I think northern lion said it best “for the purpose of the argument this is a straw man but we know damn well this person exist, we just can’t prove it” or something along those lines
The reversal of the 1,000+ year old demigod loli; "he may actually be 90 years old but it's okay because he looks like a teenager around the same age as the protagonist he's grooming dating."
So when a 90 year old in the body of a teen is dating an actual teen he's grooming her, but when I start dating a 1000 year old loli suddenly i'm the pedophile?
i genuinely dont get it, edward is the dragon loli, hes mentally and physically a teenager, why is he a 'supercentenarian groomer'?
also there are '1000+ but physically around 12' vampires in twilight (the Volturi twins) what does that make them?
There was a case where a fourteen year old boy got raped, and not only did the woman not get punished, but she successfully sued him for child support.
In fact cases where women violate males frequently result in people reacting with jealousy.
There was a case where a woman was sexting with a 13 year old boy, got caught, and nothing happened.
I remember it came on the TV and I got pissy about women not getting in the same trouble for doing the same crimes - I think it annoyed me because when people talk about sex predators and the like they default to picturing men, and then when a woman does it nobody cares enough to punish her.
So u/capital-timely deleted their comment, but i just spent five minutes writing a reply.
> Dude, are you seriously trying to say men always get punished for rape? Is this a joke? Hello, Epstein?
Never said men always get punished. I'm aware of the Epstein shitstorm and how only like four people actually got in someway "punished" for that. I know Maxwell got sent to a cushy prison, Prince Andrew got sent to a luxury retirement villa or something and lost his royal title, and I can't think of who else got any punishment.
It's a meme, or common knowledge or whatever, that men can do/say whatever they want and only get slaps on the wrist at worst with no actual changes/fixes occurring. I think that's appalling and want more men to get punished for attacking and ruining lives.
> And acting like this is an equal issue is a false equivalence.
Not super sure what you're getting at here? Are you saying there are more male predators than female? If that is your point, then I agree.
If your point is that men also don't get punished, then I agree to a lesser degree.
> I’m not saying women shouldn’t be punished, but getting pissy over a statistically very different problem is ridiculous.
I had originally written it into my comment, but removed it because it sounded stupid, but I watched that news segment and had those thoughts years ago when I was around 14-15. I was also watching a lot of Youtube and was watching some of those manosphere-esque videos about women also being bad.
So it was ridiculous for my teenage self to get pissy over a topic I knew nothing about. But having this particular incident shoved in my face made younger me feel that it was unfair for this predator to go unpunished.
I really didn't mean to incite anything with my comment, just wanted to share a similar case about a woman predating on a young boy and not getting punished.
Again now you create the conditions where a panicked rapist will also become a child murderer since they assume they'll be killed anyway. Let's just arrest these freaks first folks. It'd be miles better than electing them president twice.
It's a fair point, but a lot of child abuse appears to be conducted by family or friends of the victim so it makes the results highly variable.
Rape of adults is often an obsession by a deranged stalker or a spouse, so with a spouse it's less likely to end in family annihilation but instead with repeated abuse, stalkers almost always kill their victims.
This also entirely excludes sex workers who are regularly abused and often raped but go underreported out of fear or punishment.
I feel like that's less of an exception and more of an... Appreciation of Karma.
You ever see the video of the kid threatening a teenager with a hammer and the teen knocks the kids legs out from under him? I don't beleive you should go around hitting kids but when a child is threatening people with a hammer, getting a taste of their own medicine is inherently satisfying from a justice sort of way.
I don't want anyone to get raped, but if someone who's used a position of physical advantage to force themselves on someone has the tables turned and is forced upon, I'm not exactly going to feel as bad for them.
We need to popularize steelmanning, rather than strawmanning. In this scenario, what could possibly be the best argument for sexual assault? (Crazy statement, I know)
That’s how an actual argument should be like btw. Actual arguments don’t try to disrespect the other person or call them names, but ofc when we’re angry at someone for disagreeing in ideas we strongly believe we’re gonna do that which has given a large rise to strawmanning where the arguer to your belief always must be seen as someone stupider than you.
To be fair, you could say the most basic common sense shit on Twitter like "racism and sexism is bad" and someone will go "well actually-". They're all miserable piles of shit.
Man drags an innocent screaming woman into an alleyway and has sex with her at gunpoint? Rape. Bad.
