It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Advocate for Rape? or just exercising his right to Free Speech ? You decide

page: 8
26
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew

Lol.




posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 09:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: CharlestonChew

Lol.



There isn't anything funny about attacking a person's character in a debate. For those of us who know logic, and how to debate, you just make yourself look like a child.
edit on 4-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 10:00 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew


Oh PLEEZE. Stop with the self-aggrandizement.
I didn't attack your character. I asked you a question.
Are you Bill Cosby?



edit on 2/4/2016 by angeldoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: CharlestonChew


Oh PLEEZE. Stop with the self-aggrandizement.
I didn't attack your character. I asked you a question.
Are you Bill Cosby?


Actually, you did. Clever, clever girl.

Educate Yourself


Fallacy: Poisoning the Well

Description of Poisoning the Well

This sort of "reasoning" involves trying to discredit what a person might later claim by presenting unfavorable information (be it true or false) about the person. This "argument" has the following form:

Unfavorable information (be it true or false) about person A is presented.
Therefore any claims person A makes will be false.
This sort of "reasoning" is obviously fallacious. The person making such an attack is hoping that the unfavorable information will bias listeners against the person in question and hence that they will reject any claims he might make. However, merely presenting unfavorable information about a person (even if it is true) hardly counts as evidence against the claims he/she might make. This is especially clear when Poisoning the Well is looked at as a form of ad Homimem in which the attack is made prior to the person even making the claim or claims. The following example clearly shows that this sort of "reasoning" is quite poor.

Before Class:
Bill: "Boy, that professor is a real jerk. I think he is some sort of eurocentric fascist."
Jill: "Yeah."

During Class:
Prof. Jones: "...and so we see that there was never any 'Golden Age of Matriarchy' in 1895 in America."

After Class:
Bill: "See what I mean?"



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew

You are looking more and more like one of Roosh V ' s fan boys through your constant use of lengthy side arguments that have little to do with the OP
It's OK if you are an ardent fan, you can let us know which of Roosh V's books are the most inspirational and why.

Your input began by raisng a few points on free speech and advocacy of a crime.

Moving on then to drunken sex versus rape.

Then a flat out denial of the existence of rape culture ( could there be a more anti feminist statement ? )

Your agreement with his rational to abolish rape law ( which he protests was only a joke/satire/he didn't mean it ) ....according to you this would work brilliantly, remove all ambiguity regarding consent issues and also lower the rape crime statistics !

After that you took another swipe at feminists, this time accusing them of manipulation and duplicity in their attempts to secure convictions in rape cases. ( seeing a pattern in your argument yet ? )

You only want to discuss date rape, as it is the only one that fits into the " rape can be justified if she knows she is at risk of it happening, then if it does it's all her fault "

On and on...you have continued to make more of a case for everything I have read in Roosh V 's so called satirical appeal to abolish rape laws.

Till eventually you resort to using a completely cheesy YouTube video featuring a college girl stereotype talking about the law of consent and how campus rape statistics make no sense.

Only to then follow up with more nonsensical argument finally rolling over with a few desperate cries of ad hominem, logical fallacy .......and there you go. You are done. Fail

No logic.
Total failure to recognise rape for the violent crime it is
You are a Roosh V fan boy, aren't you ?
edit on 5/2/16 by cosmickat because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 02:40 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew

Rape is violence, period.

It does not matter whether it is done surrounded by cushions filled with the finest eiderdown, on sheets of purest silk, and with great care not to leave bruising or over much physical trace. It is still violence, and the fact that you have no understanding of that means that this conversation is over. You have shown a lack of willingness to learn the reality of the situation, and for my part, I have learned as much as you can teach me about how wrongthink manifests in people about this subject.

Continuing from this point, will avail neither of us any benefit what so ever.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 03:03 AM
link   
I can't believe it's 2016 and some folks still don't want to understand basic respect for another human being.

If your sex drive is so messed up that you'll try and twist and turn words to justify what is, by any normal definition, rape. Then seek help or just remove yourself from the gene pool.

Either works for me.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 03:35 AM
link   
From reading some of the things this guy has said he has done he clearly can't relate to women and can only get his end away by raping them.

He is reputed to say he hates female promiscuity - I wonder what he makes of his own promiscuity when he looks in the mirror? I would imagine his own mother can't stand the sight of him and is utterly ashamed.

I see he holds his money and posh car up as though he is successful but his only claim to fame is having profited from his own disgusting behaviour and writing about it. Seems a dreadful waste of a degree in microbiology but who would ever trust this man in the workplace. Once his fame dries up I doubt he will ever be employable.

