Should a potential rape wictim be allowed to use deadly force?

[Archer]

First, I agree with Alceste on "should" language. It is found in this post above and in poll. I didn't just respond to poll. I responded to reasoning brought up in OP, and then submitted my "no" on the poll.

Secondly, I think the no side allows a lot more leeway in what a rape victim could do than what other side is suggesting. It's a nice little insult to insinuate that us who said no are advocating that the victim just lie there and enjoy it, because apparently that is epitome of our position. I'm sure that BS logic works for you, but let's be clear on where the BS lies.

You're essentially saying a woman should fight if in that position. Physically fight and resist. And with a 'should' statement in there, the logic is, if she doesn't, well then that's her own damn fault. She should've known better, done better. Fighting is only option that could work. She should fight. She has to.

I think fighting is one option and it could lead to escape. I don't think it ought to be ignored or ruled out completely, but if included, I think it needs to be understood that it carries repercussions. And I do think we get this, but to advocate this as "best way, and let's be done with this charade" is very poor reasoning. I also think because of the mindf**k that violence is, it gets to be a position that if you disagree with it, you are somewhere in vein of, weak, pathetic, loser type who simply doesn't understand way the world (really) works.

As a theist, I do ultimately think an appeal to God / Inner Spirit is something to at least consider if that situation ought to present itself. And therefore be advocated for in debate like this. We can sit here going back and forth, and in hypothetical give and take, I do understand that perceived actions speak louder than 'other.' Meaning, even if you otherwise believe in God, an example such as rape can be presented in hypothetical fashion where one can, rather easily conclude, that 'invisible God' will have absolutely no effect on that situation. I disagree and will have that debate, up to point. If the hypothetical is being pushed in such a way where 'there is no other way to look at situation but way one person wants things to be seen,' then in that hypothetical, perhaps God will have absolutely no impact.

For the people not so sure a God exists, or feel almost confident that She doesn't exist, then the alternatives to fighting rape victim become matter of psychology. I could see using these strategies first, as way to escape. Akin to presenting front where victim is like, "yes, I absolutely want this to happen" only to enable sense of control and then create outlet in opportune time later on. That would be alternative option, that may utterly fail, but if it did succeed would be possible non violent solution to otherwise violent situation. I do think there are other options, where God doesn't even need to be considered and could lead to escape / resolution.

As theist, I do think appeal to God would lead to invisible transaction which would potentially be made visible where rapist is 'suddenly not into it.' Not magically apologetic and wanting to seek redemption and light a candle vigil. But something realistic where rapist say vents anger on inanimate object, or two, and leaves situation on his (or her) own volition. This may happen without victim making the appeal, but I think a plausible defense mechanism would be this sort of appeal. And I think the more genuine it is, the more conviction it has, the better the chance of success. If say thought is, well I have that gun in the drawer downstairs, so just need to get to that, so I can plug this ******* with a few rounds to his chest, but in meantime, I'll appeal to God, in short order. Wait 3 seconds, oh well, that didn't work, so now violence is my only resort -- this to me would be poor way of appealing to God. And reality would show that mind was already made up, God will be ineffective while gun in drawer will be effective.

So near end of this post, I would just say for sake of debate / understanding reality of situation, realize that there is possibly several solutions that could resolve the situation, and in general there is the one that says, "violence of some sort here is answer," and one that understands, "this doesn't need to end violently, and I am empowered to effect that sort of change."

I realize violence / defense of physical self seems like the hypothetical best and/or most realistic way to resolve the situation, but I strongly believe it is likely to exacerbate the underlying problem and is also a call to weakness. Self defense (of the physical) kind is a call to weakness. I don't expect someone hearing this perhaps for first time to understand this, but the reality is you are already making your mind up if this is only way 'defense' looks to you. Only way you think 'strength' can be found. You are free to do it, free to go in that direction. Human made laws won't stop you, nor will human made consequences (or lack thereof) do anything of real consequence in relation to such a decision. If the mind is made up that the body or some other physical object is your best defense going into that situation, then so be it, and the consequences of that may not show up anytime soon, given the veil that has been pulled over actual seeing. At that level of 'sight' you can justify a whole bunch of violence and really, who the hell is going to stop you?

