Playing the Devil's Advocate

120 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fleur
Offline
Joined: 21-02-12
Apr 4 2014 01:40

Previously on Playing the Devil's Advocate….(episodic recap.)

1. Nobody endorses retaliatory beatings for rapists/abusers sanctioned by an organization.
2. Retaliatory violence happens from time to time but it is very rare.
3. Everybody(?) feels that the vast majority of survivors have been raped/assaulted and they are
not making it up
4. The current situation is that survivors are not supported adequately.
5. We want to change that.
6. Pretty much the biggest sanction we can exercise against a rapist is to exclude them from a group, which is a lot less traumatic than being raped/abused.

Anything else?

Also, if someone did rape, threaten, harass, stalk, abuse and generally make a woman's life utterly miserable, having failed to take the hint to fuck off and leave her alone and if she and/or her friend(s) decided to give him a kicking, then cry me a river. He undoubtedly deserved it. What do you expect? Gandhi?

Quote:
beating up accused rapists but by the same hand will say exclusion is absolutely not a violation of freedoms or a big deal in anyway in a different context

It's totally a different context. You know what? When I had that offer on the table I turned it down because I didn't want my friends to get hurt, possibly find themselves up on charges and to do anything to make people feel sorry for the bastard. But it's a totally different kettle of fish, a bunch of angry blokes who were upset about what happened to their friend than a premeditated rape by someone who showed no remorse. One's a crime of passion and the other is calculated.
And the best way of not having your "freedom violated" by being excluded from a group is not to rape anyone, I would have thought. And I don't think people have the inalienable freedom to be part of an anarchist group anyway, just let people show up for the snacks. I don't think you have the freedom to be there if you're a fascist or a cop, why not extend this prohibition to rapists too?
As you keep referring to accused rapists, it implies that you don't really buy into the idea that the vast majority of assaults are real. You're using the language of the criminal justice system, which is inherently biased against survivors. Our culture is steeped in this shit, I can see that it's hard to let that go. We do not have the means to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. By hanging on to the innocent until proven guilty we're letting a lot of women down and de facto excluding them, because honestly, no-one really likes hanging around with the people who assault and abuse them.

I started this thread specifically to use address using adversarial debate techniques such as playing devil's advocate in threads on triggering subjects such as this. However, I'm going to do it now. Suppose, for a minute, we decided that in the light of the awful way survivors are treated, we took a change of attitude and started believing them. We recognize that the current situation is actively detrimental to survivors. Then we could just see how it goes and address problems when they come up, none of us being gifted with clairvoyance and are able to tell exactly what's going to happen. Then we can address actual, real world issues as they arise, instead of fretting about hypothetical scenarios. The hypothetical falsely accused innocent man, beaten up by angry anarchists may happen, far less often than the real violence perpetuated against real women, but if it does happen let's address it then, work out ways to prevent it in the future and give him the support he needs.
Nothing is ever going to be 100% just and fair and without problems, we are actually only human and can't solve everything. However, this discussion almost always turns poisonous, has a disproportionate amount of time spent on the rights and freedoms of the men, has a ridiculous amount of time spent by women trying to reassure men that we're not actually out to get them. It seems to me that spiralling mind-farts about hypotheticals ends up in a paralysis and, nah, nothing changes.

fingers malone's picture
fingers malone
Offline
Joined: 4-05-08
Apr 4 2014 07:34

Just, like, everything Fleur said.

Croy's picture
Croy
Offline
Joined: 26-05-11
Apr 4 2014 07:39

The irony of talking about actual, real world issues when you admittedly launch into a hypothetical situation. Lol.

fingers malone's picture
fingers malone
Offline
Joined: 4-05-08
Apr 4 2014 08:01

Seriously, you actually think it's funny? You remember what kind of actual, real world situations we are talking about here? And we didn't "launch into a hypothetical situation." This was never a hypothetical situation. Somebody (who had been assaulted) wrote an article about dealing with sexual assault. Two women (who had been harassed or assaulted) took exception to some of it from their different perspective. Then we started having a massive online row about sexual assault. Which has always, the whole way through, actually been about a whole load of assaults that really happened.
One of the most upsetting things about this whole argument is that you just don't seem to care about any of the things people are saying happened to them. It's really horrible. It's like talking to a person made of ice.

