Process, Ethics, and Justice: An Inauspicious Note Regarding the Politics of Rape Culture

This would seem to be the crux of the issue, and this is a large part of what needs fixed. Treating anything else is just like putting a bandage on a sucking chest wound; ultimately futile. So, lets go about fixing this then.

The second part (or, perhaps, the first part - depends on what we would want to fix first) would be prevention, ergo, raising people to be empathetic and not self-serving power-craving douche-bags.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If you don't go to the police = it is a matter of consequences it is no big deal: nothing can be done about, at least not morally, I mean sure you can defame someone but that is wrong.

Yaaa doiiiii, next you will tell me the sky is blue.

wait what, let me check if I have a vagina... nope. How can this be a outlet of the misogyny you project on me?

OOOh so you are accusing me of harassing women? Asexual me that has fucked nothing but cartoons (some furry and androgynous and with dicks) for 5 years now? Me who treats women like men and believe co-worker relationships, even reproduction its self (by the way Kittamaru... gross) as disgusting... I am victimizing women?

See this is what I have been talking about, you and your ilk demonize anyone that questions you, doing that is why we LOST and now have president trump, because you and your ilk cut out enough people with your cliquish behavior.

No I think it will harm EVERYONE, it harms liberals, it harms women, etc, it does help the republican though, does not harm them.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Only if you do it falsely.

 

One in which willfully maintained ignorance of the past behavior, visible motives, and inferrable character, of people like Gillebrand, is presented as evidence of high moral ground.

Why not? It has been in front of you, easily seen.
Your world is apparently confined to what you are willing to see.
Hence the term "bubble".

It's not me who's claiming willfully maintained ignorance as a sign of virtue and high moral ground.

As far as you are willing to see.

Apparently the harm done to female targets of sexual assault, women who lose medical care for themselves and their children, female targets of workplace discrimination in various ways, and other women disproportionately injured as women by a further ascension of Republican Party and Blue Dog politics in Minnesota (those appealing women's rights issues to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, the Governor's Office, or the Federal Congress, say; or those in poverty, non-citizen refugees, non-white, criminal in some way, etc)

among the other politically inexpedient effects of political incompetence, compromise with political wrong, abetting of authoritarian and patriarchal agendas, abandonment of reason and crippling of liberal or progressive politics in the State,

is not visible to you, because you are unwilling to see it. You have explicitly defended refusal to see such things as a moral virtue, and described all attention paid to them as proof of amorality and misogyny and so forth.

The question, then, of whether your contribution to those harms, or the increased risk and severity of them, is doing something wrong, pivots on the quite relevant and topical and even critical question permeating American politics in general these days, of whether willful ignorance excuses bad political behavior. How innocent of wrongdoing are those who maintain their ignorance by denial, slander, and lies?

And how do we deal with that when it has become a central feature of all political discussion?

 

I want the accuse given due process, just like for any other crime. Why is that so hard to understand?

So you think social media is the fucking solution?

The police are not paid to believe, they are paid to gather evidence and then a judge/procutor determins if there is a enough evidence to prosecute and then a warrent for arrestr is made and then the police arrest the suspect, followed by a grad jury trial then, etc. Regardless if she is full of shit or not her name is kept hidden and she is protected.

Question: do you think men are in a social and political climate where they can speak out about being sexual harassed by women?

Everyone knows sexual harassment happens, hey let me shed some light: did you know stealing happens? mugging happen? I been mugged by the way, murder happens too!

With the internet everyone can find out they are not alone: if you don't think the earth is round there are people like you, if you have a fetish for feces, there are people for you, if you have been raped there are even live in person therapeutic groups in your city you can find for you. Going around accusing people in mass on the other hand, that is a public hysteria, it is a witch hunt.

"Raise awareness." = Do nothing useful.

Hey did you know there are children in Africa that are starving and orphaned by AIDS and poverty? We need to raise awareness!

Oh you mean a social paradigm like giving the republicans a bludgeon to beat us with?