Other than your Self.

You see how they justify themselves.

I said first step is to escape and evade and prepare ranged weapon if you have one. it is also the best choice.

Next I said (assuming you did not get away and had to stop) ranged weapon because if they are close enough for you to hit then they are close enough to grab you.

Third fight like hell.

Shooting first is not a good option but if you are going to shoot don't shoot to kill just shoot to center of mass.

 

[Archer]

Cause violence is sometimes a good solution, yes?

The only option after they (the attacker) win a pursuit or have you cornered is what in your opinion?

Drop your pants, lift your skirt or undress and lay down (bend over) for them?

 

[waitasec]

Cause violence is sometimes a good solution, yes?

survival of the fittest...
not the survival of the vilest.

 

[MoonWater]

First, I agree with Alceste on "should" language. It is found in this post above and in poll. I didn't just respond to poll. I responded to reasoning brought up in OP, and then submitted my "no" on the poll.

Secondly, I think the no side allows a lot more leeway in what a rape victim could do than what other side is suggesting. It's a nice little insult to insinuate that us who said no are advocating that the victim just lie there and enjoy it, because apparently that is epitome of our position. I'm sure that BS logic works for you, but let's be clear on where the BS lies.

You're essentially saying a woman should fight if in that position. Physically fight and resist. And with a 'should' statement in there, the logic is, if she doesn't, well then that's her own damn fault. She should've known better, done better. Fighting is only option that could work. She should fight. She has to.

I think fighting is one option and it could lead to escape. I don't think it ought to be ignored or ruled out completely, but if included, I think it needs to be understood that it carries repercussions. And I do think we get this, but to advocate this as "best way, and let's be done with this charade" is very poor reasoning. I also think because of the mindf**k that violence is, it gets to be a position that if you disagree with it, you are somewhere in vein of, weak, pathetic, loser type who simply doesn't understand way the world (really) works.

As a theist, I do ultimately think an appeal to God / Inner Spirit is something to at least consider if that situation ought to present itself. And therefore be advocated for in debate like this. We can sit here going back and forth, and in hypothetical give and take, I do understand that perceived actions speak louder than 'other.' Meaning, even if you otherwise believe in God, an example such as rape can be presented in hypothetical fashion where one can, rather easily conclude, that 'invisible God' will have absolutely no effect on that situation. I disagree and will have that debate, up to point. If the hypothetical is being pushed in such a way where 'there is no other way to look at situation but way one person wants things to be seen,' then in that hypothetical, perhaps God will have absolutely no impact.

For the people not so sure a God exists, or feel almost confident that She doesn't exist, then the alternatives to fighting rape victim become matter of psychology. I could see using these strategies first, as way to escape. Akin to presenting front where victim is like, "yes, I absolutely want this to happen" only to enable sense of control and then create outlet in opportune time later on. That would be alternative option, that may utterly fail, but if it did succeed would be possible non violent solution to otherwise violent situation. I do think there are other options, where God doesn't even need to be considered and could lead to escape / resolution.

As theist, I do think appeal to God would lead to invisible transaction which would potentially be made visible where rapist is 'suddenly not into it.' Not magically apologetic and wanting to seek redemption and light a candle vigil. But something realistic where rapist say vents anger on inanimate object, or two, and leaves situation on his (or her) own volition. This may happen without victim making the appeal, but I think a plausible defense mechanism would be this sort of appeal. And I think the more genuine it is, the more conviction it has, the better the chance of success. If say thought is, well I have that gun in the drawer downstairs, so just need to get to that, so I can plug this ******* with a few rounds to his chest, but in meantime, I'll appeal to God, in short order. Wait 3 seconds, oh well, that didn't work, so now violence is my only resort -- this to me would be poor way of appealing to God. And reality would show that mind was already made up, God will be ineffective while gun in drawer will be effective.

