Ensign Article Controversy: "Rape Culture"

[LittleWyvern]

What, I'm not allowed to ask what you mean?

Of course you are. That's not at all what I meant, but I'm sure you knew that anyway.

This isn't hard, LW. You are implying things in what you write. I think your implications are false, so I'm asking you to substantiate them.

So then, let me be as explicit as I can so you don't misunderstand me. You openly imply, in fact practically assert, that someone suggested that those who think Elder Callister's wording can be taken harmfully by some are "becoming apostate" or are "needing to leave the Church".

Right? This is obviously what you're saying, right? That's the clear implication of your words. Or are you just pulling random ideas out of thin air and making a statement apropos of nothing whatsoever?

I never even remotely asserted that somebody suggested exactly that. My follow up to your first response made it absolutely clear that I asserted that such an event could have happened, but the language we were using regarding those who do not completely agree with Elder Callister's remarks is so vague that such a conclusion may have been made or may not have been made, and that it was difficult or impossible to tell. My post #35 was meant to point out how that conclusion, if someone had made it, seemed unreasonable to me. That is all. No more, no less.

You may continue your cross-examination if you wish.

It was a slow-thrown softball...

Asking me if I think it's fine to say evil things about Prophets and Apostles? Some softball, indeed.

I was attempting to give you a chance to withdraw your implied false accusations and/or clarify what you were trying to say. So far, you haven't done anything of the sort, but just gotten all huffy and claimed hurt feelings.

Would you mind quoting the post where I "claimed hurt feelings?"

Edited February 25, 2014 by LittleWyvern

[Wingnut]

Men cannot "stop rape"

Since you're so fond of identifying false assertions, I'll identify yours. Men can stop rape by choosing not to do it.

[Vort]

Since you're so fond of identifying false assertions, I'll identify yours. Men can stop rape by choosing not to do it.

Allow me to prove you wrong:

I have chosen not to rape.

Rape has not been stopped by my choice.

Ergo, you are wrong.

[Vort]

Of course you are. That's not at all what I meant, but I'm sure you knew that anyway.

Yet when I asked what you meant in specific terms, you cried about "interrogation".

I never even remotely asserted that somebody suggested exactly that. My follow up to your first response made it absolutely clear that I asserted that such an event could have happened, but the language we were using regarding those who do not completely agree with Elder Callister's remarks is so vague that such a conclusion may have been made or may not have been made, and that it was difficult or impossible to tell. My post #35 was meant to point out how that conclusion, if someone had made it, seemed unreasonable to me. That is all. No more, no less.

So, in other words, you claim that you had no one in mind here, nothing at all? You simply pulled a couple of utterly non sequitur examples out of thin air, just to make a random statement from nowhere that, by the way, disagreeing with Elder Callister's choice of wording doesn't make someone X or Y?

Uh-huh.

Okay, so here are other examples of exactly the kind of thing you were saying:

• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a baboon!
  
• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a mass murderer!
  
• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a pornography distributor!
  
• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a mermaid!
  
• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a Democrat!
  
• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a Floridian!
  
• Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a Disney princess!
  

This is pretty much what you were trying to say. Right?

Would you mind quoting the post where I "claimed hurt feelings?"

I already did: "Since when did this turn into an interrogation?" This implies hurt feelings, or at least irritation. Or do you just normally ask everyone who requests clarification from you why they are engaging in interrogation?

[Wingnut]

Allow me to prove you wrong:

I have chosen not to rape.

Rape has not been stopped by my choice.

Ergo, you are wrong.

Had you chosen to rape, rape would have happened. Ergo, rape didn't happen because you chose not to rape.

[Dravin]

Here's the thing. I don't understand why we're (society "we," not necessarily Mormon "we") teaching women about avoiding being raped. Why aren't we teaching men not to rape?*

Probably for the same reason you see messages concerning how to avoid being mugged but you see relatively little in the form of teaching people not to mug. It's assumed to be understood that mugging is immoral and illegal and that an information campaign highlighting those things is targeting people who already are aware of the message and disregard it anyway. I suppose one can challenge that assumption, I'm not arguing for the assumption, but it's why the discrepancy between minimizing risk messages and don't commit crimes messages.

