Mayor blames 4 year old for her own molestation

[Underseer]

http://alternativemediasyndicate.co...ld-blames-says-willing-consented-molestation/

There.

I am criticizing this man for blaming the victim. That makes me a bad person, right? I'm one of those "finger-wagging" feminists who causes so much crying among the woman-hating crowd. Does criticizing this man count as "oppressing men" with my "feminazi" ways?

 

[TSwizzle]

What point are you trying to make?

Interesting

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

He is hyper religious so I wouldn't be surprised, but what did he actually say that blames the child? That article just makes that claim and quotes him saying she was a "willing participant". Disgusting that he did what he did and messed up that he thinks she is capable of consent at that age, but this bit about him blaming her could be mere hyperbole unless we learn more.

Also, since when are DEMOCRATS getting loony religious and molesting kids? Isn't that usually a religious right-wing thing?

 

[laughing dog]

http://alternativemediasyndicate.co...ld-blames-says-willing-consented-molestation/

I realize that there are people who are simply unable or unwilling to accept responsibility for their actions, but this guy should have time added on to his sentence for claiming a 4 year old initiated a sexual relationship. Though I suppose if someone is gullible enough to believe that JC died for our sins, he is gullible enough to believe he should accept sex from a 4 year old.

 

[Angry Floof]

He is hyper religious so I wouldn't be surprised, but what did he actually say that blames the child? That article just makes that claim and quotes him saying she was a "willing participant". Disgusting that he did what he did and messed up that he thinks she is capable of consent at that age, but this bit about him blaming her could be mere hyperbole unless we learn more.

Also, since when are DEMOCRATS getting loony religious and molesting kids? Isn't that usually a religious right-wing thing?

And here we have someone, presumably with a straight face, thinking it's important to defend a man who says his 4 year old rape victim wanted it.

Why? Because someone used the trigger phrase: "victim-blaming." UH OH!

"Oh not defending the actual act, of course! I'm not an ANIMAL, you know! I just think it's more important that you do not use the phrase "victim-blaming" when clearly he was just saying she wanted it."

Well, glad that's cleared up.

Keep up the good work, Underseer. It might be ugly but it's necessary to tease out the depravity that lurks in so many people walking around pretending to be normal humans. If saying "victim-blaming" has the effect of people holding such sociopathic views being pushed out into the sun to help dry out some of the ideological rot in our culture, then so be it.

 

[ronburgundy]

http://alternativemediasyndicate.co...ld-blames-says-willing-consented-molestation/

There.

I am criticizing this man for blaming the victim. That makes me a bad person, right? I'm one of those "finger-wagging" feminists who causes so much crying among the woman-hating crowd. Does criticizing this man count as "oppressing men" with my "feminazi" ways?

No, it just means you are being predictably irrational and engaging in passive aggressive false equivalency by implying this case has any similarity whatsoever to your many other fallacious accusations of "victim blaming".

The fact that you have no clue how this man's comment is fundamentally different than pointing out the objective scientific fact that intoxication makes people more vulnerable to be victims of violent crime is exactly the same kind of failure to understand the "is"/"ought" disctinction that underlies most "victim blaming" accusations.

The issue of consent in a sexual act is what determines criminal and moral blame, so this man's comments are about shifting moral blame for the act from himself to the girl.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'd like to see this from a more mainstream news source.

 

[ronburgundy]

He is hyper religious so I wouldn't be surprised, but what did he actually say that blames the child? That article just makes that claim and quotes him saying she was a "willing participant". Disgusting that he did what he did and messed up that he thinks she is capable of consent at that age, but this bit about him blaming her could be mere hyperbole unless we learn more.

Also, since when are DEMOCRATS getting loony religious and molesting kids? Isn't that usually a religious right-wing thing?

And here we have someone, presumably with a straight face, thinking it's important to defend a man who says his 4 year old rape victim wanted it.

Why? Because someone used the trigger phrase: "victim-blaming." UH OH!

