= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DaFranker comments on LW Women- Minimizing the Inferential Distance - 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 (1254)
Really? Is that the message I'm sending? Wow.
(in case of doubt: Not sarcastic)
I usually read enumeration statements of the form 'A or B or some other C', where C includes A and B, as "Here are two examples of C things to avoid confusion, and it's one of the C things". If I'm either not interpreting this right at all or I wasn't actually communicating this for some reason, I really want to know.
Well, "[Average Americans think that if a woman complains of a rape in some form, then] she probably deserved it, or is a weakling, or some other strong negative affect.""
I read that as that people make a negative judgement, of which be deserving or being a weakling is among them not uncommonly and is typical of the category in general.
If you wanted to demonstrate that the "deserved it" judgement was an outlier, I would expect some modifier or formulation like "[they consider...] that she's overplaying it, or some other negative effect, even seemingly that she deserved it somehow."
Unless you were trying to invoke this trope:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ArsonMurderAndJaywalking