Accepting the need for a "men, don't rape" message, I don't see why that invalidates messages concerning minimizing risk. It would seem to me an argument for both messages to be communicated. The reasons to stop one message in the favor of the other one would boil down to:

A) The messages are contradictory (which I don't think they are).

B) Either funding or public attention limits the ability to put out both messages simultaneously and therefore the more effective one should have precedence. This I suppose would be a good area for social scientists to study.

Note: Just to be perfectly clear even though I felt I adequately disclaimed my comments. I am simply analyzing the why, I am not arguing that the why is correct.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Dravin

[Vort]

Had you chosen to rape, rape would have happened. Ergo, rape didn't happen because you chose not to rape.

If rape doesn't happen, why does the web site you pointed to even exist?

Vort does not rape, therefore there is no rape.

By your own words, I have STOPPED RAPE by choosing not to rape.

You are welcome, world.

[Wingnut]

If rape doesn't happen, why does the web site you pointed to even exist?

Vort does not rape, therefore there is no rape.

By your own words, I have STOPPED RAPE by choosing not to rape.

You are welcome, world.

Forgive me for leaving out the word "a." By you choosing not to rape, you have prevented a rape from happening.

[Dravin]

Forgive me for leaving out the word "a." By you choosing not to rape, you have prevented a rape from happening.

Theoretically he's prevented every rape that he could have committed by didn't. Just an observation, not an argument.

[LittleWyvern]

Yet when I asked what you meant in specific terms, you cried about "interrogation".

That's because you have been going through my posts with all the nitpicky-ness of a prosecuting attorney.

So, in other words, you claim that you had no one in mind here, nothing at all? You simply pulled a couple of utterly non sequitur examples out of thin air, just to make a random statement from nowhere that, by the way, disagreeing with Elder Callister's choice of wording doesn't make someone X or Y?

Uh-huh.

Okay, so here are other examples of exactly the kind of thing you were saying:

(snip)

This is pretty much what you were trying to say. Right?

I'm at a complete loss of words here. I do not see how it's logically possible to go from what I have clearly stated many times to thinking that I'm trying to say something logically equivalent to "Disagreeing with Elder Callister's word choice does not make one a baboon!" Regardless, let me try one more time. We were talking about 1) disagreeing whether Elder Callister's words were always 100% right and 2) claims of apostasy using vague language. I wanted to point out that disagreeing that Elder Callister's words were not universally applicable did not constitute apostasy. I had nobody in mind: the conversation seemed to be heading in that direction. Claiming that stating a personal opinion about how two main subjects of the thread didn't fit together is "random" defies all attempts at logic.

I already did: "Since when did this turn into an interrogation?" This implies hurt feelings, or at least irritation.

Hm. A false implication. That's odd...

EDIT: in case this isn't completely clear, my feelings certainly are not hurt. Thanks for caring!

Or do you just normally ask everyone who requests clarification from you why they are engaging in interrogation?

Nope, just the people who nitpick my posts and repeatedly miss what I'm trying to say in favor of trying to claim some sort of moral victory over a logical "gotcha."

Edited February 25, 2014 by LittleWyvern

[apexviper]

Here's the thing. I don't understand why we're (society "we," not necessarily Mormon "we") teaching women about avoiding being raped. Why aren't we teaching men not to rape?

Well this is a very stereotypical question. Women aren't the only ones sexually assaulted and men aren't the only ones who can sexually assault others.

[Vort]

Forgive me for leaving out the word "a." By you choosing not to rape, you have prevented a rape from happening.

Wingnut, you are a highly intelligent individual. I have years of interaction with you on this site that demonstrates that fact. So you cannot be in ignorance about what is being said. You are either choosing to ignore it, or your social views are literally (though metaphorically) blinding you to what is right before your (metaphorical) eyes.