It would be interesting to see if he ever marries because unless she's a gold digger no decent respectable woman would touch this creep with a barge pole.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 03:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: CharlestonChew
a reply to: TrueBrit


Are you saying that a rape is ever nonviolent?


Yes.

There are many examples where violence wouldn't be required. It wouldn't take much physical effort to have sex with a person who is unconscious. Still rape, though.


This is becoming ridiculous. The physical violation of another's body is the very definition of violence.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 07:39 AM
link   
well he cancelled Glasgow because of the overwhelming twitter responses telling him he'd get his #in heid kicked in if he tried any # like that wae the Scottish women !

he really needs 5 grams of dried stropharia cubensis and shut the # up!

the guy is a parasite man freedom of speech aye , but he is basically advocating rape to be ok making this a meme an passed on piece of language that says its ok society is ok with rape!

and that piece of pollutant propaganda is morally wrong, if he wants to legalise rape to "protect" women fine he can speak about it as much as he likes but he is damaging society by implanting that thought.
if more and more men sign up to this bull# then we have a problem on our hands.

Maybe we should just legalise rape on him only and see how quickly he changes his mind about it



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat


You are looking more and more like one of Roosh V ' s fan boys through your constant use of lengthy side arguments that have little to do with the OP
It's OK if you are an ardent fan, you can let us know which of Roosh V's books are the most inspirational and why.


Ah, and another contender enters the ring to side-step all arguments in favor of subtlety attacking the character of one's opponents.

Yes. It's strange. One time I was defending Christians and was accused of being Christian myself, even though I am actually an atheist.

Another time I was defending some claims of modern Feminists and some StormFront, neo-nazis kept calling me a Feminist sjw and "cuck." Even though I am not a feminist.

Liberals call me conservative, conservatives call me liberal.

And everyone misses the point...

It's weird how a human can entertain an idea without actually accepting or rejecting an idea, it's almost spooky. It's even stranger how some truths can be logically deduced from opposing philosophies, even though every claim of the philosophy may not be true.

Oh well.


Your input began by raisng a few points on free speech and advocacy of a crime.


And my point still stands.


Moving on then to drunken sex versus rape.


The thread is about rape, rape laws, our cultures views on rape, why rape happens, how best to avoid it or disincentivize it's practice...etc. Roosh V wrote an article with his arguments regarding all of the above. I read his arguments, they appear counter-intuitive, but from an anarchist's perspective, they make sense. Your thread pertains to all of those things and arguments regarding free speech, and arguments regarding law and government and their inherent role in society.


Then a flat out denial of the existence of rape culture ( could there be a more anti feminist statement ? )


Rape in the Western world is absolutely unacceptable, and for good reason--it is a loss of bodily autonomy of the individual--and we in the Western world have a long tradition of classical liberalism.

Because of the "privilege of the 1st world," we have an entire generation of coddled children, all looking for windmills to call giants. Modern feminism in Western civilization is a laughing-stock of accusations of oppression because air-conditioning is a tool for misogynists, men with their legs spread too far apart on a train is oppressive, logic is authoritarian--don't you dare mansplain--farts are rape, and a person can get PTSD from mean words on the internet. All the while, women all over the world are actually oppressed, but the spoiled children in the Western world are too self-absorbed to care.

Real rape cultures actually exist, and you do a disservice to the people who have to live in them by claiming that you live in one, too.


Your agreement with his rational to abolish rape law ( which he protests was only a joke/satire/he didn't mean it ) ....according to you this would work brilliantly, remove all ambiguity regarding consent issues and also lower the rape crime statistics !


Counter-intuition is a hell of a drug. It's weird how getting rid of laws actually works better for society.

You never did make any arguments against anything I said....


After that you took another swipe at feminists, this time accusing them of manipulation and duplicity in their attempts to secure convictions in rape cases. ( seeing a pattern in your argument yet ? )


Are you claiming that innocent people are never falsely accused?


You only want to discuss date rape, as it is the only one that fits into the " rape can be justified if she knows she is at risk of it happening, then if it does it's all her fault "


You'll have a hard time finding where I attempted to justify date rape.


Till eventually you resort to using a completely cheesy YouTube video featuring a college girl stereotype talking about the law of consent and how campus rape statistics make no sense.


You're really good at attacking people instead of their arguments.

That's usually a sign of a shallow mind.


Only to then follow up with more nonsensical argument finally rolling over with a few desperate cries of ad hominem, logical fallacy .......and there you go. You are done. Fail

No logic.
Total failure to recognise rape for the violent crime it is
You are a Roosh V fan boy, aren't you ?


