Thoughts on this pyramid? Agree? Disagree?

[WiolentOne]

Basically context does matter, even when it comes to gang rape.

I maintain that gang rape is always wrong.

 

[Skulli]

That pyramid looks like a leftist delusion.

Unequal pay lol.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That is not what the pyramid is supposed to mean at all. It should have an explanation posted along with it, because a lot of people seem to think it's a sequence of actions or something.

General obstacle to discussing things here is that people get their backs up way prematurely and feel that they can't concede anything. A lot of people see that pic almost as an personal attack on them.

I think the basic observation in that pyramid is that norms are violated more easily when they're kind of adjacent to acceptable behavior. And that one isn't really disputed. Think in terms of something less charged. A place where traffic laws are taken extremely seriously is less likely to see really egregious violations than a place where they're taken as kind of loose suggestions. Agreeing with that doesn't imply that you want enforcement cameras all over the place.

 

[Rod1]

Certain parts of America do. Hollywood has a rape culture obviously as does the American contingent of the catholic church (and the catholic church at large).

Hollywood as a whole colludes to cover up rapes and sexual assaults and even laughs about it. The church has an actual system to protect rapists and ensure they always have new victims to prey upon.

You mean religion in general.

 

[RhinoRush]

General obstacle to discussing things here is that people get their backs up way prematurely and feel that they can't concede anything. A lot of people see that pic almost as an personal attack on them.

I think the basic observation in that pyramid is that norms are violated more easily when they're kind of adjacent to acceptable behavior. And that one isn't really disputed. Think in terms of something less charged. A place where traffic laws are taken extremely seriously is less likely to see really egregious violations than a place where they're taken as kind of loose suggestions. Agreeing with that doesn't imply that you want enforcement cameras all over the place.

We were actually having a pretty constructive discussion in here before you showed up.

 

[RhinoRush]

You mean religion in general.

I'm sure various religions have problems with it but I have a hard time anyone other than the catholics have an actual organized structure to protect child rapists and ensure their longevity.

Well, except islam. But that's more cultural that religous. I generally find most of the horrible stuff muslims do has little to do with their religion. They tend to just use islam as a shield to protect themselves when they do all parts of truly awful and despicable stuff from rape to terrorism and more.

 

[SammyPops]

The 'boys will be boys' one triggers me.

When my daughter was in grade 1 there was a little boy 'bullying' one of her friends and the above comment was made by another parent, and I was like wtf?

 

[RhinoRush]

The 'boys will be boys' one triggers me.

When my daughter was in grade 1 there was a little boy 'bullying' one of her friends and the above comment was made by another parent, and I was like wtf?

Just wait till she gets to high school and the girls start bullying each other over boys. We've basically accepted girls bullying each other to death as part of normal life.

 

[SammyPops]

Just wait till she gets to high school and the girls start bullying each other over boys. We've basically accepted girls bullying each other to death as part of normal life.

I have a few more years, so stop stressing me out.

 

[Rod1]

I'm sure various religions have problems with it but I have a hard time anyone other than the catholics have an actual organized structure to protect child rapists and ensure their longevity.

Well, except islam. But that's more cultural that religous. I generally find most of the horrible stuff muslims do has little to do with their religion. They tend to just use islam as a shield to protect themselves when they do all parts of truly awful and despicable stuff from rape to terrorism and more.

You would be surprised.

At least the Catholic church is trying to fix that issue at this point, you would be amazed at what evangelicals and other religions do without anyone supervising.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think "white privilege" is another one. I understand aspects of it, but the overuse makes people denounce it entirely.

We could make a list of like 20 such terms pretty easily I think. Terms that have some truth to them, and can be supported with logically and intellectually honest evidence. But when things are overused or exaggerated, it creates a group that opposes the very idea of it, which I think is also a bad thing.

I'm rambling, but do you know what I mean? Lately I've been saying that conversations need to be honest from the start in order to go anywhere, because I think that's one of the main things causing divisiveness. If something starts with an exaggeration or complete dismissal (of something that is somewhere in between), it quickly goes off the rails.

Amen. And that's the comparison I thought of. I'm not sure what utility the concept of "white privilege" has. Depends on the context, I guess. But people take it as a personal insult, and deny obvious stuff because of that, and discussions are derailed from the start.

 

[Rod1]

I'd rather be murdered than gang raped.

This is actually the mentality behind stoning women in the middle east.

Gulf arabs would rather kill their daughters than living with the shame of being the parent of the gang raped girl.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

On another note,


I somewhat lean to what @Devout Pessimist has said…especially regarding the emasculating/neutering of men in western nations.

