 Rape Prevention, Keep it civil, folks |
  |
 May 21 2006, 12:43 AM
Post
#151
|
|
|
Great Dragon  Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957  |
Such as?
|
 |
 
|
|
May 21 2006, 12:43 AM
Post
#152
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 208 Joined: 3-May 06 From: On the Run Member No.: 8,521 |
What about the Corporate Joygirls/boys? I seem to remember that it was standard practice to have their own joygirls to the mid level and scientific employees as a way to maintain security. I highly doubt that a mega is going punish Mr. Scientist for raping a joygirl that the corp provided to him. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 12:45 AM
Post
#153
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
If she's a joygirl her job description includes "rape victim." If it doesn't include rape victim and the encounter becomes a rape, the corporations with higher morals (or at least the ones that want to project an image of higher morality) would punish him.
|
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 01:57 AM
Post
#154
|
|||
|
Moving Target Group: Members Posts: 777 Joined: 18-February 03 Member No.: 4,110 |
use your imagination... a not-very-subtle warning.... maybe slow down a researcher without killing him/her for whatever reason.... make an example of what happens to the daughters of certain competing corp execs who make business decisions the raping corp doesn't like... for starters. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 02:13 AM
Post
#155
|
|||||||||||
|
Midnight Toker Group: Members Posts: 7,686 Joined: 4-July 04 From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop Member No.: 6,456 |
Argument by analogy is not a fallacy. It is a cornerstone of inductive reasoning. The fallacy you are thinking of is argument by false analogy. This only applies if the analogy is, indeed, false. Either way, your assertion that my statement was an arguement by analogy is incorrect. It doesn't fit the form of an argument by analogy. I did not imply that BMT and was similar to sexual encounters. I simply asserted that there exist, in human communications, certain situations where the words said do not match the meaning intended to be conveyed because the speaker is unable or unwilling to overtly his true meaning.
But we're saying the same thing. We're just niggling over details. Lets make a deal. If you don't be an ass then I won't. Okay? It'll make everyone much happier.
Some people get off on the illusion of being forced or coerced. Not everyone does, of course. Most people don't. But quite a few do. Once you break character and consent is overtly confirmed that illusion is dead and there is no way to bring it back. Surely, you get that there is a difference between acting out a fantasy and doing the real thing. Surely, you get that characters say things that their actors do not mean.
If its that kind of club, certainly. If it is that kind of club doing so would be explicitly required by the rules. If they are having casual sex so soon after meeting there is a fairly good chance that it is that kind of club. Obviously, you don't do much BDSM. |
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
May 21 2006, 02:21 AM
Post
#156
|
|||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Perhaps you din't mean to imply it, but including the story in a thread about rape indicates that you have the idea that it has something to do with rape. How about we agree that there are things that go on in Air Force basic training that involve communication, but that it isn't relevant to a discussion about rape?
Saying "who cares" is being an ass? Trust me, when I'm being an ass, you'll know. :)
Ummm... Yeah. I know that. I even said something along those lines in my followup post. What's your point? I'll reiterate what I said: If you're into protesting but actually having it happen, use a safe word. If your partner never mentions a safe word, don't assume that the signals you think you're getting are the signals that are being sent, and go by the "no means no" rule of consent. Heck, even if you're in the midle of receiving the best fellatio this side of Dallas's famous Debbie, the moment she stops and says no, doing anything besides asking has a good chance of constituting rape. Likewise, the moment he says no, doing anything besides asking has a good chance of constituting rape. No matter what the situation, if there has not been some prior agreement, doing anything after a "no" is quite likely rape. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
May 21 2006, 03:22 AM
Post
#157
|
|
|
Beetle Eater Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 4,797 Joined: 3-June 02 From: Oblivion City Member No.: 2,826 |
I was just thinking about how we require a database to register sex offenders and inform neighborhoods when a convicted sex offender moves in. Expand this to AR, and we could see people with Criminal SINs (especially for sex offences, but perhaps not exclusively) forced to broadcast a warning arrow. Marked for life.
