[Rob Instigator]

while it would be ideal to live in a society that teaches people not to rape, the sad fact is that sociopaths will do whatever they feel like doing because they just don't care, no matter what you teach them.

It is analogous to police. they cannot stop people from breaking into your home. the only thing they can do is try and teach ways to keep yourself from being broken into, and then after it happens, to try and catch (ha!) the person that broke in.

If it was simply a matter of education it could be fixed for good.

"A sociopath is simply a human who combines a total absence of empathy with a profound sense of entitlement. They feel no pain but their own." - Andrew Vachss

Those people cannot be taught. They learn how to respond in the manner that will gain them approval, regardless of how far that response is from what they truly feel.

Our current society seems to create more sociopaths than ever. Many people argue that the pop culture breeds and ingrains these thoughts into people who are susceptible to becoming sociopaths.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Nefeli

i agree with all that.
just to clarify, i m not pretending or avoiding anything.
i speak openly and say what i feel is needed to be said; i just do it without feeling that i have to characterize myself in any way.
i mean, i have met men who have said to me: i m a feminist.
so what?
from the way you will talk, i will understand many things about what you are.
or when people say, i m homosexual friendly.
if you think about it, its ridiculous to say smth like that.
i understand that we say terms, because it saves us time and dont get me wrong i used to call myself out to people a feminist for years, when i was little, i still might do if i have to, i just prefer to do things the way i do now.

the thing is, when you don't say "i'm a feminist", it makes us weaker.
it makes it sound like it's a bad word or something that you wouldn't want to identify yourself as one.

men/people will tell you that like it's some sort of insult when they are annoyed you're not being as submissive as they would like you to.

but there's nothing wrong with being a feminist or a LGBTT supporter, I'm very proud of those things myself.

I hope you understand what I mean.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

while it would be ideal to live in a society that teaches people not to rape, the sad fact is that sociopaths will do whatever they feel like doing because they just don't care, no matter what you teach them.

It is analogous to police. they cannot stop people from breaking into your home. the only thing they can do is try and teach ways to keep yourself from being broken into, and then after it happens, to try and catch (ha!) the person that broke in.

If it was simply a matter of education it could be fixed for good.

"A sociopath is simply a human who combines a total absence of empathy with a profound sense of entitlement. They feel no pain but their own." - Andrew Vachss

Those people cannot be taught. They learn how to respond in the manner that will gain them approval, regardless of how far that response is from what they truly feel.

Our current society seems to create more sociopaths than ever. Many people argue that the pop culture breeds and ingrains these thoughts into people who are susceptible to becoming sociopaths.

Are you seriously trying to argue that every rapist is a sociopath?
Doesn't even make sense IN NUMBERS.
But if you most know, all rapists think all men do the same thing as they do.
http://dbzer0.com/blog/feminists-don...sts-rapists-do

It's like I accidentaly got myself in a time machine and went back in the 1950s or something.

[Rob Instigator]

you really read a lot into things knox.

I was just making a comment about the inability to teach people NOT to do evil things.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

you really read a lot into things knox.

I was just making a comment about the inability to teach people NOT to do evil things.

And their ability to teach them to go ahead and do evil things and still exempt themselves of any responsability over the message they convey or what it represents.

Oh, and by the way, people don't become sociopaths, they just are, and they are a minority. And we don't have any more sociopaths than ever, we have more powerful weapons that enable them to do more crazy shit.

Now, can we teach people to operate in a sociopath-like logic when we tell them it's acceptable to forget empathy, self-assessment and responsibility over certain things? Of course. We can even teach them that there's nothing wrong with it or that it's only natural and that they're still "good people".

That's how sexism, racism and discrimination operate.

[Rob Instigator]

you are wrong knox. people can and do become sociopaths.

read up on it.

Most serial rapists, killers, abusers who can be classified as sociopaths come themselves from backgrounds of terrible abuse, terrible trauma. Not every abuse victim becomes sociopathic, but many do as a response to the world which they have experienced, full of fear and endless terror. It creates a disconnect in the brain, a willful detachment from shared "reality."

[knox]

No. People do not become sociopaths.
Sociopaths that have been exposed to violent environments can become VIOLENT sociopaths. Most sociopaths aren't violent.

