The thread where you post your mildly unpopular opinions

Power Ranger Monster said:
Rape. Victims of rape. Victims of rape can blame themselves.

Alright now let's say I, Power Ranger Monster, attempt to walk through a dark alley and end up getting gang-raped. Now while the rapists would take the majority of the blame for this, I will still blame myself a little, as after all I did decide to walk through that alley.

I believe all victims of rape and whatnot reserve the right to blame themselves in small part from their circumstances. It is of course considered rude for others to hold them to those standards.
Click to expand...
I’m going to play devil’s advocate and try to express this guy’s post better than he did.

Responsible people should take reasonable precautions to ensure their own safety. If you don’t want to get robbed, you should lock your doors and consider not walking through the ghetto at night. If you don’t want to die in a car crash, you should wear a seatbelt and drive cautiously. If you don’t want to get raped, you should avoid accepting drinks from strange men at parties or walking through dangerous areas alone at night dressed in club clothes (for example).

None of this has to do with blame. The blame for any crime perpetrated against you lies solely with the perpetrator. Saying “victims of rape can blame themselves” is even more retarded than saying “victims of theft can blame themselves” because it’s much harder to describe exactly which circumstances are likely to lead to rape, which I noticed as I came up with the last paragraph. Wearing a low-cut shirt for instance cannot be considered a circumstance likely to lead to rape — there is really no comparison between “wearing a low-cut shirt” vs “leaving your car door unlocked.”

I think it makes sense to encourage people to take reasonable precautions to avoid being victimized, but it doesn’t make sense to attribute blame to them once they have been victimized. “Reasonable precautions” in my eyes does not include wearing less revealing clothes, etc
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Character from a movie, George Floyd Sneed, eDove and 9 others
Islamo-Christian is less of an oxymoron than Judeo-Christian.

Islam while being non-Trinitarian and denying the reality of the Passion, Death, and Resurrection (just like Judaism), at least has a place for Jesus and uses fragments and re-imaginings of the New Testament, even praising Mary highly. Nestorians and Miaphysites (the latter essentially Trinitarian) existed in the pre-Islamic world. Muhammad was merely a bastardization of a medieval Pope. Judaism doesn't go nearly as far as all that.

As for the brutality of Islamic jurisprudence, that's a consequence of being in a backwards part of the world. But frankly it makes more sense to group Christianity with Islam than to group Christianity with Judaism. Had Muslims mixed in medieval Europe rather than Jews, probably Islamophobia today would be milder than antisemitism ever was, and if Muslims had not eventually virtually entirely Christianized, in the west they would be barely distinguishable (just like the Jew down the street now!).
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: mickey339, snailslime, George Floyd Sneed and 7 others
Power Ranger Monster said:
Rape. Victims of rape. Victims of rape can blame themselves.

Alright now let's say I, Power Ranger Monster, attempt to walk through a dark alley and end up getting gang-raped. Now while the rapists would take the majority of the blame for this, I will still blame myself a little, as after all I did decide to walk through that alley.

I believe all victims of rape and whatnot reserve the right to blame themselves in small part from their circumstances. It is of course considered rude for others to hold them to those standards.
Click to expand...
Is there ANY way that one can be raped and not share blame? Say, a nun in her own room being assaulted?
 
Despite how everyone saying "the internet is worse than it was years ago because people became soft" or "the internet is better because we got rid of the toxicity" are both wrong. The internet is still the same, the motives changed. What I mean is, people doxing and fucking with others in the mid-late 2000s was just to fuck with people and thought it was funny. Now people do it out of pettyness and being 'inclusive' towards marginalized groups. Both are bad but one is not necessarily worse than the other.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Agree
Reactions: malapropism, eDove and Haffhart
Many of the video game companies, and even animu place hidden themes in their products that only severe autistics or someone openly explained what they are. "In plain sight" type matrix crap.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Haffhart
Indians are useless.

The average Indian will go their entire lives dreaming of being the ultimate incarnation of financial success: delivery driver in a foreign country with a Bluetooth earpiece, constantly talking on the job with their friends who will make it their gods-sworn duty to make sure no delivery ever finds the right address at the right time.

Some will even get there. All of them will die leaving behind families of equally retarded little pajeets who will continue the same pathetic cycle.
 
  • Like
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: malapropism, George Floyd Sneed, eDove and 8 others
"You had to be there" is an illogical way of saying STFU and I don't like it. It's applicable only when talking about the personal impact this or that had on someone, but not for striking down conversation about this or that. Often the clearest perspective comes from an outsider.

And in my experience it's not even used for appropriate stuff like the Fall of Saigon or whatever - but unironically for fandom bullshit. Always from oldfags debating newfags on something old. That's just gatekeeping - I support gatekeeping so if your point is "newfags reee" just say "newfags reee" and don't dress it with illogic.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: malapropism, eDove and NoReturn
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back