So near end of this post, I would just say for sake of debate / understanding reality of situation, realize that there is possibly several solutions that could resolve the situation, and in general there is the one that says, "violence of some sort here is answer," and one that understands, "this doesn't need to end violently, and I am empowered to effect that sort of change."

I realize violence / defense of physical self seems like the hypothetical best and/or most realistic way to resolve the situation, but I strongly believe it is likely to exacerbate the underlying problem and is also a call to weakness. Self defense (of the physical) kind is a call to weakness. I don't expect someone hearing this perhaps for first time to understand this, but the reality is you are already making your mind up if this is only way 'defense' looks to you. Only way you think 'strength' can be found. You are free to do it, free to go in that direction. Human made laws won't stop you, nor will human made consequences (or lack thereof) do anything of real consequence in relation to such a decision. If the mind is made up that the body or some other physical object is your best defense going into that situation, then so be it, and the consequences of that may not show up anytime soon, given the veil that has been pulled over actual seeing. At that level of 'sight' you can justify a whole bunch of violence and really, who the hell is going to stop you?

Other than your Self.

So essientially your saying the best way to deal with such a situation is to "pray that god will intervene and save you." lol, please:areyoucra. I also find it interesting that you use the phrase "speaking as a theist" as if all people who believe in a god must also think this way. Well you know, I'm a theist too. And you know what, my gods say that if someone attacks you you fight back with all you have to protect yourself and your loved ones.

Your comments actually remind me of a joke about a man who was trapped on the roof of his house by a rising flood. He was praying to god to save him when a boat came by. The people on the boat told him to jump in so they could save him but he said no and that god would save him, so they left. Then a helicopter came for him and said the same thing. But again he reiterated that god would save him and refused to leave. Well when he finally drowned and stood in heaven before god he asked go "why didn't you save me?" and god said "I sent you a boat and a helicopter what more do you need?" Did you ever consider that perhaps god's method of intervening and saving you would be by giving you the means to save yourself?

and how in the world is self-defense a "weakness"? Even the pacifistic monks learned how to fight with deadly force in order to protect themselves and their temples from robbers.

 

[MoonWater]

Cause violence is sometimes a good solution, yes?

when being attacked violently it is often the ONLY solution.

 

[Alceste]

I have some close friends and an ex girlfriend who have been sexually assaulted, and I find it absolutely repulsive that anyone would try to downplay something as traumatic and brutal as rape. You try to dismiss someone beating, biting and forcing themselves upon a screaming, struggling victim as an "uncomfortable misunderstanding". Seriously, what's wrong with your head? But if she managed to suggestively defend herself, and the attacker happened to die as a result, that's "horrible" because you think it's better for a woman to endure a lifetime of emotional and psychological scars than it is for some worthless lowlife scumbag to die? Why should the arbitrary and undue value you place on their lives mean anything to anyone else? There is no justification for preventing a woman from defending herself or for punishing her for doing so. Your argument makes no rational sense. Why on earth should emphasis be placed on the assailant's well being above that of the victim's?

I am talking about what is by far the most common occurrence, statistically speaking, which is rape by a person the victim has some kind of relationship with. The odds that she is going to perceive her husband, grandfather, brother, boyfriend, study buddy or date as a worthless lowlife scumbag who deserves to die at the moment when such a perception would make the difference between rape and not-rape are zero. I am not "downplaying" the trauma of rape, I am trying to inject a small dose of realism into a thread where people are getting swept away by melodramatic fantasies of rape and retribution.

I'm also trying to discourage "blame the victim" thinking in all its forms.

 

[Alceste]

But they should not even do that according to some people because they could inadvertently hurt their attacker. What if they pick something up while resisting and kill the poor rapist? They have murdered that person. This seems to be how some people view this.

So in a world ruled by the no voters all people should lay down, give their attacker a breath mint and ask if they mind using a condom because any resistance could kill the attacker.

What a strange mentality you have - "if she's not willing to murder her boyfriend to avoid unwanted sex that's the same as saying "yes"."