"Oh not defending the actual act, of course! I'm not an ANIMAL, you know! I just think it's more important that you do not use the phrase "victim-blaming" when clearly he was just saying she wanted it."

Well, glad that's cleared up.

Keep up the good work, Underseer. It might be ugly but it's necessary to tease out the depravity that lurks in so many people walking around pretending to be normal humans. If saying "victim-blaming" has the effect of people holding such sociopathic views being pushed out into the sun to help dry out some of the ideological rot in our culture, then so be it.

The rot in our culture takes many forms, one is which is when people like yourself show zero regard for rational thought about matters of fact, and just want to pretend that every fact is whatever you can most easily abuse to paint your ideological opponents as evil as possible.

Jolly did not "defend [this] man", and in fact very explicitly made his negative moral judgment of him clear for both what he did and what he said about it. Facts, you predictably ignored. Honest and rational people recognize that that not every possible thing that is generally viewed as bad is true of every person they think are bad people. So, despite clearly viewing this man negatively, he was questioning whether what this man said, despite being "messed up" does in fact have the properties of "victim blaming".

As I stated in my response to the OP above, I think Jolly is incorrect on this factual question and that claiming consent for a sexual act is inherently about shifting blame.

 

[Underseer]

http://alternativemediasyndicate.co...ld-blames-says-willing-consented-molestation/

There.

I am criticizing this man for blaming the victim. That makes me a bad person, right? I'm one of those "finger-wagging" feminists who causes so much crying among the woman-hating crowd. Does criticizing this man count as "oppressing men" with my "feminazi" ways?

No, it just means you are being predictably irrational and engaging in passive aggressive false equivalency by implying this case has any similarity whatsoever to your many other fallacious accusations of "victim blaming".

The fact that you have no clue how this man's comment is fundamentally different than pointing out the objective scientific fact that intoxication makes people more vulnerable to be victims of violent crime is exactly the same kind of failure to understand the "is"/"ought" disctinction that underlies most "victim blaming" accusations.

The issue of consent in a sexual act is what determines criminal and moral blame, so this man's comments are about shifting moral blame for the act from himself to the girl.

Oh, here we go with the special pleading fallacy.

So the other case wasn't victim-blaming, but this is?

Or are you saying the other case was victim-blaming, but this isn't?

I'm curious: when is it ok to blame the victim, and when isn't it ok to blame the victim? It's so hard to keep your different positions straight.

 

[Underseer]

What point are you trying to make?

Interesting

Oh, I am so sorry.

I did not mean to say that he is blaming the victim. What he is really doing is pointing out that the victim was acting recklessly and that she probably would not have been molested if she wasn't being so reckless. I wouldn't want to be accused of a straw man argument again.

 

[Angry Floof]

And here we have someone, presumably with a straight face, thinking it's important to defend a man who says his 4 year old rape victim wanted it.

Why? Because someone used the trigger phrase: "victim-blaming." UH OH!

"Oh not defending the actual act, of course! I'm not an ANIMAL, you know! I just think it's more important that you do not use the phrase "victim-blaming" when clearly he was just saying she wanted it."

Well, glad that's cleared up.

Keep up the good work, Underseer. It might be ugly but it's necessary to tease out the depravity that lurks in so many people walking around pretending to be normal humans. If saying "victim-blaming" has the effect of people holding such sociopathic views being pushed out into the sun to help dry out some of the ideological rot in our culture, then so be it.

The rot in our culture takes many forms, one is which is when people like yourself show zero regard for rational thought about matters of fact, and just want to pretend that every fact is whatever you can most easily abuse to paint your ideological opponents as evil as possible.

Jolly did not "defend [this] man", and in fact very explicitly made his negative moral judgment of him clear for both what he did and what he said about it. Facts, you predictably ignored. Honest and rational people recognize that that not every possible thing that is generally viewed as bad is true of every person they think are bad people. So, despite clearly viewing this man negatively, he was questioning whether what this man said, despite being "messed up" does in fact have the properties of "victim blaming".