In one sentence you claim that I mistakenly decried your use of fallacies, while immediately using a fallacy to associate me with Roosh V.

A truth is a truth, regardless as to who says it. Roosh V could say "1 + 1 = 2" and that would be a truth, and it would continue to be true, even though he said it.

Some of his arguments are valid, some of his arguments are not valid. Acceptance of his valid arguments, is not acceptance of his invalid arguments.

Observe:

2 * 3 = 6
Hitler was biologically female
My hair is brown
I own a computer

I made three true statements, and three false statements. The true statements will continue to be true, even if I am a "bad person" and I am the one uttering them. Truth is not dependent upon who is saying it. My opinion does not create truth, your opinion does not create truth. The fact that I typed one false statement, does not change the value of the other three statements--they remain true. The truth of the three statements cannot be rendered false by a majority who wishes for them to be false, your emotions can't change truth into falsehood, an "authority" qua authority doesn't decide what truth is.

The point is: truth is a thing that exists exclusively from us that we discover.
edit on 5-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: beansidhe

originally posted by: CharlestonChew
a reply to: TrueBrit


Are you saying that a rape is ever nonviolent?


Yes.

There are many examples where violence wouldn't be required. It wouldn't take much physical effort to have sex with a person who is unconscious. Still rape, though.


This is becoming ridiculous. The physical violation of another's body is the very definition of violence.


That is simply not true.

I could mistakenly rest my hand on your shoulder, without realizing that you didn't want me to, which would be classified as "violence" by your extremely loose definition of the word.

According to you, when my Grandmother pinched my cheeks when I didn't want her to, I was a victim of violence.

You are doing a disservice to people who are violently assaulted, by cheapening the extremity of their experience, because you want all bodily violations to be violence.

It's a nice way to keep the strong emotions flowing to further an agenda (it's chiefly a tool of the ignorant or liars, like Politicians).



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 09:24 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit


Rape is violence, period.

It does not matter whether it is done surrounded by cushions filled with the finest eiderdown, on sheets of purest silk, and with great care not to leave bruising or over much physical trace. It is still violence, and the fact that you have no understanding of that means that this conversation is over. You have shown a lack of willingness to learn the reality of the situation, and for my part, I have learned as much as you can teach me about how wrongthink manifests in people about this subject.

Continuing from this point, will avail neither of us any benefit what so ever.


Your outrage doesn't make any of your conclusions true. Outrage is easy to feign and it's boring. I mean, think of it: if outrage actually determined truth, then Galileo was wrong and the Catholic Church was right.

Thankfully, it doesn't work that way.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Outrage and ad hominems are the final, desperate tactics of the losing side.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 09:47 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew

Rape is a violent act, no matter how you want to spin it. You can disagree with that if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact.




You are doing a disservice to people who are violently assaulted, by cheapening the extremity of their experience, because you want all bodily violations to be violence.


Again you're getting confused. If you don't understand, that's fine, just say so.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe


Rape is a violent act, no matter how you want to spin it. You can disagree with that if you want to, but that doesn't change the fact.


Your claim is unreasonable, you are making it seem as if there is no degree in the severity of rape cases.

We know that there are degrees in the severity of murder, theft, and perjury. Rape is no exception.

There is no comparison to being shagged while you were unconscious at a party, to a girl being forced to have sex with her father when no one is around, or having someone break-in to your home and beat and rape you.

Degrees in severity. As I said, you want all of them to be seen as violence, when not all of them are violence. Some of them are associated with violence.

You claimed that the physical violation of another's body is the very definition of violence. I showed you why that is not true.

My Grandmother pinching my cheeks when I didn't want her to was a physical violation of my body, but it's not violence.
edit on 5-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew

You're not understanding this.




Your claim is unreasonable, you are making it seem as if there is no degree in the severity of rape cases. We know that there are degrees in the severity of murder, theft, and perjury. Rape is no exception.
There is no comparison to being shagged while you were unconscious at a party, to a girl being forced to have sex with her father when no one is around, or having someone break-in to your home and beat and rape you.


Rape is rape. All of the above definitions are an act of violence and it is claims such as yours that prevent the majority of women and girls from coming forwards and reporting it. There is no such thing as 'degrees of rape'.

There can be rape with grievous bodily harm, that 's true - it's still rape. You can tag on extra charges for additional assaults commited during the act of rape, and that happens.




Degrees in severity. As I said, you want all of them to be seen as violence, when not all of them are violence. Some of them are associated with violence.


You think that only punching or kicking equates with violence, which is why you are getting confused.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:45 AM
link   
a reply to: beansidhe


Rape is rape.


And murder is murder.

