Rape Only Hurts If You Fight It

meeze said:
You mean kinda like how you are viewing this article?
Click to expand...

no I'm giving my viewpoint on his article

social issues dont neccesarily concern directly with imperialism and secularism

It just bothers me that there are people who think that way not neccesarily this person he just seems to be another Swift
 
Skiewalker said:
Ｓｔｉｌｌ，　ｉｔ’ｓ　ｎｏｔ　ｒｅａｌｌｙ　ｓｏｍｅｔｈｉｎｇ　ａｎｙｏｎｅ　ｓｈｏｕｌｄ　ｂｅ　ｊｏｋｉｎｇ　ａｂｏｕｔ．　　Ｉ　ｃａｎ　ｕｎｄｅｒｓｔａｎｄ　ｗｈｙ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ　ｇｏｔ　ｓｏ　ａｎｇｒｙ　ａｂｏｕｔ　ａ　ｓｏ－ｃａｌｌｅｄ　”ｓｏｃｉａｌ　ｅｘｐｅｒｉｍｅｎｔ．”　　Ｓｏｍｅｔｈｉｎｇ　ｌｉｋｅ　ｔｈａｔ　ｗｏｕｌｄ　ｈｉｔ　ｔｈｅ　ｗｒｏｎｇ　ｋｉｎｄ　ｏｆ　ｒｅｓｐｏｎｓｅ．　　Ｉｔ’ｓ　ｌｉｋｅ　ｓａｙｉｎｇ　ｅｖｅｒｙｏｎｅ　ｉｎ　ｔｈｅ　Ｗｏｒｌｄ　Ｔｒａｄｅ　Ｃｅｎｔｅｒ　ｄｅｓｅｒｖｅｄ　ｔｏ　ｄｉｅ．　（Ｗｈｉｃｈ　ｔｈｅｙ　ｄｉｄｎ’ｔ，　ｏｆ　ｃｏｕｒｓｅ，　ｂｕｔ　ｉｔ’ｓ　ｊｕｓｔ　ａｓ　ｂａｄ．）
Click to expand...

I disagree. While this could have done in a better way, it still proved the point. You're allowed to disagree and argue all you want but to protest suggest that the person should be arrested? That's far more extreme in my opinion. I don't care what the guy may have said. Thankfully, freedom of speech isn't limited to whatever doesn't offend the majority.
 
Bustaballs said:
I disagree. While this could have done in a better way, it still proved the point. You're allowed to disagree and argue all you want but to protest suggest that the person should be arrested? That's far more extreme in my opinion. I don't care what the guy may have said. Thankfully, freedom of speech isn't limited to whatever doesn't offend the majority.
Click to expand...

Ｉ’ｍ　ｎｏｔ　ｓａｙｉｎｇ　ｔｈａｔ　ｉｔ　ｉｓｎ’ｔ　ｃｏｖｅｒｅｄ　ｉｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｆｒｅｅｄｏｍ　ｏｆ　ｓｐｅｅｃｈ;　ｎｏｒ　ｓｈｏｕｌｄ　ｈｅ　ｂｅ　ａｒｒｅｓｔｅｄ　ｆｏｒ　ｈｉｓ　ｓｔｕｐｉｄ　ｃｏｍｍｅｎｔｓ　ａｂｏｕｔ　ｒａｐｅ．　（Ｗｈｅｔｈｅｒ　ｏｆ　ｎｏｔ　ｔｈａｔ　ｗｅｒｅ　ｈｉｓ　ｉｎｔｅｎｔｉｏｎ．）
Ｉｔ’ｓ　ｊｕｓｔ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ　ｌｉｋｅ　ｔｈａｔ，　ａｎｄ　ｈｕｍａｎｉｔｙ　ｉｎ　ｇｅｎｅｒａｌ，　ｓｈｏｕｌｄ　ｂｅ　ｍｏｒｅ　ａｗａｒｅ　ｏｆ　ｅａｃｈ　ｏｔｈｅｒ’ｓ　ｆｅｅｌｉｎｇ　ａｎｄ　ｗｈａｔ　ｔｈｅｙ　ｓａｙ　ａｎｄ　ｗｒｉｔｅ　ａｂｏｕｔ．　　Ｉ　ｕｎｄｅｒｓｔａｎｄ　ｔｈｅ　ｒｅａｓｏｎ　ｗｈｙ　ｈｅ　ｗｒｏｔｅ　ｉｔ、ｂｕｔ　Ｉ　ｗｉｓｈ　ｈｅ　ｄｉｄｎ’ｔ　ｗｒｉｔｅ　ｉｔ　ｌｉｋｅ　ｔｈａｔ．
 
