^ I think the bigger concern related to that is if different people get grouped together when their offences are vastly different in degree and number.
If one person has a long rap sheet, and the employers order it to emphasize the most serious offences, then that's different.
The 'me too' movement
Moderator: bbmods
Some twitter comments referred to above:
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 9828218881
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 8432894976
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 4169447424
His defence of paedophilia seems to be that he was a victim but it was a "harmless experience".
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 9828218881
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 8432894976
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/stat ... 4169447424
His defence of paedophilia seems to be that he was a victim but it was a "harmless experience".
You mean about the paedophilia? I guess you must, since that's the only statement in my last post.
How is that a misrepresentation? My sentence indicates that he was a victim. It's all rather sad, really. "Harmless experience" is a direct quote (if you believe the newspaper articles). What would you prefer me to say?
As I said, it's sad that as a victim he seems to have accepted, or at least downplayed, what he calls "mild" paedophilia. Just being a victim does not give you moral authority to minimize the suffering of fellow victims. Just thinking it didn't harm you does not necessarily mean it didn't harm you, either.
You can apply this "gradation" argument to everything and everyone. People generally avoid doing that. There's a good reason why. It's a childish and dangerous game he plays when he does that. There are extrinsic imputations attached to such statements, which is of course exactly why he makes them. Pathetic.
How is that a misrepresentation? My sentence indicates that he was a victim. It's all rather sad, really. "Harmless experience" is a direct quote (if you believe the newspaper articles). What would you prefer me to say?
As I said, it's sad that as a victim he seems to have accepted, or at least downplayed, what he calls "mild" paedophilia. Just being a victim does not give you moral authority to minimize the suffering of fellow victims. Just thinking it didn't harm you does not necessarily mean it didn't harm you, either.
You can apply this "gradation" argument to everything and everyone. People generally avoid doing that. There's a good reason why. It's a childish and dangerous game he plays when he does that. There are extrinsic imputations attached to such statements, which is of course exactly why he makes them. Pathetic.
He's not talking about his own experiences in his general tweeting. When he dismisses drunken women, do you think he's talking about his own experience as a drunken woman? When he talks about aborting the disabled, is he talking about his own experience of aborting or being aborted for his disabilities?
He has a completely undeserved soapbox, and yet he thinks he's somehow being censored, that he's the victim. Absurd.
And stop talking about presumption. Look at the word "necessarily". I neither presume nor care about his life story. Nor does he in his tweets. Nor do the media in asking him about his tweets.
He has a completely undeserved soapbox, and yet he thinks he's somehow being censored, that he's the victim. Absurd.
And stop talking about presumption. Look at the word "necessarily". I neither presume nor care about his life story. Nor does he in his tweets. Nor do the media in asking him about his tweets.
I don't think that's the same discussion.David wrote:...
(this is a discussion we've had here previously on Nick's, incidentally, if you want to check it out: http://magpies.net/nick/bb/viewtopic.php?t=78968 ).
...
Well, the main topic of that thread appears at casual glance to be about the age of consent, not about unwilling victims, and (presumably) no one was suggesting that age of consent should be a single-figure age. I'm conscious that this discussion may also have drifted or be drifting a little off this thread's main topic, though.
As for that man's defence of paedophilia, it seems to have had nothing to do with a victim wanting to share his experience, or a victim wanting to be free from victimhood. It seems to have first come up in one of his trashy books (not an autobiography), in 2006. If you look at the passage, all he's doing is invoking the old, tired, feeble argument
"It happened to us, and it didn't do us any harm". You frequently hear uneducated, unthinking dinosaurs saying this, along with claims that everything was better in the old days.
As for that man's defence of paedophilia, it seems to have had nothing to do with a victim wanting to share his experience, or a victim wanting to be free from victimhood. It seems to have first come up in one of his trashy books (not an autobiography), in 2006. If you look at the passage, all he's doing is invoking the old, tired, feeble argument
"It happened to us, and it didn't do us any harm". You frequently hear uneducated, unthinking dinosaurs saying this, along with claims that everything was better in the old days.
-
Skids
- Posts: 9940
- Joined: Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:46 am
- Location: ANZAC day 2019 with Dad.
- Has liked: 29 times
- Been liked: 44 times
I haven't read much into this thread, but your bold bit.... happened to US and didn't do US any harm... who is speaking for a collective... and how the hell could they reach that conclusion?!K wrote:Well, the main topic of that thread appears at casual glance to be about the age of consent, not about unwilling victims, and (presumably) no one was suggesting that age of consent should be a single-figure age. I'm conscious that this discussion may also have drifted or be drifting a little off this thread's main topic, though.
As for that man's defence of paedophilia, it seems to have had nothing to do with a victim wanting to share his experience, or a victim wanting to be free from victimhood. It seems to have first come up in one of his trashy books (not an autobiography), in 2006. If you look at the passage, all he's doing is invoking the old, tired, feeble argument
"It happened to us, and it didn't do us any harm". You frequently hear uneducated, unthinking dinosaurs saying this, along with claims that everything was better in the old days.
Don't count the days, make the days count.