Bill Cosby.....You Know You Wanna Discuss It.

[Robert.Evans]

Actually: You likely would not notice that I was doing it unless you though in the same ways I do. The only people who have commented to me that they notice I do it are others who are safety paranoid and so considering the same things. Sometimes I don't notice it anymore either. After a few years it mostly became habit.

Doesn't hurt that perhaps half my friends are martial-oriented and firearm aficionados.

It's not like I feel a need to sit in the back row of the movie theater (in some ways, that would be less safe anyway due to distance-to-exit), but I can tell you without re-checking who is behind, in front of, and directly beside me most of the time.

And they are habits that have saved me from trouble more than once.

Okay.
Have you ever thought of moving? haha

 

[Revoltingest]

If anyone asks me again why I think there's such a huge need for feminism even in supposedly "civilized" cultures, I'm going to use this thread as an example.

Gee, thanx for the thumbs up, bub. But this thread hardly puts feminists in the best light either.

 

[Wu Wei]

19 accusers

 

[Debater Slayer]

Gee, thanx for the thumbs up, bub. But this thread hardly puts feminists in the best light either.

Maybe to some people, but it's not like those people viewed feminism positively or were likely to in the first place anyway.

 

[JerryL]

Okay.
Have you ever thought of moving? haha

It's not a problem with my area. We've had mostly just bored kids breaking into cars and even that's been pretty rare.

But much like nowhere is free of rapists, nowhere is immune to other types of violence. 2am in the party district of any city is an area of potential trouble. I have found it more effective and simpler to always assume the potential for trouble exists than to try to guess where it will come from.

And I actually haven't experience all that much in my (post-high-school) life. Though you can find me on the news from about 15-years ago because my car was involved in a shooting/car-jacking rampage at the time. Fortunately, I was not in it when the carjacker came. The woman in the car behind mine was not so lucky and was killed.

 

[Revoltingest]

19 accusers

I read thru'm all. Just amazing.

 

[Revoltingest]

Maybe to some people, but it's not like those people viewed feminism positively or were likely to in the first place anyway.

To think that no one who sees feminist goals of gender equality as positive would be adversely affected by abusive elements in the movement is flat out wrong. Feminism is not just its goals...it is also the culture (or cultures) which represent it. And when some in the movement become abusive over perceived disagreement, it stymies discussion & drives away some who otherwise might even identify with it. I know many who fit the definition of "feminist", but eschew the label for this reason.
How you comport yourself matters.

 

[Debater Slayer]

To think that no one who sees feminist goals of gender equality as positive would be adversely affected by abusive elements in the movement is flat out wrong. Feminism is not just its goals...it is also the culture (or cultures) which represent it. And when some in the movement become abusive over perceived disagreement, it stymies discussion & drives away some who otherwise might even identify with it. I know many who fit the definition of "feminist", but eschew the label for this reason.
How you comport yourself matters.

Which "abusive elements" are you talking about? I certainly don't think being direct or even blunt when addressing rape apologetics, for example, is abusive at all... unless one feels that rape apologists deserve some sort of protection against hurt feelings. And again: It's not like blatant misogynists are likely to identify with feminism in the first place.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Since most rapes and sexual assaults, including the ones Cosby is accused of, come from someone you know: I would suggest getting more objective and honest in deciding whom you trust and how far.

In this case, another thing that could have prevented several of these rapes would be if the victims had come forward. Am I correct in understanding that the first person to try to press charges was 2005?

I know people who were raped and have not gone public, and have not pressed charges. Their rapists will presumably go on to rape again. So: there's something that could be done to reduce rape... report rapes.

I've had friends go get drunk without a sober chaperon. I've known them to have drugs slipped into their drinks by the unscrupulous. I'd bet you think you can picture it. I'll bet that none of those pictures is my father. And yet, that's exactly what happened to him (though it was for purposes other than sexual assault).


I've been sexually assaulted twice. Not rapes (nor really attempted rapes either); but certainly at the definition of "sexual assault". Had I responded differently, the outcome might have been different as well.

Then talk about how the system is broken. You aren't doing that. You are discussing what people tell potential victims. You are, in point of fact, part of the problem here.

Great points so far. You and I are new to the discussion together, so you might not be aware of how often I've addressed the system as a whole ought to be changed to shoulder the accountability onto the perpetrator and not the victim, and justice can be closer to being blind as it should.

