In Interviews With 122 Rapists, Student Pursues Not-So-Simple Question: Why?

[Walkie]

ooh, El's  got three plusses (so far)  for the above
i like to keep an eye on the karma, cos it helps me find the good posts (it really does! though  not always, ofc. Sometimes it helps me rediscover the really annoying posts   )
and also,   sometimes, like today, it reassures me that I^2 is not brain-dead after all.
Go, El!

[Jack]

It is in a woman's best interests to see every guy as a potential rapist.

Don't think it's overly common for females to view all males as potential rapists. Though do believe it's common for females to view all females as potential rape victims. The latter is important and likely unavoidable in teaching/learning personal risk assessment; the former strikes as unhealthy.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

It is in a woman's best interests to see every guy as a potential rapist.

Don't think it's overly common for females to view all males as potential rapists. Though do believe it's common for females to view all females as potential rape victims. The latter is important and likely unavoidable in teaching/learning personal risk assessment; the former strikes as unhealthy.

The point is not to demonise every man as a potential rapist.

The reality is that most women are not attacked by random strangers or by acquaintances who have personality types or reputations which make them identifiable as potential rapists.

A woman may not, for example, accept a lift home from a colleague who has a reputation for trying to force himself onto women, or from a colleague who makes inappropriate jokes and comments about sexual violence. And that is wise. But that guy who is married with 3 kids or who seems charming and gentle..... they might not be so careful. And the reality is that a woman is just as likely, actually more likely, to find herself in a scary situation with a guy they thought they could trust than with a guy they felt they couldn't trust and so avoided allowing him the opportunity.

[Minister Of Silly Walks]

Oh  I  agree with all that, except that I'm very surprised by that 3% figure. that suggests to me that modern-day US is hugely better that Britain in the seventies and eighties!  My experience was that every girl/woman I ever talked with about it with had been groped without her consent on several occasions  by several different men.  The number of boys/men who were well-known to be to much too free free with their hands was closer to 50% than 3%. and that probably went up to 50% or more  when they were drunk.

That said, I moved in a number of radically different social circles , as it happens,  and I found  that  college kids  (who were largely middle-class, back then. That might have changed somewhat?) were , on average, a lot more civilised in their sexual behaviour than working-class men were.

Again, I suppose that goes to  reinforces the part that prevailing cultural attitudes play. You can't just dismiss culltural influences and put it all onto the individual, like Al does.

My first proper job, starting in 1984, was in a predominantly male office environment. Females would have been maybe 20% on average out of a workforce of about 40. But we did turn over quite a few staff so there were maybe a couple of dozen ladies who worked there during the time I worked there.

If you had run a survey of females who had been there more than a few months I would estimate that you would have been lucky to find one or two who had not been groped. Tall, short, old, young, pretty, not-classically-beautiful, fat, thin. It didn't matter, they (almost) all got groped.

What % of guys were participating in this groping? Just the one guy out of 30+. No HR in those days, of course, so if a female employee didn't appreciate the attention she could take it to his male boss who couldn't care less.

[Al Swearegen]

ooh, El's  got three plusses (so far)  for the above
i like to keep an eye on the karma, cos it helps me find the good posts (it really does! though  not always, ofc. Sometimes it helps me rediscover the really annoying posts   )
and also,   sometimes, like today, it reassures me that I^2 is not brain-dead after all.
Go, El!

When was it even remotely applicable that the forum membership may be braindead? Who falls into that illustrious category? (Don't say no one. If there was no one then it would not have taken El's post to placate your fears of the membership or some elements of it being braindead)

[Walkie]

ooh, El's  got three plusses (so far)  for the above
i like to keep an eye on the karma, cos it helps me find the good posts (it really does! though  not always, ofc. Sometimes it helps me rediscover the really annoying posts   )
and also,   sometimes, like today, it reassures me that I^2 is not brain-dead after all.
Go, El!

When was it even remotely applicable that the forum membership may be braindead? Who falls into that illustrious category? (Don't say no one. If there was no one then it would not have taken El's post to placate your fears of the membership or some elements of it being braindead)

oh! FFS , Al, you are really going out of your way to take offence at my posts, aren't you?
Just consider for a moment just how many members have complained abut the dearth of stimulating, intellifgent discussion on this forum? Scrap and Jack spring to mind, instantly.  Did you challenge them to name which  particular members are responsible for that sad state -of-affairs? Of course you didn't.  Because " braindead forum" is  clearly  a very different thing from "braindead membership"...unless it's Walkie who says it, and Al who reads it.
I 've been hoping against hope  that if just i stop talking to you, then your relentless campaign to force me to explain myself (or rather force me to agree agree that the point of my post was to  insult you, even if it wasn't) would just  tail off, for lack of fuel. Well, maybe it will work eventually.  So I'll shut up now and go back to hoping, if that's alright by you?  (or even if it isn't)

