|
This entire line of argument amounts to an insistence that rapists are not responsible for their actions, inventing a biological theory of war as a justification.
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You are claiming that rape is something that anyone would do and is a natural consequence of violence, so unless you are claiming to not be human yourself... I'm claiming that it's a thing some people do, for reasons I do not pretend to understand. You are the one who is yelling incoherently that everybody is a rapist (or nobody is, and nothing in between).
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:This entire line of argument amounts to an insistence that rapists are not responsible for their actions, inventing a biological theory of war as a justification. I'm sorry about your fantasy of war without victimization.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:55
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:This entire line of argument amounts to an insistence that rapists are not responsible for their actions, inventing a biological theory of war as a justification. Rapists are responsible for their personal actions during wars and those who perpetrate them are responsible for creating an environment where all crimes become exponentially more common. Though it is also undeniable that one's personality is not sheltered from its external conditions, and that changes in conditions and incentives cause changes in behaviour. Which is however just an extenuating circumstance, just like growing up as an orphan would be one for a thief, not an argument for innocence and against punishment. Then again, war also makes punishment infinitely less likely, and does so inherently. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 17:02 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:I'm claiming that it's a thing some people do, for reasons I do not pretend to understand. You are the one who is yelling incoherently that everybody is a rapist (or nobody is, and nothing in between). Your efforts to clarify yourself lead to the argument that there is no connection between misogyny and rape. Typical of your ilk, o bohemian corporal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
So ultimately the blame lies both on personal pathologies of the culprits, and those whose cheering and scheming enabled the war, such as Effectronica.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:So ultimately the blame lies both on personal pathologies of the culprits, and those whose cheering and scheming enabled the war, such as Effectronica. Looks like I struck a nerve.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Your efforts to clarify yourself lead to the argument that there is no connection between misogyny and rape. Typical of your ilk, o bohemian corporal. You aren't even reading my posts anymore, why are you even bothering to respond. Maybe you are, however, a qualified expert on what causes people to rape, and could inform me first hand.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
"There's absolutely no reason to assume that there are rapists in the armed forces, and just thinking so makes you suspect, only a sick mind could conceive of such an unpatriotic thing" says Effectronica, as his country covers up another couple dozen cases of sexual assault by soldiers and cops.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
They were just a couple of bad apples!
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
"Rape culture isn't a thing that exists, and it has no social impacts," says a prominent feminist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
Well, steinrokkan, you hit on it exactly. As one of the gods and goddesses of war, I am responsible for all armed conflicts. When you get your rear end beaten in a bar for whining about PC culture run amuck, I am responsible. When Kingfish gets to cross-burnin' and then gets raided by the FBI, I am responsible. And I am not happy that you are displacing blame for your own crimes onto me and my cohort.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:"Rape culture isn't a thing that exists, and it has no social impacts," says a prominent feminist. You're the one insisting that rape culture doesn't exist, since you're claiming rape as a natural result of violence and conflict. Your propaganda efforts are clumsier than Pravda circa 1943. Indeed, your arguments are that is is not eliminatable, which is contrary to the notion of rape culture, which is understood as a phenomenon that can and must be destroyed. You, snaggletooth mcBrit, and mr. Grand Hobgoblin are very bad at understanding the things you wish to use for reactionary ends.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Rape can be eliminated because war can be eliminated. You think that war is an inevitable part of human society because you enjoy the fantasy of just war.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:22
|
|
|
The Kingfish posted:Rape can be eliminated because war can be eliminated. You think that war is an inevitable part of human society because you enjoy the fantasy of just war. So it was wrong to resist Nazism?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:So it was wrong to resist Nazism? are you actually retarded?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 19:00
|
|
|
JFairfax posted:are you actually retarded? You all are arguing that rape is an inevitable consequence of "war", which means that fighting back against the Nazis inevitably meant rape committed by the people defending. Thus, in order to eliminate rape, according to the Snaggletooth-Imperial Wizard brain trust, we cannot ever resist with violence against things if we don't want to be responsible for rapes happening. This is extremely stupid, but it was extremely stupid and malevolent people like you who developed it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:You all are arguing that rape is an inevitable consequence of "war", which means that fighting back against the Nazis inevitably meant rape committed by the people defending. Thus, in order to eliminate rape, according to the Snaggletooth-Imperial Wizard brain trust, we cannot ever resist with violence against things if we don't want to be responsible for rapes happening. This opinion may shock you, but the Nazis were bad for starting a war. The idea that the resistance at all instances clean and virtuous is false, but whatever injustices it produces were the product of Nazi aggression throwing entire countries into disarray and giving birth to toxic militarism / vigilantism. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 19:36