No one knows the cause of the neurological abnormalities that have been recently observed that can cause someone to be unable to feel empathy, but people are born that way. Society can shape HOW violent/dangerous someone with antissocial disorder can become.

And it's in that sense that a violent environment enhances violent leanings.

Most people who have been abused or witnessed violence as children do not grow up to be violent and cannot "become" sociopaths.

The great majority of "sociopaths" never kill or rape anyone.
The vast majority of rapists are not sociopaths.

It's kind of funny that you tell me to read up on it when I've been reading about it for 5 years now.

So, no, YOU read up on it.
Start with Dr. Hare.
And stop talking about things you don't know, please.

[Trama]

Originally Posted by Nefeli

i m going to post this picture here; i saw it posted somewhere else today.
i would post it in the irrelevant thread and only for not to be misunderstood that it has anything to do with the rape comments here or in the other thread, if there were any. but it is going to get lost in there.

so it has nothing to do with rape comments here
and i m bad for not taking the time to read both threads.

 

the point i want to make with this pic
is smth i wanted to say in the other thread as well, but now this pic helps me.

we dont exactly need feminism for that.
for me it is the way that people should normally think.
its because people are lazy or because it suits them better, not to try and think bit harder. you know, just do a couple of more turns in your thoughts. see more ankles of what you are thinking.
thats why i always welcomed extreme voices for example in politics, even if i might not agree with what their saying; even though it might come against my extremely anti-violent position in all matters.*
because it helps people to shake their minds a bit.


* and since i m honest, dont think for a minute that there arent times when i question this about myself.
i think harder when that happens. (totally irrelevant that now).

It should be in name of the principle of fairness and not penis or vagina. I feel the same way about it.

[Rob Instigator]

your absolutism is pathetic knox

[floatingslowly]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

read up on it.

If I may (once more) interject, between the ooglings of knoxy's juicy badunkadunk, please, please, rise above this behavior.

"read up on it" & "study up on it" are the hallmarks of a failed argument, typically reserved for creationists, pro-lifers, gun-nuts and flat-worlders.

It brings nothing to the table except for a veiled jab that (often wrongly) suggests that the user of this phrase is more well-versed in whatever given subject is at hand, but is simply a lazy cop-out.

You are better than this....don't do it!

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by knox

the fact is, dear, we do need feminism for that.
if you think that's how people should normally think, then you already are a feminist.
and the sad truth is, they don't. not the majority of them.

Originally Posted by knox

the thing is, when you don't say "i'm a feminist", it makes us weaker.
it makes it sound like it's a bad word or something that you wouldn't want to identify yourself as one.

men/people will tell you that like it's some sort of insult when they are annoyed you're not being as submissive as they would like you to.
.

Feminism (from the Latin "Of women")
+
attacking women who disagree with you
=
DOES NOT COMPUTE

 

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Nefeli

but i was always considering myself humansmth instead, because i m thinking women and men as humans and thats how i express and get through my feminism.

whereas i prefer to speak like there isnt an 'issue', because there shouldnt be one.

You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Nefeli again.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Nefeli again.

nefeliiiiiiii! clear yr pms for a subject totally unrelated to this ( i thought you'd read this thread, see)

[!@#$%!]

thanks! back later...

[knox]

are you people seriously trying to imply that feminism is not humanism and equality? because thats like the biggest joke among serious humanists that so many people are so blind with entlitlement (and possibly mysoginy, in this case) that they cant stand proper terminology for certain aspects and groups. its a well accepted fact that one cannot be a humanist without being a feminist.

and rob theres no need to act like a baby because you said something innacurate and i reccommended you to read the biggest expert on the subject, dr. robert hare. now you can practice what you preach and read up on it.

[keep poppin pimples]

Maryland Man Sues Firing Range for 'Reverse Sexism'