I agree that rapes must be reported more often. They must also have greater advocacy for the victims so that rape kits and evidence must actually be used and not left on shelves of hospitals after being applied to patients. Law enforcement must follow better procedure in regards to the response to calls for help and the report filing, instead of badgering the people pressing charges because they think the attack was provoked (not their job to decide that).

Comprehensive sex education must include the topic of consent. It took long enough for schools to accept the teaching of contraceptives as part if its ethics, but I submit that consent is the most basic in initiating the act.

Same things I do to prevent most other crimes. I spent years improving my spacial awareness (would get randomly attacked in the martial arts school to keep me on my guard), I position myself whenever possible with no one behind me, usually against a wall. I stay facing so that everyone, if possible, is in my span of vision, I have typically 2-3 weapons including a firearm on me. I don't drink. I don't accept open drinks from people I don't trust. I don't go places with strangers. I tend to maintain a zone of physical exclusion, closer than which I'm already pre-fighting. The list goes on and on.

I think those are fair situational awareness tactics. I practice much of the same.

I'm aware of how similar many of us are in regards to reducing sexual assault. I vehemently disagree with the tone that people who do not practice situational awareness are "stupid".

THAT is victim-shaming. And it's too bad that not everyone calls it out except the angry feminist.

 

[Robert.Evans]

It's not a problem with my area. We've had mostly just bored kids breaking into cars and even that's been pretty rare.

But much like nowhere is free of rapists, nowhere is immune to other types of violence. 2am in the party district of any city is an area of potential trouble. I have found it more effective and simpler to always assume the potential for trouble exists than to try to guess where it will come from.

I can't say that is on my mind, not that i go out now, but if I did, I don't think I would enjoy it, so I think I might have a private party... it would be more relaxing. After all, what could go wrong with someone you know... like, like, I don't know, perhaps a celebrity.

And I actually haven't experience all that much in my (post-high-school) life. Though you can find me on the news from about 15-years ago because my car was involved in a shooting/car-jacking rampage at the time. Fortunately, I was not in it when the carjacker came. The woman in the car behind mine was not so lucky and was killed.

Sorry to hear it

 

[Robert.Evans]

Which "abusive elements" are you talking about? I certainly don't think being direct or even blunt when addressing rape apologetics, for example, is abusive at all... unless one feels that rape apologists deserve some sort of protection against hurt feelings. And again: It's not like blatant misogynists are likely to identify with feminism in the first place.

It alienates people though, which is not good. There is a way of putting things, rather than ''puke'' especially when you're wrong and misunderstand.

 

[Debater Slayer]

It alienates people though, which is not good. There is a way of putting things, rather than ''puke'' especially when you're wrong and misunderstand.

Merely arguing for women's rights tends to alienate a certain type of people. Placating those people isn't particularly high on my priority list.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Great points so far. You and I are new to the discussion together, so you might not be aware of how often I've addressed the system as a whole ought to be changed to shoulder the accountability onto the perpetrator and not the victim, and justice can be closer to being blind as it should.

But how does one put the accountability on to the perpetrator? It is all well and good saying it, but if someone has done something wrong, it is too late. Fine bringing then to account, who is arguing against that? no one. But how does that stop them? It does not.

I agree that rapes must be reported more often. They must also have greater advocacy for the victims so that rape kits and evidence must actually be used and not left on shelves of hospitals after being applied to patients. Law enforcement must follow better procedure in regards to the response to calls for help and the report filing, instead of badgering the people pressing charges because they think the attack was provoked (not their job to decide that).

Comprehensive sex education must include the topic of consent. It took long enough for schools to accept the teaching of contraceptives as part if its ethics, but I submit that consent is the most basic in initiating the act.

I think if you have to teach consent, and basically not bullying in all its forms, you have one big problem with soceity in general.

I think those are fair situational awareness tactics. I practice much of the same.

I'm aware of how similar many of us are in regards to reducing sexual assault. I vehemently disagree with the tone that people who do not practice situational awareness are "stupid".

THAT is victim-shaming. And it's too bad that not everyone calls it out except the angry feminist.

Who is saying that it is not a good idea to be aware? No one. But to not be aware of things is stupid. That is the very point he is making when he goes out for a relaxing drink dressed like Rambo. What I am saying is be careful where you go and what you do. Why do you have a problem with that? I think this is a woman's problem personally, because it makes no sense to say go wherever you want and don't bother to way up the situation, none whatsoever. You seem to twist that into something else. For some reason, the very fact that you did not take proper precautions, must make you feel guilty, and all you are doing is twisting it round to blame the man, which is a common occurrence with women. No one is saying rape is right, or that the victim is wrong. Just use your head.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Merely arguing for women's rights tends to alienate a certain type of people. Placating those people isn't particularly high on my priority list.

