Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, February 28, 2013

[OTP - March] Scott wants money for spring training teams

While working at the Detroit Tigers’ spring facility in Lakeland, Gov. Rick Scott announced today he will ask the Florida Legislature to set aside $5 million a year for projects specifically aimed at improving the Major League Baseball training facilities in the state.

“It’s my job as governor to make sure Florida remains the number one destination for spring training and that is why we will work to provide $5 million annually to only be used for spring training facilities,” Scott said in a statement that was released while Scott was participating in one of his “work days” with the Tigers at Joker Marchant Stadium in Lakeland.

Tripon Posted: February 28, 2013 at 02:05 PM | 2909 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: baseball, florida, ot, politics, spring training

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 27 of 30 pages ‹ First  < 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 > 
   2601. Lassus Posted: March 25, 2013 at 07:12 PM (#4396303)
It was rhetoric and attitudes without mercy or empathy, bordering on repellant.

I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise.

If that is so repellent that it is where you find the focus of this issue to be, I will gladly be the brunt and easily stand so labelled.
   2602. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 07:17 PM (#4396306)
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there. If that is so repellent that it is where you find the focus of this issue to be, I will gladly be the brunt and easily stand so labelled.

Seconded.
   2603. Jay Z Posted: March 25, 2013 at 07:18 PM (#4396309)
Have to agree with Ray & Sam (& possibly others; I'm not exactly keeping score) here. What happened in Steubenville in this instance strikes me as very much a crime of opportunity. Take away or drastically lessen the opportunity, & lt's unlikely that something comparable would've occurred, or so it seems to me.


There are thousands of parties where attendees drink to incapacity. Do you think this sort of behavior is a likely outcome?

For that matter, when incapacitated, a boy/man can be raped as easily as a girl/woman. So either gender should be equally vulnerable, right? Also, when among friends, one should expect that all cash and vehicles would be stolen as well as credit card numbers. Serves the drunk right. People who try to help the drunk get home safely are saps. (/sarcasm)
   2604. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 25, 2013 at 07:48 PM (#4396320)
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these boys, these young men, however you wish to define them.


I know. And that's the problem. You've assigned them to a class called "monsters" and washed your hands of it. Absolutely nothing good or constructive comes of that.
   2605. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 25, 2013 at 07:51 PM (#4396322)
There are thousands of parties where attendees drink to incapacity. Do you think this sort of behavior is a likely outcome?


Ray's point is not the likely, but the possible, and reducing the possibility in whatever way available.

For that matter, when incapacitated, a boy/man can be raped as easily as a girl/woman. So either gender should be equally vulnerable, right?


If he got wasted at a circuit party in the 90s? Maybe. Your gotcha is empty and void. Perhaps you wish we lived in a world of this sort of equality of possible assault, but we do not. We live in the world as it is.
   2606. Lassus Posted: March 25, 2013 at 07:59 PM (#4396326)
I know. And that's the problem. You've assigned them to a class called "monsters" and washed your hands of it. Absolutely nothing good or constructive comes of that.

Washed my hands of it? Because I disagree with you by my satisfaction with my opinion? That's not what Pilate meant.

And because I admit things that bolster your own certainty of your position, it doesn't mean that other points brought up are simply immaterial. Your answer (to my question for Ray) regarding why rape victims do not come forward left out shame, internal and personal. Your dismissal of the questioning of the narrative as it is presented by the society at large - evidenced in a minor way by this thread and a major way by CNN - does not discount that the narrative keeps rapes from being reported and keep those who will sexually assault (in whatever state's laws you are following) enabled due to that silence. You can say it doesn't happen, you can say it isn't important, but rape victims disagree. The OH LORD THEN WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT IT AT ALL shrieking (mostly from Morty) is just an extreme that means nothing. By merely challenging the narrative, I'm as you say part of the problem. I'll disagree - by supporting the narrative I firmly believe that you and Ray and SBB are. You can talk all you want and I'll be there toe to toe. I stand by what I've read from victims of assault as the primary reason to question you and yours on this issue.

Lastly, if you mean to say there are no limits whatsoever to your own mercy and empathy, I would also like to talk to you about that bridge. I have an offer.
   2607. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:05 PM (#4396330)
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise.


That's really nothing to be proud of -- assuming you are.
   2608. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:14 PM (#4396340)
I'll disagree - by supporting the narrative I firmly believe that you and Ray and SBB are.

Do you support fair trials and due process for the accused in rape cases? Because that has a chilling tendency on rape victims' willingness to report and participate as witnesses.

Do you support the accused having the right to counsel in rape cases? Because that has a chilling tendency on rape victims' willingness to report and participate as witnesses.

Do you support the accused having the constitutional right to have counsel appointed by the state if he cannot afford his own? Because that has a chilling tendency on rape victims' willingness to report and participate as witnesses.

If you do support those bedrocks of civilized justice, are you not "part of the problem" and perhaps even a willing participant in the "rape culture"?
   2609. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:19 PM (#4396341)
Here is the entirety of the discussion the moon howlers want to have on this issue:

"Rape is rape. These are heinous acts committed by heinous people. The victim's conduct is absolutely not relevant."

That is the whole of what passes as permissible discussion as far as they are concerned.

If you say anything else, if you try to discuss the various factors and circumstances and gradations, if you try to suggest that the victim's conduct (e.g., in getting blackout drunk at a high school party) is relevant in that it increased the chances of her being raped and therefore young women should be educated as to that -- if you try to have an honest and sane discussion about the topic -- you will be shouted down, you will be branded as contributing to the "rape culture," you will be branded as quite possibly a rapist yourself.

The above is what passes as a full and fair "discussion" of the issues as far as the moon howlers are concerned. Everything else is out of bounds, everything else is not part of any accepted discourse on the subject, and you will be deemed anything from part of the problem to the problem itself.

Evidence: This entire thread.

   2610. Lassus Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:25 PM (#4396345)
So, Ray, where I answered your question(s, multiple), that's to be included in your evidence?
   2611. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:27 PM (#4396347)
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise.


That's really nothing to be proud of -- assuming you are.


There are many cases when there are lots of gray areas, where you can have empathy for both sides. This is not one of them.

When confronted with evil, and I do believe what these 2 perps did was evil, the only moral stance is 100% opposed to the evil. You don't try to understand evil, you don't sympathize with it. You come down on it like 100,000 lbs of bricks, and the evil doers can rot.

They'll get a chance to redeem their souls (even the man on the scaffold gets that); I don't care if they can redeem there miserable lives.
   2612. zenbitz Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:33 PM (#4396350)
Rape" fits much better in a headline, of course.


Also on a forehead in a legible font.
   2613. Lassus Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:36 PM (#4396353)
That's really nothing to be proud of -- assuming you are.

Comfort is not equal to pride, but, nice try?
   2614. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:44 PM (#4396362)
I could fill this entire page with the names of early to mid-1960's Duke undergraduates who were making the same sort of arguments as Ray is now. "I don't complain if I can't eat in a black-owned restaurant. Why should it be any different the other way around?"

Do they or don't they get to say that?

Of course they do. What do you think I was doing, shooting them for saying it? Trying to get them kicked off campus? Morty, this was the Goldwater-loving Duke of the early-mid 60's, not the Berkeley or Harvard of 2013.

Trying not to make it personal here, but, yes, I do think there are those here that you have aligned yourself with that would do exactly that if they could--or would tolerate that happening.


Cheeses K. Reist, Morty. I've heard of guilt by association, but this is the biggest stretch yet. Once again you want---indeed, it almost seems like a biological urge on your part---to conflate disagreement with some sort of urge to censor other opinions. Morty, I don't give a flying #### what you think, or how you say it. This is a free forum, and fire away.

OTOH I'm also free to think of your posts on this thread as having about as much substance as a 6 ounce Diet Coke.

There’s another Duke incident that seems to be whistling past your eyes and ears. We must not pretend that false accusations are just some paltry phantasmagoria that in reality is inconceivable and hardly needs bothering about.

