that I would have been willing to kill her attacker if he would have been identified, charged but not convicted. I'm not sure how I would have felt. I'd have no problem using extreme violence if I had happened upon the crime but to take retribution in my own hands after the fact just seems wrong. While I am not a religious person I do hope there is some sort of accounting in the end.
My experience dictates that calls for revenge are a symptom of one's personal feelings of helplessness and should be viewed as selfishly motivated. I had to let matters drop because I wasn't helping Shelly, I was prolonging her agony. The only thing I was truly capable of was letting her know that I loved her and that I was there if she needed me.
[ February 16, 2005, 03:32 PM: Message edited by: punwit ]
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Lalo, I don't have the time to fully respond to you right now, and I'm not sure when I'm going to. I just want you to know that I read your response, and that I feel you are seriously mischaracterizing some things I said and drawing invalid interpretations from others.
If I get the time to write a considered response before the thread dies I will. I'm mostly writing this so everyone reading, including but not limited to you, knows that I disagree with the conclusions you've drawn. This is the henna party weekend, and I've got stuff after work every night this week, so if the thread dies or substaintially changes before I have time to revisit it I'm not going to drag it back up just to make my points. I don't really expect to change your mind, and I doubt anyone else agrees with you, so it wouldn't be worth it.
But if I have time, I'll happily sit here and address every last one of your points. I'm sure you're looking forward to it.
Added: And thank you, whiskeysunrise.
[ February 16, 2005, 03:45 PM: Message edited by: ElJay ]
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
Paul G., there is no way of knowing whether rape is more common now than in the past because rape usually goes unreported. So my assumption that rape is more common nowadays doesn't hold up well.
I think maybe rape in the past was primarily perpetrated by family members on helpless little girls who could have done nothing to prevent it.
I think rape by friends and acquaintances is a more recent development because it is now acceptable for single women to live away from their parents, whereas in the past, the girl wouldn’t have left her parents until she got married in her late teens.
So who is doing the raping may have shifted. And the causes and motivations may have shifted as well. I think the media’s portrayal of women as sex objects has probably increased the incidence of rape. I think this shift in causes and motivations requires a new, enhanced set of defenses.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Wow, ElJay. I can't think of how many times I have had strong feelings in reaction to a thread, not had the time or energy to post it then, and not wanted to drag the thread back up later. I'm always frustrated, though, that not dragging the thread back up means not getting to register my position . . .
I may have to make use of this technique . . . I think I will call it "giving an ElJay Warning"!
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Rape isn't about sex. It's about power.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
Mack, what you said is also what my wife learned when she took classes, preparing to serve as a rape crisis counselor.
I'm thinking that motivation is shifting. With the object-ification of women in the media, the more recent view of women as a venue/object for releasing sexual tension is adding to the power motivation.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Icarus:
I'm flattered. Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Do you have ANY support for this idea, skillery? Or is it purely conjecture? Because, as far as I can tell, the rape rate has been going down for the last decade or so, as media objectification of women has been become more widespread.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
...at least in the cases of Arthur Bishop and Gary Gilmore.
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
quote:Rape isn't about sex. It's about power.
Although it is widely touted as a truism, I am not convinced this is actually true.
It might be, but I haven't seen anything to actually support this oft-made assertion.
Posted by Space Opera (Member # 6504) on :
punwit, I'm so glad that you were able to be there for your sister. I think your story is a really moving example of the fact that what we may want is not always what a rape victim needs.
I can honestly understand Lalo's intial feelings, just not his entire argument. If someone ever molested my son or daughter, you bet my first instinct would be to find the bastard and use a gun for the first time in my life - especially if the court system failed us. But, I truly feel that when we make a decision we not only make one for ourselves, but for those around us as well. It certainly wouldn't do my children any good to have Mommy in jail, and it wouldn't do my community good to promote vigilante justice.