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Apr 4 2014 08:04

Croydonian - you are so wrong here mate, just like we all are sometimes. The reasons that you are wrong have been put to you again and again far better than I could ever hope to. I really think you need to open your eyes and your ears and put your hands up. If you can't do that at least just quit the thread - it's going nowhere and people are getting upset. With good reason.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 4 2014 08:21
the croydonian anarchist wrote:
The irony of talking about actual, real world issues when you admittedly launch into a hypothetical situation. Lol.

mate, there is a time and a place for saying things like "LOL" in online discussions. Do you really think this is the best one?

And as for this, this isn't ironic at all. You completely failed to listen to reason when we spoke about actual, real world issues, relying instead on hypothetical, "devil's advocate" scenarios. So Fleur attempted to discuss with you on your hypothetical scenarios. And this is how you respond.

I've got another hypothetical scenario for you, as you don't seem to be paying attention to real-world scenarios. And particularly you seem to be lacking in empathy for survivors of sexual assault. So how about you try to imagine that you were raped by a man in your anarchist group (or at an anarchist event, if you're not in a group). What do you think should be the priority for the rest of the group afterwards? Supporting you? Or making sure you didn't attack the rapist?

Because all you have focused on is the latter, and an anarchist group doing that sends entirely the wrong message, and would basically discourage survivors from speaking up about what happened.

If that hypothetical scenario did happen to you, I also wouldn't condemn you or your friends if you took a baseball bat to the perpetrator (although as I said I wasn't supporting an organisational policy of violence against perpetrators, like absolutely every other person in this discussion).

Now, of course (not making any assumptions about your life or experiences) you are fortunate in that you are male, and so much less likely to be subjected to a sexual assault. However, women are not so lucky and huge numbers of them are subjected to domestic and sexual violence every day.
On this note:

EmC wrote:
Quote:
It's funny how EmC is going to be outraged at the prospect of being excluded from a political group in the case of being a consequence for beating up accused rapists but by the same hand will say exclusion is absolutely not a violation of freedoms or a big deal in anyway in a different context. Double standards.

He wants survivors excluded from groups if they beat up their rapist.
He doesn't want accused rapists (of which 99% ARE rapists) excluded from groups.
Can we end these stupid word games now?

Now now, "accused of beating up their rapist", as what if it was a false allegation?!

Mr. Jolly's picture
Mr. Jolly
Offline
Joined: 28-04-11
Apr 5 2014 21:04

Domestic violence ended in my cousin being murdered. The anger that the family had towards the the person was palpable and understandable, they wanted revenge and it could have easily happened once the perpetrator was let out of prison. But it never happened, often the violence that was meted out is not something that you would want to reciprocate, even when someone close to you is take away in very violent circumstances, violence makes you sick to the stomach. The point is hypothetical 'what ifs' don't really cut it, you have to go through a process and everyone is different.

Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
Apr 4 2014 08:49

Webby #96:
Spot on.

Croydonian:
You got to stand back.
Re-read this thread in six months and you’ll cringe at your tenacious will to win your ‘principled’ argument. When anyone gets stuck in a hypothetical argument it gets harder and harder to back out. Every twist leads to a turn.

At present I’m arguing with a socialist who assures me that domestic violence is equally balanced between male and female. I’ve asked for proof as he claims ‘it is scientifically proven’. He says he’ll post me (!).

I’m not equating you with him, it is that he earnestly believes what he says, and the hardest thing is to adjust ones mental scaffolding. It takes time - give it time.

Ablokeimet
Offline
Joined: 30-04-13
Apr 4 2014 09:02
Auld-bod wrote:

At present I’m arguing with a socialist who assures me that domestic violence is equally balanced between male and female. I’ve asked for proof as he claims ‘it is scientifically proven’. He says he’ll post me (!).

The best information of which I am aware comes from the Australian Bureau of Statistics. It has conducted two Personal Safety Surveys (2005 & 2012) and, before that, a Women's Safety Survey (1996). It doesn't come from police or hospital reports, but from a household survey, with specially trained interviewers. information on partner violence is here:

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4906.0Chapter7002012

In summary, 5.3% of men had experienced partner violence since the age of 15, while 16.9% of women had. I can't see why the situation in Britain would be substantially different.