[Walkie]

No, hang on , I'll say one more thing: The last time I had people picking my words apart to hunt for the non-existent insult, and cross-examining me over every little syllable,  there was a reason for that. It was because some malicious rumours about me were circulating, behind the scenes, and those people believed the rumours.   But that was somewhere  else, and more than a decade ago.  I didn't think the same the thing would happen here,
However, much to my surprise, it has come to my attention that malicious rumours about Yours Truly are in circulation  again -  amongs members of I2!  I don't know the content, exactly, nor do I know how many people have given them credence and passed them on (probably not many at all)  But I do know they exist.
I am extremely hesirtant to put two-and-two together here, because I do believe it  would be totally out- of-character for Al to give credence to anything like that. But I can't help wondering can I?

[Lestat]

Shit, hun. I haven't seen any myself walkie, I will keep an eye out though. If we find them, given your mobility my dear, shall you pour the acid and I pour the rumor-monger down into the sewers? I do have a spare pair of goggles. And I do have a power saw (at least three of them actually), so I think we could get the job done pretty quick. We can use my bathtub too, since I never take a bath, now that since my mom was all fucked up before she barked her last, I have a walk-in shower. Would be the perfect place for the bits, once cut up into little segments like bites of steak, since they could marinate in a bath of 98% (strongest I have atm) H2SO4. We just root 'em out, tie 'em up and dip them slowly, toes first, to conserve my sulfuric acid.

[Walkie]

Shit, hun. I haven't seen any myself walkie, I will keep an eye out though. If we find them, given your mobility my dear, shall you pour the acid and I pour the rumor-monger down into the sewers? I do have a spare pair of goggles. And I do have a power saw (at least three of them actually), so I think we could get the job done pretty quick. We can use my bathtub too, since I never take a bath, now that since my mom was all fucked up before she barked her last, I have a walk-in shower. Would be the perfect place for the bits, once cut up into little segments like bites of steak, since they could marinate in a bath of 98% (strongest I have atm) H2SO4. We just root 'em out, tie 'em up and dip them slowly, toes first, to conserve my sulfuric acid.

Hey! Thanks for the back-up, Lestat !  but, I do tend to very much favour non-violent solutions , don't ya know?

[Lestat]

The solution would only be violent if water were added. Otherwise, the worst its likely to do is smell pretty foul and greasy until we go round the well-flushed out bath tub with a mop and some detergent. Once IN solution, they will stay there though. I can guarantee that much.  At least they will until it is time to pour them down the toilet and flush them away in portions. Can't imagine at that point any rumour-mongering dog-fellator or fellatrix is going to do any more kicking and screaming. And iron chains and duct tape can keep that down to a minimum, and then the chains can be dissolved and given the flush too. Problem solved.

Or rather, solvated.

[Calandale]

oh! FFS , Al, you are really going out of your way to take offence at my posts, aren't you?

I don't think so. It seems a pretty natural reaction. Especially given the site's history not of granting
thumbs for clever discussion so much as discussion which agrees with one's point of view (which was
likely the case for some of the other thumbers involved in this one - certainly was with me). Singling
a post out on that criteria is shallow; using it to insult everyone else's contributions mean spirited.
Why would you be surprised that people take your post that way?

[Walkie]

oh! FFS , Al, you are really going out of your way to take offence at my posts, aren't you?

I don't think so. It seems a pretty natural reaction. Especially given the site's history not of granting
thumbs for clever discussion so much as discussion which agrees with one's point of view (which was
likely the case for some of the other thumbers involved in this one - certainly was with me). Singling
a post out on that criteria is shallow; using it to insult everyone else's contributions mean spirited.
Why would you be surprised that people take your post that way?

well, at least you take it as an insult to everyone else's contributions. I'm [retty damned  sure that Al read it as a snide attack on himself. And I'm really getting sick of him of doing that.  It;'s been a problem  for months on-and-off.

 I read your karma comment Cal.  You called El's post "nuanced" , which was the exact same thing that impressed me about El's post , though I tried to put it in different words, rather than look like a copy-cat.  So I'm surprised to hear you say, now, that  you were merely agreeing with her POV.. I guess I read  rather too much into that word? I thought you were plussing that post for the exact same reason I did. *shrug*

.But nuanced it is, and we don't get an awful lot of that sort of thing on this forum, but I'm sure  it's mostly   because people just can't be arsed ., not because they can't think . In fact, we haven't been getting much intelligent discussion at all, as numerous  people have observed, though I do think it's on the up , lately.  And i like to show my appreciation for that

I didn't "single the post out just   because it got three thumbs-ups  or rarther two (excluding mine) , though i can see how my reply could be read that way.  I was just navigating by karma , when I found it, like I said  (actually, a lazy way of catching most of the intersting post when I don't have time to read everything.  Often disappointing, as I said, cos it casts to wide a net, and still misses some good bits. But hey ho. I do find others' reactions intersting, anyway, so there's a bonus.