But, I understand the urge.
space opera
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Anti-cool, I agree with mac. It's about power. But not all rapists are equally hungry for the power to dominate.
A guy who's okay with date rape isn't necessarily so hungry for power he's willing to take the same risks as a guy who will rape at knife point.
Two cases: 1: A much older man is attracted to a 15 year old. He cajoles her into sex. He's not overtly threatening and doesn't hurt her physically, but he still dominates his will over hers. 2: A guy invites his female friend out for a weekend of fun after she's laid off her job abruptly. She is clear before they leave: no sex. She gives him no indication that the rules have changed. Despite her repeated No's, he forces sex on her that night, though she doesn't fight very hard, afraid he might hurt her.
In both cases, I think if you'd asked the guys, they would have said it was just sex. But it is about power too, since they use their dominant strength to take what they want.
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
In that first case, the statement "Rape isn't about sex. It's about power" is not accurate.
[ February 16, 2005, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: AntiCool ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
quote: Despite her repeated No's, he forces sex on her that night, though she doesn't fight very hard, afraid he might hurt her.
Do you have all your gender pronouns as you wish them to be in this sentance?
Posted by Lady Jane (Member # 7249) on :
I think the pronouns are correct - the final adjectival phrase is modifying the subject of the previous clause.
[ February 16, 2005, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: Lady Jane ]
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
OK, I got it now. Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Anticool, actually, I'd argue that it was more so about power in the first case than the second. At least in the second, she was an adult capable of making a much better decision. In the first, it was like shooting ducks in a barrel. Most fifteen year olds lack the maturity, experience and self confidence to sufficiently resist an adult's will. There are very, very good reasons to keep statutory rape laws. It is far, far more about power than sexual gratification.
edit: and yeah, Katie had it right.
[ February 16, 2005, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: jeniwren ]
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
quote:It is far, far more about power than sexual gratification.
Even if this is true, saying that "It's not about sex" is still not accurate.
Posted by skillery (Member # 6209) on :
Does knowing that there are sex addicts out there who view people as things change our behavior in public? Before it might have been enough to avoid dark places when alone. But now even our trusted friends may have been pre-conditioned to overreact to the slightest stimulus.
Posted by mothertree (Member # 4999) on :
I parked a couple blocks west of a job interview so I wouldn't have to pay a meter, and while nothing happened to me, as I noted the surroundings I realized that I was doing something at least as thoughtless as getting drunk at a party.
The trouble I have with the violent retaliation tactic is that it turns your rapist into a victim without him ever feeling remorse. I don't know if that makes any sense. But I'm definitely of the opinion that answering violence with violence doesn't solve much in the long run.
Also, Lalo, I'm a little concerned about the degree of posessiveness your post about your girlfriend contained. But, then, I just watched a show on educational TV about a teen abuse prevention group.
I'm sure rape rates have gone down in the last 10 years because the population is graying. The question is what is the rate of projected rapes among people 18-35 compared with 10 and 20 etc. years ago?
Posted by jeniwren (Member # 2002) on :
Anti-cool, as the cases cited were not hypothetical, you're right and wrong. Sex drive and power hunger were pretty much synonymous for Case Guy 1. He was about as alpha male as you can get. I don't think either desire went without the other.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
Thinking about situation #1, what if he is attracted to her because she is attractive and he tries for sex because he thinks he can get it more easily out of someone naive? I would think that was more about sex than power, power being a means to getting the sex. Of course, I'm not a guy, so I can only guess as to the motivations of this hypothetical male.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Well what do you know, I found some time...
quote: quote: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Because I am addressing your hypothetical case involving your girlfriend, not the actual case involving Paul's friend. Yes, when you talk about Paul's friend you say he make it an offer once... but never when you're speaking of your own girlfriend do you say you would give her any choice in the matter whatsoever. ------------------------------------------------------------------------
So your interpretation of my position is that I want rape victims offered the chance to take revenge on their rapists, because I'm a chauvinistic male, but I apparently won't offer my girlfriend the same choice, again because I'm a chauvinistic male?
