Surely this is news;
The first monkey shot into space
http://picks.yahoo.com/picks/i/20060930.html
In the News
Freedom: True and False
An article about the Muslim religion - more confirmation about why zero tolerance to this religion is essential to truth.
When North Korea Falls
Interesting, mostly because it shows the patheticness of masculinity, the side of masculinity that the QRS find convenient to ignore. If Nth Korea causes the world problems, it is purely because of the masculinity of its leaders (which the QRS have falsely redefined as feminine - they count all negative masculine traits as being feminine).
An article about the Muslim religion - more confirmation about why zero tolerance to this religion is essential to truth.
When North Korea Falls
Interesting, mostly because it shows the patheticness of masculinity, the side of masculinity that the QRS find convenient to ignore. If Nth Korea causes the world problems, it is purely because of the masculinity of its leaders (which the QRS have falsely redefined as feminine - they count all negative masculine traits as being feminine).
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Naturally, only a woman could appreciate another woman.
I think, James, you are driven more by egoistic fear and hatred than by a love of truth.
Take a moment to breathe this in:
...deeper...
And then consider this:
I think, James, you are driven more by egoistic fear and hatred than by a love of truth.
Take a moment to breathe this in:
...deeper...So what the Islamic system has done is usurped the place of God in the lives of its believers. It has made a spiritual God unnecessary (unnecessary?). The Islamic system is all one needs to know and obey. One must memorize the fixed words of the Qur’an, but knowing God as a living spiritual being is not required. It is not even considered. Muslims may only look forward to lives of bitter self-denial or lives culminating in self-annihilation.
...deeper...
And then consider this:
.The actual faith adventure of finding God, being liberated by His love and growing to know Him is denied them. The freedom Muslims are promised is of course entirely delusional [snip]
-
sue hindmarsh
- Posts: 1083
- Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2005 9:02 am
- Location: Sous Le Soleil
Here's news of a new product being made for all those hen-pecked husbands out there – The Remember Ring. It’s a wedding ring that is programmed to start heating up 24 hours before your wedding anniversary. Giving ‘hubby’ just enough time to buy his darling wife a present, and thereby allowing him to experience his wedding anniversary in a more pleasant way - instead of his usual ‘near-death experience’, because of it having “slipped his mindâ€.
The ring will heat to around 49C for 10 seconds – but will not burn.
Ain't love great!?!
-
Sue
The ring will heat to around 49C for 10 seconds – but will not burn.
Ain't love great!?!
-
Sue
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
From the national news here:
No more detail was given. I think that remark is interesting because women are often portrayed as victim of their own fundamentalist society, but what exactly is their own role in fueling that same society? Aren't they the ones organizing the social aspect, education, raising children?The increasing radicalization amongst Muslim youngsters (...) Also it's remarkable that increasingly more suggestible teenagers (16 and 17 years), including kids of Turkish descent, are orbiting the radical networks, in where women appear to be more often the driving force behind the religious radicalizing.
Posting this because I'm convinced that there is a direct link between enlightenment, or a persons desire to seek philosophical understanding, and the brain abnormality that causes autism. Such people, and engineer types, would be at lower end of the autism spectrum disorder - "almost normal but not quite" - not enough to prevent learning and development, but enough to make one desire greater order so as to avoid inappropriate emotional reactions to experiences. As such people spend more time with themselves, learning capability would actually be enhanced, except in relation to social interaction skills.
I think that in order to become enlightened one must do something to the amygdala, with just the power of the brain, in order not to desire emotional experiences. Perhaps repeated instructions from memory to the amygdala instructing it to ignore emotional cues, causes it to whither over time.
Broken Mirrors: A Theory of Autism
"When a person looks at the world, he or she is confronted with an overwhelming amount of sensory information--sights, sounds, smells, and so on. After being processed in the brain's sensory areas, the information is relayed to the amygdala, which acts as a portal to the emotion-regulating limbic system. Using input from the individual's stored knowledge, the amygdala determines how the person should respond emotionally--for example, with fear (at the sight of a burglar), lust (on seeing a lover) or indifference (when facing something trivial). Messages cascade from the amygdala to the rest of the limbic system and eventually reach the autonomic nervous system, which prepares the body for action. If the person is confronting a burglar, for example, his heart rate will rise and his body will sweat to dissipate the heat from muscular exertion. The autonomic arousal, in turn, feeds back into the brain, amplifying the emotional response. Over time, the amygdala creates a salience landscape, a map that details the emotional significance of everything in the individual's environment.
Our group decided to explore the possibility that children with autism have a distorted salience landscape, perhaps because of altered connections between the cortical areas that process sensory input and the amygdala or between the limbic structures and the frontal lobes that regulate the resulting behavior. As a result of these abnormal connections, any trivial event or object could set off an extreme emotional response--an autonomic storm--in the child's mind. This hypothesis would explain why children with autism tend to avoid eye contact and any other novel sensation that might trigger an upheaval. The distorted perceptions of emotional significance might also explain why many children with autism become intensely preoccupied with trifles such as train schedules while expressing no interest at all in things that most children find fascinating.