 

No it is wrong even if you do it truthfully. Lets say for example a black man did rape a women in 1920's south and she accuses him and they lynch him, was that alright to you?

 

Everything to you is women, isn't it? mass genocide of people, not important, no what matters is they want the women in fix gender roles.

Say the women who said she would key me and would tell every other women to do that same.

No it was a perfect example of your ilks delusion and projection.

Yeah and we just need some to completely flip the presidency, the senate and even the house.

Seriously? All we have to do is promise them jobs, nothing more nothing less, as long as trump fails in doing that, which he most likely will, we are golden. We take the rich, reduce the finical burden on the poor with free medical care and education and extended welfare and the a demand side economy will blossom.

We don't need to kick out immigrants, de-globalize (which is impossible at this point) nothing like that.

How am I hating women?

I was talking about the "why hire women" article.

What matters is HOW one pushes for my diverse work place, he approves of more diversity, what matters is if we do it right or if we do it Lysenkoisi. As for the same science white supremacist rely on: does not change if the science is real or not. What matters is what policy is created from the science, the science says Blacks have slightly lower average IQ then whites, ergo the alt-right says that is why they commit so much crime and need to be disposed of, but we could simply provide more education, provide better water supply not filled with lead, etc, policy is what matters. Now damore specifically and repeatedly states that averages mean nothing about the individual, that individual vary and we can't just lump them all together and assume they are all oppressed or not oppressed or what ever, that we need more nuance policy and that we need to be able to have open and frank debate about it, not simply follow and ideology and anyone the questions it is fired.

Absolute bullshit, by the law your name and identity is protected.

Yeah on average. If you have a career that is prone to autistism spectrum disorder like advance computer programming, you honestly think it would be made of 50:50 men and women?

You will have to refresh me on what specifically you where arguing.

Well I guess the 'threat' is the social and political consequences of social media as the new justice system for sexual assault will cause.

No it is not for us to "beleive" or not believe, it is for a court of law to determine guilt. Adults understand personal belief should mean fuck all.

Yeah sure that why I get hit on.

And I should care about your opinion of me? oh that right you want to physically assault me.

Well that because you deny science in order to fit your world view to your ideology? Once again tell me, are women on average shorter then men, why is that, let me guess its society?

I get why you embrace it though.

No scholarships? How about for men in STEM, none of them need encouragement?

yes yes and they have only scratched the surface of the jewish global network of jews and useful goys, riiiggggghhhhhttt.

Can you at the very least entertain alternate theories?

So your 100% sure there is no biological reasons what so ever?

Well that is a cope out, and yes I have pointed out you as a non-american: having republican rule us because of people that followed your ideology is basically "let them eat cake" to you. So once again, lets assume your an american citizen, circa 1996, who would you vote for.

Well that all nice and noble, but the path to hell is made with good intentions. The consequences of what you advocate, of public accusations of crime at the whim of someone, will and is having horrible consequences. Those consequences will be worse then had we just worked to improve the justice system and private accusations made to a court of law.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

 

You can't get them, and trashing your politics to pander to them without attending to the more likely avenues of countering suppression etc is a losing tactic. Hillary proved that, as did Gore and Kerry - even Obama came nearer to losing than people realize , saved quite possibly by a last minute volunteer legal threat in Ohio and a couple of other States.

That has never worked yet. I predict it never will.

That agenda has failed, politically, on the national stage, since Nixon flipped the racial bigots Republican. Reagan buried it - to dig it out will require great effort, beginning with refusal to compromise with the Republican voter's racially bigoted, fundie-addled, corporate media propaganda-defined worldview.