Oh, you mean the lacrosse case? That's the one where those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly. If they'd only settled for watching porno movies instead, nothing would have happened to them, a point I'm sure Ray and Sam would certainly agree with. Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.

Do we as society, and our institutions, get to factor that or don't we?

"Factor it in?" By definition, we do. Let that voice override a more humane perspective on that particular issue? I would hope not.

And there reason for a definition. What is this “more humane perspective”. Is that euphemism for not getting what you want?


You know damn well what it means in the case I was referring to, and your feigning of ignorance is just silly.

How do you decide what's humane?

Individually, I can only decide that for myself. Individually, I can only try to influence collective opinion in that direction.

And the same applies to me (or anyone), right?


Yes, Morty. Yes, Morty. Yes, Morty. Yes, Morty. Yes, Morty.

There, you can cut and paste these one by one for the next five times you ask the same stupid question.

I'm well aware that my positions on various subjects aren't held by majorities in either Congress or the Supreme Court. To the extent that this bothers me in specific cases, I can try to make my voice heard to change those decisions, but in the meantime I can either choose to obey the law or violate it and accept the consequences.

This, though, is not a mechanism for resolving differences. How is that done? (It’s not just about subjectivity—we’ve got a railroad to run.)


Well, since you seem to have forgotten, in the case of the civil rights movement, violating the law and accepting the consequences was exactly how "the mechanism" was finally moved to action. Or perhaps you think that the civil rights laws of the 1960's just appeared one day and grew like Topsy.
   2615. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:52 PM (#4396364)
Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.

Actually, no, most strippers don't falsely accuse people of rape. And then their false accounts typically aren't loudly supported by wide swaths of leftist opinion using many of the tactics we see in this thread.(*)

Your minimizing of the case speaks volumes. (I'm assuming you're serious.)

(*) From Wikipedia: Feminist blogger Amanda Marcotte declared on her blog that people who defended the wrongly accused Duke students were "rape-loving scum". Stay classy, leftists.
   2616. Lassus Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:54 PM (#4396365)
Ray, your #2609 is unseemly, at best.
   2617. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 08:57 PM (#4396366)
Speaking of moon howlers ...

What upset me was labelling juveniles "rapists" when they weren't,


Is anyone other than SBB maintaining this in this thread? Do his blood brothers Sam, Morty & I suppose Ray want to second this statement?

Just curious.

They were convicted of rape, SBB. What does that make them?

   2618. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:02 PM (#4396368)
They were convicted of rape, SBB. What does that make them?


Lollygaggers?
   2619. formerly dp Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:03 PM (#4396369)
No, but I've already explained why one is proper and the other improper -- no scare quotes necessary -- and that explanation hasn't been and can't be seriously disputed.
You've asserted that NYS is civilized and Ohio is barbaric. I disagree, for the reason stated above.
--
I believe that the outraged chorus here believes that calling someone a "rapist" is itself argument enough to throw them into detention cells.
Not at all. But "rape" is what they were convicted of-- we're talking about dudes who digitally penetrated a woman multiple times while she was vomitting-on-herself drunk. If you don't think that indicates a particular sense of entitlement to the body of another, that actually raping someone does not indicate an individual's propensity for raping someone, I'm not sure what that individual has to do to convince you of their propensity to rape.

Could you point me to somewhere recently where I've made a "creepy, misogynistic argument?" Inquiring minds want to know, man.
Seriously? You were the one who started this whole conversation about the drunk girl's culpability for her assault. I know, I know-- you did it to be "interesting," so that makes it OK.
--
Is it just me, or does that hand-waving fall a bit short of the following account --
Yeah, this is the problem-- it's "we all agree it was terrible...but come on, it wasn't "TERRIBLE". And those guys, they're not Bad People, just in the wrong place at the wrong time-- if you saw a $100 bill lying in the street you would have picked it up, too.
===
those howling at the moon want to treat every instance of sexual assault or rape as if it was someone jumping out of the bushes at night with a knife and attacking a female jogger
What is the sense of trying to increase moral gradations into an issue where there should be none? It seems like this is a matter of personal preference-- a ######-up game of "would you rather?" instead of the basis for serious discussion. Leaving aside the organ/digit used in the penetrative act-- let's say your knife-wielder is impotent and uses a fist instead, or this is Ohio, where such a difference would not matter anyway-- I am still more troubled by what happened in Steubenville than I would be by the actions of the knife-wielder. But that is a matter of personal preference, and not worth arguing over, dontcha think? We're arguing over minor variations in degrees of heinousness, ya?

"Rape is rape. These are heinous acts committed by heinous people. The victim's conduct is absolutely not relevant."
Pretty much, yes. Why do you need to condemn the victim's actions? It smacks of arrogance-- "I would have made a better decision than the lass, those ladies need to be careful where they and their vaginas pass out"-- and adds nothing to the conversation, other than to craft a narrative where attention is diverted away from the rapist as the direct and inciting cause of the action.

You can still talk-- you can still say the same things men have always said to women about their complicity in sexual assault. Go ahead and blather on about it for another 200 posts, if that's what you need to do to make yourself feel better. No one has said you don't have the right to blather-- we've tried to introduce some need self-awareness into your blathering, and you are of course free to disregard that advice, as is evidenced by the fact that you've disregarded it and continued to post. But blather away. Or, alternatively, you could take a half hour off of blathering, and spend it instead reading what experts have written on the subject based on their empirical, data-driven experience working with the victims and perpetrators of sexual assault. I swear that I'm not making this up Ray-- there are people who, for a living, study the narrative framing of sexual assault in the mass media. Some of those people are, as we speak, crafting quantitative and qualitative analyses of the way Stuebenville is discussed in social and mass media. You can simply ignore that sort of work and continue to hold to RayRay's always perfect intuition, or you could learn some new things. Smart money's on you doing the former, but hope springs eternal in March...

The above is what passes as a full and fair "discussion"
You don't have a vagina, you don't get to lecture rape victims about the things they could've/should've done to avoid rape. Not difficult, not all that fair, but it's also not fair that your penis allows you the privilege of not worrying about being raped if you pass out drunk somewhere. A little bit of self-awareness. Just a little.
===
which upset you so much you had to make New York pick a fight with Ohio?
The Reds and the Indians will have more combined wins than the Yankees and Mets this year. Does this happen often?
   2620. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:06 PM (#4396371)
You've asserted that NYS is civilized and Ohio is barbaric. I disagree, for the reason stated above.

I've asserted far more than that on the point, which you've left out.

What is the sense of trying to increase moral gradations into an issue where there should be none? It seems like this is a matter of personal preference-- a ######-up game of "would you rather?" instead of the basis for serious discussion.

No, it's a matter of law in many/most states.
   2621. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:08 PM (#4396372)
Or, alternatively, you could take a half hour off of blathering, and spend it instead reading what experts have written on the subject based on their empirical, data-driven experience working with the victims and perpetrators of sexual assault. I swear that I'm not making this up Ray-- there are people who, for a living, study the narrative framing of sexual assault in the mass media. Some of those people are, as we speak, crafting quantitative and qualitative analyses of the way Stuebenville is discussed in social and mass media.


But, see, those people are "leftists." Which means they're out to drain Ray's & SBB's & their cohorts' precious bodily fluids, or ... or something.
   2622. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:09 PM (#4396373)
They were convicted of rape, SBB. What does that make them?

Juveniles who were found delinquent, not "guilty," of rape by a judge, not a jury, in juvenile court in a jurisdiction that overdefines "rape."
   2623. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:10 PM (#4396376)
But, see, those people are "leftists." Which means they're out to drain Ray's & SBB's & their cohorts' precious bodily fluids, or ... or something.

Actually, it means if they have their way they'll bring us more outrages like the Duke LAX farce.