 

[waitasec]

I am talking about what is by far the most common occurrence, statistically speaking, which is rape by a person the victim has some kind of relationship with. The odds that she is going to perceive her husband, grandfather, brother, boyfriend, study buddy or date as a worthless lowlife scumbag who deserves to die at the moment when such a perception would make the difference between rape and not-rape are zero. I am not "downplaying" the trauma of rape, I am trying to inject a small dose of realism into a thread where people are getting swept away by melodramatic fantasies of rape and retribution.

I'm also trying to discourage "blame the victim" thinking in all its forms.

i totally hear what you are saying.
in the moment of struggle no one has the foresight of what the consequences of their actions will be, speaking from a defensive POV. they are in the moment, struggling to survive.
a rape victim, if she does kill the *******, will also be subjected to the possibility of guilt afterwards because she knew the rapist, or she has some other empathetic feeling about how the jerk ruined everyones life. and by taking his life, her actions ultimately in response to his actions, affected those who are associated with the scumbag of that horrific moment.
the picture i see is not a maniacal laugh while shooting the rapist, it's a picture of 'how do i get out of this and who do you think you are for putting me in this position in the first place?'

 

[Archer]

What a strange mentality you have - "if she's not willing to murder her boyfriend to avoid unwanted sex that's the same as saying "yes"."

Jesus Christ help this person. Talk about taking something out of context.

If he is not willing to stop and tries to force her to have unwanted sex with him then she should use any means necessary and at her disposal to escape the situation.

We can not make exceptions for husbands or boyfriends. If we did it would simply be if you live with me I can preform any sexual act I want on you.

 

[darkstar]

I fully believe that if a woman/man is being raped that they have the right to defend themselves. If it leads to the rapist being seriously injured or killed, then it should be viewed as self defense. HOWEVER, I would note that police have stated on many occasions. A victim shouldn't fight back.
The reason is, when the victim fights back the rapist will be more forceful and aggressive. Rape is generally not about sex, but control. You fight back and you're taking control from the rapist meaning they're more likely to hurt you further or even kill.
It's an interesting question to be sure. On the one hand I wouldn't feel too sorry for a rapist that gets what he/she deserves. (Though hopefully they survive the encounter and learn some kind of lesson) But I would, however, feel sorry for a victim that fought back and died in the process.

 

[Acim]

So essientially your saying the best way to deal with such a situation is to "pray that god will intervene and save you." lol, please:areyoucra.

Nice spin. Here let me try it.

I also find it interesting that you use the phrase "speaking as a theist" as if all people who believe in a god must also think this way. Well you know, I'm a theist too. And you know what, my gods say that if someone attacks you you fight back with all you have to protect yourself and your loved ones.

So essentially your saying the best way to deal with such a situation is to "kill mfs who you disagree with, because you have a short fuse and violence is best solution ever made." Lol, please :areyoucra

Your comments actually remind me of a joke about a man who was trapped on the roof of his house by a rising flood. He was praying to god to save him when a boat came by. The people on the boat told him to jump in so they could save him but he said no and that god would save him, so they left. Then a helicopter came for him and said the same thing. But again he reiterated that god would save him and refused to leave. Well when he finally drowned and stood in heaven before god he asked go "why didn't you save me?" and god said "I sent you a boat and a helicopter what more do you need?" Did you ever consider that perhaps god's method of intervening and saving you would be by giving you the means to save yourself?

You forgot about the part in the parable, fitting in with your version of protection, where God sent a whole bunch of people after the helicopter came and one of them threw up a gun with 18,000 rounds of ammunition. Fortunately, there were exactly 18,000 people all around the house, and guy on top of the roof blew them all away. Shot them cold. They all stacked up and absorbed just enough water, that he was able to climb off the roof top and get to safety. All thanks to the gun and his use of force.

He later told God, thanks for telling me stories where violence is the answer. Some stupid people tried giving me a boat and a helicopter to get out of the situation in a non violent way, but I knew my God wouldn't do that. So, I intentionally waited for the gun to come, because that's what I was praying for, and you came through God. As always.