It seems that, almost all violence perpetrated by men, is pigeon holed into the stupid new buzz term, “toxic masculinity.”

Like Devout said, back in the good ole days, a rapist, child molester getting his ass kicked used to be applauded, or men defending their women, or women in general used to be lauded….

Now, we have a movement, and/or belief that extol the virtues of “women independence” or women saying, “I don’t need you to fight my fights for me, I can defend myself!”

And do agree with a certain degree with feminists on this...you shouldn’t need men to hold your hand, and no, you don’t always need a white knight to swoop in and save you…

However, men who do, do this shouldn’t be condemned and branded as chauvinist pigs either.

I don’t mean to go all @IDL here…but there are times where I believe there is a conspiracy to curb the birth rate in western nations by completely emasculating men, introducing new genders, stating that there is no biological difference between men and women, etc

Now I’m rambling.

 

[Rod1]

Both gang rape and murder should be punishable by death.

No, i dont think so, it depends on the context, for both crimes.

 

[RhinoRush]

This is actually the mentality behind stoning women in the middle east.

Gulf arabs would rather kill their daughters than living with the shame of being the parent of the gang raped girl.

That's the rationale they give but really it's punitive. We have the same thing with sikhs and muslims in Canada. Their daughters embarrass them somehow so they put them in the trunk and roll their car into a canal.

Like I said above, the religious reasons are just cover for people being shitty.

 

[Renard]

The graph doesn't mean anything, you could draw your own random graph right now, it would have no more or less scientific validity i.e. none.

They haven't established any causal relationship that engaging in the bottom actions prompts people into actions at the top of the pyramid. They haven't established that there's this supposed culture of rape in society, seeing as rape is widely reviled and considered one of the worst crimes, and the actions at the bottom and middle of the pyramid are widely considered socially unacceptable or reprehensible. Most criminals are on the extreme end of low trait agreeableness i.e. their psychopathic traits are baked into their personality and no amount of social justice re-education will change their behaviour. Most actions at the bottom of the pyramid, I would say, are caused by any combination of 1) disagreeable temperament, 2) negative schemas about women (chauvinism), 3) dysfunctional personality, 4) poor socialization. Again, none of this is societal wide, in fact men who engage in the lower and middle pyramid actions would be considered very poor specimens compared to an ideal western male representation.

 

[RhinoRush]

You would be surprised.

At least the Catholic church is trying to fix that issue at this point, you would be amazed at what evangelicals and other religions do without anyone supervising.

Yes and mormons etc.

But if you really read into how deep it goes in the catholic church, it's just ridiculous.

 

[Tycho- Taylor's Version]

I think we get into a habit of using intense language to describe things, and the intense language makes it a bit divisive.

For example, the term "rape culture" fits that description. I understand what people mean when they use it, and I think they have a lot of good points. I've also seen people exaggerate it, which turns rational people off to the idea.

I think "white privilege" is another one. I understand aspects of it, but the overuse makes people denounce it entirely.

We could make a list of like 20 such terms pretty easily I think. Terms that have some truth to them, and can be supported with logically and intellectually honest evidence. But when things are overused or exaggerated, it creates a group that opposes the very idea of it, which I think is also a bad thing.

I'm rambling, but do you know what I mean? Lately I've been saying that conversations need to be honest from the start in order to go anywhere, because I think that's one of the main things causing divisiveness. If something starts with an exaggeration or complete dismissal (of something that is somewhere in between), it quickly goes off the rails.

Pretty much. I don't think this trend is inherent to the words themselves though, which don't seem especially confrontational to me, but rather part of the life cycle of politicized language.

"Rape culture" and "white privilege" could have been generated by well-meaning, nuanced sources, but the combination of fanatic supporters over-applying it and knee-jerk skeptics dismissing it eventually render it useless for productive conversation. This either ends the conversation or forces a re-branding of the general point.

 

[Rod1]

That's the rationale they give but really it's punitive. We have the same thing with sikhs and muslims in Canada. Their daughters embarrass them somehow so they put them in the trunk and roll their car into a canal.

Like I said above, the religious reasons are just cover for people being shitty.

Of course, religion didnt popped out of nowhere, it most likely codified the cultural norms of the time.

They are called honor killings for a reason, a lot of people wont accept it, but they would rather be a widower than being married to a woman that was trained by 20 young black gangbangers.

 

[Rod1]

Yes and mormons etc.

But if you really read into how deep it goes in the catholic church, it's just ridiculous.

The catholic church on the virtue of being much larger of course is seen as worse, not to mention that they tried to sweep it under the rug due to politics and image.

They completely deserve all they get.