Mr. Jolly's picture
Mr. Jolly
Offline
Joined: 28-04-11
Apr 4 2014 09:06

Whatever the stats and the cock waving think its crucial to say that domestic violence can happen to anyone in any type of relationship. To play it as a political football is dangerous.

Auld-bod's picture
Auld-bod
Offline
Joined: 9-07-11
Apr 4 2014 09:13

Thanks for the information. Anything else would be much appreciated - libcom once again turns up trumps!

EDIT: Mr Jolly #101

Agreed

omen
Offline
Joined: 20-09-12
Apr 4 2014 10:58

Sorry if this trivializes things further, given the serious nature of the topic, but Croydonian is being spectacularly stupid, so this:

(Instead of giggling at the cartoon, Croydonian, you should probably think hard about it this time.)

Croy's picture
Croy
Offline
Joined: 26-05-11
Apr 4 2014 16:25

Assuming some one doesn't empathize or sympathize with something based on the frequency of how much they talk about something else is pretty dumb. I wouldn't say any women don't care about male on male sexual abuse/rape etc just based on the fact they don't talk about it in equal amounts.

Ed's picture
Ed
Offline
Joined: 1-10-03
Apr 4 2014 16:59
EmC wrote:
Not a single person here has argued that an organisation should engage in physical violence.

(Just in case this was in response to me) Yeah, Em, I'm not saying anyone here has. I was responding to Croydonian's comment. My opinions can probably be summarised best by what fleurnoire-et-rouge wrote in post #92..

Croydonian wrote:
Assuming some one doesn't empathize or sympathize with something based on the frequency of how much they talk about something else is pretty dumb. I wouldn't say any women don't care about male on male sexual abuse/rape etc just based on the fact they don't talk about it in equal amounts.

No, that might be true. But then if someone asks you what your proposal is for supporting survivors of sexual assault in radical groups (as an alternative to one which has been proposed and which you've already rubbished as heading into 'cop territory') and the only concrete suggestion you put forward is that the accused isn't beaten up, then it does seem like your priorities lie primarily with the accused rather than the survivor.. or at least that you think that the current support provided is already adequate (which it obviously isn't)..

Croy's picture
Croy
Offline
Joined: 26-05-11
Apr 4 2014 17:34

People can take and interpret what I say how they like. If you all want to think I sympathise more with rapists than I do rape survivors based on what was meant to be a tiny suggestion just to avoid un necessary things that got blown massively out of proportion and took to mean something way bigger in scale, then that's up to them. I am confident anyone that may meet me in person will know I am far from the above.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 4 2014 18:05
the croydonian anarchist wrote:
People can take and interpret what I say how they like. If you all want to think I sympathise more with rapists than I do rape survivors based on what was meant to be a tiny suggestion just to avoid un necessary things that got blown massively out of proportion and took to mean something way bigger in scale, then that's up to them. I am confident anyone that may meet me in person will know I am far from the above.

I've met you and know that this is not the case, as have others. Which is why I think many people are being very patient and polite with you, despite your occasional rudeness (although I appreciate that this discussion probably feels like everyone against you, and you probably feel a bit under attack, which can be difficult). But maybe if this is the impression you are giving people with your posts here, then maybe there is a problem with your posts?

What do you think of my questions, above, to my hypothetical scenario?

commieprincess's picture
commieprincess
Offline
Joined: 26-08-07
Apr 4 2014 18:53
the croydonian anarchist wrote:
Assuming some one doesn't empathize or sympathize with something based on the frequency of how much they talk about something else is pretty dumb. I wouldn't say any women don't care about male on male sexual abuse/rape etc just based on the fact they don't talk about it in equal amounts.

It wasn't based on how much you talk about it, it's stuff like the lol, the general hostility to people who are talking about really difficult things, calling several people dumb, defending your use of the word 'victim' without taking a second to think about the implications at all etc. That's the stuff that makes you come across like you have no sympathy for survivors.

However, I know it's difficult to examine your own shortcomings in an argument when you feel like you're under attack, but hopefully in a few months you'll be a bit embarrassed by your posts and weird persistence with whatever point you're trying to make.

Mr. Jolly's picture
Mr. Jolly
Offline
Joined: 28-04-11
Apr 5 2014 21:09

Moving on... Are all coppers bastards?

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Apr 13 2014 21:40

Not sure if this is quite the place for this but I didn't want to start a new thread.