  I  surely don't slavishly agree  with popular opinion! (I'm more often accused of the opposite  *chuckle* ) But I was genuinely  pleased that other people liked Elle's post for the same reaon I did (or so it seemed)

I know karma is relatively meaningless, but, still,  a lot  of us do quite often give positive karma for totally sincere reasons, self included

Anyway, the real  point was that  Elle's post was a breath of fresh air. Not the only breath of fresh air on this forum, nor even on this thread. I've plussed a whole bunch of other posts, from a bunch of opther posters  for the same reason, as you ought to know, cos you were one of the people I plussed! So why the heck would i suiddenly want to insult all those people now?  I didn't intend to insult anybody at all, just referring to an oft-repeated complaint about this place.

Now, I'm willing to explain myself in great detail to yiou , Cal. cos you haven't aggressively demanded explanations, then demanded explanations for the explananation, and so in, until it's practically a full-time job, and clearly a futile endeavour.

I'm very sorry if you, or anybody else  ( with one exception) read an unintended insult into my post. I really didn't expect that!

But, here's the exception: I'm not sorry if Al did, because he does that all the time, and  I'm past caring . I'll just be happy if he leaves me alone.   

[Calandale]

well, at least you take it as an insult to everyone else's contributions. I'm p[retty damned sure sure that Al read it as a snide attack on himself. And I'm really getting sick of him of doing that.  It;'s been a problem  for months on-and-off.

 I read your karma comment Cal.  You called El's post "nuanced" , which was the exact same thing that impressed me about El's post , though I tried to put it in different words, rather than look like a copy-cat.  So I'm surprised to hear you say, now, that  you were merely agreeing with her POV.. I guess I read  rather too much into that word? I thought you were plussing that post for the exact same reason I did. *shrug*

I meant what I said. But, if it didn't agree with my own stance, I'm not sure I would've plussed it. It was a more detailed
and nuanced version of what I stated concisely.

I didn't "single the post out just   because it got three thumbs-ups  or rarther two (excluding mine) , though i can see how my reply could be read that way.  I was just navigating by karma , when I found it, like I said  (actually, a lazy way of catching most of the intersting post when I don't have time to read everything.  Often disappointing, as I said, cos it casts to wide a net, and still misses some good bits. But hey ho. I do find others' reactions intersting, anyway, so there's a bonus.

Indeed it does miss a lot. Because of the way folk thumb here. It will also likely create ideological bias.

I know karma is relatively meaningless, but, still,  a lot  of us do quite often give positive karma for totally sincere reasons, self included
post for the reason I did- or so I thought!)

The real problem with karma is that it serves too many meanings. So, any reasonable usage for it becomes muddied.

So why the heck would i want to insult those people now?  I didn't intend to insult anybody at all, just referring. an oft-repeated complaint about this place.

I don't think it was intentional. I think the tone managed to come across that way. My reaction was a brief moment of
"ah...so El gets the credit for what I spake." Unlike Al though, I just didn't worry about it. Figured some folk needed more
fleshing out to 'get' things. Then, re-reading it, it seemed derogatory to the forum as a whole. And well, I wanted to register
my own reaction then, because it seemed less personal once I read Al's objection.

I'm very sorry if you, or anybody else  ( with one exception) read an unintended insult into my post. I really didn't expect that!

No biggie. I don't much mind insults anyhow - just what seem like inconsistent statements.
In fact, if you had ignored Al's tldr statement, I wouldn't have gotten involved at all. 

[Pyraxis]

My reaction was a brief moment of
"ah...so El gets the credit for what I spake." Unlike Al though, I just didn't worry about it. Figured some folk needed more
fleshing out to 'get' things.

Read to me like her post was inspired by yours, in the natural flow of conversation.

I think obsessing over karma is silly, though I admit to checking mine sometimes, cause it's useful to know what people did and didn't enjoy reading. 

[Calandale]

My reaction was a brief moment of
"ah...so El gets the credit for what I spake." Unlike Al though, I just didn't worry about it. Figured some folk needed more
fleshing out to 'get' things.

Read to me like her post was inspired by yours, in the natural flow of conversation.

Yes. But inspired in fleshing out some details from her own experience. I'm not saying that my
initial feeling about Walkie's post was particularly justified mind you.

I think obsessing over karma is silly, though I admit to checking mine sometimes, cause it's useful to know what people did and didn't enjoy reading. 

I like to masturbate to mine.