...Investigators have found that nearly one third of children with autism have had temporal lobe epilepsy in infancy, and the proportion may be much higher given that many epileptic seizures go undetected. Caused by repeated random volleys of nerve impulses traversing the limbic system, these seizures could eventually scramble the connections between the visual cortex and the amygdala, indiscriminately enhancing some links and diminishing others. In adults, temporal lobe epilepsy results in florid emotional disturbances but does not radically affect cognition; in infants, however, the seizures may lead to a more profound disability.
I think that in order to become enlightened one must do something to the amygdala, with just the power of the brain, in order not to desire emotional experiences. Perhaps repeated instructions from memory to the amygdala instructing it to ignore emotional cues, causes it to whither over time.
Broken Mirrors: A Theory of Autism
"When a person looks at the world, he or she is confronted with an overwhelming amount of sensory information--sights, sounds, smells, and so on. After being processed in the brain's sensory areas, the information is relayed to the amygdala, which acts as a portal to the emotion-regulating limbic system. Using input from the individual's stored knowledge, the amygdala determines how the person should respond emotionally--for example, with fear (at the sight of a burglar), lust (on seeing a lover) or indifference (when facing something trivial). Messages cascade from the amygdala to the rest of the limbic system and eventually reach the autonomic nervous system, which prepares the body for action. If the person is confronting a burglar, for example, his heart rate will rise and his body will sweat to dissipate the heat from muscular exertion. The autonomic arousal, in turn, feeds back into the brain, amplifying the emotional response. Over time, the amygdala creates a salience landscape, a map that details the emotional significance of everything in the individual's environment.
Our group decided to explore the possibility that children with autism have a distorted salience landscape, perhaps because of altered connections between the cortical areas that process sensory input and the amygdala or between the limbic structures and the frontal lobes that regulate the resulting behavior. As a result of these abnormal connections, any trivial event or object could set off an extreme emotional response--an autonomic storm--in the child's mind. This hypothesis would explain why children with autism tend to avoid eye contact and any other novel sensation that might trigger an upheaval. The distorted perceptions of emotional significance might also explain why many children with autism become intensely preoccupied with trifles such as train schedules while expressing no interest at all in things that most children find fascinating.
...Investigators have found that nearly one third of children with autism have had temporal lobe epilepsy in infancy, and the proportion may be much higher given that many epileptic seizures go undetected. Caused by repeated random volleys of nerve impulses traversing the limbic system, these seizures could eventually scramble the connections between the visual cortex and the amygdala, indiscriminately enhancing some links and diminishing others. In adults, temporal lobe epilepsy results in florid emotional disturbances but does not radically affect cognition; in infants, however, the seizures may lead to a more profound disability.
PM condemns sheik's sex sermon
"Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly's reported comments, made in a Ramadan sermon, compared women who wore make-up and dressed immodestly to meat that attracted cats.
He blamed women who "sway suggestively" and who wore make-up and no hijab (Islamic scarf) for sexual attacks.
"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?" he said.
Poster on another non-philosophy forum: [Time for the sheik to p*** off out of here.... and pack him off with as many of his mates as possible, preferably in a shipping container.
Many years ago a beautiful young nurse called Anita Cobby was brutally murdered by a gang of predators. The teenage boys involved in the DVD - recorded attack on a young girl are probably just misunderstood young fellas out having a good time. I wonder if that was the case with the boys who grew to be (cowardly) men and murdered Anita by throwing her into a dam and leaving her to drown?
Like **** they are!]
Another Poster: [Yep time for Australia to shake off the sheik. Like the article stated..if the head of the Anglican or Catholic church made the same statement hed be out of a job straight away.]
Me: To be honest I agree with the sheik to some extent on the central point.
IMO, immodestly dressed women do provoke sexual attacks. No doubt about it at all, really.
Sexuality is the strongest of our animal drives, and most men constantly think of sex. Sexuality is by far the most useful tool that an attractive woman can use to influence men for her own advantage. Its the old joke - why does a dog lick its balls? - because it can. And so it is for women. The angry reaction of women to comments about blantant displays of sexuality is rabid, because if such comments were listened to, they might lose a valuable tool of manipulation.
The thing people have to remember is that with the formation of the s.l.u.t concept in an off-balanced mind, or more commonly a male gang mind, then a kind of misogeny comes about over a period of time. A resentment to womens sexuality develops, and when sexual desires for the most desirable women, are not met, then some males will turn to abuse of those females that can be controlled, and some will ****, harm and murder.
If women themeselves decided to dress more modestly, the world would be a better place for both sexes. They won't however, because young attractive females will always be in demand, by older manipulative males, and will be lead into overt displays of szexuality. Sex sells.
Poster repsonding [Jim, you are full of crap. You want women to hide behind their clothes and scarves so men don't have to fight their sexual urges? I am the father of three daughters - they are not sub-human members of society, they have a right to feel comfortable and dress the way they choose and they certainly should feel safe in our 'civilised' society. The majority of men respect women but unfortunately the media and music industry is doing its hardest to objectify women as sex objects for male consumption. Society is ignoring it and as a result we have a generation of young males who see young girls as desirable objects to possess and abuse. God knows what sort of society we will have in a decade or two when the young nimrods with your attitude grow up and breed their own little sex offenders. Your attitude is disgusting.]
Me: To be honest I do not think the majority of men really
do respect women. I would regard you as a misogynist, because you are patronising - you judge women by lower standards to men. You judge women by the value you obtain from them, sex, companionship, care, their ability to bind people together, paternal style control that sates your ego, and so on. Yuo just choose to ignore their emotional irrationality.