Your referenced web site claimed that MEN CAN STOP RAPE. The obvious implication is that MEN ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR RAPE.

But of course, you say. Men are the rapists.

But you are much smarter than that. If you choose to look, you can see exactly what is going on here.

INDIVIDUAL MEN are rapists. MEN AS A GROUP are not rapists. But feminists gladly blur this distinction so that the crime of "rape" sort of descends to taint all men.

As an honest woman and a lover of men, you cannot consciously condone this lie. Yet somehow, that part of your brain that should be screaming "bull crap!" at this blatant twisting of truth remains strangely silent.

Choosing not to rape someone is not the same as STOPPING rape. You know this full well, too. My choosing not to rape anyone has not STOPPED rape in any sense at all (edited by mod).

Such dishonest word games do not help us. They do not help the situation. They do not increase understanding or modify behavior. They simply confuse the situation and push forward the feminist agenda.

Men CANNOT "stop rape". Not individually, and not collectively. The suggestion that "men" can do any such thing is a feminist lie.

The idea of putting the onus to "stop rape" on men is a feminist lie. Decent men can do little to stop rape beyond teaching their daughters to be wise and their sons to respect women, and upholding laws to curb and punish rape. Rapists, of course, will simply laugh at the screeching. They are not likely to be deterred by feminist sloganeering.

It is a feminist lie that we teach women to avoid rape INSTEAD OF teaching men not to rape.

It is a feminist lie that teaching women to live the principles of modesty is tantamount to blaming them for being raped, as many of Elder Callister's detractors seem bent on establishing.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Eowyn
Way too far.

[Wingnut]

Theoretically he's prevented every rape that he could have committed by didn't. Just an observation, not an argument.

I agree. That was my point.

Well this is a very stereotypical question. Women aren't the only ones sexually assaulted and men aren't the only ones who can sexually assault others.

Clearly you didn't read the footnote in that post.

Wingnut, you are a highly intelligent individual. I have years of interaction with you on this site that demonstrates that fact. So you cannot be in ignorance about what is being said. You are either choosing to ignore it, or your social views are literally (though metaphorically) blinding you to what is right before your (metaphorical) eyes.

Your referenced web site claimed that MEN CAN STOP RAPE. The obvious implication is that MEN ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR RAPE.

But of course, you say. Men are the rapists.

But you are much smarter than that. If you choose to look, you can see exactly what is going on here.

INDIVIDUAL MEN are rapists. MEN AS A GROUP are not rapists. But feminists gladly blur this distinction so that the crime of "rape" sort of descends to taint all men.

As an honest woman and a lover of men, you cannot consciously condone this lie. Yet somehow, that part of your brain that should be screaming "bull crap!" at this blatant twisting of truth remains strangely silent.

Choosing not to rape someone is not the same as STOPPING rape. You know this full well, too. My choosing not to rape anyone has not STOPPED rape in any sense at all (edited out).

Such dishonest word games do not help us. They do not help the situation. They do not increase understanding or modify behavior. They simply confuse the situation and push forward the feminist agenda.

Men CANNOT "stop rape". Not individually, and not collectively. The suggestion that "men" can do any such thing is a feminist lie.

The idea of putting the onus to "stop rape" on men is a feminist lie. Decent men can do little to stop rape beyond teaching their daughters to be wise and their sons to respect women, and upholding laws to curb and punish rape. Rapists, of course, will simply laugh at the screeching. They are not likely to be deterred by feminist sloganeering.

It is a feminist lie that we teach women to avoid rape INSTEAD OF teaching men not to rape.

It is a feminist lie that teaching women to live the principles of modesty is tantamount to blaming them for being raped, as many of Elder Callister's detractors seem bent on establishing.

You're right, Vort. I am a highly intelligent individual. And in the number of years I've interacted with you on this site, I think I've finally hit my limit of being called a liar by you. It's enough.

Edited February 25, 2014 by Eowyn

[skippy740]

Thread closed.