I don't see how you got what you characterize as my interpretation of your position from what you quoted, but to clarify: While I don't think you will find a rape victim who will take you up on your offer, I'm fine with you making the offer and don't think that makes you a chauvinistic male. I think if you make the decision for the woman, whether it's your girlfriend or anyone else, that makes you a chauvinistic male.
quote: Seriously? No, LJ. My apologies if I haven't made this clear enough, but my position is that women deserve the chance for retribution after rape. If a court decides there's no way to prove it wasn't willing, and I trust the victim absolutely to be accurate and honest, I have very few moral qualms about giving a rapist what he deserves -- with the victim's permission.
You still have not given me a straight answer to if you would honor your girlfriends wishes about if she wanted you to carry out retribution or not. You still have not even said if you'd ask her opinion. You railed against me in your last message for not giving you a straight answer to what you thought was your main point and I thought was drek, so I'll ask again, very clearly, in two parts:
1. If your girlfriend was raped tomorrow and told you who did it, would you ask her if she wanted you to take retribution?
2. If she said no, would you do it anyway?
quote: still, I doubt many people would stand by and watch their friends' or families' rapists walk away without any repurcussions for what is in many cases destroying the victim's life.
Not one single person other than you has said they would take violent retribution in this situation, though some have said their initial gut reaction would be to want to. So while we probably don't have a representative sample of anything yet, it's hard to see how you can "doubt many would stand by and watch." Also, I have never said I don't want repercussions. I have many times, here and elsewhere, been an advocate of urging women to go to the police and do everything they can do get their attacker punished to the fullest extent of the law. There are other activities I find appropriate as well, but we'll touch on that later.
In other words no, I don't want to see my rapist walk away. Nor do I want to see my boyfriend try to kill him. I would hope for a middle ground, but if the choice is between those two extremes then yes, I take the former.
quote: It's absolutely adorable, said the chauvinistic male, that the you want to make this a personal fight -- but it isn't.
Personal? I haven't come close to getting personal yet. All the examples I've used are ones you brought up. Here's the thing -- I think you are using an intentionally inflammatory posting style in an attempt to inflame an emotional response. In my opinion, it just makes you look juvenile, but I suppose it might be working on others.
quote: I'm not the bad guy here, this rapist is. Punishing this rapist with the victim's consent still doesn't make me the villain,
No it doesn't make you the bad guy or the villain. It does, however, make you a bad guy and a villain.
quote: no matter how loudly or often you proclaim that violence begets violence, so no harm should come to those who harm those incapable of defending themselves,
I don't believe I proclaimed that violence begets violence. I believe I opined it. You can go back and check if you like, you'll find that reading carefully really does make a difference. I'm pretty sure that you'll try to accuse me of playing with semantics next. If you didn't try it already with my last point. But I think it's an important difference. In that paragraph I was not trying to say that what you say you would do is wrong -- although obviously I believe that it is. I was trying to explain to you why I believe as I do. I thought perhaps the seeing reasoning behind my feelings would help you understand me better and maybe temper your reaction, so you could at least see the opposing viewpoint. Instead you try to twist my words and take them out of context. It's cute when you think everything's so black and white.
quote: and let's maybe kinda hope that someday he's careless with one of his victims.
Twisting the night away.... Let's look at what I said, shall we?
quote: And if you stop short of killing the person, his reaction when he recovers is probably going to be violence. Maybe he figures out who you are and hunts you down and takes it out on you. Maybe he goes out an assaults more women. However it happens, there will be more violence. Yes, maybe if you don't do it, he continues attacking other women. And maybe the next one will fight back and stop him, or maybe he'll get caught and dealt with by the justice system. You can't know.