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:The bombing campaign did have an impact on German manufacturing, just not near as great as its proponents imagined or exaggeratedly reported. And the efforts later in the war to target oil production in Romania and synthetic fuel production were quite successful if I recall correctly. Though throughout the cost to bomber crews and planes was staggering, and area bombing and destroying morale became euphemisms for bombing what were largely residential areas. Immoral or not, and much of what happened in the war was immoral, you'd be a fool to disregard the bombing campaign as not having had any impact at all. Not only the luftwaffe but it also diverted 10ks of 88mm guns which could have being used as excellent anti-tank weapons on the eastern front. They were instead used as AA weapons defending the Reich vs allied bombers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 19:41
|
|
|
rudatron posted:Do I have to post the ww2 casualties by country graphs again? Okay, it's a criminal action, so what's wrong with aggressively prosecuting the rapists and all the people responsible? And what is wrong with my post? Rape is never committed in defense. It should be aggressively prosecuted. Allied commanders who let it happen should have been put on trial. Do you disagree with any of these three sentences? Soviet commanders did not need to allow rape to win the war, and therefore were complicit and should have been prosecuted as well. Flowers For Algeria fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 20:35
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:The idea that the resistance at all instances clean and virtuous is false To be fair, it was quite easy to interpret this as your argument three pages ago, and it's exactly what rudatron is explicitly preaching.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Okay, it's a criminal action, so what's wrong with aggressively prosecuting the rapists and all the people responsible? Absolutely nothing, but an army will never prosecute such crimes in earnest, because it's not how it is structured to work. There may be token concessions to decency as we see these days, but those are few and far between, and arguably the military apparatus fights against making them teeth and nails.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Absolutely nothing, but an army will never prosecute such crimes in earnest, because it's not how it is structured to work. There may be token concessions to decency as we see these days, but those are few and far between, and arguably the military apparatus fights against making them teeth and nails. So take it out of the hands of the army, change the laws to fit the situation, crush the reticent military apparatus, rely on outside observers, investigate every claim and prosecute every case. Make rapists afraid again. Sounds easy enough.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:45
|
|
|
Sounds easy if - the military isn't in collusion with the rest of the state - the military can't hide the truth and strongarm other institutions It's feasible in small armies that are pretty chill and not really all that important to the working of the country, but hardly in a country like the US, or during a major war.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:47
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Sounds easy if Sure sounds like you like coming up with reasons we as a society should go easy on rapists and give up!
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
Well, your can't do attitude certainly doesn't help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:48
|
|
|
stone cold posted:Sure sounds like you like coming up with reasons we as a society should go easy on rapists and give up! Exactly, a fight against militarism is practically a fight for mandatory rape. The military must be politically destroyed before civilian oversight can become a thing. Hell, you know what, I'm gonna say that military personnel having any political clout whatsoever is the chief reason why violence against civilians becomes permissible in militaries. Not just because of the personal activities of these people, but also because it allows the military a privileged position of maintaining institutions parallel to the civilian state and undermining the power of the latter. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Feb 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Exactly, a fight against militarism is practically a fight for mandatory rape. You seem real interested in denying the culpability of the red army, so I think that's why you're pro rape, hth
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Exactly, a fight against militarism is practically a fight for mandatory rape. All right, let's do both - smash the military's hold on civilian power, and prosecute military rapes and other war crimes. Now, keeping in mind that this is not an is, but an ought question: don't you agree that the Allied (American as well as Soviet) command, as well as individual soldiers, should have faced trial back at home for the war crimes they committed in the liberation of Europe?
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:This opinion may shock you, but the Nazis were bad for starting a war. The idea that the resistance at all instances clean and virtuous is false, but whatever injustices it produces were the product of Nazi aggression throwing entire countries into disarray and giving birth to toxic militarism / vigilantism. Okay, so we're back to rapists not having responsibility for their actions. steinrokkan posted:Exactly, a fight against militarism is practically a fight for mandatory rape. Okay, so in other words, rape is the product of the existence of professional militaries, without which "war" cannot happen. I think that this opinion solely exists so you can wring your hands and weep about how your febrile honky nation is so much better than evil AmeriKKKans but not actually feel any sort of responsibility towards ending rape and sexual assault, by placing the possibility of doing so well outside any likelihood of ever occurring.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Wait, I think that there's a great alternate solution - if you don't want to bother doing all the "hard" stuff such as actively investigating and prosecuting rapes, you can simply ban all men from serving in the armed forces.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:All right, let's do both - smash the military's hold on civilian power, and prosecute military rapes and other war crimes. They should have! But my point has been, and I don't know how to express it in any clearer terms, that the state-military complex has many incentives not to deal with it, and very few incentives to tackle the issues, which is a grounds for a strong anti-military push in today's politics. Because just hoping that violence can be remedied within the constraints of the system is wishful thinking.