Poster: [The majority of men respect women but unfortunately the media and music industry is doing its hardest to objectify women as sex objects for male consumption]
Women buy just as much as a result of this sexualization as men.
Poster: [God knows what sort of society we will have in a decade or two when the young nimrods with your attitude grow up and breed their own little sex offenders]
You need to blame yourself, then.
Poster: [Okay, I think it's time you got some help Jim... there's a loose wire in your brain. When it's fixed, come back and re-read your posts.]
Me: that you cannot see what I mean does not mean it is wrong. Though in terms of "what is best for the future", I certainly could be wrong.
I guess even that doesn't matter that much anyway. When the technology becomes good enough, both men and women will end up having more virtual sex than any other kind anyway.
Another Poster: Good to see that the Islamic councils of both Vic and NSW have condemed Sheik tosspot for his comments and have called for his resignation]
Me: Of course they would - it harms their politics. Most muslims would actually agree with him. He stuffed up by taking it too far when he mentioned the hijab.
I'm not of course denying that the Sheik has his own selfish male dominance reasons for saying such things.
"Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly's reported comments, made in a Ramadan sermon, compared women who wore make-up and dressed immodestly to meat that attracted cats.
He blamed women who "sway suggestively" and who wore make-up and no hijab (Islamic scarf) for sexual attacks.
"If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it ... whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?" he said.
Poster on another non-philosophy forum: [Time for the sheik to p*** off out of here.... and pack him off with as many of his mates as possible, preferably in a shipping container.
Many years ago a beautiful young nurse called Anita Cobby was brutally murdered by a gang of predators. The teenage boys involved in the DVD - recorded attack on a young girl are probably just misunderstood young fellas out having a good time. I wonder if that was the case with the boys who grew to be (cowardly) men and murdered Anita by throwing her into a dam and leaving her to drown?
Like **** they are!]
Another Poster: [Yep time for Australia to shake off the sheik. Like the article stated..if the head of the Anglican or Catholic church made the same statement hed be out of a job straight away.]
Me: To be honest I agree with the sheik to some extent on the central point.
IMO, immodestly dressed women do provoke sexual attacks. No doubt about it at all, really.
Sexuality is the strongest of our animal drives, and most men constantly think of sex. Sexuality is by far the most useful tool that an attractive woman can use to influence men for her own advantage. Its the old joke - why does a dog lick its balls? - because it can. And so it is for women. The angry reaction of women to comments about blantant displays of sexuality is rabid, because if such comments were listened to, they might lose a valuable tool of manipulation.
The thing people have to remember is that with the formation of the s.l.u.t concept in an off-balanced mind, or more commonly a male gang mind, then a kind of misogeny comes about over a period of time. A resentment to womens sexuality develops, and when sexual desires for the most desirable women, are not met, then some males will turn to abuse of those females that can be controlled, and some will ****, harm and murder.
If women themeselves decided to dress more modestly, the world would be a better place for both sexes. They won't however, because young attractive females will always be in demand, by older manipulative males, and will be lead into overt displays of szexuality. Sex sells.
Poster repsonding [Jim, you are full of crap. You want women to hide behind their clothes and scarves so men don't have to fight their sexual urges? I am the father of three daughters - they are not sub-human members of society, they have a right to feel comfortable and dress the way they choose and they certainly should feel safe in our 'civilised' society. The majority of men respect women but unfortunately the media and music industry is doing its hardest to objectify women as sex objects for male consumption. Society is ignoring it and as a result we have a generation of young males who see young girls as desirable objects to possess and abuse. God knows what sort of society we will have in a decade or two when the young nimrods with your attitude grow up and breed their own little sex offenders. Your attitude is disgusting.]
Me: To be honest I do not think the majority of men really
do respect women. I would regard you as a misogynist, because you are patronising - you judge women by lower standards to men. You judge women by the value you obtain from them, sex, companionship, care, their ability to bind people together, paternal style control that sates your ego, and so on. Yuo just choose to ignore their emotional irrationality.
Poster: [The majority of men respect women but unfortunately the media and music industry is doing its hardest to objectify women as sex objects for male consumption]
Women buy just as much as a result of this sexualization as men.
Poster: [God knows what sort of society we will have in a decade or two when the young nimrods with your attitude grow up and breed their own little sex offenders]
You need to blame yourself, then.
Poster: [Okay, I think it's time you got some help Jim... there's a loose wire in your brain. When it's fixed, come back and re-read your posts.]
Me: that you cannot see what I mean does not mean it is wrong. Though in terms of "what is best for the future", I certainly could be wrong.
I guess even that doesn't matter that much anyway. When the technology becomes good enough, both men and women will end up having more virtual sex than any other kind anyway.
Another Poster: Good to see that the Islamic councils of both Vic and NSW have condemed Sheik tosspot for his comments and have called for his resignation]
Me: Of course they would - it harms their politics. Most muslims would actually agree with him. He stuffed up by taking it too far when he mentioned the hijab.
I'm not of course denying that the Sheik has his own selfish male dominance reasons for saying such things.
What Kerry said Monday at a campaign rally was this: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq."
Kerry, as a generalisation, was perfectly correct.