As I stated in my response to the OP above, I think Jolly is incorrect on this factual question and that claiming consent for a sexual act is inherently about shifting blame.

No, heartlessness and obliviousness to your fellow human beings is not rational. It's not rational to read a story about a child rapist saying the child wanted him to do it and immediately respond to the OP's tone and attitude like a magnet, and try to shame the OP for using words you don't like in talking about the depravity of a mind that believes a four year old could possibly be complicit in such a depraved act.

So, it's false that I said anyone defended the rape, and you might have read the whole post to see that, but instead you chose to do exactly what you're complaining about.

Jumping to defend a man from being accused of "victim-blaming" in a thread on this topic doesn't seem like a bit of rot in one's humanity that this is their response? Even if it doesn't to you, those responses can be called out like any other. The kind of mentality that would zero in on a trigger phrase that hurts the feelings of men's rights groups while disregarding the elephant of child rape and a diseased man's sick delusions is a mentality that will be pushed out into the sun. So sorry. More griping about a technicality in the face of human suffering doesn't really change that.

 

[Underseer]

Apparently some of you are triggered by the use of the phrase "victim-blaming."

Is there a politically correct term you would prefer that I use to describe this phenomenon? I wouldn't want to hurt your delicate feelings by failing to use the politically correct term for blaming the victim of a rape.

 

[Angry Floof]

Interesting

Oh, I am so sorry.

I did not mean to say that he is blaming the victim. What he is really doing is pointing out that the victim was acting recklessly and that she probably would not have been molested if she wasn't being so reckless. I wouldn't want to be accused of a straw man argument again.

Did anyone check her blood alcohol level?

What other absurd irrelevancies can we pull out of our asses to make sure a child rapist is not misunderstood when putting his grown up responsibility onto a toddler?

 

[Angry Floof]

It's factually correct that he didn't specifically use the word "blame," so we are wrong to criticize a rapist for saying what he did about a four year old child being complicit in his own depraved actions.

 

[Underseer]

Just to review:

In the previous thread, one of them told me I was constructing a straw man by saying they were accusing the victim when in fact they were saying that the rape would not have happened if not for the victim's actions, another told me that I was a bad person for being "obsessed with not blaming the victim" (which also contradicts the straw man claim).

Honestly, their claims contradict themselves so much that I think their male hormones are making them emotional, and that's why their arguments are so incoherent.

In your defense, guys, you're kind of cute when you're angry. Really, I could kiss you if I were gay.

 

[RavenSky]

http://alternativemediasyndicate.co...ld-blames-says-willing-consented-molestation/

There.

I am criticizing this man for blaming the victim. That makes me a bad person, right? I'm one of those "finger-wagging" feminists who causes so much crying among the woman-hating crowd. Does criticizing this man count as "oppressing men" with my "feminazi" ways?

Yes, this is a very clear-cut example of victim-blaming

Here is another article about this case: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...rticipant-records-say/?utm_term=.bcbc1915f897

I will say, however, that rapists ALWAYS blame the victim. That's to be expected, even if it is disgusting.

It's the normal, rational, non-rapists that I would like to see not blaming the victims.

 

[laughing dog]

From the cited article

He blamed the child for initiating sex and describing her as a “willing participant.

(emphasis is mine).

So, in order to make a convincing reality-based argument that this pastor did not blame the child, one would need to present evidence to contradict the report that either the pastor did not literally blame the child (i.e. a report with quotes from him) or evidence that the reporter of the cited article is unreliable.

In the absence of such evidence, I would think and hope any rational and disinterested party would agree that this pastor actually blamed his victim.

 

[Lion IRC]

No real minister would say such a horrible thing.

 

[Lion IRC]

But you hear a lot of pedophiles (masquerading as priests) saying that it was consentual or that the minor seduced the adult or that (gay) kids can give informed consent....blah blah blah

 

[Keith&Co.]

What other absurd irrelevancies can we pull out of our asses

How did her mommy dress her? Slutty or what?