So, I just found out that my older daughter was in a pub last night and this sleaze of a bloke made a grab for her and touched her in various intimate places. Fortunately, she managed to extricate herself and, to my delight, proceeded to punch him out. Apparently, she got two good, clean shots in to the same eye. His mates apologised for him saying he 'isn't usually like this'. Bollocks to that. He said he'd done nothing wrong and was 'disgusted that a woman would hit someone'. He also said something along the lines of all that he had done was showed her how attractive he thought she was and felt very hard done by as he got punched for paying someone a compliment. What a fucking wanker. Hopefully his black eye will be very sore today.
So I just thought I'd share that very small victory.

boozemonarchy's picture
boozemonarchy
Offline
Joined: 28-12-06
Apr 13 2014 21:57
Webby wrote:
He also said something along the lines of all that he had done was showed her how attractive he thought she was and felt very hard done by as he got punched for paying someone a compliment.

Load em' up, we shouldn't even have a meeting bout' it.

the button's picture
the button
Offline
Joined: 7-07-04
Apr 13 2014 22:04

https://twitter.com/RosieMarx/status/455465747188563968/photo/1

Fleur
Offline
Joined: 21-02-12
Apr 13 2014 22:09

Webby
Hat tip to your daughter!

On a similar note, my daughter's just turned 18 and when I asked her about her plans, going out, having her first legal drink etc, she explained to me that she was just going around to friend's to watch movies, that she hated going to bars etc because she was fed up with being harassed by grabby, intimidating douchebags and that she wasn't going to have her birthday spoiled by sexist men who didn't understand how to back off.
So, things haven't got a hell of a lot better since I was her age.

Croy's picture
Croy
Offline
Joined: 26-05-11
Apr 22 2014 14:58

Having got into a discussion with some one about the robin thicke blurred lines I re evaluated this whole thing and I actually have changed my mind mostly.

Croy's picture
Croy
Offline
Joined: 26-05-11
Apr 22 2014 15:04

I'm not going to bend over ass backwards to do some verbal self flagellation but I apolagise to the people I've offended.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Apr 22 2014 17:18

What made you change your mind if you don't mind sharing?

Croy's picture
Croy
Offline
Joined: 26-05-11
Apr 22 2014 18:13

I think it comes down to what assumptions I would rather act in accordance with sacrificing small possibilities on shit things happening. I was talking to people about blurred lines and consent. Basically what I was saying was that "I know quite a few friends who are in/have been in relationships where the sex was very much about power play where their partners would enjoy feigning struggle and beg for them to stop but A they have told me a genuine no would be very easy to stop from the feigned no that they both get mutual enjoyment out of and they practice often accompanied by safewords BUT I would rather act on the assumption that no means no when generally approaching people". I realised it really wasn't that much different to practicing on the assumption of truth because women continuing to be ignored and how that all plays into rape culture has way fewer shitty consequences than not.

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Apr 22 2014 19:14

And even a happy ending. Croydonian, I'm glad you've seen through it and I'm pleased
It's very hard to admit you're wrong, especially when it feels like doing so will make you on the same side as the 'bad guys'.

A couple of articles that I've seen in the last two or three days.

It's quite a long way down but here is Patton Oswalt on rape jokes and realising that he was wrong.
http://www.pattonoswalt.com/index.cfm?id=167&page=spew

And a recent article from the guardian which shows why rightfully criticising rapists creates a distance that allows us to ignore the complicity of our society in their actions.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/apr/18/my-wife-was-murdere...

button, great pic !

webby, great story, glad he didn't get away with it.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 22 2014 23:10

Croydonian, that's really cool, thanks for letting us know. And sorry if it seemed like I was being harsh on you: just to be clear either way your politics and gender politics are way ahead of where mine were when I was your age!

And yeah, Jef I think that Guardian article by the husband of the murder victim is really good as well

Noah Fence's picture
Noah Fence
Offline
Joined: 18-12-12
Apr 23 2014 05:21
Quote:
webby, great story, glad he didn't get away with it.

The guy has been seen since and he's still sporting a black eye which is pretty good.
I found out when talking to her about it is that this sort of thing has happened to her repeatedly over the years but on this occasion she saw red and let him have it. What's really sad is that when I asked her why she hadn't told me about this happening before she said it was because 'it's just normal'. I mean, WTF?!!!