Mass Assault in Cologne, Mayor blames female victims ?!

[columbus]

3) I'm supposedly being "self-righteous."

What?

You are extremely self-righteous on the subject of feminism.
Perhaps it is youth, perhaps it is your feeling trapped in a Muslim culture you don't like and is repressive, probably it is a combination of factors.
But you are judging the mayor of Cologne based on things she didn't say or do, assuming you know why she said and did other things.
Tom

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you realize that you are talking to someone who has changed aspects of his worldview multiple times because of debates and reading other people's perspectives? Not bragging; just stating a fact that nullifies what you just said.

It is good to find one's philosophical path.
But having changed one's mind is not necessarily a sign of current openness.
There is the condition called "the zeal of the convert".
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/10/28/the-zeal-of-the-convert-is-it-the-real-deal/
So I see your arguments for what they are, not for what you are.
(I don't hold it against you that you remind me of myself.)

 

[prometheus11]

Which he knows I belong to, or else he wouldn't have mentioned it.

Assumption

I think you are unable to acknowledge the implications of the mayor's words. I'm not taking them for more than what she said; I think you are taking their implications for less than what they are.

I don't consider POSSIBLE implications when it makes more sense to NOT assume motives I don't know about.

You can blame me for that "fault" if you like, but I think it's the only honorable recourse.

I don't assume. You do.

Do you realize that you are talking to someone who has changed aspects of his worldview multiple times because of debates and reading other people's perspectives? Not bragging; just stating a fact that nullifies what you just said.

Yes, I'm aware. No, it doesn't nullify what I just said.

I have no problem changing my opinions if someone shows me that they are wrong. You have failed at that so far.

I am not attempting to change YOUR mind and I never will; I know it's a worthless endeavor.

I have succeeded in proving your position wrong. I don't expect you to acknowledge it. Far from it. I expect you to keep assuming what you don't know and feeling self righteous in what you believe by faith the "implications" are.

 

[Revoltingest]

I am not attempting to change YOUR mind and I never will; I know it's a worthless endeavor.

I must disagree.
It's worthwhile to influence others.
One never knows who might be inspired by something said.
Change does happen.

But more importantly.....
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GET A PROPER AVATAR?

 

[prometheus11]

I must disagree.
It's worthwhile to influence others.
One never knows who might be inspired by something said.
Change does happen.

But more importantly.....
WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GET A PROPER AVATAR?

Sometimes when debating, you're trying to influence other viewers instead of the person arguing against you.

Not sure on the avatar. [emoji106]

 

[Debater Slayer]

Therein lies the crux of the problem, ie, as Wolfgang Pauli says....
"Das is nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch."
Translation & application....
A claim of the mayor's intent isn't even wrong, ie, it cannot be verified or disproven.
But I don't claim to be right (or wrong) either.

You are extremely self-righteous on the subject of feminism.
Perhaps it is youth, perhaps it is your feeling trapped in a Muslim culture you don't like and is repressive, probably it is a combination of factors.
But you are judging the mayor of Cologne based on things she didn't say or do, assuming you know why she said and did other things.
Tom

If someone says something that has certain connotations, whether they were aware of those connotations or not doesn't change much as to the meaning of what they said. It is similar to calling abortion "murder"; not all people who do that are cognizant of the fact that they are effectively calling millions of women murderers, yet the implication of labeling abortion "murder" remains the same.

As for the claim of being "self-righteous," I'm honestly not surprised to see that claim being made by someone who appears to have hostile feelings toward the feminist movement.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Assumption



I don't consider POSSIBLE implications when it makes more sense to NOT assume motives I don't know about.

It would appear that you have gotten so entangled in trying to defend the mayor from imagined libel that you have overlooked what her comments imply about victims of sexual assault. Says a bit about your priorities.

You can blame me for that "fault" if you like, but I think it's the only honorable recourse.

Quite frankly, I don't particularly care to know what you consider to be the "only honorable recourse."

Yes, I'm aware. No, it doesn't nullify what I just said.

Well, it does nullify your claim that I think I can't be wrong, since I have changed my mind numerous times before.

I am not attempting to change YOUR mind and I never will; I know it's a worthless endeavor.