Thanks, but no thanks.
   2624. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:13 PM (#4396378)
Ah ... they're just juvenile delinquents. That doesn't sound so bad! What'd they do? Still some cigarettes from the liquor store, the scamps?
   2625. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:15 PM (#4396379)
Ah ... they're just juvenile delinquents. That doesn't sound so bad!

Doesn't matter how it sounds; it's what they were adjudicated.
   2626. formerly dp Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:15 PM (#4396381)
No, it's a matter of law in many/most states.
Excepting the digit/organ distinction, most states do not differentiate between the use of force and raping a person who is unconscious/unable to give consent. And if we're talking about moral outrage here, I'm more disturbed by the numerous people around the girl who failed to intervene on her behalf while the act was being committed,and who encouraged it by videotaping it than I am by the hypothetical knife-wielder in the park.
   2627. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:15 PM (#4396382)
Actually, it means if they have their way they'll bring us more outrages like the Duke LAX farce.


I forget. Was the DA in that case a Trotskyist or a more traditional Marxist-Leninist?
   2628. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:18 PM (#4396384)
And if we're talking about moral outrage here, I'm more disturbed by the numerous people around the girl who failed to intervene on her behalf while the act was being committed,and who encouraged it by videotaping it than I am by the hypothetical knife-wielder in the park.

So now you're more "disturbed" by non-rapists than violent rapists.

Score one for the "rape culture"!!
   2629. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:18 PM (#4396385)

Juveniles who were found delinquent, not "guilty," of rape by a judge, not a jury, in juvenile court in a jurisdiction that overdefines "rape."


SBB, why is your instinct to defend these creeps, and minimize their acts?

You've done it a lot. That just stuns me.

And Sam and Morty have provided tacit agreement and support for your minimization.
   2630. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:18 PM (#4396386)
Doesn't matter how it sounds; it's what they were adjudicated.


So Ohio somehow got that right while barbarically over-defining rape?

Thank god for tiny favors. Blinds hogs & acorns, I guess.
   2631. SteveF Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:21 PM (#4396388)
Pretty much, yes. Why do you need to condemn the victim's actions? It smacks of arrogance-- "I would have made a better decision than the lass, those ladies need to be careful where they and their vaginas pass out"-- and adds nothing to the conversation, other than to craft a narrative where attention is diverted away from the rapist as the direct and inciting cause of the action.


I've taken your argument not to be that it adds nothing -- rather it detracts more than it adds.

The argument isn't that we shouldn't tell our sons and daughters to be careful about their alcohol consumption before the night begins, but rather doing so after the milk is spilled is highly counterproductive, given how victims of crimes are already feeling shame/blaming themselves for what's happened.

Beyond that, most of the societal improvement is going to come from changing the attitudes and behaviors of those who commit crimes. Focusing on changing the behaviors of victims of crimes is simply not what we should be emphasizing, and doing so arguably harms our ability to reform the attitudes and behaviors of the potential and actual criminals.

You don't have a vagina, you don't get to lecture rape victims about the things they could've/should've done to avoid rape.


How would having a vagina reduce the societal harm you claim is done by 'lecturing' rape victims? Presumably it's bad when anyone does it, regardless of genitalia, yes?
   2632. formerly dp Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:25 PM (#4396391)
So now you're more "disturbed" by non-rapists than violent rapists.
No, I'm more disturbed by this event, with its multiple rapists and accomplices, than I am the actions of a single lone rapist. In case you're fuzzy on the deets, from our friend Wikipedia:
In a photograph posted on Instagram by a Steubenville High football player, the victim was shown looking unresponsive, being carried by two teenage boys by her wrists and ankles. Former Steubenville baseball player Michael Nodianos tweeted "Song of the night is definitely Rape Me by Nirvana" and "Some people deserve to be peed on," which was reshared later by several people, including Mays. In a 12-minute video later posted to YouTube, Nodianos and others talk about the rapes, with Nodianos joking that "they raped her quicker than Mike Tyson raped that one girl" and "They peed on her. That's how you know she's dead, because someone pissed on her."[3] In one text, Mays described the victim as "like a dead body" and in another he told the victim that a photo of her lying naked in a basement with semen on her body had been taken by him, and that the semen was his. In a text message to a friend afterwards, he said "I shoulda raped her now that everybody thinks I did," but "she wasn't awake enough."[2] One classmate testified he videotaped with his phone while Mays exposed the victim's breasts and penetrated her with his fingers in the backseat of a car, and another testifed he saw Richmond digitally penetrate the victim while she lay in the basement.

The self-proclaimed "rape crew" publicized the event using Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and text messages. Video and photo evidence reveal that the girl was sexually assaulted over the course of several hours in front of party attendees, with no one intervening. The video and photo evidence showed her to be unconscious. Some members of the community blamed the girl for her own rape and blamed her for casting a negative light on the football team and town.
   2633. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:27 PM (#4396392)
The self-proclaimed "rape crew"


They didn't call themselves the "juvenile delinquent crew"?

SBB is outraged! Outraged!
   2634. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:28 PM (#4396393)
The self-proclaimed "rape crew" publicized the event using Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, and text messages. Video and photo evidence reveal that the girl was sexually assaulted over the course of several hours in front of party attendees, with no one intervening. The video and photo evidence showed her to be unconscious. Some members of the community blamed the girl for her own rape and blamed her for casting a negative light on the football team and town

There should have been a conspiracy case brought here against the whole lot.
   2635. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:32 PM (#4396397)
There should have been a conspiracy case brought here against the whole lot.

At least with adults, you don't need conspiracy. If they actively participated in the crime, even if they didn't themselves penetrate, they're guilty of the same crime(s) as the penetrators.

   2636. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:35 PM (#4396399)
At least with adults, you don't need conspiracy. If they actively participated in the crime, even if they didn't themselves penetrate, they're guilty of the same crime(s) as the penetrators.


True, though offhand I've never seen that approach applied to a rape case. Doesn't mean it hasn't happened, of course.
   2637. starksy Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:44 PM (#4396410)
Oh, you mean the lacrosse case? That's the one where those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly. If they'd only settled for watching porno movies instead, nothing would have happened to them, a point I'm sure Ray and Sam would certainly agree with. Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.


Andy, you're not blaming the victim of a false rape accusation, are you? Maybe the sarcasm is going over my head.
   2638. starksy Posted: March 25, 2013 at 09:46 PM (#4396413)
Double post; sorry
   2639. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:10 PM (#4396424)
Oh, you mean the lacrosse case? That's the one where those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly. If they'd only settled for watching porno movies instead, nothing would have happened to them, a point I'm sure Ray and Sam would certainly agree with. Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.

Andy, you're not blaming the victim of a false rape accusation, are you? Maybe the sarcasm is going over my head.


Sorry, but yes, that most definitely was Sarcasm with a capital "S". But then suggesting strategies for avoiding bad outcomes caused by bad people seems to be the sport du jour in these parts, so I thought I might get in the spirit.

------------------------------------------------

Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.

Actually, no, most strippers don't falsely accuse people of rape.


And most women who get drunk don't get raped, but that doesn't seem to stop the unsolicited advice that they stop getting drunk as a method of rape prevention.

And then their false accounts typically aren't loudly supported by wide swaths of leftist opinion using many of the tactics we see in this thread.(*)

Since that's addressed to me, whom exactly have I accused of anything surrounding the Steubenville case? I haven't once made any comment of any kind about it.

Your minimizing of the case speaks volumes. (I'm assuming you're serious.)

You've assumed so many silly things about my comments, that I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you can't recognize sarcasm when it jumps up onto your lap and licks you on the nose. Starksy has the valid excuse of being a newcomer here, but what's your excuse, other than general thickness of skull?
   2640. starksy Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:15 PM (#4396427)
You've assumed so many silly things about my comments, that I guess I shouldn't be surprised that you can't recognize sarcasm when it jumps up onto your lap and licks you on the nose. Starksy has the valid excuse of being a newcomer here, but what's your excuse, other than general thickness of skull?


