Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
MustardSeed

Boy Scout article- SA allegations pour in

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, Calm said:

You changed it from "potential" to "latent".  Which means something very different.  Latent means inherent, already there, but hidden.  Potential means possible whether it means as Hamba used it to describe agency that allows us to choose evil by small changes or meaning "can't tell, may be".

How many women are actually saying "latent rapist" as opposed to men 'translating' (misrepresenting) what they are actually saying when they say "potential rapist" (meaning you can't tell the difference without knowing someone just as we can't tell who is and isn't a thief walking down the street)?

I know personally lots of women who go by every man a potential rapist where I know none personally who think every man a latent rapist.  We are simply treating our bodies with the same intelligent caution we treat our purses/wallets.  Once we know people better, we can choose to lighten up on the caution if indicated.  With only a few have I felt the need to increase wariness, thank goodness.

I go by the rule every man a potential rapist, have since I knew what rape was.  I would never have dated or married if I thought every man a latent rapist.  

I changed it because “latent” expresses more precisely my intent. I often edit my posts, because it matters to me that the words I use accurately convey my meaning. 

If by “potential,” you mean that every able-bodied male has the physical capacity to commit a rape, I think that is far less significant than saying that every male could reasonably be expected to commit sexual assault given sufficient opportunity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I changed it because “latent” expresses more precisely my intent. I often edit my posts, because it matters to me that the words I use accurately convey my meaning. 

If by “potential,” you mean that every able-bodied male has the physical capacity to commit a rape, I think that is far less significant than saying that every male could reasonably be expected to commit sexual assault given sufficient opportunity. 

But latent doesn't describe how the women I know and read mean it.  I have been clear and .I think most women are when they say something like that.  Read what Rain had to say.

Edited by Calm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

When I was studying in America, I took a dinner break one evening and joined my housemates in watching a doco on Jeffrey Dahmer. Everyone was talking about how they couldn't comprehend how he could do what he did, and I was about to join them, and then, in an instant, I saw clearly (and visually!) the specific pathway that would turn me into someone who could and would pick up young men, rape and torture them, kill them, and then dismember and eat them. And the very beginning of that pathway wasn't anything like the end of it; it was all very little stuff that most people outside the Church wold pooh-pooh as insignificant.

At first, I was terrified to discover that there was at least one potential pathway that would lead to my 'committing an axe murder'. And then I felt empowered. Knowing the pathway meant that I never had to worry that I'd wake up one morning and discover something monstrous inside me that I had no control over. I didn't have to worry that I was a predatory monster 'by nature'. Instead, I could choose not to be another Jeffrey Dahmer by choosing to avoid the first steps on that path.

That vision has shaped much of the rest of my life.

I, on the other hand, cannot envision any circumstance or set of circumstances or sequence of events that would lead me to commit murder — or sexual assault, for that matter. As I said earlier, it’s not a matter of having developed self control. I simply lack the desire or inclination. The very idea, in fact, is abhorrent to me. 

Like anyone else, I’m subject to impulses that, left unchecked, could lead to wrongdoing; murder and sexual assault are not among them. 

This ought to be welcome news to anyone, women especially. I don’t understand the resistance to it. 

Edited by Scott Lloyd

Share this post


Link to post
54 minutes ago, Calm said:

But latent doesn't describe how the women I know and read mean it.  I have been clear and .I think most women are when they say something like that.  Read what Rain had to say.

I use a normative definition for “latent,” expressed this way by an online source: 

QUOTE: 

(of a quality or state) existing but not yet developed or manifest; hidden or concealed.” 

Irrespective of what “most women [you] know” mean by it, I know what I mean when I use it. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I use a normative definition for “latent,” expressed this way by an online source: 

QUOTE: 

(of a quality or state) existing but not yet developed or manifest; hidden or concealed.” 

Irrespective of what “most women [you] know” mean by it, I know what I mean when I use it. 

Are you using the term to refer to how you look at the issue or how women are looking at it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Are you using the term to refer to how you look at the issue or how women are looking at it?

By how I look at it and how I thought others did (see the dictionary definition I cited). It didn’t occur to me that some would be employing a quirky definition of the word. 