|
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 06:01 AM
Post
#158
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Debbie isn't from Dallas, she just does it. In theory, at least—the city never appears, and is only a plot point. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 06:17 AM
Post
#159
|
|
|
Runner Group: Members Posts: 2,901 Joined: 19-June 03 Member No.: 4,775 |
That movie had such terrible character development, and the cinematography was embarrassingly simple. I was really unimpressed.
|
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 06:36 AM
Post
#160
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
yes, actually, i do know that 95% of of accused rapists aren't all guilty, because there have been a number of cases where the accused rapist was acquited based on genetic evidence. moreover, i also know that there are a fair number of false convictions who were later exonerated, also based on genetic evidence--so not even all of the 5% that do get convicted are actually guilty. regardless, you aren't really arguing that those 95% are all guilty. you're arguing that some of them are guilty--an unknown percentage. if you're not calling for a witch hunt, though, you should probably not use langauge that indicates a witch hunt. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 08:09 AM
Post
#161
|
|||||||||||||||
|
Grand Master of Run-Fu Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 6,840 Joined: 26-February 02 From: Tir Tairngire Member No.: 178 |
Cool, they said a word. Now, what about the other 90% of communication that's going on? You know, then *nonverbal* communication? Granted, the 90% number is kinda mythical, but the point is that saying one word isn't the same thing as laying down a clear message.
Um, yeah. So, like, if we send a lot more accused drug dealers to jail, the drug abuse rates will go down? Wow, nice idea... pity it doesn't work.
You're completely off base. First of all, he's completely right about puberty. Largely, it's the concentrations of FSH and LH that determine what secondary characteristics develop, and how. Even later in life, pumping someone full of hormones from the opposite sex can start androgynizing them. You can read about this in any fifth-grade human biology textbook, so I'd say that he's perfectly justified in sounding "confident". Second, let's not just choose 20 random scientists, let's go to the best. Dr. Reimer is the head of pediactric urology at John Hopkins, which is one of the leading teaching hospitals in the country. What does he have to say on the subject? It shouls also be added that Dr. Reimer also has advanced degrees in psychiatry, so he'd be the best at ruling out any social/societal infulence. This study is just the icing on the cake, BTW-- there's lots and lots more that pretty much show that gender identity is determined well before birth.
You're confusing two totally separate things here: the placebo effect, and the judgement-impairing effects of alcohol. The placebo effect is what convinces people that they're drunk in the first place. Alchohol does impair judgement, but it doesn't grant permission to do anything. That bit is entirely societal in nature.
No, you don't have to do a study. However, the facts are quite different. There is no societal excuseability factor in this country for being drunk. I mean, go ahead and picture it: "Yes, your honor, I know I was driving too fast when I hit that school bus full of kids and killed everyone, but it's not a big deal-- I was drunk!" :please: If anything, we're currently *harder* on people who are drunk or stoned, because we feel they made the situation worse. You're confusing the personal safety factor with a societal/permissive one. Namely, people can say or do things while drunk, without damaging their own self-concept. That does not equal permission, or indicate that alcohol isn't lowering inhibitions and impairing judgement.
Not just "no", but "Hell no". Literally. You don't stop muggers by saying "pretty please, no." For your own safety, you need to be very clear and firm and up-front about what you want, and where the lines are to be drawn. |
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
May 21 2006, 08:35 AM
Post
#162
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 7,116 Joined: 26-February 02 Member No.: 1,449 |
I favor sending drug dealers and rapists to jail for a long time, but you're right. It doesn't work... by itself. It only works when you combine it with education (the most neglected area) and rehabilitation (which, to be effective, needs accountability and mandatory attendance - and there will be cases where it is too late for it). The punitive/enforcement end seems like buckets against the tide, sometimes, but as frustrating as it is, it is still necessary.