Mostly lurker who forgot my old account id and password (and stopped using the email address). Thanks for the clarification!

Doing my best to stay out of this discussion; I see valid points on both side, but due to having the crime in question happen to a family member, I'm sure I'd say something I regret. Just saw that one thing as odd and wanted to be sure.
   2641. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:18 PM (#4396429)
Glad to clear it up, starksy, and I'm glad you asked, as otherwise you might have gotten the wrong idea. Just be forewarned that in dealing with some of these clowns, sarcasm is often the only possible response, and I'm hardly the only one here who employs it.
   2642. Lassus Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:25 PM (#4396435)
SBB, do you have any thoughts on the boys gleefully calling themselves "the rape crew"? Or is that generally insignificant?
   2643. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:30 PM (#4396437)
SBB, do you have any thoughts on the boys gleefully calling themselves "the rape crew"?


Obvious you old squares aren't up to date on the latest memes.
   2644. Morty Causa Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:41 PM (#4396441)
The argument isn't that we shouldn't tell our sons and daughters to be careful about their alcohol consumption before the night begins, but rather doing so after the milk is spilled is highly counterproductive, given how victims of crimes are already feeling shame/blaming themselves for what's happened.


Every person that will be raped has not yet been raped. That's why you warn after the fact in one instance that has already transpired.
   2645. Morty Causa Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:43 PM (#4396442)
2614:

Hulu was showing a lot of Kurosawa films. Hope you checked out Roshomon.
   2646. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 25, 2013 at 10:57 PM (#4396450)
2614:

Hulu was showing a lot of Kurosawa films. Hope you checked out Roshomon.


Thanks, Morty, but I've already got it. TCM had Mifune as a SUTS honoree in 2011 and featured Kurosawa for an entire month in March of 2010, and I'm up to my neck in DVDs of both of them.

And BTW TCM also just ran Gabin's Port of Shadows early Friday morning, which they hadn't shown for many years, if at all. That's been the movie highlight of the month to date.

Speaking of movies, has everyone (or anyone) here seen La Femme Nikita? TCM ran it right behind the Cassavettes / Gena Rowlands film Gloria the other night, and I found the Rowlands movie far more compelling.
   2647. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 25, 2013 at 11:13 PM (#4396457)
Lastly, if you mean to say there are no limits whatsoever to your own mercy and empathy, I would also like to talk to you about that bridge.


The limits of my mercy and empathy are defined by my mercurial mood at any given moment. They are absolutely arbitrary and exist only in relation to the slings and arrows of my emotional state on any given day. This fact doesn't separate or distinguish me from the world at large. The only minor distinction is that I admit as much freely, while you lot pretend to operate on some wholesome, pristine, metaphysical bullshit level that's a mirror of some pie in the sky theory of everything. The only thing I got going for me is honesty.

And charisma.

And an iron liver.
   2648. starksy Posted: March 25, 2013 at 11:13 PM (#4396458)
Speaking of movies, has everyone (or anyone) here seen La Femme Nikita? TCM ran it right behind the Cassavettes / Gena Rowlands film Gloria the other night, and I found the Rowlands movie far more compelling.


Besson's? It's a good movie; it's been a while since I saw it, but I recall enjoying it. If you're talking about the tv series, I happily admit it's not great but I loved it.
   2649. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 25, 2013 at 11:16 PM (#4396461)
Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.


If you boys don't mind, I can speak for myself.
   2650. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 25, 2013 at 11:19 PM (#4396462)
There should have been a conspiracy case brought here against the whole lot.


We should probably disband courts altogether and just ask Snapper who gets to live or die.
   2651. Morty Causa Posted: March 25, 2013 at 11:31 PM (#4396465)
I have to laugh at the idea of snapper as Christian. (I laugh because I love.) I can't help it. Where the heck did he get his religion? Jesus channeling Michael Corleone? Joe Pesci as Saul of Tarsus. Now, he has the pretext he needs to run off because he's being insulted for his religion.
   2652. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 01:23 AM (#4396491)
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise.

If that is so repellent that it is where you find the focus of this issue to be, I will gladly be the brunt and easily stand so labelled.


I actually feel bad for you and find this point of view very unfortunate. To toss these two 16 year old boys overboard for the rest of their lives, to give up on them, to deem them so evil that even after they pay their punishment and serve their time and learn their lesson there is no hope for them is a fairly abhorrent attitude. I truly expected more from you.

And _I_ am called a robot with no emotion?
   2653. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 01:28 AM (#4396493)
There are thousands of parties where attendees drink to incapacity. Do you think this sort of behavior is a likely outcome?

For that matter, when incapacitated, a boy/man can be raped as easily as a girl/woman. So either gender should be equally vulnerable, right?


So now the claim is that men and women are equally vulnerable to rape. And you people take issue with the observation that your position is an utter farce?
   2654. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 01:36 AM (#4396495)
Oh, you mean the lacrosse case? That's the one where those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly. If they'd only settled for watching porno movies instead, nothing would have happened to them, a point I'm sure Ray and Sam would certainly agree with. Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.


Andy, I am guessing from this paragraph that you have had little actual real world experience or contact with strippers, nor have you read any real world accounts of that lifestyle or of the culture in general.

Strippers don't go around falsely accusing people of rape. Which is not to say it doesn't happen, but anything under the sun happens. If we're talking false rape claims, I'd be very comfortable betting that women in everyday life file more of them than strippers.

But what is your point, exactly? The students hired strippers. And? So they deserved to be hit with false rape claims and be railroaded and have their lives nearly destroyed?
   2655. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 01:49 AM (#4396496)
Oh, you mean the lacrosse case? That's the one where those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly. If they'd only settled for watching porno movies instead, nothing would have happened to them, a point I'm sure Ray and Sam would certainly agree with. Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.

Andy, you're not blaming the victim of a false rape accusation, are you? Maybe the sarcasm is going over my head.

Sorry, but yes, that most definitely was Sarcasm with a capital "S". But then suggesting strategies for avoiding bad outcomes caused by bad people seems to be the sport du jour in these parts, so I thought I might get in the spirit.


My sense is that the sarcasm did not apply to the "those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly" part. I say this because we saw plenty of this from your side during the incident. Along with, at the end, "well, maybe they didn't rape her, but they did _something_ bad, man."

My sense is also that the sarcasm did not apply to the "strippers will be strippers" piece.
   2656. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: March 26, 2013 at 01:50 AM (#4396497)
Here is the entirety of the discussion the moon howlers want to have on this issue:

"Rape is rape. These are heinous acts committed by heinous people. The victim's conduct is absolutely not relevant."

That is the whole of what passes as permissible discussion as far as they are concerned.

If you say anything else, if you try to discuss the various factors and circumstances and gradations, if you try to suggest that the victim's conduct (e.g., in getting blackout drunk at a high school party) is relevant in that it increased the chances of her being raped and therefore young women should be educated as to that -- if you try to have an honest and sane discussion about the topic -- you will be shouted down, you will be branded as contributing to the "rape culture," you will be branded as quite possibly a rapist yourself.

The above is what passes as a full and fair "discussion" of the issues as far as the moon howlers are concerned. Everything else is out of bounds, everything else is not part of any accepted discourse on the subject, and you will be deemed anything from part of the problem to the problem itself.

Evidence: This entire thread.

Ray, your #2609 is unseemly, at best.


What about it is unseemly? It strikes me as extraordinarily accurate.

"Rape is rape. These are heinous acts committed by heinous people. The victim's conduct is absolutely not relevant."

Pretty much, yes. Why do you need to condemn the victim's actions? It smacks of arrogance--


This is an excellent example of why Ray is correct. You can't talk about the victim's actions, because to talk about them is synonymous, in that sorry attempt to shame and cripple discussion, with condemnation.

