Mass Assault in Cologne, Mayor blames female victims ?!

[FearGod]

Your link is actually an argument against your claim.

Yes, because it isn't me in this world making this point.

 

[Revoltingest]

And when one is weak on the issues, one feels the need to police other members' tones.
So you still don't denounce the post. I think this puts your policing posts in the proper light for any observers and readers here. My job is pretty much done.

You keep posting to me about my post to someone else.
Is it your goal to keep some imagined personally critical pressure on me?
I can keep responding ad tedium.....although I have some interruptions (real life stuff, you know).

 

[Debater Slayer]

You keep posting to me about my post to someone else.
Is it your goal to keep some imagined personally critical pressure on me?
I can keep responding ad tedium.....although I have some interruptions (real life stuff, you know).

I'm just pointing out selective policing and denunciation of posts for future reference. I find it more than a little disappointing that you apparently find posts criticizing (or "bashing," according to some) MRAs to be worse than posts outright justifying rape and sexual harassment because women are "pretty enough."

 

[FearGod]

Bottom line:

Girls need to stop being attractive, then men won't have to learn to control themselves.

Did the mayor say so?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Did the mayor say so?

You did.

 

[Rival]

Did the mayor say so?

I was being sarcastic. This sounds like the argument you're vaguely making.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I see no problem with the caution measures while punishing the abusers, no one says
the abusers should be free.

Seems to me the abusers are being ignored the most when it comes to "rape prevention". What happens when abusers are ignored? Do they just go away? Or do they continue what they do or even escalate their behavior?

Yes, because it isn't me in this world making this point.

Oh, but you did. You most certainly did. And your feminist link points out how problematic and destructive attitudes like that is.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm just pointing out selective policing and denunciation of posts for future reference. I find it more than a little disappointing that you apparently find posts criticizing (or "bashing," according to some) MRAs to be worse than posts outright justifying rape and sexual harassment because women are "pretty enough."

Meh....I leave much disappointment in my wake (unpopular views, you know).
But I still urge people to follow the rules.
Staff should also set a positive example when posting with us little folk.

Btw, you & I both don't criticize everything evil.
Despite this, no one should infer from this selective silence that we're
both OK with Timothy McVeigh's terrorism, burning of churches,
beatings of transsexuals, Ukranian invasion, or oppression in Tibet.

Btw, I underlined the portion of your post which is the gravest error.
What you find apparent, is incredibly & utterly wrong.....although I'm sure
it's an honesty held opinion, & not a mischievous dishonest provocation.

 

[FearGod]

Seems to me the abusers are being ignored the most when it comes to "rape prevention". What happens when abusers are ignored? Do they just go away? Or do they continue what they do or even escalate their behavior?

Caution measures doesn't mean ignoring the abusers.

Oh, but you did. You most certainly did. And your feminist link points out how problematic and destructive attitudes like that is.

Exactly, as some chose to be a Muslim and other to be an atheist, what's the problem
of the free choice of opinions regardless of what you think of it.

 

[FearGod]

I was being sarcastic. This sounds like the argument you're vaguely making.

And i was being sarcastic as well, but i don't need to tell you that.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Meh....I leave much disappointment in my wake (unpopular views, you know).
But I still urge people to follow the rules.
Staff should also set a positive example when posting with us little folk.

I still don't know what you're disagreeing with here. Of course we both agree that everyone should follow the rules. What are you disagreeing with? I don't usually point out to members that they should follow the rules in the middle of a conversation when I'm posting as a regular member. None of my posts violate the rules (since I know the rules inside out, being an admin), but I don't go around telling members that they should look up to my posts as exemplary while I'm talking to them. That would be unprofessional, condescending, and poor form.

Btw, you & I both don't criticize everything evil.
Despite this, no one should infer from this selective silence that we're
both OK with Timothy McVeigh's terrorism, burning of churches,
beatings of transsexuals, Ukranian invasion, or oppression in Tibet.

When two issues are brought up in the very same thread and you feel the need to speak out against one and ignore the other, it is clear that you have certain priorities, and I have already pointed out what those are.

 

[Flankerl]

If under investigation then why accusing without any evidences yet?

There has been enough testimony on the events. Stop whining.

I wonder where were the people while the women were undressed and raped.

Huh? Which people?

Standing and on the ground within the crowd.

Yeah really crazy huh?

 

[FearGod]

There has been enough testimony on the events. Stop whining.

How many person were celebrating in Cologne at that night?

Huh? Which people?

The one celebrating the new year event.

Yeah really crazy huh?

Which one is crazy? Standing or on the ground.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Caution measures doesn't mean ignoring the abusers.

Name one measure in this thread that focuses on how to educate people to stop abusing others and to understand what informed consent means.

Name. One.

Exactly, as some chose to be a Muslim and other to be an atheist, what's the problem
of the free choice of opinions regardless of what you think of it.

Have your opinion. I have mine. Guess what we're having? A debate. And ideas are free to be attacked on this forum.

There's this insidious notion, however, that ideas are not worthy of contempt. I disagree. There are people here who despise feminism, and share their contempt for it on a regular basis. This is allowable.