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Wait, I think that there's a great alternate solution - if you don't want to bother doing all the "hard" stuff such as actively investigating and prosecuting rapes, you can simply ban all men from serving in the armed forces. Again, I'm not convinced that more soldiers are latent rapists (or criminals of any sort) than the average person, they are just in a position where expressing this pathology is easier or outright encouraged / required to fit in. The problem is with the disjointed realities of the concept of a military vs. the civil society. Biopower is very much a thing, and it exists to serve the military, to the detriment of all other beings. Brainiac Five posted:Okay, so we're back to rapists not having responsibility for their actions. You are the worst, and please stop responding to me with these retarded "arguments". It's interesting how the notion of understanding criminals and seeking their rehabilitation is generally seen as a worthwhile endeavor (few posters on these forums would argue that reconciliatory justice programs or the Scandinavian model of restorative criminal justice are worse than conventional retributive justice), but in this particular case any sort of sociological approach to a problem gets flagged as EVIL because it disregards idealist notions of what people should be like, and challenges abstract notions of human nature based on whitewashed history. steinrokkan fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Feb 18, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:You are the worst, and please stop responding to me with these retarded "arguments". It's interesting how the notion of understanding criminals and seeking their rehabilitation is generally seen as a worthwhile endeavor (few posters on these forums would argue that reconciliatory justice programs or the Scandinavian model of restorative criminal justice are worse than conventional retributive justice), but in this particular case any sort of sociological approach to a problem gets flagged as EVIL because it disregards idealist notions of what people should be like, and challenges abstract notions of human nature based on whitewashed history. You're also engaging in abstract notions of human nature, bucko. This is cuttlefish argumentation, throwing up a cloud of ink to distract from your unwillingness to engage with any criticism you don't like. For example,. I've said nothing about what is to be done in response to rape as a crime, you're just throwing out some slanderous propaganda. Your argument that rape is located in the existence of militaries is absurd, your probably intended argument that rape is just something that happens with hierarchy is anti-feminist, and the whole thing amounts to a claim about human nature- that we cannot get people to stop raping without eliminating any form of authority in society, almost as if you were a teenage anarchist hot off Crimethinc. Now, maybe you are simply stupid enough to not think about any of your beliefs long enough to understand why I might make these posts, and maybe you simply don't care about communicating coherently when you've got to keep the fire alive against the PC-SJW tyrants like me, but I don't really loving care.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 03:19
|
|
|
Flowers For Algeria posted:Okay, it's a criminal action, so what's wrong with aggressively prosecuting the rapists and all the people responsible? Until you acknowledge that context, you are not seriously discussing the issue. Furthermore, by treating allied and nazi commanders as the same, you're saying that the two contexts are the same, which is emphatically not the case. There is no comparison between nazi commanders and allied commanders. In my view, Russian, American and British leadership did the best they could have reasonably done, in prosecuting a war that they didn't start.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:17
|
|
|
rudatron posted:If you can find proof that an individual soldier committed a rape, then you should prosecute that, because they committed a criminal action. But when it comes to the commanders, you're arguing negligence, which necessarily entails taking into account the constraints they were operating under. I've tried repeatedly to get you to acknowledge these constraints, yet you and others keep stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that, instead opting to keep pretend that the eastern front was some kind of gentlemanly picnic, where clearly issues of limited resources and the viability of policing/prosecution (to the extent that you seem to want) didn't matter. I acknowledge the context and dismiss it as irrelevant, since there are no extenuating circumstances to crimes against humanity such as wartime mass rapes. Incontrovertible crimes against humanity such as mass rapes deserve to be prosecuted, no matter who the perpetrator is. Keep in mind that I am not treating allied and nazi commanders the same. I am prosecuting some for the crime against humanity that was the war of agression against the rest of Europe, and all the crimes against humanity that followed on from it. The others, I am prosecuting for the crimes against humanity that followed on from their justified war against an agressor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:30
|
|
|
At no point did soviet leadership order or encourage rapes, they therefore did not commit a crime against humanity. You are arguing negligence, correct? That's not the same thing as arguing that the leadership perpetrated the war crimes themselves, ergo your entire premise (that war crimes are inexcusable) is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
Also lol, are you calling the soviet counteroffensive a war of aggression against the rest of europe? Because if so, you are legit a moron.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:35
|
|
|
rudatron posted:At no point did soviet leadership order or encourage rapes, they therefore did not commit a crime against humanity. You are arguing negligence, correct? That's not the same thing as arguing that the leadership perpetrated the war crimes themselves, ergo your entire premise (that war crimes are inexcusable) is irrelevant. a) The leadership was aware and did nothing to stop it, so I am arguing willful complicity. I am also fairly certain that they encouraged it, and there are grounds to believe that they did - the sheer scale of it, for one - so there also should at least be an investigation into their participation, yes. b) I'm not limiting myself to mass rapes. Crimes against humanity were ordered by Allied leadership, and they were passed down the chain of command and carried out. The number and extent of these crimes should have been investigated as such by a civilian international court, and the people deemed responsible should have been tried. rudatron posted:Also lol, are you calling the soviet counteroffensive a war of aggression against the rest of europe? Because if so, you are legit a moron. No I'm not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
"Did nothing to stop it" assumes a realistic and reasonable capacity to stop it, which means taking into account constraints of the system and the situation command was operating under. You, therefore, cannot dismiss context as irrelevant, as you admit to have done.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2017 08:53
|
|