Emphasis added. I think that's pretty obviously a string of hypotheticals. Are you honestly suggesting that I was saying we should hope that he's careless with his next victim as the best way of stopping a rapist? That's pretty far-fetched.
quote: Who will she be, LJ? Your sister again? My girlfriend?
Goodness, Lalo, if you're going to get personal about this why didn't you just say me?
quote: Rapists destroy lives, even if some women manage to pull through relatively unscarred by the experience. How many would Paul's rapist need to destroy before you decide that the law won't stop him, so someone else should?
Ooooooh, I'm gonna play semantics again. If Paul was raped, he certainly didn't tell us about it. But to answer your question... before I would endorse vigilante justice I would try to change the laws, I would lobby to change the people enforcing them, I would press to hold the police department accountable, and I would raise holy hell anywhere and everywhere I thought might help. I would organize a grassroots movement dedicated to sexual assault awareness and tough sentencing, or join one that was already in existence and light a fire under there asses to step things up. I would do everything within the bounds of the law to get the rapist brought to justice.
I would not go out and kill him myself until the country descends into anarchy. That's if the rapes me, that's if he rapes you, that's if he rapes both of us, your grandmother, and my dog. And I would not endorse you killing him, either.
quote: I wouldn't accept this reasoning from anyone else, but I trust my own judgement.
Others have pointed out the ludicrousness and hypocrisy of this statement, so I don't think I need to. I just hope you understand when I decide that I'm not accepting anyone else's reasoning on if they are fit to bear children or not and turn you in for forceable sterilization. Unfortunately, since I don't believe in vigilantism, it'll have to wait until after I'm the supreme ruler of the world, but at least you have something to look forward to.
quote: If a wife or daughter here were raped, I doubt any spouse or sibling or parent here would disagree with me.
Do I need to point out again that so far everyone on the bleeding thread has disagreed with you? I bet that's included a few spouses, siblings, and/or parents.
quote: Believe me, I would be arguing your argument for you if a) it were someone else suggesting vigilante justice or b) it were a different crime. I support the ACLU, I consider vigilante justice a crime and often a terrible one, and brutality goes against every belief I have -- except in this case.
Oh! Then that makes it all better, that it's only in this case! Forget I said anything. You just go right ahead running around killing rapists. Do you read what you type? Do you think it sounds credible in the slightest? And I do mean slightest?
quote: Forgive me for bringing a personal example into this, but if Dana were willing to let you go after hers (and for the sake of consistency, say this is shortly after the crime) -- would you doubt her word? Would you let the bastard walk away if she were willing to let you go after him, even if you couldn't definitively prove to me that he were guilty?
If Dana told me she wanted me to go after her rapist I would urge her to get counseling. And this isn't just because I know my sister and know she would never suggest such a thing in her right mind... if anyone I loved suggested such a thing that would be my response.
Before you call me a coward, there are things I would go to jail for. Before you call me cold, if I could make it so I was the one attacked instead of her I would in a heartbeat, without hesitation. (I have been sexually attacked, incidentally, although not as severely.)
quote: The puzzling quality of your argument, LJ, is that you seem to be willing to dismiss a rapist's crimes post-trial
Did I imply that? I certainly didn't say it. Or is it just that you think "not killing" equals "dismissing?"
quote: in hopes that he won't return for more and maybe the victim can move on with her life -- but you're aghast at the idea of anyone punishing a monster who attacks innocent women.
Oh, I'm not aghast at the idea of anyone punishing him. I'd be quite happy if the court and penal system did it.
quote: Her-word-against-his arguments are useless in court, but if it came down between, as an example to make it personal, your mother and a sleazy co-worker, who do you think's telling the truth? Even if you couldn't prove it in court? Would you seriously just turn away and wait to hear news of his next victim
Who would I believe? My mother, of course. Whether the courts did or not. But how many examples to you need to give, how many ways do you need to ask it, before you understand that if we cannot get him convicted, while I would still consider him guilty as sin, I WOULD NOT THEN GO KILL HIM OR WANT ANYONE ELSE TO? You're just saying the same thing over and over. I get your point. I understand what you think you would do, and why. If you want to convince anyone about it, however, you're going to have to do a lot better than these little scare tactics you keep trying to use.