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

By how I look at it and how I thought others did (see the dictionary definition I cited). It didn’t occur to me that some would be employing a quirky definition of the word. 

I think Calm is saying that women don't actually look at it that way, so you can't hold women responsible for a perspective they don't actually hold.  (If i'm understanding what you and calm are disagreeing about).

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

By how I look at it and how I thought others did (see the dictionary definition I cited). It didn’t occur to me that some would be employing a quirky definition of the word. 

 

Share this post


Link to post

So Boy Scouts.... 

I asked my son last night if he’d had any negative experiences in scouts.  It’s an important conversation as scary as it is to initiate. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think Calm is saying that women don't actually look at it that way, so you can't hold women responsible for a perspective they don't actually hold.  (If i'm understanding what you and calm are disagreeing about).

When there’s a disagreement about meaning of terms, I quickly fall back on normative definitions as expressed in standard dictionaries. A person can hardly be expected to be acquainted with esoteric jargon. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, MustardSeed said:

So Boy Scouts.... 

I asked my son last night if he’d had any negative experiences in scouts.  It’s an important conversation as scary as it is to initiate. 

And?

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, USU78 said:

 

I wonder if there is confusion in this discussion between latent sexuality and latent predisposition to commit sexual assault. I don’t view them as the same thing. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I wonder if there is confusion in this discussion between latent sexuality and latent predisposition to commit sexual assault. I don’t view them as the same thing. 

I don't either, but I theorize that it comes from an imperfect understanding of Freud, as demonstrated in that clip.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, cacheman said:

This is like a game of research telephone!  Bell and Weinberg write a book which includes a small survey of gay men in gay bars and other sexually charged environments.  The statistics presented above were from among that subset of gay men. Bergin cherry picks theses statistics and presents them without specifying the limitations of the survey..... and now you editorialize by saying things like "fully 25% of the adult homosexual males of San Francisco had actually had sex with minors under the age of sixteen."

If we went to pickup bars and swingers clubs in Salt Lake City to survey heterosexual participants,  do you believe the results  obtained would be representative of the broader SLC heterosexual population? 

I was citing, not editorializing, but your comments are thought-provoking and ought to give us all pause.  We need to ask whether we learned anything from the ever so swift rate of HIV infection in San Francisco during the 1980s.  What sort of sex-obsessed culture aided in that fast transmission, and why were so many gay men reluctant to shut down the bathhouses? Or to curb their lack of reasonable protection or restraint in pursuing their traditional life-style?  Indeed, I lived in San Francisco during the 1960s and nothing Bell & Weinberg came up with is surprising to me.  That RC priests and monks were heedlessly pursuing the same gratification by predation on youth seems to me no surprise at all, and we now know that it was a worldwide phenomenon.

For example, at one time gay men frequented public park restrooms -- cf. Donald P. Warwick, “Tea Room Trade: Means and Ends in Social Research,” The Hastings Center Studies, I (1973):27-38, for discussion of one male prostitute’s annual performance of about 3,000 oral sex acts (fellatio) in just such a public restroom.   Horatio Alger, for example, used both the YMCA and homes for newsboys as his venues for  procurement of young boys for sex, after he had to leave his ministry of a Unitarian congregation in Brewster, Massachusetts, for molesting two young boys (“Biographies: The Lives of Horatio Alger, Jr.,” at www.lib.rochester.edu/camelot/cinder/bio.htm ); Gary Scharnhorst and Jack Bales, The Lost Life of Horatio Alger, Jr. (Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press, 1985) – with the pickup of young boys by affluent young men being a standard plot-line in his novels.  Cf. John D. Gustav-Wrathall, Take the Young Stranger by the Hand: Same-Sex Relations and the YMCA (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1998). 

Even after direct experience with mass HIV death, rather than simply cruising the streets in search of young male prostitutes, gay men now prefer “cruising” gay chat rooms on the internet in search of “quick turnaround sex” (statistics are astonishing, and gay & bisexual males “are two to three times as likely as heterosexual men to seek sexual partners online”).  Public health officials are very worried about the consequences of unbounded gay and bisexual promiscuity – “a sexual superhighway” undoubtedly leading to increases in HIV, antibiotic-resistant syphilis, HPV, hepatitis, tuberculosis, etc.  Is "hook-up culture" really what we want or need?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post

 

43 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I think Calm is saying that women don't actually look at it that way, so you can't hold women responsible for a perspective they don't actually hold.  (If i'm understanding what you and calm are disagreeing about).