You can't suggest that she could have done things differently, because any attempt to reduce rape by talking about how certain behaviors make rape easier to commit is simply arrogance! How dare anyone point out that walking through Battery Park at 3am, alone, makes robbery more rather than less likely?

   2657. Jack Carter, calling Beleaguered Castle Posted: March 26, 2013 at 02:29 AM (#4396499)
You can still talk-- you can still say the same things men have always said to women about their complicity in sexual assault.


This wasn't addressed to me, but it's clearly, obviously, blatantly full of ####.

Formerly dp is happy to sacrifice your daughters on the altar of his nonsense, but if it was his daughter, dressed up for her first unchaperoned party at 16, a party where it was just possible that alcohol might be served, do you really think he wouldn't talk to her about the dangers of drinking, and about the dangers of drinking around boys she does not know?

Further, if what happened in Steubenville happened at the party his daughter just attended last week, do you really think he'd really refrain from talking to his daughter about the extreme danger of getting drunk at parties?

The above is what passes as a full and fair "discussion"
You don't have a vagina, you don't get to lecture rape victims about the things they could've/should've done to avoid rape.


I'd like to avoid calling dp's arguments "pathetic", so I'll just point out that he won't apply this argument anywhere else. We hope, anyway. He won't tell us that women, for example, don't get to vote on whether countries go to war in those cases where they won't be combatants and the war will be overseas. He won't tell us, for example, that people who only watch movies don't get to discuss what directors themselves put up on the screen. He won't tell us that if you're too poor to pay taxes, you don't get to vote in elections. He won't tell us that mothers, upon learning that a boy down the street became a father at age sixteen, shouldn't have a long talk with their sons about the advisablity of condoms.

And if we're talking about moral outrage here, I'm more disturbed by the numerous people around the girl who failed to intervene on her behalf while the act was being committed,and who encouraged it by videotaping it than I am by the hypothetical knife-wielder in the park.

So now you're more "disturbed" by non-rapists than violent rapists.

Score one for the "rape culture"!!


Effing amazing, isn't it?

Still, it's perfectly consistent with--and a logical consequence of--his overarching belief, that it's much, much more important not to appear to be "condemning" the victim, than it is to actually help her, you know, not get raped in the first place.

One would think the worst part of "rape culture" is that rapes actually occur. One would be wrong, apparently.

The argument isn't that we shouldn't tell our sons and daughters to be careful about their alcohol consumption before the night begins, but rather doing so after the milk is spilled is highly counterproductive, given how victims of crimes are already feeling shame/blaming themselves for what's happened.


You're wrong, Steve. The "argument" is that YOU don't get to talk to your daughters at all. YOU don't have a vagina, so you need to shut the fuck up. Remember, he just wrote,

You don't have a vagina, you don't get to lecture rape victims about the things they could've/should've done to avoid rape.


In any case, since when did what happens to a single victim, no matter how awful, mean that we don't use that as a cautionary tale when talking to our own sons and daughters? Do we not point to the drunk driver who kills four in Iowa and mention that this is one of the terrible things that can result? Dp's rhetoric is terrible, too. No one is "lecturing the victim".

I have to laugh at the idea of snapper as Christian. (I laugh because I love.) I can't help it. Where the heck did he get his religion? Jesus channeling Michael Corleone? Joe Pesci as Saul of Tarsus. Now, he has the pretext he needs to run off because he's being insulted for his religion.


Heh. Check out the Cashman thread where once again, because snapper agrees with one side's politics, some mass murders with millions of victims are definitely better than others. I was even on the verge of wondering there at his failure to show up quite as quickly as I had expected with excuses, demurrals, and 'it coulda been worses'.

That's some Jesus he's got.


   2658. Greg K Posted: March 26, 2013 at 05:36 AM (#4396503)

My sense is that the sarcasm did not apply to the "those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly" part. I say this because we saw plenty of this from your side during the incident. Along with, at the end, "well, maybe they didn't rape her, but they did _something_ bad, man."

My sense is also that the sarcasm did not apply to the "strippers will be strippers" piece.


Well, you're wrong.

A) Andy explained pretty clearly what he meant
and
B) It seemed pretty obvious to me on first reading.

He was pretty obviously looking to generate this response:

But what is your point, exactly? The students hired strippers. And? So they deserved to be hit with false rape claims and be railroaded and have their lives nearly destroyed?


And use it to compare to "The girl got drunk. And? So she deserved to be raped?"

Not saying whether it was an effective rhetorical strategy, or taking sides in this debate. It just seemed pretty clear to me that's what Andy was trying to achieve with his comment.

   2659. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 06:22 AM (#4396506)
Not saying whether it was an effective rhetorical strategy, or taking sides in this debate. It just seemed pretty clear to me that's what Andy was trying to achieve with his comment.


Yeah, but after scores of episodes of reading his stuff and hoping it was sarcasm, only to have those hopes cruelly dashed, not wanting to get burned again is certainly understandable.
   2660. Greg K Posted: March 26, 2013 at 06:23 AM (#4396507)
Skipping ahead a bit, Ray responds with:

Faulty comparison, getting blackout drunk has a higher probability of being dangerous than hiring a stripper.



Being in a different time zone can be really dull. There's whole hours of the day where you have to re-create the conversation rather than following it live.
   2661. Lassus Posted: March 26, 2013 at 07:21 AM (#4396517)
To toss these two 16 year old boys overboard for the rest of their lives, to give up on them, to deem them so evil that even after they pay their punishment and serve their time and learn their lesson there is no hope for them is a fairly abhorrent attitude.

And _I_ am called a robot with no emotion?


That's quite something you've come up with there. Where once has my comfort with their sentencing and punishment - something you've made a point to say is exactly how you and yours also feel about the outcome - translated to anything at all about AFTER their punishment, or their rehabilitation during, even?

I suppose I am glad to find out what sort of situation and beleaguered souls finally merit you speaking out on your humanity.
   2662. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:31 AM (#4396539)
Oh, you mean the lacrosse case? That's the one where those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly. If they'd only settled for watching porno movies instead, nothing would have happened to them, a point I'm sure Ray and Sam would certainly agree with. Because, as Sam would put it, strippers will be strippers.

Andy, I am guessing from this paragraph that you have had little actual real world experience or contact with strippers,


Possibly not nearly as much as you have, since I've never felt the need to patronize strip joints, but I've met a few strippers through pool room friends. Which is totally irrelevant, since my comment was pure sarcasm and not intended to be taken literally.

My sense is that the sarcasm did not apply to the "those stupid boys should have known that hiring a stripper could only turn out badly" part. I say this because we saw plenty of this from your side during the incident. Along with, at the end, "well, maybe they didn't rape her, but they did _something_ bad, man."

My sense is also that the sarcasm did not apply to the "strippers will be strippers" piece.


Sorry, Ray, but both of those comments were so totally sarcastic that I mistakenly supposed that even the BTF cavemen could have figured it out. I guess the next time I should include a reference or two to 1970's TV shows, in order to provide an easier bridge to understanding on your part.

Of course the obvious point I was making is that people who love to give advice to women about drinking, on the grounds that it's just good, practical, All-American advice, should also consider advising men not to hire strippers, for the same practical, disinterested reason. I'm assuming that you'd have no objection to giving future lacrosse players that sort of comradely advice---for their own good, of course---the next time you see them about to order a Birthday Cake Special.

---------------------------------------------

Not saying whether it was an effective rhetorical strategy, or taking sides in this debate. It just seemed pretty clear to me that's what Andy was trying to achieve with his comment.


Yeah, but after scores of episodes of reading his stuff and hoping it was sarcasm, only to have those hopes cruelly dashed, not wanting to get burned again is certainly understandable.

I'm tempted to call this the Andy Derangement Syndrome, only I don't want to flatter myself with the comparison.






   2663. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:34 AM (#4396542)
That's quite something you've come up with there. Where once has my comfort with their sentencing and punishment - something you've made a point to say is exactly how you and yours also feel about the outcome - translated to anything at all about AFTER their punishment, or their rehabilitation during, even?