It is sad to see the reaction. In the manner in which the Republicans use things like this, and the way the press carries on, is just animalistic. It is this reaction that creates a negative impact on the soldiers, not what Kerry said.
Kerry, as a generalisation, was perfectly correct.
It is sad to see the reaction. In the manner in which the Republicans use things like this, and the way the press carries on, is just animalistic. It is this reaction that creates a negative impact on the soldiers, not what Kerry said.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
Jamesh wrote:
If you check some research, I'm sure that you will find that rape is all about power and control, and has nothing to do with sexuality.
When I was barely 18 years old, I was in New York for my first semester of college. I was wearing olive drab jeans, a black shirt, an olive drab sweater with the hood up, a black trench coat, a black scarf, black earmuffs, black mittens, and black boots when I was sexually attacked. The whole thing lasted perhaps 12 hours. In the middle of the night, I asked him why he was doing this, and he told me that he was tired of his coworkers giving him a hard time because he was from the Middle East, and he wanted to "get back at America." My clothes had nothing to do with it.IMO, immodestly dressed women do provoke sexual attacks. No doubt about it at all, really.
If you check some research, I'm sure that you will find that rape is all about power and control, and has nothing to do with sexuality.
Many women around the world wear make-up and do not wear a hijab. As for swaying suggestively, female hips are built differently from male hips - so much so that the way to tell the difference between a male skeleton and a female skeleton is by if the angle in the pelvic region is greater than or less than 90 degrees. There is still variance, but the 90 degree point is the differentiation. Is a woman to be raped for her bone structure?He blamed women who "sway suggestively" and who wore make-up and no hijab (Islamic scarf) for sexual attacks.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
List of Rape Myths, U of M
a quote from the above link:
a quote from the above link:
Research data clearly proves that a way a woman dresses and / or acts does not influence the rapists choice of victims. His decision to rape is based on how easily he perceives his target can be intimidated. Rapists are looking for available and vulnerable targets.
Statistics were obtained from various sources including the study Rape in America, 1992, National Victim Center, The Federal Bureau of Investigations and the National Crime Survey.
Myth: Rape is a crime of passion.
Fact: Rape is an act of VIOLENCE, not passion. it is an attempt to hurt and humiliate, using sex as the weapon.
When I was barely 18 years old, I was in New York for my first semester of college. I was wearing olive drab jeans, a black shirt, an olive drab sweater with the hood up, a black trench coat, a black scarf, black earmuffs, black mittens, and black boots when I was sexually attacked. The whole thing lasted perhaps 12 hours. In the middle of the night, I asked him why he was doing this, and he told me that he was tired of his coworkers giving him a hard time because he was from the Middle East, and he wanted to "get back at America." My clothes had nothing to do with it.
You have a personal story about everything, don’t you! I’m almost certain you are have false or exaggerated memories – your detailed description of your clothing suggest this to me.
I think you exaggerate in order to make yourself more interesting to people, as a result of being picked on when young.
I’m not saying you are purposefully lying, after all rape is very common, but I am indicating that you do raise suspicions of bullshit in my mind.
If you check some research, I'm sure that you will find that rape is all about power and control, and has nothing to do with sexuality.
You have not phrased this very well. It has as much to do about sexuality as it has power and control. Power and control are part of any sex act, not just rape – they are just too closely intermingled to be separable in such a black and white fashion. Undoubtedly rapists do have a stronger, perhaps irrepressible, desire to exercise power over others, but really, if they were getting sex regularly with women they liked, then they would not be out raping. The dude you mentioned raped you would be a terrorist instead :).
Of course, there would be a percentage who rape more or less purely for the power trip or the thrill of the hunt and capture, but even so the causes that occurred as the person was growing up, would be primarily sexual in nature.
You have a personal story about everything, don’t you! I’m almost certain you are have false or exaggerated memories – your detailed description of your clothing suggest this to me.
I think you exaggerate in order to make yourself more interesting to people, as a result of being picked on when young.
I’m not saying you are purposefully lying, after all rape is very common, but I am indicating that you do raise suspicions of bullshit in my mind.
If you check some research, I'm sure that you will find that rape is all about power and control, and has nothing to do with sexuality.
You have not phrased this very well. It has as much to do about sexuality as it has power and control. Power and control are part of any sex act, not just rape – they are just too closely intermingled to be separable in such a black and white fashion. Undoubtedly rapists do have a stronger, perhaps irrepressible, desire to exercise power over others, but really, if they were getting sex regularly with women they liked, then they would not be out raping. The dude you mentioned raped you would be a terrorist instead :).
Of course, there would be a percentage who rape more or less purely for the power trip or the thrill of the hunt and capture, but even so the causes that occurred as the person was growing up, would be primarily sexual in nature.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
I have said before that I have been through more levels of hell than most people have imagined.Jamesh wrote:You have a personal story about everything, don’t you!
I’m almost certain you are have false or exaggerated memories – your detailed description of your clothing suggest this to me.
You have no background in psychology, and have not bothered to do your background research before formulating your opinions. More stressful memories are formed in such a way as to make them much more clear, much more vivid, and much more complete (hence, the "flashback" phenomenon of PTSD).