By ABBY ELLIN
Aug. 24, 2012



One Monday last October, Derrick Hunter decided to go shooting at the Maryland Small Arms Range in Upper Marlboro, his local firing range. He paid the $15 entry fee, and went inside.
And that's when the metaphorical bullets started to fly.
According to Hunter, 34, a special police officer, two women walked in behind him. Since it was "Ladies' Day," a longtime staple at the club, a manager told them they didn't have to pay.
Hunter heard the exchange, and asked if he could use the range for free too. "He said, 'It's Ladies' Day and you don't meet that criteria,'" he told ABC News. He accuses the firing range of "reverse sexism."
"Any time you get any kind of discrimination it does hit home to a certain extent," he said. "I have children. If don't stand for something you'll fall for anything. Sooner or later you have to stand up for your rights."
Hunter complained to the Human Relations Commission of Prince George's County, which reviews cases of discrimination. In August, it concluded that the case had merit. Last week, Hunter filed a $200,000 lawsuit against the firing range.
Carl Roy, president of the gun range, said he doesn't think he is doing anything illegal by letting in women for free.
"It's a governmental micro-managing society," he said. "If you read the county ordinance, they are narrowly construing discrimination to mean if you give a discount to somebody, then you got to give it to everyone. But no one is saying anything about age discrimination. They're not saying anything about occupational discrimination, or JC Penney giving free haircuts to children for the month of August."
Hunter's lawyer, Jimmy A. Bell, sees it differently. "If someone said because you were Jewish you'd have to pay more money, what would you think about that?" he said. "People don't look at it like that. People think a man should have to take it. And that's now how the law works."
As it happens, attorney Bell is no stranger to discrimination suits. In 2010 he sued a nail salon after he shelled out $4 more for a manicure/pedicure than women were charged.
He eventually settled with the salon for an undisclosed amount. But last year, he sued another nail salon, Nail First, on Hunter's behalf. Hunter didn't win any money, but the court issued a permanent injunction against the salon.
This time that would not be enough, said Bell.
"It's obvious that an injunction doesn't work," he said. "You've got to look at a person's dignity. When someone tells you that based on who you are, your physical characteristics, that you have less value to them than someone else, that stings a lot of people. It's illegal in our state. And it's been illegal since 1986."
"The special court of appeals outlawed gender discrimination and ladies' night activities in 1986," he said. "You can't offer one benefit to one group and not to the other group based on sex."
Brian Heller, a partner at Schwartz and Perry, an employment discrimination law firm in New York City, said the case is an interesting one. "On the one hand, the question is, are they treating men worse? Or are they treating women preferably?" said Heller. "And if they are treating women preferably, is there a legitimate business reason to do so?
"It's ultimately going to have to come down to a jury looking at the facts and making a decision as to what the intent was," he said. "The range could argue that there's a good reason to attract women members, and that they're not treating men badly but that they're encouraging women to sign up."

[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by knox

are you people seriously trying to imply that feminism is not humanism and equality?

Not at all, its just that your interpretation of feminism lacks humanism.

[Genteel Death]

Originally Posted by Nefeli

i agree with all that.
just to clarify, i m not pretending or avoiding anything.
i speak openly and say what i feel is needed to be said; i just do it without feeling that i have to characterize myself in any way.
i mean, i have met men who have said to me: i m a feminist.
so what?
from the way you will talk, i will understand many things about what you are.
or when people say, i m homosexual friendly.
if you think about it, its ridiculous to say smth like that.
i understand that we say terms, because it saves us time and dont get me wrong i used to call myself out to people a feminist for years, when i was little, i still might do if i have to, i just prefer to do things the way i do now.

I got all your posts completely and agree 100%. The fact that there is an issue with how genders relate to each other is no excuse to be a boring activist in areas of life that should exalt the human, rather than the gender. There are plenty of other venues where to fight for gender equality in a more effective way. Hence, for me, more Cosey Fanni Tutti and less Kathleen Hanna.

[knox]

I think it's pretty sick when someone says something like "reverse sexism" or "reverse racism", It's like implying that one kind of sexism/racism is the 'right' one, the other is 'reverse'. They'll be digging for whatever kind of exception they can find to justify this sick point.

[knox]

Originally Posted by SuchFriendsAreDangerous

Not at all, its just that your interpretation of feminism lacks humanism.

Oh yeah, my feminism is for non-humans.
Since I'm part of the women rights board of a large human rights organization, I'm going to take your complaint up to the directors, thanks.
We're going to store it in a big folder of emails we get from humanists that complain "there's too much being done about women and LGBTT, too much talk about racism" and not enough "about straight white men" who are terribly, terrible oppressed.
It's such an offensive thing we can't talk about human rights in general terms and they are specific issues to tackle - it offends the sensibility of cis-men who think they're being excluded. boo hoo.
Unless you're a pro-lifer. We don't take comments from pro-lifers.
They're not real people.