Including the anti-feminist aspect of it.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Click to strut.​

Isn't there something about Bill Cosby that goes here? Meanwhile, we should bear in mind these apathetic appeals to due process↑ do not necessarily reflect comprehension of what the phrase "due process" means. An example from American reality: There is a Democratic Congressman whose career and reputation have collapsed in the wake of revelations that the House of Representatives paid out a considerable stack of taxpayer cash in a secret settlement to a sexual harassment victim subsequently bound by a nondisclosure agreement. Now, then, why did she not go to the police? What happens in Congress stays in Congress; all roads lead back to Congress. If she reports to the police, they take it back to Congress. It is, of course, easy to note the disastrous end of what should have been a brilliant, even iconic career, and one reason we might mention this point is that everybody wants something, and everyone has some manner of threshold. Back home, his supporters bawl on his behalf comparing purported deprivation of his due process to the death penalty. And, okay, I get it; they're desperate and want their man to finish on a note befitting the rest of what his career had built. However ...

... what happens in Congress stays in Congress; when he chose the ethics process leading to that secret settlement, he enjoyed his due process.

See, there's this joke that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told at the Congressional Correspondents Dinner a couple years ago, about how nobody liked Ted Cruz, saying explicitly that if someone murdered the junior U.S. Senator from Texas on the floor of the United States Senate, there would not be a conviction.

That is to say, it would be up to the Senate to hold trial and convict the killer. What happens in Congress stays in Congress.

Process is not in and of itself justice.

We should remember that the apathetic appeals to due process are described as apathetic because they do not care to attend questions of what process exists. Like I said six months ago↗, in questions of process:

For all the issues we might raise some cynical flag about innocence and proof of guilt, there is a reason this particular #WhatAboutTheMen advocacy looks so strange and wrong to so many people. On this occasion, women in general get to say, "That's our line." It's in the way the numbers work out; it's in the history that leads us to these times and circumstances. We need not suggest that innocence and proof of guilt is somehow irrelevant to or exclusive of accused sex offenders; rather, these need to take a number and get in line with everybody else.​

Would you be surprised if I suggested an intervening response↗ missed the point?

It's one of those things that happens.

Because, you know, like the bit where I actually recalled disruptive process↗, and something goes here about an intervening response↗ missing the point.

For no matter how much we might consider these questions of process↑, well, right ... I mean ... it's not tumbleweeds, but the sympathetic response↑, while not without value, is the sympathetic response. As to the theme of a counterpoint missing the point, well, now there be some tumbleweeds.

Yet we're back to someone bawling about due process and #WhatAboutTheMen.

If I say it's one of those things that happens, well, right. Sigh. Sometimes the pretense of naïveté people put on makes its own point.

I guess my point is that while I wouldn't tell you to not try, I honestly don't think they care what you say; they're just going to keep saying whatever they want to say.

 

Dishonest.

Dishonest.

Dishonest.

Dishonest.

In particular, your inability to post honestly in response to my posts. Your continual barrage of bullshit.
You slander, lie, and misrepresent, and you do nothing else. That is morally wrong, and ethically bad, especially on an ostensibly "scientific" discussion forum. It is also crippling, intellectually: you never deal with my actual postings, and apparently one reason is that by now you can't even read them for sense. Your mouth has swallowed your head.

The remaining question is why: How does that happen, and how can competent adults of good faith deal with it in my State and local politics?

This is a serious, relevant issue in my State and in particular among those focused on specifically women's political status here - because in this respect you have a lot of company in the Minnesota DFL, and in the DNC faction that influences them, and that Party is currently the major political entity supporting in any way or to any degree the left libertarian agenda I favor - including resistance to the rollback of women's rights currently under way nationally. There is a strong faction of incompetent "message senders" like you in the DFL, and that is and has been a - possibly the - major factor in the rise of Republican (fascist) politics in Minnesota and consequent threat of ascendancy of anti-feminist governance in this State and region. We have already lost much of the liberal judiciary that was critical in past advances, and the liberal State legislature also important, and some of the Federal Congress: now sheer incompetence has put both Federal Senate seats and the Governorship on the line simultaneously, while highlighting the image of foolishness and unreliability and out-of-State puppetry that has been the DFL's albatross for decades.