You sure do seem quite certain for someone who claims to rail against certainty in one's position.

I have succeeded in proving your position wrong. I don't expect you to acknowledge it. Far from it. I expect you to keep assuming what you don't know and feeling self righteous in what you believe by faith the "implications" are.

Whatever greases your wheels.

 

[Revoltingest]

If someone says something that has certain connotations, whether they were aware of those connotations or not doesn't change much as to the meaning of what they said. It is similar to calling abortion "murder"; not all people who do that are cognizant of the fact that they are effectively calling millions of women murderers, yet the implication of labeling abortion "murder" remains the same.

There's nothing to refute here.
But neither does it mean that a connotation seen by one is the singularly correct one.
We disagree about what the mayor's intent is, & the level of confidence in our opinions.

 

[prometheus11]

It would appear that you have gotten so entangled in trying to defend the mayor from imagined libel that you have overlooked what her comments imply about victims of sexual assault. Says a bit about your priorities.

I don't assume implications like you do. I take a person's words at face value.

And I'm not "defending" anyone. Please retract that lie.


I have criticized the mayor for her words that were in no way "blaming the victim" but were insensitive.

Quite frankly, I don't particularly care to know what you consider to be the "only honorable recourse."

Duh.

Well, it does nullify your claim that I think I can't be wrong, since I have changed my mind numerous times before.

Wrong.

By that logic, someone who quits smoking for a few weeks and starts back has proven capable of quitting smoking for good. How silly.

The fact that you've changed your mind a few times in no way proves you rationally process evidence with an unbiased perspective. And your demeanor proves you to be one of the most self righteous members on this forum.

You sure do seem quite certain for someone who claims to rail against certainty in one's position.

I just love it when you miss the point and throw red herrings on the floor. You do it so well and so often. Practice makes perfect?

 

[columbus]

If someone says something that has certain connotations, whether they were aware of those connotations or not doesn't change much as to the meaning of what they said.

The problem with connotations is that they are subjective, and so very prone to misunderstanding.
If a black man says to a white woman, "Hi! Nice dress." She may think he is implying, "I'm gonna do you whether you and your husband object or not." But since he didn't actually say it, judging him based on the connotations is quite unfair.

Similarly, judging the mayor of Cologne based on what you think she meant is quite unfair if she didn't say it. Nobody has posted a quote where she blamed a victim. That is what this thread is about.
Tom

 

[Debater Slayer]

I don't assume implications like you do. I take a person's words at face value.

Words have implications. Only an unwise person would speak without giving thought to what their words implied. It is especially unwise for a person in power such as a mayor to do that.

And I'm not "defending" anyone. Please retract that lie.

So I suppose your posts throughout this thread never existed. No wonder you can't see much beyond the superficial meaning of words when you don't even seem to realize what you have been doing in this thread.

I have criticized the mayor for her words that were in no way "blaming the victim" but were insensitive.

The two are not mutually exclusive; they are insensitive in addition to implying victim-blaming.

Wrong.

By that logic, someone who quits smoking for a few weeks and starts back has proven capable of quitting smoking for good. How silly.

The fact that you've changed your mind a few times in no way proves you rationally process evidence with an unbiased perspective.

Right, many times over a period exceeding four years of re-examining core beliefs and childhood indoctrination is "a few times."

To be perfectly honest, I don't care much about your erroneous assessment of my ability to change my mind, which is no less faulty than your assessment of the mayor's comments.

And your demeanor proves you to be one of the most self righteous members on this forum.

By whose judgment? Yours? Yeah, I think I'll pass. I value reliability too much to take your word on that.

I just love it when you miss the point and throw red herrings on the floor. You do it so well and so often. Practice makes perfect?

"Red herring" = "something I don't like," I guess.

 

[Debater Slayer]

The problem with connotations is that they are subjective, and so very prone to misunderstanding.
If a black man says to a white woman, "Hi! Nice dress." She may think he is implying, "I'm gonna do you whether you and your husband object or not." But since he didn't actually say it, judging him based on the connotations is quite unfair.