I was picked on when I was young, but none of this is an exaggeration. Your response is not uncommon though - when people reach a point of stress overload, or if someone's experience is so far away from the preconceived notions of "possible" for an individual, they simply stop believing. I know that I am speaking the truth, and I am not attached to what you or anyone else thinks.I think you exaggerate in order to make yourself more interesting to people, as a result of being picked on when young.
Ah, so not only did you refuse to do the research before forming your opinion, you either did not do any research after either or you are simply too attached to the idea of being right to look for the truth.You have not phrased this very well. It has as much to do about sexuality as it has power and control. Power and control are part of any sex act, not just rape – they are just too closely intermingled to be separable in such a black and white fashion. Undoubtedly rapists do have a stronger, perhaps irrepressible, desire to exercise power over others, but really, if they were getting sex regularly with women they liked, then they would not be out raping.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
more links
James,
You don't have to believe me if you don't want to, but it is important to me that you learn the truth of what rape is all about. Spreading lies - however unintentionally - is harmful. Believeing that rape is about sex, or that how women dress has anything to do with rape, could be very damaging to someone else out there. I don't care about this for me, but I do care about it for the truth and I do care about it for whoever you might encounter in the offline world either who has been raped or who is considering raping someone and is looking for an excuse to justify in his own mind whether or not to do that.
The Rape Crisis Center for Children and Adults FAQ sheet
Boston Area Rape Crisis Center Myth/Fact sheet
Medline
Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape
PCAR FAQ
Santa Barbara Rape Crisis Center
Brisbane Rape & Incest Survivors Support Centre Myth & Fact sheet (this one goes so far as to suggest that rapists deliberatly spread lies like the ones you are spreading just to perpetuate the myths that allow rape to continue)
All of the above respectable organizations, and many more, reflect what I told you.
Brisbane Rape & Incest Survivors Support Centre
This last one gives tips on how to respond if someone you know gets raped. It is better to be aware of these sorts of things in advance of having to deal with them "up close and personal" rather than your friend or whoever talk to you and you have no idea how to respond - or worse, respond in a way that would be further damaging to him/her in a time when he/she is already vulnerable. The sheet talks as if it is a female victim, but guys get raped too.
James, I'm glad that you brought this up and that you responded to me in such a way that I would be aware that you did not know these things. Sometimes I get some backlash about being so open (which is why so many people keep their mouths shut) but if I can help spread some awareness to those who need to know, or somehow my life can be of some comfort to those who can not share that they, too went through something like this, then that is okay. Rape happens to boys, too - and I would not be in the least surprised if one or more of the guys here went through being victimized by a rapist. Only three of my male friends who I have ever known have mentioned to me that they were raped, and it is much harder for a male to admit that than a female, so I suspect that the statistics are even higher on guys than ever get reported anywhere.
You don't have to believe me if you don't want to, but it is important to me that you learn the truth of what rape is all about. Spreading lies - however unintentionally - is harmful. Believeing that rape is about sex, or that how women dress has anything to do with rape, could be very damaging to someone else out there. I don't care about this for me, but I do care about it for the truth and I do care about it for whoever you might encounter in the offline world either who has been raped or who is considering raping someone and is looking for an excuse to justify in his own mind whether or not to do that.
The Rape Crisis Center for Children and Adults FAQ sheet
Boston Area Rape Crisis Center Myth/Fact sheet
Medline
Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape
PCAR FAQ
Santa Barbara Rape Crisis Center
Brisbane Rape & Incest Survivors Support Centre Myth & Fact sheet (this one goes so far as to suggest that rapists deliberatly spread lies like the ones you are spreading just to perpetuate the myths that allow rape to continue)
All of the above respectable organizations, and many more, reflect what I told you.
Brisbane Rape & Incest Survivors Support Centre
This last one gives tips on how to respond if someone you know gets raped. It is better to be aware of these sorts of things in advance of having to deal with them "up close and personal" rather than your friend or whoever talk to you and you have no idea how to respond - or worse, respond in a way that would be further damaging to him/her in a time when he/she is already vulnerable. The sheet talks as if it is a female victim, but guys get raped too.
James, I'm glad that you brought this up and that you responded to me in such a way that I would be aware that you did not know these things. Sometimes I get some backlash about being so open (which is why so many people keep their mouths shut) but if I can help spread some awareness to those who need to know, or somehow my life can be of some comfort to those who can not share that they, too went through something like this, then that is okay. Rape happens to boys, too - and I would not be in the least surprised if one or more of the guys here went through being victimized by a rapist. Only three of my male friends who I have ever known have mentioned to me that they were raped, and it is much harder for a male to admit that than a female, so I suspect that the statistics are even higher on guys than ever get reported anywhere.
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Jamesh is quite on target here. Sexuality is at the core regulation of power, status and control issues in any group where there are sexes involved. When this regulation becomes disturbed or decreased in potential, other forms arise even while they would be at times hardly effective or functional, even self-destructive, one should not deny their roots because of that.Jamesh wrote:You have not phrased this very well. It has as much to do about sexuality as it has power and control. Power and control are part of any sex act, not just rape – they are just too closely intermingled to be separable in such a black and white fashion. Undoubtedly rapists do have a stronger, perhaps irrepressible, desire to exercise power over others, but really, if they were getting sex regularly with women they liked, then they would not be out raping. The dude you mentioned raped you would be a terrorist instead :).Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:If you check some research, I'm sure that you will find that rape is all about power and control, and has nothing to do with sexuality.