From here. What you posted it 2601:

I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise.

If that is so repellent that it is where you find the focus of this issue to be, I will gladly be the brunt and easily stand so labelled.


If you've changed your mind, I'm happy to recognize that.
   2664. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:36 AM (#4396543)

Formerly dp is happy to sacrifice your daughters on the altar of his nonsense, but if it was his daughter, dressed up for her first unchaperoned party at 16, a party where it was just possible that alcohol might be served, do you really think he wouldn't talk to her about the dangers of drinking, and about the dangers of drinking around boys she does not know?


There is a big difference between having a quiet private conversation with your daughter before the party on the one hand, and on the other coming to pick her up, finding her bleeding and broken, and exclaiming in public "boy, I bet you regret getting drunk now!!", which I think is the equivalent of what is going on here.

When a woman knows that if she gets raped, her every action and decision leading up to the rape will be subjected to close scrutiny to find out "why it happened" (because the reason has to lie with her actions), whereas the rapists will not be subject to similar scrutiny, it can only have one effect: to make it less likely that she comes forward to report an assault. Who would want to go through this? To have your entire life dissected publicly, on top of the pain and suffering?

When you come upon someone who is hurting, you comfort them. That is the appropriate action, that and nothing more.

Some seem to feel that we can discuss this clinically and impartially, like debating whether the manager should have bunted down by one run in the 8th inning, but you simply can't in a situation like this. The wounds are too raw, the suffering too real. And when an attempt to generalize is made, as up above, it gets worse. It implies that most women who are raped are raped because they are drunk. It suggests that a bunch of middle-aged men have some bit of wisdom to pass down to women that they aren't already aware of. Women, like men, know that it is a bad idea to drink until they pass out. Nevertheless, some end up doing so anyways. It's not because we haven't shouted loud enough. It's easy after the fact to find faults in the actions of anyone, but it's not constructive in this instance. It does no good. All it does is reflect poorly on us.
   2665. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:36 AM (#4396544)
Well, Andy, if people are missing the sarcasm I'd suggest you reconsider whether you've become a parody of yourself.

Of course the obvious point I was making is that people who love to give advice to women about drinking, on the grounds that it's just good, practical, All-American advice, should also consider advising men not to hire strippers, for the same practical, disinterested reason. I'm assuming that you'd have no objection to giving future lacrosse players that sort of comradely advice---for their own good, of course---the next time you see them about to order a Birthday Cake Special.


Sure; I have no problem with that advice.

   2666. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:38 AM (#4396545)
Of course the obvious point I was making is that people who love to give advice to women about drinking, on the grounds that it's just good, practical, All-American advice, should also consider advising men not to hire strippers, for the same practical, disinterested reason.

Or better yet we should consider advising men never to engage in sex with women, as that too would lessen (*) the chances of a false rape claim.

(*) But, alas, not eliminate them -- as we saw in Duke LAX.
   2667. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:43 AM (#4396546)
When you come upon someone who is hurting, you comfort them. That is the appropriate action, that and nothing more.

Does that apply to defense attorneys, other witnesses, and juries?

   2668. Bitter Mouse Posted: March 26, 2013 at 08:49 AM (#4396547)
#2664 is a good post. Especially notable for this part of the thread.
   2669. Lassus Posted: March 26, 2013 at 09:01 AM (#4396551)
Ray, #2663 answers... nothing. As you've pointed the phrase out specifically, I will ask again - what in this:
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise. If that is so repellent that it is where you find the focus of this issue to be, I will gladly be the brunt and easily stand so labelled.
equals this:
to deem them so evil that even after they pay their punishment and serve their time and learn their lesson there is no hope for them

Where do I say anything about the rest of their lives? Where do I call them irredeemable? What the hell are you talking about?


   2670. Lassus Posted: March 26, 2013 at 09:03 AM (#4396552)
SBB, do you have a macro installed for "Duke LAX" on your computer?
   2671. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 09:06 AM (#4396554)
SBB, do you have a macro installed for "Duke LAX" on your computer?

It's only seven letters, so no need. I can hold the shift key down long enough to get the three caps out.
   2672. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 26, 2013 at 09:22 AM (#4396561)
Well, Andy, if people are missing the sarcasm I'd suggest you reconsider whether you've become a parody of yourself.

Other than one person who's brand new to BTF, only you and Sugar Bear missed my point. Perhaps you two might learn to read and take a deep breath or two before responding so reflexively.

Of course the obvious point I was making is that people who love to give advice to women about drinking, on the grounds that it's just good, practical, All-American advice, should also consider advising men not to hire strippers, for the same practical, disinterested reason. I'm assuming that you'd have no objection to giving future lacrosse players that sort of comradely advice---for their own good, of course---the next time you see them about to order a Birthday Cake Special.

Sure; I have no problem with that advice.


Fair enough. I'll remember this the next time a similar case arises, as I'm sure it will at some unknown point.

------------------------------------

Of course the obvious point I was making is that people who love to give advice to women about drinking, on the grounds that it's just good, practical, All-American advice, should also consider advising men not to hire strippers, for the same practical, disinterested reason.

Or better yet we should consider advising men never to engage in sex with women, as that too would lessen (*) the chances of a false rape claim.


Yes, just as advising women never to step out of the house would lessen their chances of being raped. I'm sure we could keep swapping absurdities like this for another dozen posts, or you might just agree with Ray that advice for the goose is also advice for the gander.
   2673. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 09:39 AM (#4396579)
Other than one person who's brand new to BTF, only you and Sugar Bear missed my point.

I wondered out loud whether you were serious, which is why I "assumed" it.

Yes, just as advising women never to step out of the house would lessen their chances of being raped. I'm sure we could keep swapping absurdities like this for another dozen posts, or you might just agree with Ray that advice for the goose is also advice for the gander.


So hiring strippers makes you as likely to be the victim of a false claim of a crime as drinking until blackout makes you likely to be the victim of a crime? Is that really what you're suggesting?

If not, you're right -- I missed your point. Which is to say, I understand this as yet another effort to analogize things which aren't really alike -- much as you did with "racism"/pulling an Arpaio and rape. I also understand that you aren't "equating" them. Point being, they're so dissimilar that the proffered analogy fails. There's no relationship -- intuitively and likely empirically -- between hiring strippers and being falsely accused of a crime; there's an obvious, unmissable relationship between losing one's faculties and being the victim of a crime. The person without his faculties is unable to defend against crime.
   2674. The Good Face Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:09 AM (#4396618)
When a woman knows that if she gets raped, her every action and decision leading up to the rape will be subjected to close scrutiny to find out "why it happened" (because the reason has to lie with her actions), whereas the rapists will not be subject to similar scrutiny, it can only have one effect: to make it less likely that she comes forward to report an assault. Who would want to go through this? To have your entire life dissected publicly, on top of the pain and suffering?

When you come upon someone who is hurting, you comfort them. That is the appropriate action, that and nothing more.


Wrong. It has the effect of preventing future rapes. I would think that caring, supportive people would be more interested in preventing rapes in the future as opposed to comforting somebody who made poor decisions with lies.

People in this thread keep ranting about rapes going unreported, but what evidence is there that rapes are grossly underreported other than made-up numbers from grievance-mongers with axes to grind? And why should we give such non-barking dogs any more credence than we would to claims of rampant voter fraud?
   2675. formerly dp Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:22 AM (#4396625)
Ray, I hope this video cures you of any sympathy you feel for the Rape Crew. They don't deserve it. There are a lot of other "interesting" things to discuss with this case-- the rapists' use of technology to brag about their act, the subsequent use of that same technology as evidence in the trial, the regrettable decision to release the name of the victim, the attempts by the rapist to convince the victim not to report, the vitriol directed at the victim by supporters of the local football team, CNN's sympathetic coverage of the rapists during the trial-- those all strike me as both more interesting and more productive topics than the victim's actions. That we've spent a week talking about precisely the wrong thing speaks volumes about the priorities of those on this board.
--
It has the effect of preventing future rapes.
Reasoning from intuition will get you precisely nowhere on this. And that's all you're doing. Because what could those silly women's rights activists with their made up numbers and their qualitative studies of victims and their rapists possibly add to the conversation?
   2676. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:27 AM (#4396628)
So hiring strippers makes you as likely to be the victim of a false claim of a crime as drinking until blackout makes you likely to be the victim of a crime? Is that really what you're suggesting?