Shadowrun, however, is a distopian future, so we should think how all three of those areas could be messed up. Education? Corporate propoganda, ubituously sleazy popular entertainment, and a bottom-feeding, sensationalistic media - like today, only even worse. And no counterbalancing forces for the most part. And more people lacking education of any sort - the SINless masses of the Barrens. Rehabilitation? I touched on this earlier. Mind-altering techniques that would violate the hell out of peoples' rights, if they still had them. Plus, the bad guys can use the same techniques to create criminals, or wipe a victim's memory, or turn someone into a meat puppet or slave. Punitive/enforcement? It would depend on the security zone, and on the status of the aggressor versus the status of the victim. Plus, while Lone Star might not be quite as bad as some third world nations, they would still be fairly likely to abuse their authority, especially in dealing with the SINless. |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 08:38 AM
Post
#163
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
safewords are for already-established relationships. in new relationships, they're not all that safe.
Glyph's right, re: SR. you think there's pressure to not report a rape now? imagine getting raped by your boss at Shiawase. |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 04:19 PM
Post
#164
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
LOL Just because some are overturned and some are acquitted doesn't mean that a specific percentage of them are not guilty. Or do you have hard numbers somewhere? "Some" and "a number of" do not statistics make.
Alternatively you could not assume a witch hunt where no reason for the assumption exists. Edit: I chose 95% as a guesstimate of the number of rapists who are accused that are actually guilty. I could have chosen 60%, or even 25%. The point was that there are more rapists going free then there are being convicted, if only because a large number of rapes aren't even reported. The more rapists that go to jail the more people there will be that might think twice. If "she's asking for it" is no longer an accepted defense people may begin to ask themselves a little more forcefully whether that no really means no or not. If you've been reading this thread and/or the last one you know that I'm not advocating conviction of innocent people.
What part of "no means no" do you not understand?
Really? I'm not selling drugs because I don't want to go to jail. That's at least one person that a higher pecentage of drug convictions has affected. I doubt I'm unique in the morass of humanity.
And there are studies that show it isn't. So what? You can find a study somewhere to "prove" anything. I don't disagree that gender roles are determined during puberty (or even before). It's the "entirely by hormones" part that is up in the air. Had he said "partially" or even "mostly" it would have been ok. But when you start talking in absolutes about a subject which scientists don't agree on all you're doing is assuming that one group of the scientist's work is more correct then another's.
I'm glad we agree. Why you felt you needed to phrase that as an argument is beyond me. LOL
Again we agree. Thank you. I've asid all along that being drunk is no excuse for rape. Yet again you phrase it as a disagreement, but I suppose that's just your style of writing.
Yes, I know. Thanks for agreeing again. My, aren't we just on the same wavelength today. :)
It is in your best interests to be as clear as possible, true. But no matter what else is going on, the moment you say "no," no matter what other signals are being sent or believed to have been sent, continuing becomes rape. Should you have kicked him in the balls and fled? Maybe. But that does not change the fact that you were raped. The responsibility for personal protection falls on the rapee. But the responsibility for the rape falls on the rapist. With or without the presnce of clear signals (or at least, clear in the sense that some people think "no" sometimes means "yes"), and with or without any form of self defense, chaperoning, or whatever else can help reduce the likelihood of being raped, the reponsibility for the rape falls onto the rapist. Victims are never guilty for the crimes commited upon them without their consent.
Exactly. In a new relationship there already exists a safe word that has been well defined by society as meaning "don't have sex with me" for decades, and that word is "no." |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
May 21 2006, 04:36 PM
Post
#165
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Here's just a couple of doctors' take on gender role formation: http://www.emedicine.com/ped/topic2789.htm, found with 5 seconds of Googling. You can assume that they are not as qualified as Dr. Reiner because of their jobs, but I don't and you'd be wrong to do so.