.

 

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/QUOTE]

Im curious, since sexual harassment ecompasses a gradient from mild to extreme (warrant legal action), do you not share your events/experiences when they occur openly to family, friends and sometimes publicly, as well as name the culprit? Most people do, don't they? Especially events that upset you.

So why do you think social media is any different? Havent we all been talked about, right or wrong or occasionally misjudged? Are you against free speech?

You do realize people slander quite a bit and it affects others perceptions (not even sexual harassment)? Its called social politics and affects everyone, right or wrong.

But what other way can you expose a culprit for mistreatment thats inapropriate behavior but not so extreme that one would take legal action?

I understand slander is wrong and how accusations of sexual harassment or misconduct are much more weighty, therefore false accusations heinous but there is a dilemma in the current culture where exposure needs to happen first, then society needs to take victims seriously so that they do take legal action.

This will send a message to any perpetrators (male and female) that society will not tolerate it, brush it off or treat victims and perps depending on politics (power, status, fame, and reputation/beloved/well-liked).

The politics of the situation is why victims are not taken seriously and why the feel powerless to take legal action.

I do agree that any accusation should be investigated before the perp is judged. Now, not all evidence has to be exactly physical as in semen samples. Some common sense is in order for much of sexual harassment. For instance, multiple accounts from various victims is one way.

Still, unfortunately, there will be victims om either side (victim and accused) that cannot prove they were because they have been singularly targeted. That can happen as well as some perps keep the pool small as it's less chance of being caught.

 

Name names? No because that would be gossip.

I'm against witch hunts, lunch mobs, McCarthyism, satanic panic, #metee hysteria. Free speech did not prevent mccarthy from being censured. I think in the near future (if not already) algorithms can be used to moderate what is popular on social media to guide the marching morons around.

yeah and it is wrong. Do you realize the natural state of humans for tens of thousands of years was continuous tribal warfare, a murder rate (for males) of 15%-60%, constantly clubing each other over the head and dragging the women back for gang rape and to be made proto-slaves of the women of the tribe. Everyone did it, why not?

I'm saying we need to grow the fuck up and stop being chattering apes. There is a old saying "Geniuses talk about their ideas, smart people talk about the ideas of geniuses and stupid people talk about people". It is a feature of a weak mind to be talking about other people.

Expose is wrong, your asking for social punishment on an accusation. You can go to HR and make a complaint, you can talk to the person directly and tell them to quite it or else you will seek legal action, a simple "fuck off" has worked for me in some cases. Going to other people and bad mouthing the culprit is grade school level pathetic, worse it is reliant on your popularity: if you are unpopular or lack social capital (say your a man and no one gives a fuck if your harrassed by a women, why can't you enjoy it, are you a faggot or something?) then you have no means of utilizing social punishment, worse if the culprit is more popular then you they can make up bullshit and have you socially punished. That is why we have the legal system and means of unbais mediation like adult evolved civilized human beings rather then talking poo throwing apes.

Exposure does not need to happen, everyone other then psychopaths know sexual harassment is wrong, sexual harassment has been falling. Why not exposure for murder and burglary and theft and muggings? Just like how conservatives think black and immigrant crime or abortion is a serious problem, social justice liberals think rape is a serious problem, unfortunately for us the conservatives vote more strongly on their boggymen then we do. We need to focus on bigger problems, real infrastructure and economic problems, want to bring down rape? = raise the standard of living. Want to improve the justice system for rape victims, well first we need to control the government to implement laws and we can't do that with SJW going on endlessly about unelectable issues like the need to elect the first female president (regardless of how unelectable that particular women is) instead of issues that get us electoral traction, like jobs, and healthcare, and education and jobs, oh and jobs.

Yeah multiple witnesses, in a court of law.

Yeah the world is not perfect or fair.

 

Wrong. We had a blue wall of white working class voters.

Bullshit, worked before repeatedly.