This.

Since the complaint is that women are saying this about men, then it should deal with what they mean by it.  It makes no more sense to insist women use someone else's version than a Protestant insist that we have to understand Salvation the way he does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When there’s a disagreement about meaning of terms, I quickly fall back on normative definitions as expressed in standard dictionaries. A person can hardly be expected to be acquainted with esoteric jargon. 

Because "potential" is such an esoteric term.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I wonder if there is confusion in this discussion between latent sexuality and latent predisposition to commit sexual assault. I don’t view them as the same thing. 

Only among those actually using the term "latent". (Which according to the search function is you and USU)

Edited by Calm

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, Calm said:

Are you saying the priests involved in 81% of the pedophilia were attracted to adult males?

Do you have evidence of this?

My source is Donald B. Cozzens, The Changing Face of the Priesthood: A Reflection on the Priest’s Crisis of Soul (Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 2000), 111-119.  Moreover, Cozzens states, the profile of many priestly pedophiles is that of a focused sociopath who feels no guilt and is only sorry when he is caught.  Cf. Cozzens, Sacred Silence: Denial and the Crisis in the Church (Collegeville, Minn: Liturgical Press, 2002).  He was speaking of pedophilia.  Whether these priests had also had sex with their seminary teachers as adults or later with fellow priests or monks is not included in the data.  However, what I also said about adult RC seminaries being "gay brothels" still stands (citing Michael Rose).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

When there’s a disagreement about meaning of terms, I quickly fall back on normative definitions as expressed in standard dictionaries. A person can hardly be expected to be acquainted with esoteric jargon. 

We can't even look up the jargons in a SJW (social justice warriors) dictionary.  It is a moving target among radical professors at leading universities.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I, on the other hand, cannot envision any circumstance or set of circumstances or sequence of events that would lead me to commit murder — or sexual assault, for that matter. As I said earlier, it’s not a matter of having developed self control. I simply lack the desire or inclination. The very idea, in fact, is abhorrent to me. 

Like anyone else, I’m subject to impulses that, left unchecked, could lead to wrongdoing; murder and sexual assault are not among them. 

This ought to be welcome news to anyone, women especially. I don’t understand the resistance to it. 

I guess I am more confident that we are each human. T'were we each ripped from our current situation and put in the worst of situations, I would expect that almost every one of us could be broken and operate on only our most fundamental needs and obtain them at any cost. I hope none of us are put in that situation, but many of our brothers and sisters around the world are not so lucky. I am thinking of the Lost Boys of Sudan or the child warriors of Africa. 

Edited by Storm Rider
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
22 minutes ago, Calm said:

 

This.

Since the complaint is that women are saying this about men, then it should deal with what they mean by it.  It makes no more sense to insist women use someone else's version than a Protestant insist that we have to understand Salvation the way he does.

All I’ve done is clarify my meaning after I became aware that some were applying a non-normative definition to a word. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, Calm said:

Because "potential" is such an esoteric term.

I replaced it with a different word, one that more suitably conveyed my intent. And it was only a minute or two later. Do you always hold people accountable for earlier drafts after they have made revisions?

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, longview said:

We can't even look up the jargons in a SJW (social justice warriors) dictionary.  It is a moving target among radical professors at leading universities.

They can’t even arrive at gender pronouns that are stable these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I guess I am more confident that we are each human. T'were we each ripped from our current situation and put in the worst of situations, I would expect that almost every one of us could be broken and operate on on only our most fundamental needs at any cost. I hope none of us are put in that situation, but many of our brothers and sisters around the world are not so lucky. I am thinking of the Lost Boys of Sudan or the child warriors of Africa. 

I can only speak for myself as to what atrocities I am or am not disposed to commit. As the saying goes, your mileage may vary. But I’m not convinced I am atypical. 

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, Calm said:

On,y among those actually using the term "latent".

I don’t understand this remark. Is there or is there not confusion here between “latent sexuality” and “latent predisposition to commit sexual assault”? Do you grasp the distinction? 

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...