I say what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I hold rape apologetics with severe contempt and I share my thoughts on it here with just as much passion.

I will add, however, that for all the bickering here, pay attention to who in this debate is actually doing something outside of RF to alleviate the problem.

 

[Revoltingest]

What are you disagreeing with?

I've disagreed with a number of things.

I don't usually point out to members that they should follow the rules in the middle of a conversation when I'm posting as a regular member.

I too usually don't.
But as a regular member here, there are occasions where I find it worthwhile, even with friends.

None of my posts violate the rules (since I know the rules inside out, being an admin), but I don't go around telling members that they should look up to my posts as exemplary while I'm talking to them. That would be unprofessional, condescending, and poor form.

I recommended merely setting a positive example....not calling attention to oneself as such.
From rule #1....
" Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff."

Some posts here have been directly critical of the poster.
I gently advised avoiding this to another (a poster whom I like).

When two issues are brought up in the very same thread and you feel the need to speak out against one and ignore the other, it is clear that you have certain priorities, and I have already pointed out what those are.

You misunderstand my priorities, & then steer the discussion towards this straw ad hominem.
This thread should not be about me or any individual poster.
It should be about the posts & the issues.

Again....
" Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff."
Is this a good rule?
Should we all strive to practice it at all times?

 

[Debater Slayer]

I've disagreed with a number of things.

I too usually don't.
But as a regular member here, there are occasions where I find it worthwhile, even with friends.

I recommended merely setting a positive example....not calling attention to oneself as such.
From rule #1....
" Critique each other's ideas all you want, but under no circumstances personally attack each other or the staff."
Some posts here have been directly critical of the poster.
I gently advised avoiding this to another (a poster whom I like).

Oh man... that highlighted part speaks volumes. I don't think I need to comment much when something speaks for itself like this.

You misunderstand my priorities, & then steer the discussion towards this straw ad hominem.
This thread should not be about me or any individual poster.
It should be about the posts & the issues.
See the quoted portion of rule #1 above.
Is this a good rule?
Should we all strive to practice it?

Again with policing others' posts, this time mine.

For someone who urges others to focus on the issues and not the posters, you sure do seem quite focused on others and the tone of their posts.

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh man... that highlighted part speaks volumes. I don't think I need to comment much when something speaks for itself like this.

This is hard to understand.
It implies so much, while saying so little.

Again with policing others' posts, this time mine.
For someone who urges others to focus on the issues and not the posters, you sure do seem quite focused on others and the tone of their posts.

"Policing" is such a connotation loaded word.
This all started with my advising a friend, & then your objections to it followed.
When emotions run high, & we begin to stray from our mission, it seems useful
to try to get things back on track. You oppose this, as you've said many times.
We'll continue to agree to disagree.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This is hard to understand.
It implies so much, while saying so little.

"Policing" is such a connotation loaded word.
This all started with my advising a friend, & then your objections to it followed.
When emotions run high, & we begin to stray from our mission, it seems useful
to try to get things back on track. You oppose this, as you've said many times.
We'll continue to agree to disagree.

Same old, same old.

I'm done with this sidetracking. I have demonstrated what I wanted to demonstrate anyway.

 

[FearGod]

Name one measure in this thread that focuses on how to educate people to stop abusing others and to understand what informed consent means.

Name. One.

The OP about condemning the mayor advice which i disagree with, i see no problem with her advice.

This video is an example of an advice to be alert and to motivate women to report the assault.
Do you see it as wrong or blaming the women?

Have your opinion. I have mine. Guess what we're having? A debate. And ideas are free to be attacked on this forum.

There's this insidious notion, however, that ideas are not worthy of contempt. I disagree. There are people here who despise feminism, and share their contempt for it on a regular basis. This is allowable.

I say what's good for the goose is good for the gander. I hold rape apologetics with severe contempt and I share my thoughts on it here with just as much passion.

I will add, however, that for all the bickering here, pay attention to who in this debate is actually doing something outside of RF to alleviate the problem.

The mayor didn't blame the women but just asked them to be alert, whats wrong with it?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

The OP about condemning the mayor advice which i disagree with, i see no problem with her advice.

I do. It scapegoats survivors and acts as an apologist for the perpetrators (they're gonna try and rape anyway, so women try harder next time, is the gist).

Now answer my question. You claimed that giving caution to women doesn't mean ignoring the rapists. I think that claim needs to be backed up with how rapists are NOT being ignored in this thread for rape prevention.

Back your claim up, please. From this thread, and from posts that agree with the mayor's advice. I'll wait.

This video is an example of an advice to be alert and to motivate women to report the assault.
Do you see it as wrong or blaming the women?

We need better advocacy for survivors so we can report and find justice for the crime. That's REALLY difficult to do if we have to navigate through pushback like rape apologetics and "false rape accusations" being thrown in our faces from public and private spheres in society.

The mayor didn't blame the women but just asked them to be alert, whats wrong with it?

Scapegoating survivors and glossing over the crimes of the perpetrators while giving really lousy "advice" is what's wrong with it.