Similarly, judging the mayor of Cologne based on what you think she meant is quite unfair if she didn't say it. Nobody has posted a quote where she blamed a victim. That is what this thread is about.
Tom

I have repeatedly pointed out that I don't know the mayor's intentions, and I don't claim to know them. I'm only addressing what her comments imply. A lot of people say things that convey meanings they didn't intend to convey.

 

[Revoltingest]

Have any of the victims spoken out about anything?

 

[prometheus11]

Please retract the lie that I have defended the mayor. I have discussed the meaning of her words. I have NEVER defended her, the person.

I'll only respond to you after that.

Ps, I cannot believe that YOU consider yourself a mature and rational debater after your last two posts.

 

[TashaN]

Apparently women in Cologne are now being advised to follow a "code of conduct":

http://news.yahoo.com/mayor-cologne-just-blamed-hundreds-011347213.html

Anyone want to defend the mayor's statement?

What's wrong with the following?

This code would require women to remain "an arm's length distance from strangers" within their own group, and encourages women to ask bystanders or witnesses to help should they feel threatened, according to the same report. In the future, women would do well to be aware of the potential dangers of events conducive to drunkenness, the mayor reportedly added.

 

[Flankerl]

Have any of the victims spoken out about anything?

Yes of course.

What's wrong with the following?

This code would require women to remain "an arm's length distance from strangers" within their own group, and encourages women to ask bystanders or witnesses to help should they feel threatened, according to the same report. In the future, women would do well to be aware of the potential dangers of events conducive to drunkenness, the mayor reportedly added.

How do you keep an arm's length distance with someone that just comes nearer?
How do you keep a group of 30 men to surround you even if you are 3 or 4 people?

And also to you, Google "Cologne Carnival" and look at some of the pictures of the sheer number of people there. It is entirely impossible to keep distance to strangers.

 

[Curious George]

But that's just wrong.

If you've got to presume how some individuals of a certain group "V" might extrapolate some interpretation based on unintended perceptions of explicit warnings to people SPECIFICALLY NOT "V" then you're jumping through imaginary hurdles merely for the sake of wishing the speaker had said something that fits your accusation.

Illogical steps of caution given to non victims isn't victim blaming.

They are not so much imaginary

I feel this point really needs iterated, not only because it's very true, but because my own situation adds a unique perspective. Of course I heard such advice being directed towards women, quiet often, before I embraced myself as trans, but once I embraced myself and started taking steps towards transitioning, the very first time I met a trans-support group the issue came up, and I found myself having the same advice directed towards me. It always does fall back on women. Even as a "guy with lots of female friends," I've never heard any advice of situations, behaviors, or other potential indications to help friends stay out of such bad situations. There is nothing that men are told in regards to handling urges for inappropriate sexual conduct and rape. But women are bombarded with advice about how to not get raped, and it's never anything new, full-proof, or really even that effective given the statistics on rape (especially in regards to the acquaintance aspect that is frequently a factor in rape).

I am not trying to invalidate this experience, but I think telling men how to handle inappropriate sexual urges indicates that men are supposed to have inappropriate sexual urges. Moreover, I did get advice growing up on how to handle situations like this: If someone needs help, you help. If someone is hurt, you help. If someone is in danger, you help. If someone feels unsafe, accompany them. If you feel someone is unsafe, accompany them. If you feel unsafe doing any of these things, find others to accompany you. It is always best to have others helping you help someone. Gender need not be involved. I would give either my son or my daughter the same advice. Excepting the instance wherein an adult is requesting help of children.

There is nothing normal about an urge to rape. There is nothing normal about wanting to engage in unwanted touching. If I or someone else doesn't want to be touched, keep your f***ing hands to yourself until you can go talk to your therapist about your unnatural urges. Again this applies to all genders.

It may not be full proof, but had the mayor said this, I doubt we would be having this conversation.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes of course.

Dang...I'd hoped that someone already searched & found a link for commentary about the mayor & the authorities.
I haven't yet seen that.

 

[Flankerl]

What exactly are you looking for?

 

[Revoltingest]

What exactly are you looking for?

I'm curious how they view the mayor's conduct code & political aspects of the attacks.
We argue a bunch here, but we only know what we see filtered thru news sources.