|
posted by dennisn on January 26th, 2011 at 2:55PM
Sigh. Do you also suffer from reading problems? Not only did I fully acknowledge the "hypocrisy" but you obviously completely missed my "improper defense", that I'm not really responsible for what my rapists do.
Last time I checked, in fact, you supported taxation and other oppressions, and actually used the laughable argument of moral relativism to justify my rapists. Is the fault that of the woman who got raped, for walking in a rape-filled neighbourhood?
|
posted by Nylorac on January 28th, 2011 at 11:39AM
It's one thing to be unaware, and thus ignorant, of your circumstance, but another to be aware and knowingly and consciously take actions that betray your convictions. That's all.
I like your analogy, so let's continue with it:
Consider a woman who knows that a rapist is in a room.
She also knows that rapist likes women who wear hats.
She knows that there are other rooms that have no rapists.
She knows that there are other rooms that have rapists, but that are equipped with better defenses against rape.
Knowing all of this, the woman puts on a hat and walks into the room with the rapist that is not equipped with tools to defend against the rapist.
Is what she did her fault? This is what you're asking.
Asking if she is at fault is fruitless. The answer will be 'no', but you're overlooking the very much more important question: why would she knowingly do that? IMHO, at the very least, it's irrational. It seems like suicide. It's masochistic. She may not be at fault, but do we fault the rapist for being a rapist? You are wont to say 'yes', but that seems hardly fair. You abhor the rapist who acts according to his/her nature, but exalt the irrational woman who knowingly betrays herself. It's curious.
If it was to make an example of herself, then she needn't have done it. Everyone knew the rapist was a rapist.
If it was because she felt wronged because she was not able to enjoy the room that the rapist was in because the rapist was in it, then she was being selfish. Part of our assumption was that the rapist wasn't coming after her.
I lean most towards the former, but also believe that she also had masochistic tendencies. Am I right? Is that why you moved to Quebec?
Again, I say that it is a very different case if she did not know that a rapist was in the room, what the rapist likes, that there existed other safer rooms.
|
posted by dennisn on January 28th, 2011 at 11:57AM
EDITOR'S NOTE: If you edit stuff, try to either make an explicit note of where, and also try to just append things at the bottom.
|
posted by Nylorac on January 28th, 2011 at 11:59AM
I tend to edit several times before being satisfied.
I do that on my blog, too.
I'll try to just take my time before hitting "Post".
|
|
posted by Nylorac on January 28th, 2011 at 11:57AM
Sorry...
|
|
|
posted by dennisn on January 28th, 2011 at 11:52AM
There are no rooms without rapists. (Every square inch of land is currently owned by many rapists. Such is the nature of contemporary Statism.)
Nevertheless, it is still absolutely not her fault, for being raped.
(I must applaud you, nevertheless, for having the balls to follow through your logic. Most people don't get to this stage. So, yeah, you have just said that it is the woman's fault for getting raped. This is what everyone who uses the "get out of my continent/planet" argument says too, but never directly.)
(I know there are Statists everywhere on earth. I know they like to prey on innocent productive people. I also think it is absurd to choose one form of rape (say anal), over another (vaginal). Rape is wrong, period, always, period.)
|
posted by Nylorac on January 28th, 2011 at 11:52AM
I didn't say it was her fault.
I said you were asking the wrong question.
|
|
|
|