Reading that blurb you linked to, even your source only says "heavily influenced by." That's quite a bit different then hyzmarca's "entirely." |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 07:35 PM
Post
#166
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
McMurray, say what you mean. 95% means 95%. if you don't mean 95%, don't say 95%. we're sitting here arguing about numbers because you decided it'd be fun to make some up, and then defend them when someone took issue. christ.
if i've had a few drinks and the girl saying "no" is slow-dancing with my and grabbing my ass? it's easily possibe that i'll misunderstand both the "n" and the "o". sure, i should be listening for that all-important "no", but it's kinda hard to concentrate when she's groping me like that. and when i wake up in the morning to find the cops slapping cuffs on me and calling me a rapist, i'll probably be pretty pissed at the girl. i mean, if she didn't want to fuck me, why did she follow me into that dark bedroom? i'm guilty as sin, understand. i'm a moron. i should've backed off the first time she said "no", and not touched her even if she'd stripped naked right in front of me a second later and started unbuttoning my fly. but what the hell--i came to this party to get laid. if she's not here to do the same, maybe she oughtn't be leading me around like that? the simple fact is that humans take a lot of their understanding of a situation from non-verbal clues. when it comes to rape, that's a real problem. "no means no" is a great principle, and everyone should follow it--but in real life, it's going to get ignored more often than not, because that's how social interaction works. if a girl says "no" but acts "yes" and she gets raped, there are two people who fucked up and made that happen. to take Snow Fox's counterargument as an extreme example, if i'm saying "please Snow Fox don't cut off my balls" while simultaneously dropping my pants, what's the most likely outcome? |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 07:59 PM
Post
#167
|
|||||||
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
I took exception because someone else assumed their numbers were correct and mine were wrong, despite a lack of proof on either side. In any case though, point taken. Consider my earlier comment rephrased as: If a much larger portion of guilty rapists were convicted, it could have the beneficial effect of reducing future rapes by causing people to think twice.
From what I've seen of Snow Fox I'm guessing that you won't get your balls cut off.
Wrong, it gets ignored because of a lack of education and prosecution. If everybody looked at the phrase "no means no" and took it at face value there would be no ignoring it. It's the people that see "no means no" and add an "except when I'm involved" to the end of it that causet he problems.
Wrong. There's one person that made it happen: the rapist. The other person perhaps did some things that did not prevent it, but the final decision to ignore the word no is always in the hands of the rapist. Attempting to say anything else is what gets people off the hook because "she was asking for it," despite the obvious fact that she said "no," a clear indicator. Nonverbal clues can and will be misconstrued. Anyone thinking otherwise is a fool. As such, it's the straightforward verbal clues that have to be heeded. |
||||||
|
|
|
||||||
|
May 21 2006, 08:48 PM
Post
#168
|
|||||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
six of one, half a dozen of the other. if everyone took the phrase "no means no" at face value, it would indicate a change in the way that society worked. our society does not work in such a way that no always means no.
to a point. the rapist is the one who did the rapery, and that's why he's guilty no matter the circumstances. but if the power to prevent something bad from happening is in your hands, and you fail to act--or act in such a way that the bad thing is even more likely to happen--you are also at fault. if the girl in my example above had said "no" firmly and stopped groping me, there's a good chance i wouldn't wake up in handcuffs the next morning. nonverbal clues can be misconstrued, and that's why people need to pay close attention to the cues they're giving out. |
||||
|
|
|
||||
|
May 21 2006, 09:24 PM
Post
#169
|
|
|
Great Dragon Group: Members Posts: 5,430 Joined: 10-January 05 From: Fort Worth, Texas Member No.: 6,957 |
Doesn't matter. Obviously your opinion differs, and that's fine. You're wrong, but it's within your rights to be wrong.