I will undoubtably get slammed for playing the age card, but Lalo, I fully expect that if you archieve this thread and look back at it in 10 years your position will have mellowed and you'll be more than a bit abashed at what you've said. And I'm talking the substance of your opinions. In 10 years I'll probably regret having wasted my time on this, but I bet my feelings won't have changed. They haven't in the last 10 on this particular issue.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
What Eljay said. Cuz she did it so much better than I would have had the patience for. Posted by gnixing (Member # 768) on :
quote: If Paul was raped, he certainly didn't tell us about it.
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
LJ is on fire tonight!
*high fives LJ*
quote:I will undoubtably get slammed for playing the age card, but Lalo, I fully expect that if you archieve this thread and look back at it in 10 years your position will have mellowed and you'll be more than a bit abashed at what you've said. And I'm talking the substance of your opinions. In 10 years I'll probably regret having wasted my time on this, but I bet my feelings won't have changed. They haven't in the last 10 on this particular issue.
This really struck a chord with me. I remember saying things very similar to what Lalo has said today. I was about Lalo's age, and it was 12 years ago. There is truth to what she just said.
Posted by beverly (Member # 6246) on :
That reminds me of that "Red Blue" cartoon about Why You Should Not Get a Tattoo: Because You Are An Idiot.
Think back 10 years. You were an idiot, right? Anything you would have tattooed on your body back then you would be ashamed to have now, right? Well, guess what! That's how you will feel 10 years from now.
Posted by punwit (Member # 6388) on :
Eljay, you are truly an elegant and eloquent gem. Posted by Lalo (Member # 3772) on :
quote: quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Seriously? No, LJ. My apologies if I haven't made this clear enough, but my position is that women deserve the chance for retribution after rape. If a court decides there's no way to prove it wasn't willing, and I trust the victim absolutely to be accurate and honest, I have very few moral qualms about giving a rapist what he deserves -- with the victim's permission. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You still have not given me a straight answer to if you would honor your girlfriends wishes about if she wanted you to carry out retribution or not. You still have not even said if you'd ask her opinion. You railed against me in your last message for not giving you a straight answer to what you thought was your main point and I thought was drek, so I'll ask again, very clearly, in two parts:
1. If your girlfriend was raped tomorrow and told you who did it, would you ask her if she wanted you to take retribution?
2. If she said no, would you do it anyway?
So... Are you serious, or just trying to razz me?
If the quote you cited to respond to weren't enough of an answer -- no, LJ. If my girlfriend, or any friend, were opposed to me taking action, I'd probably argue against it. But I'm not making a move without her consent, and I've never suggested Paul do such. You have my sincere apologies if I've let you believe I'd ever endorse action against the victim's will -- isn't this why I want action taken against the rapist in the first place?
quote: quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Who will she be, LJ? Your sister again? My girlfriend? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goodness, Lalo, if you're going to get personal about this why didn't you just say me?
Whoa, kid. I know I'd rather suffer through something than watch a loved one do it -- I assume you, and most decent people, are the same way. There are crimes I'd tolerate done to my own body I'd kill for (with the victim's permission) if done to someone I love.
quote:quote: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I wouldn't accept this reasoning from anyone else, but I trust my own judgement. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Others have pointed out the ludicrousness and hypocrisy of this statement, so I don't think I need to. I just hope you understand when I decide that I'm not accepting anyone else's reasoning on if they are fit to bear children or not and turn you in for forceable sterilization. Unfortunately, since I don't believe in vigilantism, it'll have to wait until after I'm the supreme ruler of the world, but at least you have something to look forward to.
Others? Pookie, I do believe I was the first to point out how flawed my reasoning is.