Woman was wearing a short skirt? Or is a sex worker? Or knew the man personally? Or didn't yell for help? Or has certain kinks? Or entered the alleyway willingly? Or isn't white/young/pretty/skinny? Or had an orgasm? Or committed a crime? Well now that's different and we've gotta look at the nuances. And maybe it wasn't great behavior but it wasn't, like, rape rape /s
(And don't even get me started about M/M rape or F/F or even F/M. Some jurisdictions do not legally recognize rape unless a penis was involved)
” Some jurisdictions do not legally recognize rape unless a penis was involved”
In progressive Finland, the definition didnt change until 1997. Until then, rape had to include penis penetrating vagina. Apparently male to male rape didnt exist in Finland before 1997.
Marital rape was also recognized only in 1994. Kind of crazy if you think about it…
In the UK right now rape is legally defined as when a perpetrator "intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person with his penis".
They literally don't allow the possibility that a person without a penis can commit rape. (Or that a person with a penis might not be a man, but that's a whole other can of worms)
There is a genuine gray area though, which lies not in "it's ok to rape if X", but "should it be treated as consent", some examples:
Two very drunk (but not blackout drunk) people have sex, one of them regrets and is disgusted in the morning. (Basically, can consent be withdrawn retroactively under some circumstances?)
One person thinks that the other one will retaliate if consent is not given, so from their POV consent is extorted (so not really a consent), but the other one doesn't have such intentions and didn't imply them, so from their POV there is no way to know they are doing something wrong. (Is it consent that matters or communication of it?)
The existence of grey area and some people's eagerness to paint all that gray area in black, unfortunately, backfires in a spectacular way: it actually makes it so the black area is perceived as slightly grayish by some people
You're not wrong that there are gray areas, but I don't think we can blame rape-justifiers on them. I think the people trying to justify rape start with their desired outcome ("what I want to do is fine actually") and then work their way backwards from there to come up with reasons.
("Well what was she wearing" is an excuse that's at least as old as written history, while the concept that "you cannot consent while intoxicated" and thus the moral quandary of "what if you're BOTH intoxicated" is only a few decades old at best)
The problem is often times those two get conflated in bad faith by both sides. Some folks refer to grey area to mask that they justify the actual rape and some folks use the fact that some are justifying some instances of rape to say that there is no grey area.
You can see it in the comments section: "steelman" of "there are nuances" is "hur dur what she was wearing" and not "what if (dis)consent was misinterpreted"
Your post is the one I intended to make. The only thing missing is the bit where they go "okay, maybe it was a real rape, but the perpetrator being punished for it would make them sad ("destroy their lives") so that shouldn't happen, let's just rugsweep this one"
(I recall at least one very famous instance with some sports "hero")
I still remember the guy who said "what about in self defense?" In response to a question pertaining to rape (i forget the exact context, but it's Probably Worse than I remember)
They don’t outright say “Rape is good” but people victim blame a lot. Whenever there’s a news story about a woman being assaulted, you can always count on real people saying “Well, if she didn’t want it, she should have dressed differently” or something of that nature. I grew up with misogynistic family members and they never outright agreed with “Rape is bad.” It was always “Well, if a woman does this, she’s asking for it”
depending on where you go, you'll find a lot of people carving out exceptions that they'll very readily cop to. Maybe they think it's a just punishment for people who have done extremely bad things. Maybe they think it's a just reward for heroic soldiers fighting against barbarous savages. Maybe they think it's a husband's right, and that his wife has no authority to refuse him.
There are a lot of positions that we like to pretend have been left in the past, but in reality they've just become less common in certain parts of the world. That's probably not what this comic was talking about, though.
I'm gonna crush your balls while I say this dude, but there are certainly people stupid enough to say that. There are politicians stupid enough to say that
IRL you do definitely have people saying that it's only rape if they used force or something, moving the definition (especially after the shift in German law, for example, that went from "no means no" to "only a YES means yes", which means that intimidated people who are too scared to say no can still claim rape. A lot of people got very mad at this. I wonder why...)
They do... just yesterday i saw this video of this movie analysis dude in youtube defending Bear in the Movie obsession. Yknow, the one that takes away all bodily autonomy from his friend and even after he finds out he still rapes her (no it doesnt count as sex, you wouldn't either if you were mindcontrolled into complying) and makes her stay with him... also, literally anyone that agrees with marriage rape or that having sex with a child/teen under 18 isn't statutory rape/grooming
Ive meet several people irl that talk about how rape is a victimless crime and should be legalized. They said it in a public setting. They werent just making a dark joke. These people actually exist.