Skiewalker said:
Ｉ’ｍ　ｎｏｔ　ｓａｙｉｎｇ　ｔｈａｔ　ｉｔ　ｉｓｎ’ｔ　ｃｏｖｅｒｅｄ　ｉｎ　ｔｈｅ　ｆｒｅｅｄｏｍ　ｏｆ　ｓｐｅｅｃｈ;　ｎｏｒ　ｓｈｏｕｌｄ　ｈｅ　ｂｅ　ａｒｒｅｓｔｅｄ　ｆｏｒ　ｈｉｓ　ｓｔｕｐｉｄ　ｃｏｍｍｅｎｔｓ　ａｂｏｕｔ　ｒａｐｅ．　（Ｗｈｅｔｈｅｒ　ｏｆ　ｎｏｔ　ｔｈａｔ　ｗｅｒｅ　ｈｉｓ　ｉｎｔｅｎｔｉｏｎ．）
Ｉｔ’ｓ　ｊｕｓｔ　ｐｅｏｐｌｅ　ｌｉｋｅ　ｔｈａｔ，　ａｎｄ　ｈｕｍａｎｉｔｙ　ｉｎ　ｇｅｎｅｒａｌ，　ｓｈｏｕｌｄ　ｂｅ　ｍｏｒｅ　ａｗａｒｅ　ｏｆ　ｅａｃｈ　ｏｔｈｅｒ’ｓ　ｆｅｅｌｉｎｇ　ａｎｄ　ｗｈａｔ　ｔｈｅｙ　ｓａｙ　ａｎｄ　ｗｒｉｔｅ　ａｂｏｕｔ．　　Ｉ　ｕｎｄｅｒｓｔａｎｄ　ｔｈｅ　ｒｅａｓｏｎ　ｗｈｙ　ｈｅ　ｗｒｏｔｅ　ｉｔ、ｂｕｔ　Ｉ　ｗｉｓｈ　ｈｅ　ｄｉｄｎ’ｔ　ｗｒｉｔｅ　ｉｔ　ｌｉｋｅ　ｔｈａｔ．
Click to expand...

This is exactly the problem with American's Freedom of Speech.

It's okay to say what you want, until you offend someone. People are so damned worried about being Politically correct, that everything becomes influenced by it.

Being nice is one thing, but not being able to say what you want for fear of offending someone and being regarded as "mean" or something. I don't care if people think I'm a jackass, really. But if they judge me on my words, not my actions, they get a very different opinion of me. Freedom of Speech is hindered by political correctness.
 
Mirewen said:
I'm focused on how polar opposite Westyle's 2 posts were lol.
Click to expand...

Meh its his way of getting attention I geuss.

Anyways yea I heard about this, know a buncha ppl who go to the school. Its a pretty retarded article, am shocked that the school newspaper allowed it to print but who knows... Thing is definitly in poor taste, however it IS freedom of speech. No one is forcing you to read the thing, or buy the newspaper. Seen alot stupider shit out there so yea... If this was my newspaper no chance in hell I would let that print but hey they can print whatever the ppl with the money say they can print.
 
Direwolf said:
Meh its his way of getting attention I geuss.

Anyways yea I heard about this, know a buncha ppl who go to the school. Its a pretty retarded article, am shocked that the school newspaper allowed it to print but who knows... Thing is definitly in poor taste, however it IS freedom of speech. No one is forcing you to read the thing, or buy the newspaper. Seen alot stupider shit out there so yea... If this was my newspaper no chance in hell I would let that print but hey they can print whatever the ppl with the money say they can print.
Click to expand...

I may be missing the point but I believe he posted it like that on purpose because he knows people'd freak out and totally trample on the first amendment.

It's ironic that people're making a huge deal about him posting this in the news, whereas some crude comedians could get a huge laugh out of some of those comments (perhaps the jail one) if delivered properly.

I'd personally hope the guy doesn't believe in anything he posted regarding that article, because it is highly disagreeable. But really, he's not breaking any actual law by making such an article...however, school rules tend to be above Congress' grasp, and them allowing such a thing to be posted is...interesting, to say the least.








P.S. Needs more tentacles.
 
Fahrenheit 451 anyone?

I love that book but it's one scary piece of work.


We watched a film last Thursday in my American federal government class about the Supreme Court's decision of what freedom of speech was. We watched a video where a guy goes into a Jewish neighborhood and in front of a Jewish building. I don't remember what it's called. It had the star on it. Anyways, he puts an arm band with a Nazi style swastika symbol on it and starts going off about how Hitler was a great man. People gather around him and listen. Eventually, the crowd begins to get angry and starts shouting things such as, "People like you should be in jail." The crowd then jumps the guy and knocks him out. He's arrested for disturbing the piece. He feels his constitutional rights were violated and his case is taken to a higher court.