Times change, there was not a collapsing middle class with 2 decades of economic stagnation, and if you attempt to say otherwise well than there is no difference between you and the guys that see Jews behind ever political action.

 

I'm not, I'm just saying it is not the important feature.

Yeah and then you said you would key me. First of all I don't worry about being perceive as a misogynistic creep, some how women hit on my anyways, which I don't care for, but if you encourage women to psychically assault me, well that would be illegal.

Some bias article with no survay data, just someone opinion, yeah.

And again not all of them did so, we only need a few percent of them in key states.

They also liked Bernie's tax the rich, raise minimum wage, universal healthcare and free education, what is your point? Hillary's classic machiavellian baby stepping fewer liked.

It works in a lot of countries, why not in the USA?

There is a difference between logically correct and morally correct, sure it existed before, and now you are strengthening it.

Yes slander is all you have.

More like chronologist.

Well no the world of science does not prove him wrong, nor is it proven wrong blacks have on average lower IQ, the only thing unproven is "why" and "what to do about it". That is where you jump to conclusions, you conclude (as the alt-right do) that if blacks have low IQ = exterminate! That if women biological prone to different personalities, on average, then men = inferior, back to the kitchen! No one is saying any such thing (well other then the alt-right) none the less the premises are backed by science. Saying that achieving a 50:50 gender ratio may be impossible without cutting out lots of qualified candidates by sex or worse forcing people into careers they don't want to be in, is an argument at least worth entertaining and preparing for in policy. Look I don't see you worried about the lack of female boiler makers or male kindergarten teachers.

Ok once again, how does it validate the use of social media for outing and punishing people?

I don't know how. Do I need to speak to you at trump's level? "computer programmers are nerds, geeky nerds, I know women, and less women are geeky nerds, so less women are computer programmers" I tried but still to many syllables for trump.

yeah and I said I have no problem with 1-9, I just don't see how that has anything to do with using social media as a means to accuse people.

Says you. Is it bunk rubbish that men and women have different average heights? Different propensities for neurological conditions like autism and anxiety disorders? Is it junk science that men and women have on average different sizes brain structures and these structures are linked to different skills and behaviors? When I show you girls with congenital adrenal hyperplasia are more likely to play with trucks and toy guns then dolls and tea cups, or more likely to have male friends, or more likely to play sports, do you think there is come cultured reason for that? Ok how about this: is homosexuality something someone is born with or cultured?

Do people have a right to lynch blacks? Again you can have an opinion, but to then go and demand that person be fired, be harassed, be shunned is going to far.

How many scholarships are their specifically for men verse ones for women?

Your intentionally being obtuse, I'm showing how your ideology is unfalsifiable tripe, just like alt-righter ideology just with different scaepgoats.

No I want YOUR personal answer.

Well then you fucked us, we get bob dole, there goes abortion.

 

Obviously lynching is in a different moral realm than defaming. I accuse you of muddying the waters.

 

In 1967, when the working class white racial bigots and fundies were Democrats.

Got beat repeatedly, since 1968.

Collapsing white middle class. When you leave that word out you confuse yourself.
They did it to themselves, entrained by propaganda taking advantage of their bigotries regarding race, sex, and (combining) religion. That's why they're doing it now.
- - - -

Dishonest.

You can't read for sense. Literally: cannot, physically, read my posts for sense. Why is that?

"Everyone", again. One of your standard lies in responding to me, or by this time delusions - it's no longer a careless figure of speech: you yourself now believe what you have so repeatedly typed.

You can't post honestly. Why is that?

And the reason the question comes into focus is not that you have any way of answering it yourself, or recovering whatever moral and ethical status you chose to discard in a willfully ignorant pursuit of slanders and delusions.
The reason is that neither can the rest of that DFL/DNC faction involved in this Franken mess. That will do harm to all good causes they tar, and they will continue to have the all the amplification they need, courtesy of the corporate rightwing media. Ten months is a short time to walk it back even without enemy interference, even in good faith, even if they started now.