Which does not answer anything I said. Perhaps giving common sense goes against men who always want to look after women and attack men to do it..

 

[MysticSang'ha]

But how does one put the accountability on to the perpetrator? It is all well and good saying it, but if someone has done something wrong, it is too late. Fine bringing then to account, who is arguing against that? no one. But how does that stop them? It does not.

I think if you have to teach consent, and basically not bullying in all its forms, you have one big problem with soceity in general.

Who is saying that it is not a good idea to be aware? No one. But to not be aware of things is stupid. That is the very point he is making when he goes out for a relaxing drink dressed like Rambo. What I am saying is be careful where you go and what you do. Why do you have a problem with that? I think this is a woman's problem personally, because it makes no sense to say go wherever you want and don't bother to way up the situation, none whatsoever. You seem to twist that into something else. For some reason, the very fact that you did not take proper precautions, must make you feel guilty, and all you are doing is twisting it round to blame the man, which is a common occurrence with women. No one is saying rape is right, or that the victim is wrong. Just use your head.

If you want me or DS to refrain from saying inflammatory things like "puke", "vile", or "condascending," I would greatly appreciate it if you refrained from saying inflammatory things about my point of view and that victims are "stupid."

Until then, my discussion with you is over.

 

[JerryL]

Who is saying that it is not a good idea to be aware? No one. But to not be aware of things is stupid. That is the very point he is making when he goes out for a relaxing drink dressed like Rambo.

Mullets are passe'

 

[Robert.Evans]

If you want me or DS to refrain from saying inflammatory things like "puke", "vile", or "condascending," I would greatly appreciate it if you refrained from saying inflammatory things about my point of view and that victims are "stupid."

Until then, my discussion with you is over.

shame... just when I thought we were friends... haha

I am not saying that if you are a victim you are stupid. I am saying that if you put yourself in a dangerous situation you are stupid; there is a big difference; you seem to see things wrongly most of the time when it is my posts.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Which does not answer anything I said. Perhaps giving common sense goes against men who always want to look after women and attack men to do it..

There are misogynistic women too, as strange as that might sound. I have seen examples of women like that first-hand. They are literally self-loathing and think all other women should be like them.

I think defending women's rights is beneficial to men as well. Don't forget that you wouldn't have even existed if a woman hadn't carried you for nine months and that most men are primarily raised by women too.

 

[Robert.Evans]

There are misogynistic women too, as strange as that might sound. I have seen examples of women like that first-hand. They are literally self-loathing and think all other women should be like them.

It is not something that springs to mind, but I am sure you are right.

I think defending women's rights is beneficial to men as well.

Women's rights means what though? Presumably mostly giving them power and wealth. I am all for protecting the nucleus family, which is not uppermost in women's mind, not that I see at any rate. That has repercussions, like it or not. But just because i say that does not mean they should be abused or seen as less, that is just something that people think you mean.

Don't forget that you wouldn't have even existed if a woman hadn't carried you for nine months and that most men are primarily raised by women too.

True. But you wouldn't exist without the man either, for the man is needed to make the woman pregnant in the first place. And it is primarily women who want families, a primordial instinct, that they then fight against, by putting babies or children in nurseries. I am against that. Call me old fashioned if you want and dragging my knuckles, that is up to you, but I think that is better. That does not mean that both genders do not have issues that have to be dealt with.... that is why we are here in this physical realm in the first place.

This was a decent post from you to me, I wonder how you will react to this one. It appears mystic meg is not speaking anymore as I think people should take precautions, and she doesn't.

 

[Revoltingest]

Which "abusive elements" are you talking about? I certainly don't think being direct or even blunt when addressing rape apologetics, for example, is abusive at all... unless one feels that rape apologists deserve some sort of protection against hurt feelings. And again: It's not like blatant misogynists are likely to identify with feminism in the first place.

Direct is wonderful. Blunt can be wonderful. "Protection against hurt feelings" is deflection. I speak of abuse borne of anger. As for naming abusive elements, "calling out" is against RF rules.
Calling other posters "misogynist" when they aren't, using terms like "mansplaining" to belittle men, & making prejudicial remarks to an ally about a "non" poster all strike me as abuse.
You might view this as just being honest & direct. But if such honesty & directness were to head in the other direction, the fur would really fly.

Note: Minor edits on following day.