Of course, there would be a percentage who rape more or less purely for the power trip or the thrill of the hunt and capture, but even so the causes that occurred as the person was growing up, would be primarily sexual in nature.
Most people rather talk about the healthy psychological effects and feelings of well-being that consensual sex provides for all participants. That's only the surface issue though, on a 'need to know' basis.
In psychology that's strongly debated and cannot be raised even as some consensus fact. The recent two decades with the rise in incest and (alien/satanic) abduction memories have given voice to opposite research: that the vividness and detail of memories have hardly relation at all to their accuracy, and only show a relation to the emotional charge around the topic.Elizabeth Isabelle wrote:You have no background in psychology, and have not bothered to do your background research before formulating your opinions. More stressful memories are formed in such a way as to make them much more clear, much more vivid, and much more complete (hence, the "flashback" phenomenon of PTSD).
I think you misunderstood Jamesh, or otherwise I understood the idea differently: when looking into what sexuality is under the hood & cape, rape becomes clearly a sexual act. But that doesn't make the act of rape in any way acceptable or forgivable but perhaps it puts sex in a less romantic context. That this goes against the current myth of the majority needs no explanation.Elizabeth Isabelle wrote: Believeing that rape is about sex, or that how women dress has anything to do with rape, could be very damaging to someone else out there.
.
Diebert writes:
I remember well the projects of the 70s feminists who began this verbal pivot with the word "power" with regard to rape. "It's not about sex; it's about power," they said. In many regards, this is talking around the issue of power and who has it or who should be using it in the case of [avoiding] rape. It also wipes away the need for rising consciousness in women with regard to their own behaviour.
A few of these feminists also declared that 'original' copulation in early humans was definitively "rape" the way we know it today. The assumption is that we porked like animals did from behind, prior to the missionary style brought forth from civilization. Early human men were not likely bringing flowers to early human women or putting on some Lionel Ritchie to get them in the mood.
However, Jamesh's original post is rife with unconscious bad faith. You caused me to rape you is an example of misplaced blame and does not account for the millions of men who can control themselves consciously around sexual provocation. It is also full of the flavor of the skewed worship of the cause-and-effect core of enlightenment so prevalent here. Such a submissive devotion does nothing to promote the development of consciousness and awareness; it hands over the work of the rising mind to reactivity and simpleton-ism.
This is true of provocatively dressed women as well. They live in a culture that affords them a singular-value standard: bodily service to the species in all of its forms (sex, sexual value, birthing, butt-wiping, food-making, house-cleaning, etc). Women shall be in bad faith as well if they insist that they are only doing what the culture has caused them to do, thus handing over the work of the rising consciousness to reactivity and simpleton-ism.
Cause and effect are fundamental and fine things of which to be fully aware. But human consciousness possesses the unique nature of becoming -- like Heraclitus's river -- and it possesses the capacity for rising awareness in this becoming -- the conscious participation in cause and effect. Blank reactivity to stimuli, as in Jamesh's argument, is the death and end of this process; it is exactly the door shutting on what is potentially an open-ended thing.
.
Diebert writes:
I am in tentative agreement with Diebert here. Will to Power is will to life; neat separations will not illuminate the pathology of this.Jamesh is quite on target here. Sexuality is at the core regulation of power, status and control issues in any group where there are sexes involved. When this regulation becomes disturbed or decreased in potential, other forms arise even while they would be at times hardly effective or functional, even self-destructive, one should not deny their roots because of that.
I remember well the projects of the 70s feminists who began this verbal pivot with the word "power" with regard to rape. "It's not about sex; it's about power," they said. In many regards, this is talking around the issue of power and who has it or who should be using it in the case of [avoiding] rape. It also wipes away the need for rising consciousness in women with regard to their own behaviour.
A few of these feminists also declared that 'original' copulation in early humans was definitively "rape" the way we know it today. The assumption is that we porked like animals did from behind, prior to the missionary style brought forth from civilization. Early human men were not likely bringing flowers to early human women or putting on some Lionel Ritchie to get them in the mood.
However, Jamesh's original post is rife with unconscious bad faith. You caused me to rape you is an example of misplaced blame and does not account for the millions of men who can control themselves consciously around sexual provocation. It is also full of the flavor of the skewed worship of the cause-and-effect core of enlightenment so prevalent here. Such a submissive devotion does nothing to promote the development of consciousness and awareness; it hands over the work of the rising mind to reactivity and simpleton-ism.
This is true of provocatively dressed women as well. They live in a culture that affords them a singular-value standard: bodily service to the species in all of its forms (sex, sexual value, birthing, butt-wiping, food-making, house-cleaning, etc). Women shall be in bad faith as well if they insist that they are only doing what the culture has caused them to do, thus handing over the work of the rising consciousness to reactivity and simpleton-ism.
Cause and effect are fundamental and fine things of which to be fully aware. But human consciousness possesses the unique nature of becoming -- like Heraclitus's river -- and it possesses the capacity for rising awareness in this becoming -- the conscious participation in cause and effect. Blank reactivity to stimuli, as in Jamesh's argument, is the death and end of this process; it is exactly the door shutting on what is potentially an open-ended thing.