But if you ever happen to be hanging out with a friend of mine and she says no, you might want to listen to the word and ignore what you think she might be implying with her actions. :) |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 09:34 PM
Post
#170
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
whether you agree or not is less distressing to me than whether or not our society in general agrees--or, more importantly, whether or not our society at least thinks about it before disagreeing. there's a basic dichotomy in the way we look at rape, as a society, in that when rape is discussed, people tend to paint all rapists as being heartless bastards deserving of no consideration, and all rape victims as helpless innocents who had no part in making the conditions right for a rape to occur. in practice, however, our society tends to act in a manner opposite what they profess in discussion, shunning the rape victim and apologizing for the rapist.
this stems from the fact that rape is really uncomfortable to think about. people take the easy way out: in discussion, they side with the victim and villify the perpetrator, because that's what's Right and Good, and it's easy and comfortable to talk about doing the right thing. in practice, they shun the victim and apologize for the rapist because that makes the least waves, and doesn't cause anyone any discomfort except the rape victim--who was probably asking for it anyway, we all secretly agree. |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 09:50 PM
Post
#171
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,405 Joined: 23-February 04 From: Honolulu, HI Member No.: 6,099 |
I wonder if its fair to say, No means No, so goddamnit use NO properly. If you MEAN No, say no, if you mean "I want you to try a little harder to convince me" don't use the word No.
Unfortunately for communication, its difficult to take words at face value (anymore? Was it ever possible?). Saying what we mean is difficult. Saying what we want to say is difficult. Having our kinesics match up with what we're saying/meaning is also difficult. Add to it the big range of comprehension capabilities of the person you're talking to. To me, what can be depressing, is that in some ways I see many adults I work/interact with having roughly the same skills levels at communication as the adolescents (12 to 14 y/o) I work/interact with. I'm not too far off either, my own skillsets could be better when it comes to verbal communication, I have a sense of some of my weaknesses, but not all of them. I think in a way the legal situation around rape has been hurt/damaged by the extreme end of things were you have 'celebs' who go through public trials and get acquitted, cause essentially the jury decides the accusser has other motivations for the charges. The part that hurts is then in a way that reinforces the general thoughts of 'well the rape victim should be shunned cause they're probably making it up'. In this case media attention on these higher end celeb type scales give the false impression this makes up the majority of accusations. |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 09:52 PM
Post
#172
|
|||
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
that is exactly the point i'm trying to get across. |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 11:46 PM
Post
#173
|
|
|
Running Target Group: Members Posts: 1,283 Joined: 17-May 05 Member No.: 7,398 |
What about the shadowrunners?
You have a bunch of often psychopathic (but without the people skills for anyone other than Faces), often physically strong, always planning and paranoid violent criminals. I'd be surprised if a good chunk of them weren't rapists. More over, those that are aren't going to get caught for the exact same reasons they don't get caught for their 'work': they'll plan it out carefully, and avoid attention while in the crime. They'll probably mainly target SINless to avoid law enforcement attention, and are likely to be in the alley-way snatcher serial rapist category. Of course, a smart shadowrunner will only need to abduct one woman (unless he wants a harem), because he'll just lock her in a closet until she goes all Stockholm on him. then she'll consent to the future sex. |
|
|
|
|
May 21 2006, 11:55 PM
Post
#174
|
|||
|
Manus Celer Dei Group: Dumpshocked Posts: 17,013 Joined: 30-December 02 From: Boston Member No.: 3,802 |
Where did you get the idea that APD-afflicted individuals have people skills? While they're frequently charismatic, that appears to stem largely from the fact that they are, due to their inability to feel fear, relatively self-confident in appearance. ~J |
||
|
|
|
||
|
May 21 2006, 11:59 PM
Post
#175
|
|
|
Immortal Elf Group: Members Posts: 11,410 Joined: 1-October 03 From: Pittsburgh Member No.: 5,670 |
no way! shadowrunners are good guys!
i do expect that the human sex trafficking trade is even bigger business in 2060+ than it is now--and it's pretty damn big, now. as it stands, you have to travel a bit if you want to find a place where sex slavery is legal. in SR, you might only have to travel as far as the nearest Renraku-owned brothel. corp territory, corp law. |
|
|
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 3rd December 2025 - 04:49 PM |
Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.