Are people really victim when it comes to beign raped?

Do you talk like that in real life, or just when you're trying to impress folks on internet forums?

Bella Dea wrote:

smog wrote:

Bella Dea wrote:

...how could you know something you've never experienced?

Forgive me if I'm seeing this in terms that are too simplistic, but isn't the attempt at that something that we see (and have grown very used to) in basically every part of human society?

I am not sure I understand your question.

Whenever we try to discuss anything with anyone else, we're pretty much trying to understand things that have never happened to us. And even if similar things have happened to us, we can't ever feel or know exactly what those other people felt in those moments. This is true of all human experiences, I'd say, and I don't think you can fault someone for at least trying to make sense of things he or she has not immediately experienced. Otherwise, there's really no point to any conversation about anything.

Again, though, I might well be wrong.

snood wrote:

Do you talk like that in real life, or just when you're trying to impress folks on internet forums?

Another puerile disingenuous "contribution" from Snood based on the logical fallacy argumentum ad hominem.

An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin, literally "argument against the person") or attacking the messenger, involves replying to an argument or assertion by attacking the person presenting the argument or assertion rather than the argument itself.

Your post certainly puts all your:

a) disingenuous and deceitful twisting of my posts to suit your fantasy
b) numerous examples of logical fallacy argumentum ad hominem
c) failed puerile attempts to discredit

into the proper perspective.
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=74526&start=100

smog wrote:

Bella Dea wrote:

smog wrote:

Bella Dea wrote:

...how could you know something you've never experienced?

Forgive me if I'm seeing this in terms that are too simplistic, but isn't the attempt at that something that we see (and have grown very used to) in basically every part of human society?

I am not sure I understand your question.

Whenever we try to discuss anything with anyone else, we're pretty much trying to understand things that have never happened to us. And even if similar things have happened to us, we can't ever feel or know exactly what those other people felt in those moments. This is true of all human experiences, I'd say, and I don't think you can fault someone for at least trying to make sense of things he or she has not immediately experienced. Otherwise, there's really no point to any conversation about anything.

Again, though, I might well be wrong.

Honestly Bella, I think you migh well be wrong too.

I think that's not giving at least some people the, oh, not benefit of the doubt, I don't mean that...more like the CAPACITY to be able to feel what someone has gone through.

That's what empathy is all about.

People don't usually for instance, choose a pychiatrist based on whether or not they have gone through the same life situations.

Question...the scenerios I listed before about when I had sex with someone that I didn't want to....knowing that I didn't it might very well turn ugly....would you consider that a rape?

I mean, I consented to the sex, but didn't want it, didn't ask for it, didn't welcome it, didn't enjoy it....but didn't say no because it wouldn't have been in my best interest at that moment to refuse. I guess you could say that, yes, there was a fear of what would happen if I said no.

I don't feel raped, and would never say I was. But someone else might have.

Then again, I'm very pragmatic about stuff like that.

Anyone is welcome to any belief they wish, by that same token anyone is welcome to question said beliefs. That is one of the precepts of a free and open society. Does this precept pan out the real world? Not near your water cooler.

Chumly wrote:

Anyone is welcome to any belief they wish, by that same token anyone is welcome to question said beliefs. That is one of the precepts of a free and open society. Does this precept pan out the real world? Not near your water cooler.

Our conflict has nothing to do with free expression of beliefs, or with the questioning of same. We parted ways at the moment you began to talk down haughtily from ultimatum mountain and demand proofs and explanations as if you were someone's instructor here. You continue to sniff and condescend, I'll continue to issue non sequitors. You add nothing to me in discussion, and I'll suffer no loss that you are unsatisfied by my answers.

shewolfnm wrote:

Some may rape out of a closet sexual desire for anal sex with a man.

Do you have demonstrable consistent scientific unbiased third party statistically relevant evidence to support this contention? Are you convinced that the underlying impetus for rape is understood?

Do you have demonstrable consistent scientific unbiased third party statistically relevant evidence to support this contention? Are you convinced that the underlying impetus for rape is understood?

Chumly wrote:

Do you have demonstrable consistent scientific unbiased third party statistically relevant evidence to support this contention? Are you convinced that the underlying impetus for rape is understood?

Jesus Chumly. This thread has been a personal dialogue about rape - people talking about very hurtful personal experiences. It's not some philosophical smoking-room deliberation about transubstantiation or something. Put out your social antenna.

Jesus Chumly. This thread has been a personal dialogue about rape - people talking about very hurtful personal experiences. It's not some philosophical smoking-room deliberation about transubstantiation or something. Put out your social antenna.

nimh wrote:

Jesus Chumly. This thread has been a personal dialogue about rape - people talking about very hurtful personal experiences. It's not some philosophical smoking-room deliberation about transubstantiation or something. Put out your social antenna.

I must have missed the announcement of your promotion to Thread Monitor. Congratulations, nimh.

But I must question your admonition to Chumly here. Why privilege personal experiences over philosophical posts? This is, after all, a philosophy forum. If anything, philosophically oriented posts should take precedence over posts that offer nothing but anecdotal evidence.

A truely bottm-feeding troll. "Rape victims! I wonder if I can upset them?"

I'll second that guess.

Now who wants to empathize with me about the rape of my soul by corporate America? I think a case could be made that that did some real serious psychological damage, but where is MY support group!? Where are the defenders of MY dignity!!??