.
However, Jamesh's original post is rife with unconscious bad faith. You caused me to rape you is an example of misplaced blame and does not account for the millions of men who can control themselves consciously around sexual provocation. It is also full of the flavor of the skewed worship of the cause-and-effect core of enlightenment so prevalent here.
I still don't see anything wrong with my original post. Your response is too "out there" or indirect for me to take much notice.
We are not really talking about the billions of men that can control themselves, but those that can't. Mind you, I reckon at least 70% of hetero men would rape women, if dangers or penalties for such actions were non-existent (non-existent for a males whole life - not just all of a sudden).
Seeing as you ladies seem to want to pretend I was saying "dress/act sexually = an invitation for sex = excuse for rape", perhaps I should have been clearer about the progressive psychological resentment and anger build-up in a rapists brain, that occurs as a result of sexual frustration. You both just seem to want to ignore this reality.
In some ways it is the same as a woman who goes loopy because she can't get a partner - I am speaking about the progressive build-up of internal hurt caused by the continual stoking of the fire by blatant displays of sexuality by women.
In the animal world displays of sexuality by females are understood by the males to be an invitation for potential sex. Humans are not sufficiently advanced to be over this, though many are and in many others our ego's suggest we should be, and this comment is proven by all the other forms of harmful emotions we still have.
In some males this frustration will build up and like a caged animal it will attack any "Woman" who matches the cause of the frustration in the first place. The cage does not have to be purely a sexual one - it can come from being ostracised by the herd. If say for example a gang of young Leb wolves are running around being loud and provocative, they will attract negative reactions from society, which causes a perceived discriminatory boundary between them and others, and they may begin to feel entrapped by others, they begin to feel caged in. Some event may occur to cause anger, blatant racism for example, and they may end up releasing that anger on any member of society. With women however there is sexual lust, a perceived gratification reward, so they will be frequently chosen as targets for ad hoc revenge via rape.
Above I used the common media example in recent times in Sydney, but all sorts of different cages of frustration, in which there is a sexual relationship, will exist in different people. Even say an overbearing over-protective needy mother of a single male child can cause aberrant behaviour later in life. Women may start to find they can USE this beaten male, who automatically obeys the wishes of women, but deep down he may feel outraged by being subservient and he may someday lash out in a hysterical reaction, and rape women.
I still don't see anything wrong with my original post. Your response is too "out there" or indirect for me to take much notice.
We are not really talking about the billions of men that can control themselves, but those that can't. Mind you, I reckon at least 70% of hetero men would rape women, if dangers or penalties for such actions were non-existent (non-existent for a males whole life - not just all of a sudden).
Seeing as you ladies seem to want to pretend I was saying "dress/act sexually = an invitation for sex = excuse for rape", perhaps I should have been clearer about the progressive psychological resentment and anger build-up in a rapists brain, that occurs as a result of sexual frustration. You both just seem to want to ignore this reality.
In some ways it is the same as a woman who goes loopy because she can't get a partner - I am speaking about the progressive build-up of internal hurt caused by the continual stoking of the fire by blatant displays of sexuality by women.
In the animal world displays of sexuality by females are understood by the males to be an invitation for potential sex. Humans are not sufficiently advanced to be over this, though many are and in many others our ego's suggest we should be, and this comment is proven by all the other forms of harmful emotions we still have.
In some males this frustration will build up and like a caged animal it will attack any "Woman" who matches the cause of the frustration in the first place. The cage does not have to be purely a sexual one - it can come from being ostracised by the herd. If say for example a gang of young Leb wolves are running around being loud and provocative, they will attract negative reactions from society, which causes a perceived discriminatory boundary between them and others, and they may begin to feel entrapped by others, they begin to feel caged in. Some event may occur to cause anger, blatant racism for example, and they may end up releasing that anger on any member of society. With women however there is sexual lust, a perceived gratification reward, so they will be frequently chosen as targets for ad hoc revenge via rape.
Above I used the common media example in recent times in Sydney, but all sorts of different cages of frustration, in which there is a sexual relationship, will exist in different people. Even say an overbearing over-protective needy mother of a single male child can cause aberrant behaviour later in life. Women may start to find they can USE this beaten male, who automatically obeys the wishes of women, but deep down he may feel outraged by being subservient and he may someday lash out in a hysterical reaction, and rape women.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
James wrote:
If so, that makes it all the more important to not spread the lies about how to blame women for the rapes. It gives more of that 70% a reason to think that they have a good chance at getting away with it.
There was a study done - surveys of college guys I think - and the results were pretty close to that - I think it was higher than 70%, but I don't remember. I thought it might just be the age, but are you saying that most guys of any age are like that? Are most guys just little more than animals that ought to be caged up or kept on a short leash?We are not really talking about the billions of men that can control themselves, but those that can't. Mind you, I reckon at least 70% of hetero men would rape women, if dangers or penalties for such actions were non-existent (non-existent for a males whole life - not just all of a sudden).
If so, that makes it all the more important to not spread the lies about how to blame women for the rapes. It gives more of that 70% a reason to think that they have a good chance at getting away with it.
Elizabeth Isabelle wrote: There was a study done - surveys of college guys I think - and the results were pretty close to that - I think it was higher than 70%, but I don't remember. I thought it might just be the age, but are you saying that most guys of any age are like that? Are most guys just little more than animals that ought to be caged up or kept on a short leash?