 

[Acim]

The reason is, when the victim fights back the rapist will be more forceful and aggressive. Rape is generally not about sex, but control. You fight back and you're taking control from the rapist meaning they're more likely to hurt you further or even kill.

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding.

:takeabow:

 

[Archer]

Nice spin. Here let me try it.



So essentially your saying the best way to deal with such a situation is to "kill mfs who you disagree with, because you have a short fuse and violence is best solution ever made." Lol, please :areyoucra



You forgot about the part in the parable, fitting in with your version of protection, where God sent a whole bunch of people after the helicopter came and one of them threw up a gun with 18,000 rounds of ammunition. Fortunately, there were exactly 18,000 people all around the house, and guy on top of the roof blew them all away. Shot them cold. They all stacked up and absorbed just enough water, that he was able to climb off the roof top and get to safety. All thanks to the gun and his use of force.

He later told God, thanks for telling me stories where violence is the answer. Some stupid people tried giving me a boat and a helicopter to get out of the situation in a non violent way, but I knew my God wouldn't do that. So, I intentionally waited for the gun to come, because that's what I was praying for, and you came through God. As always.

What is your solution? Sounds to me like you think they should not resist and just scream help.

 

[NeedingGnosisNow]

i know some rape victims that were permanently harmed by it. some suffer from something kinda like ptsd that soldiers get. i personally witnessed a friend of mine have a breakdown once that resembled having a nightmare while she was awake. all i could do was call her mom and brother to come over try to bring her back to reality cause it freaked me out. so i think lethal force should be used to keep this type of thing from happening to anyone

 

[Revoltingest]

Hey now, some rap is alright!

I just jest.
I even composed & posted (somewhere) my own rap verse....A Revolting Ode To Kwame Kilpatrick.

 

[Me Myself]

Jesus Christ help this person. Talk about taking something out of context.

If he is not willing to stop and tries to force her to have unwanted sex with him then she should use any means necessary and at her disposal to escape the situation.

We can not make exceptions for husbands or boyfriends. If we did it would simply be if you live with me I can preform any sexual act I want on you.

If this was the case it shuold be law to have a safe word o.o.

 

[Archer]

If this was the case it shuold be law to have a safe word o.o.

It should be.

 

[Alceste]

Jesus Christ help this person. Talk about taking something out of context.

If he is not willing to stop and tries to force her to have unwanted sex with him then she should use any means necessary and at her disposal to escape the situation.

We can not make exceptions for husbands or boyfriends. If we did it would simply be if you live with me I can preform any sexual act I want on you.

It's not "making exceptions", it's acknowledging the fact that a woman is not likely to want to hurt or kill her attacker in most sexual assaults because they have a personal relationship.

 

[Archer]

It's not "making exceptions", it's acknowledging the fact that a woman is not likely to want to hurt or kill her attacker in most sexual assaults because they have a personal relationship.

Understood. The problem is many times the blame is put on the woman in those cases and they feel helpless. I am no counselor but if it were me it would be the last time it happened.

Many will think of the children but the fact is if he has not got control enough to stop with you he may not be able to stop himself with the kids (beating not sexual) so he professional needs help and I and the kids would not be there for him.

 

[MoonWater]

I fully believe that if a woman/man is being raped that they have the right to defend themselves. If it leads to the rapist being seriously injured or killed, then it should be viewed as self defense. HOWEVER, I would note that police have stated on many occasions. A victim shouldn't fight back.
The reason is, when the victim fights back the rapist will be more forceful and aggressive. Rape is generally not about sex, but control. You fight back and you're taking control from the rapist meaning they're more likely to hurt you further or even kill.
It's an interesting question to be sure. On the one hand I wouldn't feel too sorry for a rapist that gets what he/she deserves. (Though hopefully they survive the encounter and learn some kind of lesson) But I would, however, feel sorry for a victim that fought back and died in the process.

So what the police think a woman should just lie there and take it?