Lord Mistborn wrote:This goes for deanruel too.
No it doesn't Nothing deanrule said at any point argued in favor of any of the things Wot said that were bad, and nothing he said was structured in a way that continues to hurt people who are victims or victim advocates. Deanrule could in the future say something stupid and horrible, but he hasn't yet.
Even Wot, if he was ever at any point willing to back down from crazy land and just say "Oh yeah, slut shaming is a problem that effects rape victims, all of them, and is not part of a women vs women thing, but is actually a problem perpetuated by society on many levels, BUT I don't think what I said constitutes making that problem worse because ...." would be fine.
wotmaniac wrote:But that doesn't even matter to the whole point of starting the thread. But you wouldn't know that, because you were too fucking lazy to read the 3 blog posts that I linked at the opening -- which means that you are completely ignorant of the proper context .... which means that you have no business wading in to this in the first place.
I did read the blog posts. And then I didn't post, because I had nothing to say that was not better said by someone else (IE, don't). However, none of that information changes the context of you saying stupid things that hurt rape victims and their advocates. I will continue this in response to another statement:
wotmaniac wrote:who insist that I'm some kind of monstrous rape-fetishist.
No one but PhoneLobster called you a rape-fetishist, and no one cares what he says about rape because he is the boy that cried rapewolf.
We are saying that the things you say actively contribute to a culture that hurts rape victims and their advocates. The correct response is not to whine about how people are calling you a rapist. The correct response is to address that issue, and not do it by just assuming you are 100% right and that nothing you have said could be a problem, but to actually look at what you said, and what we said about it. It is not an accusation of rape or being a terrible person, it is a statement that you should reconsider something that is factually wrong.
wotmaniac wrote:I didn't derail this. I went out of my way to try to keep this pointedly on topic,
No, you went out of your way to say how you thought part of the problem was those evil bad feminazis exploiting rape victims for profit.
This is not about derailing. Your question was answered. On a completely separate note, don't talk about how evil feminazis are suppressing your right to talk about rape when it 1) isn't true, and 2) perpetuates the cultural problem that rape victims and their advocates are treated like shit.
wotmaniac wrote:Has it occurred to anyone that intelligent people of good will and good conscience can disagree on some of the finer points of particular aspects of this topic?
Has it occurred to you that when people disagree about some of the broader aspects, such as whether or not false rape reports are a problem, or whether or not slut-shaming is only the fault of one gender, one party might be wrong? And that that party might be you?
wotmaniac wrote:Has it similarly occurred to anyone that you can actually talk about those aspects in an objective, emotionally-detatched manner; and in doing so, you don't actually disrespect the topic or the victims?
Has it occurred to you that no one is getting upset that you are talking about it in an "objective" manner, and they are in fact just pointing out that you are "objectively" wrong? Has it occurred to you that your steadfast determination to see anyone who disagrees with you about this as being an overly emotional whinny baby who just doesn't understand facts might get in the way of you seeing the facts they present to you, and therefore you correcting yourself from being wrong, to being right?
wotmaniac wrote:Has it additionally occurred to anyone that when someone says "this is some of what I've been able to observe", that it just might be legitimate, empirical observations? And if so, could you possibly be bothered with actually assimilating that information? Or would that mean that you might have to re-evaluate your own position -- and we can't have that, can we?
Has it occurred to you that your observations are pretty much irrelevant just like all anecdotes? Has it occurred to you that we might have our own empirical observations, and that they might be more or less relevant than yours depending on the context? Has it occurred to you that I might be not talking about rape cases I have had to deal with specifically because anecdotes about how rape has been treated in only the specific cases I have seen in the specific jurisdiction I have worked might not be particularly universal?
wotmaniac wrote:Has it further occurred to anyone that, perhaps, if someone says something that seems internally-conflicting, that maybe - just maybe - that you're viewing it through the wrong fucking prism? That perhaps you might need to readjust your own paradigm?
Has it occurred to you that no one here thinks anything yo have said is internally conflicting, because nothing is internally conflicting about being an asshole who believed the cultural bullshit that is foisted on everyone, and then internalizing it so that you whine a lot about how some large portion of victims are faking, and this is the real problem with how rapes are dealt with and not at all the institutional and cultural problems that fuck everything up?
wotmaniac wrote:And I'm left being the Motherfucking Monstrous Rape-fetishist.
Thank god we can go back to making statements. I was sick and tired of those hypothetical questions with obvious leading answers that are in no way at all better than just making an argument with statements.
Hey do you remember like a year ago, when dickwolves or something had a thread, and PL, being PL, decided to accuse a bunch of people of being rapists? And he accused you, because you took the crass horrible position that a comic was funny and that it wasn't that big a deal? And didn't I fucking defend you against PL, and that somehow convinced you to like, take me off ignore or some other stupid thing, and whatever?
I bring this up because the point here is (aside from PL) no one is out to get you. We are telling you these things are actively harmful to say and think, because they are wrong, and wrong in a way that hurts real people. No one is calling you a rapist, and no one is trying to drive you off or destroy you. We want you to stop saying that false reports of rape are a problem, that victim advocates are doing it to get famous (so therefore we can ignore them), and that all the problems with how victims are treated are problems unrelated to rape. Because all those things are false.
If you want to keep saying them, then the only appropriate thing to do is to present arguments and evidence, (as opposed to assertions) that they are true.
Not that presenting arguments and evidence is not the same thing as throwing a shitfit and moaning about how you didn't say that victim advocates are just in it for the profit, you are saying that victim advocates are just in it for the profit, and that that is the problem with how rape victims are treated. Restating the problematic statements does not count as argument or evidence unless it comes at the end of a validly structure arguments with premises you believe you can convince us of.