There was also a study done showing that 75% of men would stop a woman from getting raped.
Seems a bit of a contradiction and I suspect both sides are lying.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
I'd believe that one too. That's the "knight in shining armor" side coming through. The appearant contradiction could be summarized as "I'd do it if I could get away with it, but I'm not letting anybody else get away with it." I don't see it so much of a contradiction regarding the male self, rather I see it as a morality/ego issue. He wants to rape, he wants to be a hero, "he wants" is the issue as he wants these things for himself. The larger issue is that rape is wrong - but he isn't looking at it as an enlightened being - he's looking at it from the WIIFM (what's in it for me) perspective - as an animal.Rory wrote:There was also a study done showing that 75% of men would stop a woman from getting raped.
I hate the US Supreme court. They are the most powerful political party support group in the world. Their decisions create lasting trends in the rest of the world. Trends that almost always involve protection of corporations. I have no doubt that the court is criminal, by weight of its bias ever since its inception to the protection of established power groups.
Time for a change to this system if you ask me.
Supreme Court Sides With Philip Morris
Nov 27 11:53 AM US/Eastern
The Supreme Court on Monday sided with Philip Morris USA, refusing to disturb a court ruling that threw out a $10.1 billion verdict over the company's "light" cigarettes.
The court issued its order without comment.
Last year, the Illinois Supreme Court threw out the massive fraud judgment against Philip Morris, a unit of the Altria Group Inc., in a class-action lawsuit involving "light" cigarettes. Because the Federal Trade Commission allowed companies to characterize their cigarettes as "light" and "low tar," Philip Morris could not be held liable under state law even if the terms it used could be found false or misleading, the state court said.
The case involved 1.1 million people who bought "light" cigarettes in Illinois. They claimed Philip Morris knew when it introduced such cigarettes in 1971 that they were no healthier than regular cigarettes, but hid that information and the fact that light cigarettes actually had a more toxic form of tar.
An Illinois judge ruled in favor of the smokers in March 2003, saying the company misled customers into believing they were buying a less harmful cigarette.
A separate case involving Philip Morris is pending before the Supreme Court. Justices are considering whether to allow a $79.5 million punitive damages award to the widow of a longtime smoker from Oregon.
Time for a change to this system if you ask me.
Supreme Court Sides With Philip Morris
Nov 27 11:53 AM US/Eastern
The Supreme Court on Monday sided with Philip Morris USA, refusing to disturb a court ruling that threw out a $10.1 billion verdict over the company's "light" cigarettes.
The court issued its order without comment.
Last year, the Illinois Supreme Court threw out the massive fraud judgment against Philip Morris, a unit of the Altria Group Inc., in a class-action lawsuit involving "light" cigarettes. Because the Federal Trade Commission allowed companies to characterize their cigarettes as "light" and "low tar," Philip Morris could not be held liable under state law even if the terms it used could be found false or misleading, the state court said.
The case involved 1.1 million people who bought "light" cigarettes in Illinois. They claimed Philip Morris knew when it introduced such cigarettes in 1971 that they were no healthier than regular cigarettes, but hid that information and the fact that light cigarettes actually had a more toxic form of tar.
An Illinois judge ruled in favor of the smokers in March 2003, saying the company misled customers into believing they were buying a less harmful cigarette.
A separate case involving Philip Morris is pending before the Supreme Court. Justices are considering whether to allow a $79.5 million punitive damages award to the widow of a longtime smoker from Oregon.
Kid shoots himself at school
Kid shoots himself at school
This is only interesting because the shooting occurred at the high school that is about one mile from my house. When I was living with a woman, her daughter went to that high school.
Philadelphia itself has had over 380 homicides this year, mostly with guns.
This is only interesting because the shooting occurred at the high school that is about one mile from my house. When I was living with a woman, her daughter went to that high school.
Philadelphia itself has had over 380 homicides this year, mostly with guns.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
The article does not give very coherent information. They related some bare facts about what this kid did, and threw in some other shooting stories, but it didn't really relate all of its information together.
Yes, lots of people shoot people nowadays, and teenagers do commit suicide, sometimes with guns. I don't mean to sound too "ho-hum" about this, but it is just the state of affairs. As you said, it mostly sparked your interest because it was one mile from your house - but that is what commonplace means - it happens in your neighborhood, too.
Yes, lots of people shoot people nowadays, and teenagers do commit suicide, sometimes with guns. I don't mean to sound too "ho-hum" about this, but it is just the state of affairs. As you said, it mostly sparked your interest because it was one mile from your house - but that is what commonplace means - it happens in your neighborhood, too.
-
Elizabeth Isabelle
- Posts: 3771
- Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:35 am
Here David H - not just in high school but in nursing homes, too (also today's news, but fairly local to me - 30 minute drive).
Murder-Suicide at Pasco nursing home, Zephyrhills, Florida
30 minute's drive is a lot different than a mile (although people have been shot within a mile of my house, but my emphasis was on "this is an everyday occurrance."
Murder-Suicide at Pasco nursing home, Zephyrhills, Florida
30 minute's drive is a lot different than a mile (although people have been shot within a mile of my house, but my emphasis was on "this is an everyday occurrance."