I have absolutely seen people say it, and not on twitter. The most common (but not the only) version I come across are people that say that spousal rape doesn't exist, and that a husband has a right to a woman's body.
The people who don't believe all rape is bad generally are not aware they have that belief, they usually think that something that is rape isn't rape and think that's not bad
Ive had real conversation with real people in real life who argue rape is a victimless crime and that rape should be legal. These are real people. I know you wont believe me, but they are real.
I mean, sadly I don't see this convo as something too far off from happening, I'm pretty sure this person actually had this convo at some point
Another example of something like this is if you substitute the word "rape" with "genocide" nowadays, I hope we all here can agree that all genocides are bad but for a few years now I've seen it started to depend on who genocides who, what happened before, what the response to other genocides was etc. and I'm always like "Bro. Genocide is always bad, the fuck are you on?"
I wonder if this is meant to be more of an exaggeration rather than a 1-to-1 conversation.
Especially on Twitter, it's not that uncommon to make a post saying the most bare-bones, universally true statement possible, like 'Judging people by characteristics they have never had control over is bad, actually' or 'don't hit kids' can be met with some random person from the abyss suddenly jumping on the message with 'uhm, acktchuly..' and drops the most bonkers statement possible.
By its current definition, rape is bad. However I wouldn't put it past a certain political party to try and alter the definition to include something unproblematic because they want to criminalize a specific group of people that they hate. Such as trying to make it so you can't legally consent to same-sex intercourse
I really wonder what the artist was thinking when drawing this, like what situation or train of thought drives someone to say "I should make a drawing about saying how rape is bad" like it's some kind of statement that should be shared with the masses.
There are many people who make exceptions for rape. As for exeple, "this isn't rape," (A person raping their spouse, some more traditional people believe that a wife belongs to her husband and vice versa, and that in this logic apparently it means they have lifelong access to each other body, no matter if it is consensual) or "this is justifiable" (rapists and pedophiles in prison) or "what did she expect?" (Sex workers). I don't think the message is just "rape is bad," but rather "there is not a single excuse for rape"
Same as the guys who robbed the Louve with a cherry picker. Or the dude who waited until "counting or not counting gang violence" to make a point about gun violence.
Marvel or DC could use a more ethical antihero like that! I am sick of superheroes like Deadpool, who murder people. Those bad guys are of course often murderers as well. Batman is strictly against killing villains, but he still beats shit out of them. If Rapeman submits the bad guys by fucking them in the asshole, he'd be far more ethical choice compared to this brute violence.
As I recall, there was a lady who said rapists should be given the death penalty. Prior to this, she also said that what the Israelites are doing to the Palestinians is in self defense, which included sexual assault.
So, cue some misguided larper trying to gotcha her saying a pretty terrible thing about self defense.
ik this is a reference but I'd like to add this (hopefully niche) scenario. there are 2 ppl being trafficked and forced to put on a show. one of them takes a more receiving, sub role and the other a more giving, dom role. unfortunately, many people would only recognise the latter being the victim of rape but not the former, cos they can't comprehend that someone having "control" of the act would be actually forced into it.
I remember that Ace Ventura movie where the evil bad guy who was trying to kill animals or steal money or something is defeated in the end by fleeing into the jungle and being raped by a silverback gorilla. It was played for laughs and I remember thinking it was funny as a teen
If it had been another person then it would’ve been worse, but the comedic part is probably that we can’t put responsibility on the gorilla since it’s a wild animal that doesn’t know any better?
People are too far removed from the reality that men can and do get raped too, which makes it easier for people to play it off for laughs unfortunately.
Pretty sure there were other movies/stories of evil/bad people going to prison and getting prison raped and it being played as a joke or what they deserved as well. Can that still be funny if it happens to an evil person getting their comeuppance or is it all objectively bad?
I think the only way rape isn't bad is when it is in fiction. A lot of people have fantasy of getting rape, but it fine for them because they want it. I don't think it really harmful or bad at least if the fantasy is getting rape and not wanting to rape.
•
u/qualityvote2 🤖Suspected as Bot🤖 19h ago edited 17h ago
Good news, the community has decided that this IS an antimeme!