But, someone who commits first degree murder is not going to be charged the same as someone who commits second degree, or third degree murder.


All of the above definitions are an act of violence


No.

You claimed that the physical violation of another's body is the very definition of violence. I demonstrated why this isn't true. You continue clinging to falsehood.

Rape is not a violent crime, some rapes are violent.

Your feelings do not determine truth.




and it is claims such as yours that prevent the majority of women and girls from coming forwards and reporting it.


The logical law of identity stops people from reporting crimes?

Is everyone on this website ran off of emotion??


There is no such thing as 'degrees of rape'.


Yes there are, some rapes are more severe than other rapes.

Say for instance, you have a boyfriend. You go to a party. You meet a guy you like, your flirting, before you know it--you're both naked and shagging.

He's inside you, your in the missionary position. You've been at it for some time now. You start feeling guilty, you decide to you can't go on with it and tell him to stop. He doesn't, and 10 seconds later he reaches climax.

IF the above scenario is rape because the man continued after you took away your consent, then this case of rape is logically less severe than others. Is it still rape? Yes. Is it violent? No.

You cannot compare the above scenario to a girl whose father forced her to have sex with him for years. Or to a woman who was violently gang-raped by strangers who broke into her home. By doing so, you are taking away from the severity of the extreme cases, by grouping a less extreme scenario in with them and declaring them all to be the same.

Three different cases of rape. Three dynamically different situations. Three varying degrees of the same crime.


There can be rape with grievous bodily harm, that 's true - it's still rape.


No one has claimed that it isn't rape.


You can tag on extra charges for additional assaults commited during the act of rape, and that happens.


That's because oranges aren't apples.


You think that only punching or kicking equates with violence, which is why you are getting confused.


Punching, kicking, smacking, cutting, stabbing, slashing, gouging...

There are lots of types of violence.

Your claim that the physical violation of another's body is the very definition of violence isn't true, because then we emotionally wind up associating an act that isn't violence with violence.
edit on 5-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2016 by CharlestonChew because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew


violence ˈvʌɪəl(ə)ns/ noun noun: violence 1. behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.





Rape is not a violent crime, some rapes are violent. Your feelings do not determine truth.


You're wrong. Your beliefs do not determine truth.




Say for instance, you have a boyfriend. You go to a party. You meet a guy you like, your flirting, before you know it--you're both naked and shagging. He's inside you, your in the missionary position. You've been at it for some time now. You start feeling guilty, you decide to you can't go on with it and tell him to stop. He doesn't, and 10 seconds later he reaches climax.


Oh please. Claiming that a man is too aroused and can't help himself is possibly the lowest argument you could have used. If I tell him to stop and he doesn't, is he doing me harm or good?




Punching, kicking, smacking, cutting, stabbing, slashing, gouging... There are lots of types of violence.


Add rape into that list. Rape is an act of violence - unfortunately you don't agree as is your right.



posted on Feb, 5 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: CharlestonChew

Rape is ALWAYS an act of violence. As it has been pointed out to you by other posters, just because there are no visible external indications of a beating, or harm, does not in any way negate the fact that it's a violent act. I don't know how you've managed to convince yourself otherwise. You have blundered in your thought processes, and definitions, apparently stuck on your own definition of the word "violent", and applying it to these events, in a way that is clearly NOT fitting.

Let me explain to you how this works. Rapists are pathetic little worms who are unable to stand toe to toe with a mature women. They either hate them, or are trying to exert power over them. They are too inadequate to do so, in a normal way. So although they might not beat them up, or injure them in other ways, such as with their fists, they are using their tiny little tallywhacker as a weapon. I suppose it makes them feel powerful, because their arms are stronger than a woman and they can hold her down while they inflict their pathetic form of violence. The little penis becomes the instrument of violence.

Some women have been taught not to fight, in order to avoid other injury, so they lie quietly and still as a strategy to survive the assault. This does not mean it is not a violent act. If she is drugged and unconscious, it is still a violent act, and the rapist is aware of that. It is a part of the intended consequence of the assault.

The motive is to injure, to humiliate, to control, to gain a momentary sense of power, as the rapist sees himself as powerless to stand toe to toe with a mature woman. To seduce her, to gain her willingness. That's not what he's after.

As I have stated, the penis itself is viewed by the perpetrator as "a weapon" (how pathetic is that), and each thrust offers the beating and violence you are so looking for. It's like beating someone up with your penis. There are sometimes internal bruises and tears, as occurs when sex is unwanted. Women are not sexually aroused or responsive during these vile acts. These are the lowest terms in which I can reduce my explanation for you.

I'm off to work. You have a good day.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join