And, wow. Forceable sterilization? At least let me be the cute little felon I so desperately want to be before you decide I need to be stopped from ever reproducing.
I'm hitting a nerve with you, but I'm not sure why. In my world, it's decent -- even honorable -- if a friend takes revenge on a rapist. I dislike vigilante justice as much or more than you do, but I know and approve that if I beat or rape my girlfriend, her brother's (and probably many others) coming after me. I still have serious trouble believing you'd insist he undergo forceable sterilization because he's defending his sister, or me my girlfriend, or Paul his friend, from a true monster.
I'd also like to point out I am not suggesting, nor have I suggested, that Paul kill this rapist. I do endorse taking revenge on the rapist so he knows a) his last victim won't be a future one, and b) rape has consequences, even if you manage to get her alone and in circumstances which prevents the law from being able to conclusively prove the rape wasn't willing.
I'm a feminist, LJ -- I don't know how or why you tried to turn this into a big-bad-man-making-her-decisions-for-her. For yet further clarification, no, I don't endorse action without the victim's approval. Of all the flaws in vigilante justice to point out, you tack up one I disagree with? Attack the stupidity of I'll-do-what-the-law-doesn't, attack the inconsistency of this particular belief with the rest of my philosophy -- but feminism against a feminist?
Again, you seem to be taking this intensely personally, and I'm not sure why. I've never attacked you or Dana (and I've apologized for misunderstanding Dana when I promised to offer myself to her, even if doing so would cost me her friendship), nor do I consider what I'm endorsing that outrageous -- or at least not offensive to you. You can point out how ludicrous vigilante justice is and the danger it poses to a civilized society, but Dag's done so without getting as furiously disdainful as you have. Why? If I offend -- now that I hope it's clear to you that I endorse no action against or without the victim's consent -- I hope you'll accept my apologies for whatever slight I've done you.
If I look back in ten years, I may -- god forbid -- have a daughter, assuming you haven't decided to forceably sterilize me. If she were raped or molested, I seriously doubt my position would have changed.
I understand that you're opposed to vigilante justice, LJ -- so am I. But I don't consider it immoral in instances of certain sexual assault. Note that I'm not endorsing murder, no matter how tempted I would be if the victim were especially dear to me. But I have very few qualms about beating a rapist or child molester. If you disagree, your position's duly noted -- I respectfully disagree with your belief that if the court system can't stop the rapist, we'll need to wait until an unknown number of future victims later and hope they press charges and maybe they'll succeed where the first victim couldn't. Hopefully life never presents either of us with this choice ever again.
Erthang clear, or do you have any further issue with my stance aside from a distaste for vigilante justice?
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Just quickly, Lalo, as as fun as this is all my time pressures still apply --
Thank you for answering my question. Yes, I was being serious, every time you've talked about checking with the woman first it's been in widesweeping generalities, and everytime you've gone to the specific about your situation you've seemed to be dodging that point.
You still hit the rhetoric so much, though...
quote: But I'm not making a move without her consent, and I've never suggested Paul do such.
The thing is, you have suggested it. I've already quoted it to you once, I'm not going to bother again because you seem to do a great job of ignoring the quoted parts that prove you wrong. You've said that if Paul thinks asking his friend will make her feel too guilty he should just go ahead and do it without ever consulting her.
quote: I'm hitting a nerve with you, but I'm not sure why.
You're not, really. This is a discussion board. I'm discussing the issue. I happen to be passionate and enthusiastic about discussing things I feel strongly about. I feel strongly about this issue, not particularly about your take on it personally.
And I'll point out that I've been responding to you the entire time in the same tone you set. You posted passionately, you made it personal, and you acted dismissively of me all prior to me doing any such thing. Which makes me wonder why you try so hard to call me on it.