That's an empirical question, and the answer is irrelevant. Hiring a stripper for a frat party is also likely to make a man more susceptible to finding himself in the middle of a drunken melee than if he'd simply opted to watch the stripper on YouTube or a DVD, but that doesn't mean I'm going to tell anyone not to go to hire strippers, if that's the sort of thing they enjoy.

If not, you're right -- I missed your point. Which is to say, I understand this as yet another effort to analogize things which aren't really alike -- much as you did with "racism"/pulling an Arpaio and rape. I also understand that you aren't "equating" them. Point being, they're so dissimilar that the proffered analogy fails. There's no relationship -- intuitively and likely empirically -- between hiring strippers and being falsely accused of a crime; there's an obvious, unmissable relationship between losing one's faculties and being the victim of a crime. The person without his faculties is unable to defend against crime.

And anyone who hires a stripper (or goes to strip clubs) might possibly find himself subject to blackmail or public humiliation by a paparazzi or a tabloid gossip columnist, not to mention being outed by a clever cell phone user. Why isn't that enough to make you start issuing your concern troll instructions to them? I can think of a few politicians who could have used a cautionary word along these lines.
   2677. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:28 AM (#4396630)
I would think that caring, supportive people would be more interested in preventing rapes in the future as opposed to comforting somebody who made poor decisions with lies.

I didn't understand the "comforting" idea to necessarily include "lies." That's an unfair burden to put on it.

There's certainly nothing wrong with comforting the victim, or counseling the comforting of the victim. The victim should be comforted. It's a noble and honoroable thing to do and to counsel doing.

It's just that the prescription is incomplete and doesn't get at anything related to what we're discussing.

As noted above (and curiously left unaddressed), the existence of the criminal justice system, due process, the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses -- in other words, all the hallmarks of civilization -- prevent and discourage rape victims from coming forward.(*) It would be easier on them if they could just go to a judge in secret, make an accusation in secret, and have the person they're accusing locked up.

So society does not in fact operate under the principle that every single thing anyone anywhere does and says, must be aimed entirely at encouraging rape victims to report their crimes and participate in the process. Nor should it. Meaning that when someone suggests that A, B, and C shouldn't be done because it might in some way, shape, or form "discourage" rape victims, they're met with quite understandable head scratching. (At least by non-extremists.)

(*) By orders of magnitude more than a few people talking about the relationship between binge drinking and crime victimization.
   2678. formerly dp Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:33 AM (#4396634)
And Face, if the data were not so cacophonous in its agreement on the subject, you might have some sort of point. But your ignorance of the data does not invalidate it. Here's study for an 11 (edit 11 not 111) year period in Mass (college campuses), here's a DoJ report. This is a notorious problem on college campuses-- I'm not sure you'll find that much in dispute anywhere. It's worse in the military, according to their own studies. You can read more here if you're actually interested in understanding the problem. But I'm sure all numbers and victim studies you encounter will simply be waved away as "ideological"-- if only we'd listen to the Almighty and All-Knowing Face, we could prevent so much of the sexual violence against women.
   2679. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:34 AM (#4396635)
.
   2680. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:34 AM (#4396636)
Why isn't that enough to make you start issuing your concern troll instructions to them?

Uh, oh, Andy's gone from "you don't have standing to advise" to "I guess advice is ok" back to "advice is concern trolling." Can the Foremanesque comeback of "standing" be far behind?
   2681. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:36 AM (#4396638)
CNN's reportage was not "sympathetic" to the rapists.
   2682. formerly dp Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:37 AM (#4396640)
As noted above (and curiously left unaddressed), the existence of the criminal justice system, due process, the right to counsel, the right to confront witnesses -- in other words, all the hallmarks of civilization -- prevent and discourage rape victims from coming forward.(*) It would be easier on them if they could just go to a judge in secret, make an accusation in secret, and have the perp locked up.
This hasn't been addressed because it's an idiotic strawman. No one is saying that victims' rights trump all other considerations, just that when giving advice to victims in a public forum, you take into account the effects of that discourse on both the present and future victims of sexual abuse. I can't believe you were actually patting yourself on the back for that one...
   2683. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:38 AM (#4396641)
Is it just me, or does that hand-waving fall a bit short of the following account --


yes, yes it does.


and since this is the OTP thread, let's discuss North Korea's latest propaganda epic, a 4 minute YouTuber depicting their 3 days victory over the US of A and the taking of 150,000 POWs.

Or pretty much anything but rape/sexual assault, since this thread has done nothing but gotten uglier and uglier.

   2684. formerly dp Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:39 AM (#4396642)
CNN's reportage was not "sympathetic" to the rapists.
"OMG, what will happen to these poor boys" sounds pretty ####### sympathetic. I mean, it's CNN, so I'm not expecting much, but ffs.
   2685. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:43 AM (#4396645)
Where do I say anything about the rest of their lives? Where do I call them irredeemable? What the hell are you talking about?


I don't see any qualifications in your 2601. But once you stated that my conclusion was incorrect I immediately accepted that, so I don't know what the issue is now.

EDIT: Oh, I guess I referred to your statement as having been "revised." Fine. I withdraw that. But it's not like your 2601 is unfairly read (absent clarification) as you simply having nothing to offer these two 16 year old criminals, so upon reading it I basically put you with Snapper.
   2686. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM (#4396646)
This hasn't been addressed because it's an idiotic strawman.

So then the criminal justice system, under your terminology, is part of the "rape culture." Good to clear that up.
   2687. rr Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:44 AM (#4396647)
(and curiously left unaddressed),


It's been addressed. Public media and public discourse, like BTF, are different settings with different communicative, sociological, and ethical imperatives than courtrooms are. It's the same principle as the "private conversation with the daughter" before the party vs. the collective post-party "advice" on social media.

If you can find someone in the thread saying that individuals accused of rape should not have due process or lawyers or trials, by all means, cite the posts and attack. But the only legal issues that I have seen discussed here are by you, with the NY and OH thing, and a couple of guys, notably snapper, saying that they thought the sentences were too light.
   2688. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:46 AM (#4396649)
"OMG, what will happen to these poor boys" sounds pretty ####### sympathetic.


Pure confirmation bias. CNN ran the story of how the assailants lives will be destroyed because 1) that's the story they had (they didn't have the victim's name at the time, so they had limited angles to run, and 24 hours of infotainment to fill) and 2) because showing other young men the *consequences* of raping their classmates is a good way of getting them to think twice if they're ever so tempted themselves.

You think it was "sympathetic" because you're looking for the outrage angle.
   2689. Lassus Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:49 AM (#4396653)
But it's not like your 2601 is unfairly read as you simply having nothing to offer these two 16 year old criminals

It is in fact dishonestly read. You quoted words I wrote:
I positively refuse to have any mercy or empathy with these two boys, these young men, however you wish to define them. My mercy only goes so far and it does not go there, and I am comfortable with the expanse of my mercy and empathy otherwise.
and that with these words, I
toss these two 16 year old boys overboard for the rest of their lives, to give up on them, to deem them so evil that even after they pay their punishment and serve their time and learn their lesson there is no hope for them is a fairly abhorrent attitude.


You are quite simply making things up.
   2690. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:49 AM (#4396654)
You think it was "sympathetic" because you're looking for the outrage angle.


