= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eugine_Nier comments on I've had it with those dark rumours about our culture rigorously suppressing opinions - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (857)
I understand that law can be complicated, but you seem to endorse the following position:
That legal position is inconsistent with most other crimes (robbery is taking your property from you without consent - no violence element is included). I think criminalizing sex in the absence of consent is quite justified. I acknowledge that consent can have multiple meanings and that ambiguity must be resolved, but non-consent seems a complete justification for criminalization.
Additionally, the above theory seems likely to put the victim at risk of further harm - my understanding is that most police departments recommend not resisting (both rape and robbery) because of the risk that the criminal will do further injury.
False accusations are a problem for the criminal justice system in general. I can falsely accuse you of stealing money from me, or hitting me, or harassing me. If I tailor the explanation carefully, the police would have no reason to expect corroborating evidence. You deny the charge, and it comes down to relative credibility. I'm not saying this is ideal, but it is the best we can do in the absence of some kind of truth-oracle. Why is this a bigger problem for rape than other crimes?
As Instapundit points out here.
I think this nicely illustrates the problem with the definition of rape that feminists like yourself are pushing.
Yes, many feminist thinkers are epistemically unhealthy. That doesn't prove all or even a majority of feminists are anti-epistemic. Notice how the original advice columnist (on Slate.com - hardly an anti-feminist site) rejected the idea that the woman's experience was obviously rape. More importantly, she emphatically rejected the idea that attempting to withdraw consent after the sex is over is something that others should respect in any way.
I think you could have made this point without linking to Instapundit. If you don't want this thread to get totally mindkilled, perhaps it's better to leave out links to people who elicit highly polarized reactions from different political tribes.
I find it rude to quote people without linking to them.
I meant that quoting him was unnecessary; the idea is almost certainly not original to him anyway, so you could restate it in your own words.