I picked my tone for two reasons in this, Lalo... one, you were obviously passionate about it and when people responded to you with calm, reasoned answers you basically say you can't believe they're all such a bunch of namby-pambies. So I thought letting my passion show through might move you more than sticking in an analytical mode. And two, I was pretty sure you could take it without running off crying that "ElJay's being mean to me." I will fully admit that I have not been as respectful and polite on this thread, when addressing you, as I normally am. I don't think I've gone too far out of line, and I certainly don't think I've been anymore dismissive of you than you've been of me. But when the climate on this board is such that their are regularly threads discussing if we're nice enough to each other or not, I normally tread lightly.
Regardless, no, you haven't done anything to me or my sister, and I'm not sitting here with a bleeding heart over how you feel on this issue, and there's no mysterious slight I'm taking out on you. It's a rhetorical device. Get over it.
quote: I still have serious trouble believing you'd insist he undergo forceable sterilization because he's defending his sister, or me my girlfriend, or Paul his friend, from a true monster.
Oh, I wasn't implying I'd have you sterilized because of wanting to beat up a rapist. Sorry if it seemed that way, completely unrelated. Just looking for an example that could be considered as invasive and out-of-line as what you were suggesting without being the same.
quote: but feminism against a feminist?
It takes more than labeling yourself a feminist to make you one. Your words here lean too closely to considering women as possessions as far as I'm concerned, but that could just be a matter of style. I will say, however, that as unpleasant a topic as it is I hope you'll talk to your girlfriend about her feelings on this matter, so if, God forbid, you should ever find yourself in the situation you'll know in advance how she feels about it. If she's as vehemantly against the idea as I am, if you would wait and bring it up shortly after an actual rape you would just make things worse for you and probably ruin any chances of your relationship making it through the aftermath as well.
About my possessions comment - obviously everyone's different, and there are cultural differences here to take into account as well. My last boyfriend was Mexican, and there were some things I had to deal with when walking in his world with him that in my world I would consider horribly offensive, and reason to stop dating someone. But we talked about them before they ever came up, and he told me things that would happen that he knew I would find offensive and how he would respond to them, and how I should respond to them. It was an interesting experience.
(As an example, so this doesn't look so horribly vauge... he told me that when we went dancing at latino clubs if we were taking a break between songs and someone else wanted to dance with me, they would come up and ask him if they could dance with me, and he would answer them. I just sat there flabbergasted... "What? You two sit there and discuss the matter and I get no say in it?" "Well, no, if it was someone I was okay with you dancing with I'd look over and see if you wanted to dance with him, and you would nod or shake your head, and then I'd tell him yes or no." So knowing in advance I could accept it as a cultural difference. If I hadn't been warned and it had happened, I would have been really pissed at the idea that I can't answer for myself, much less make my own decisions. My but I've tangeted... I'm just saying that the things I hear from you as possessive and restricting might not be intended that way, which would increase the chances of us taking past each other.
Hope you're still around in 10 years, doll, so we can revisit the issue.
Posted by AntiCool (Member # 7386) on :
quote:In my world, it's decent -- even honorable -- if a friend takes revenge on a rapist. I dislike vigilante justice as much or more than you do,
I cannot fathom how you can believe these two things at the same time. It seems obvious to me that you don't have as much problem with it as LJ or myself do.
quote:I understand that you're opposed to vigilante justice, LJ -- so am I. But I don't consider it immoral in instances of certain sexual assault. Note that I'm not endorsing murder
You're just saying that it is what you would do, that it is the decent, honorable thing to do. While you may not be actively advocating it, you certainly are endorsing it.
Posted by TheHumanTarget (Member # 7129) on :
I think there are cases where vigilante justice is legitmate and valid. I mean, let's just assume that someone rapes, mutilates, and murders your child. Then the accused person gets off on a technicality, when their guilt has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, but a stupid bureaucratic error lets them walk. In this situation, I think that's it's not only legitmate, but very proper. <---- I agree that it's a longshot, but it is possible...
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)