You don't think it was sympathetic because:

1: You didn't watch it
2: You're trolling
3: You're a moron
4: You yourself are overly sympathetic to the poor misunderstood lads and hence incapable of seeing such bias in others

I don't believe 3, I don't want to think 4, so I tend to go with 2.

   2691. Lassus Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:50 AM (#4396657)
and since this is the OTP thread, let's discuss North Korea's latest propaganda epic, a 4 minute YouTuber depicting their 3 days victory over the US of A and the taking of 150,000 POWs.

The everyday citizens of North Korea, the children there especially I have enough mercy and empathy for it makes me want to weep.
   2692. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:51 AM (#4396659)
If you can find someone in the thread saying that individuals accused of rape should not have due process or lawyers or trials, by all means, cite the posts and attack.

It's not that they come out and say it. It's that they describe things that discourage victims from coming forward as forming and comprising a "rape culture." The criminal justice system discourages victims from coming forward. Therefore, under their own words and constructions, the criminal justice system is part of the "rape culture."

Which will I'm sure now unleash a new wave of, "Well, I didn't really mean it that ways."
   2693. formerly dp Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:51 AM (#4396661)
You think it was "sympathetic" because you're looking for the outrage angle.
I'm not outraged by their coverage. It's CNN-- I don't expect much better. And #1 is definitely valid, but does not let them off the hook for the tone, especially given the narrative that was being advanced by Stuebenville locals, that the victim should STFU because of the effects it will have on the football team, and these are basically good kids. Hell, Sam-- you yourself took this tone by suggesting that they weren't "real" rapists, but just kids who saw an opportunity and took it. (does their self-identification as the "rape crew" cause you to revise that thesis?)
   2694. rr Posted: March 26, 2013 at 10:57 AM (#4396665)
a 4 minute YouTuber depicting their 3 days victory over the US of A and the taking of 150,000 POWs.


Wow. I want to watch that, but then again I don't.
   2695. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 11:00 AM (#4396669)
When a woman knows that if she gets raped, her every action and decision leading up to the rape will be subjected to close scrutiny to find out "why it happened" (because the reason has to lie with her actions), whereas the rapists will not be subject to similar scrutiny, it can only have one effect: to make it less likely that she comes forward to report an assault. Who would want to go through this? To have your entire life dissected publicly, on top of the pain and suffering?

When you come upon someone who is hurting, you comfort them. That is the appropriate action, that and nothing more.


Her actions get "scrutinized" because there is no point in "scrutinizing" the actions of the rapist, because everyone agrees that he did something horrid, and people (including me) figure that it's pointless to expect that he or guys like him would have behaved differently in similar circumstances, so people (including me) want to change the circumstances for the future in an attempt to prevent future rapes, because people (including me) feel that there is a good chance he wouldn't have behaved that way in different circumstances.

That's where the actions of the victim come in as education for the future, not as "blame" -- although you people can't stop using that word -- but as a mechanism for changing the circumstances in order to attempt to prevent future rapes. Again: someone jumps out from behind a bush with a knife, there's nothing you can do (*). But someone predisposed to criminality if the circumstances present themselves has a blackout drunk girl at a party fall into his lap -- well, likely if she hadn't been blackout drunk, the rape never would have occurred.

Why people recoil and hiss at the above is left as an exercise for the reader.

(*) Unless you were walking through the park at night and then... you can change that behavior. See how this works?
   2696. Lassus Posted: March 26, 2013 at 11:00 AM (#4396670)
Which will I'm sure now unleash a new wave of, "Well, I didn't really mean it that ways."

I would more expect a new wave of "SBB, you're kind of a loon."
   2697. Ray (RDP) Posted: March 26, 2013 at 11:03 AM (#4396675)
I would think that caring, supportive people would be more interested in preventing rapes in the future as opposed to comforting somebody who made poor decisions with lies.


I didn't understand the "comforting" idea to necessarily include "lies." That's an unfair burden to put on it.

There's certainly nothing wrong with comforting the victim, or counseling the comforting of the victim. The victim should be comforted. It's a noble and honoroable thing to do and to counsel doing.

It's just that the prescription is incomplete and doesn't get at anything related to what we're discussing.


Well, yes, the bolded part is the "lies" part. People have valuable information that could prevent the victim from being raped again in the future, and they don't mention it to the victim they are counseling. That is deceitful - to claim you're helping someone while withholding valuable information - and, beyond that, frankly it is abhorrent.
   2698. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: March 26, 2013 at 11:05 AM (#4396676)
1: You didn't watch it


Stipulated.

2: You're trolling


A popular gambit against me, so you have that. Loses points for originality.

3: You're a moron


It's possible, I suppose.

4: You yourself are overly sympathetic to the poor misunderstood lads and hence incapable of seeing such bias in others


I'm not overly sympathetic to anyone.
   2699. The Good Face Posted: March 26, 2013 at 11:05 AM (#4396677)
Because what could those silly women's rights activists with their made up numbers and their qualitative studies of victims and their rapists possibly add to the conversation?


Not much if they don't have quantitative studies. A bunch of information about how victims feel really gets the old self-righteous motor running, but doesn't tell us much about how to prevent or enable future events. I am amused that by your own admission, education is apparently useless when it comes to impacting human behavior. I guess you're a biological determinist after all!

Also, you should really stop randomly linking to reports that you think bolster your arguments without reading or understanding them. Nothing in any of that documentation answered my questions.
   2700. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: March 26, 2013 at 11:07 AM (#4396680)
I would more expect a new wave of "SBB, you're kind of a loon."

You want loony, how about post 2401 (for example):

This has been explained, but one of the effects of the discourse you're talking about is that it reduces the likelihood of rape victims coming forward, because of the subtext that they are partially at fault for the rapist's actions. The effects of these crimes are deeply psychological, and what we know from victims is that feeling like the attack was partially their fault reduces their willingness to report. And having a culture of victim-shaming, where dickheads on internet message boards feel compelled to declare victims stupid and irresponsible, is part of the ####### problem-- the "rape culture"* discussed earlier.

Replace "dickheads [sic] on internet message boards" with "the criminal justice system" and not a thing about the substance and import of the words changes. Thus, as noted, the criminal justice system fits snugly within the prevailing definition of the "rape culture."


Page 27 of 30 pages ‹ First  < 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Phil Birnbaum
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogAJC: Hart says ‘yes’ to Braves, will head baseball operations
(15 - 5:31am, Oct 24)
Last: Morty Causa

NewsblogWhat's Buster Posey's best trait as a catcher? Here's what his pitchers had to say - Giants Extra
(4 - 5:31am, Oct 24)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogGleeman: Royals may bench Norichika Aoki for Game 3
(21 - 3:00am, Oct 24)
Last: PreservedFish

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(8 - 2:52am, Oct 24)
Last: mex4173

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(368 - 2:12am, Oct 24)
Last: RollingWave

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3402 - 1:51am, Oct 24)
Last: Swoboda is freedom

NewsblogKey question GMs have to weigh with top World Series free agents | New York Post
(28 - 12:50am, Oct 24)
Last: Dale Sams

NewsblogOT: NBC.news: Valve isn’t making one gaming console, but multiple ‘Steam machines’
(867 - 12:47am, Oct 24)
Last: Poster Nutbag

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-23-2014
(13 - 11:36pm, Oct 23)
Last: EddieA

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(44 - 11:31pm, Oct 23)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogRoyals are not the future of baseball | FOX Sports
(39 - 11:25pm, Oct 23)
Last: villageidiom

NewsblogOT: NFL/NHL thread
(8370 - 11:22pm, Oct 23)
Last: Russlan is fond of Dillon Gee

NewsblogI hope this doesn't get me fired. | FOX Sports
(23 - 11:17pm, Oct 23)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogGold Glove Awards finalists revealed | MLB.com
(53 - 11:07pm, Oct 23)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(904 - 10:56pm, Oct 23)
Last: frannyzoo

Page rendered in 1.1160 seconds
52 querie(s) executed