We had a short, in class debate/discussion about the video. At first, most everyone, not including myself, thought that the guy got what he deserved or that he wasn't being punished enough. Some people claimed he was intentionally trying to start a riot. They said he could have done it anywhere but he decided to do it in the worst place imaginable. As I was thinking of an example to use to defend the guy, a girl came out and gave a decent one before myself. She suggested that it could be compared to the so called "pro-life" Christian groups who protest right outside of abortion clinics. While it wasn't the best comparison, it got people thinking. Some said that the people made the choice to stand there and listen and they made the choice to get angry and cause violence while the man was simply speaking his mind. After the discussion, there were only two people left who felt he should have been punished for it.

I love my college. It's one of the most awesome experiences I've had in life so far.
 
First off, just to clarify things for some folks, Freedom of Speech is not absolute. You are not free to yell "fire!" in a theater, you are not free to yell "thief!" at an innocent man, and there's a whole laundry list of other things you're not free to do. Not on the basis of what you're saying, but of what your intent is in saying it. Inciting a riot, disturbing the peace, hell, just plain old slander.

In this case, the intent is clearly satirical even though his execution is tragically flawed. As such, it doesn't really rate legal action, though a good prosecutor could probably get him on it if he really wanted to.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him lose his job over it though. Hell, if I were his boss, I'd fire him myself.
 
'Social experiments' annoy the crap outta me. People doing something they know is going to get a bad reaction just to get a bad reaction, so they can tell everyone they totally saw it coming.
 
Raesvelg said:
First off, just to clarify things for some folks, Freedom of Speech is not absolute. You are not free to yell "fire!" in a theater, you are not free to yell "thief!" at an innocent man, and there's a whole laundry list of other things you're not free to do. Not on the basis of what you're saying, but of what your intent is in saying it. Inciting a riot, disturbing the peace, hell, just plain old slander.

In this case, the intent is clearly satirical even though his execution is tragically flawed. As such, it doesn't really rate legal action, though a good prosecutor could probably get him on it if he really wanted to.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him lose his job over it though. Hell, if I were his boss, I'd fire him myself.
Click to expand...


That sums it up, dunno why people assume whenever they say something stupid and retarded that freedom of speech will protect them.
 
Raesvelg said:
First off, just to clarify things for some folks, Freedom of Speech is not absolute. You are not free to yell "fire!" in a theater, you are not free to yell "thief!" at an innocent man, and there's a whole laundry list of other things you're not free to do. Not on the basis of what you're saying, but of what your intent is in saying it. Inciting a riot, disturbing the peace, hell, just plain old slander.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone was suggesting that it was absolute. Also, slander is extremely difficult to get someone punished for. If it wasn't then Fox News, National Enquirer, etc wouldn't exist.

Miros said:
That sums it up, dunno why people assume whenever they say something stupid and retarded that freedom of speech will protect them.
Click to expand...

Because most of the time, it will.
 
Last edited:
The issue with slander isn't that it's difficult to prove, but rather that it's difficult to disprove, and that the act of disproving it can be counter-productive, since very often, "slanderous" utterings are founded in at least some measure of truth.

Which would be why MSNBC and CNN have never sued Fox News for the "liberal media" cracks.
 
Raesvelg said:
The issue with slander isn't that it's difficult to prove, but rather that it's difficult to disprove, and that the act of disproving it can be counter-productive, since very often, "slanderous" utterings are founded in at least some measure of truth.

Which would be why MSNBC and CNN have never sued Fox News for the "liberal media" cracks.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Calling someone a slut because of their outfit is an example of that. But what about things such as the recent Obama thing on Fox or the constant lies that Hannity and O'Reily utter? I think it works both ways.
 
Raesvelg said:
The issue with slander isn't that it's difficult to prove, but rather that it's difficult to disprove, and that the act of disproving it can be counter-productive, since very often, "slanderous" utterings are founded in at least some measure of truth.

Which would be why MSNBC and CNN have never sued Fox News for the "liberal media" cracks.
Click to expand...

Just because they say liberal with a sneer doesn't mean it's a bad thing. Liberalism is an ideology, philosophical view, and political tradition which holds that liberty is the primary political value. It would take a consevative to sneer at liberty.

See what I did there?

/on topic

Rape is one of those things that is really hard to joke about, even more so than murder. When telling a rape joke, you can't be sure that there is noone in the room that has ever been raped. When telling a joke about murder, you can be damn sure noone there has ever been murdered before.

The article has it's merits but is over all in poor taste because of the way it was written.
 
This article reminds me of EON8, though not quite as disappointing.
 
Frylock: You need to go home and lie down

Handbananna: Mmm. Face down.
Click to expand...

That episode wins.

Edit: My old Big Bag of Things stories occasionally had to do with me trying not to be raped by completely random people and monsters (mainly the second and sixth ones). I gained much popularity throughout middle school because of those stories. The original was stolen on a friend's story where he was running away from Sesame Street characters that were trying to rape him.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top