All Activity

And putting aside the emotional response, I think the potential and/or likely adverse effects of categorical denigrations along these lines are serious and deserve some attention and consideration. We see all sorts of commentary about "toxic masculinity," about how (some) men sexualize women, and so on. Categorically disparaging all women everywhere by describing all of them as "potential" prostitutes or pedophiles or rapists is not going to improve categorical relations between men and women. And no amount of ad hoc revisionism ("Hey, when I say that 'All women are golddiggers' what I mean is that some men have had some unpleasant experiences with women in relation to money issues, such that men need to be on guard about that...") doesn't rehabilitate or justify the accusation. Thanks, -Smac

@webbles @Calm Muslims seem to hold to a traditional view of "virgins", although they paint a more sensual view of paradise. "So; and We shall join them to Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes" (Yusif Ali, Quran 44:54). "They will recline (with ease) on Thrones (of dignity) arranged in ranks; and We shall join them to Companions, with beautiful big and lustrous eyes" (Yusif Ali, Quran 52:50). "In them will be (Maidens), chaste, restraining their glances, whom no man or Jinn before them has touched" (Yusif Ali, Quran 55:56) "And (there will be) Companions with beautiful, big, and lustrous eyes, Like unto Pearls well-guarded, A Reward for the deeds of their past (life)" (Yusif Ali, Quran 56:22–24). Quran 56:35–37 describes women of a special creation, whom God has made anew ("We have created (their Companions) of special creation, And made them virgin - pure (and undefiled), full of love, well-matched". About 84 english translations are provided for each chapter and verse at https://islamawakened.com/quran/#gsc.tab=0 Then there are other writings (the hadiths, accepted by Sunnis) which describe polygamy in Paradise. 1.] Jamiʿ al-Tirmidhi 1663 - Regarding The Rewards For The Martyr 2] Sunan Ibn Majah 4337 - Description of Paradise Teachings from Islamic scholars (the tafsirs) indicate some women remain perpetual virgins. 1] Al Islam, chapter 7, Her Other Names 2] Maʿarif al-Quran, commentary on 56:36 The English commentary states: “The sense is the creation of the maidens of Paradise will be of such a nature that, even after every sexual intercourse, they will remain like virgins". 3] Tafsir al-Quran al-Karim on 56:36. “All will always remain virgins; whenever their husbands unite with them, they will find them virgins.” Some other commentary by Dr. Suad Joseph, a Roman Catholic, was provided in her "Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures".

Returning to topic: I find walking out to a parking lot alone in the dark to 100% of the time puts me on high alert because of my experiences with men. So whenever I see a man walking towards me in that situation, I suspect that I am in danger. I never feel this way when a woman is walking towards me. Every man is suspect to me in that scenario. it’s sad because I know not all men are actually threatening, but in that scenario, I have to assume that any man is threatening. so in my mind, I’m assuming that any man approaching me in a dark parking lot is potentially very dangerous to me and so I have to quickly get in my car and lock the door and prepared to scream and kick and fight as necessary. There are zero exceptions to this, unless that man is my husband, my father my brothers or my sons. Why is this? My experiences with other humans who happen to have all been men. Unfortunate isn’t it?

I can only speak for myself and I think it’s a silly argument. I’m unaffected.

‘Mormon Land’: Would Joseph Smith be a progressive or conservative in today’s political landscape? A Grok summary: The article, being promotional, is pretty thin. Nevertheless, labeling elements of an 1844 platform “progressive” or “conservative” using 21st-century categories is almost always anachronistic. Joseph's platform (detailed in his “Views of the Powers and Policy of the Government of the United States”) included proposals such as a national bank, gradual compensated emancipation with colonization, annexation of Texas, prison reform, and a stronger federal role in protecting minority rights against state-level mobs. Those positions can be described in period terms (Whig-adjacent economic nationalism, limited anti-slavery sentiment short of immediate abolition, minority-rights advocacy born of persecution). Mapping them onto today’s left-right spectrum requires selecting which modern associations to emphasize and which to ignore. Park’s broader scholarship (especially Kingdom of Nauvoo) emphasizes Smith’s late-period theocratic Council of Fifty, his criticism of existing constitutional arrangements as insufficient to protect the Saints, and his willingness to contemplate a more centralized, revelation-guided political order. That is a legitimate historical observation. It is also easy to read in ways that flatter contemporary preferences for activist government or minority-rights rhetoric while downplaying Smith’s repeated affirmations of the Constitution as inspired (D&C 98, 101), his practical experience of mob rule and political betrayal, his patriarchal and polygamous family order, and his expectation of a theocratic millennium, none of which would seem to mesh well with modern notions of a secular progressive state (modern notions of conservatism likewise don't map very well). Anyway, thoughts? Thanks, -Smac

@Kenngo1969

If that was the only context given, quite possibly.

If you will let me talk about what I am actually talking about without trying to fit me into your square hole, sure. I am specifically speaking about C, or more precisely C(1): can’t tell good guys from bad guys while you switch it out to C(2): latent rapist Don’t know how to do superscript yet

Same here. It’s an understandable position in that case. Also if that was the reality for where someone lived, using that phrase to teach young men and women or even adults depending on their attention levels to prepare themselves for being approached would be reasonable, if not the best way to go about it.*** I can even see using it as a quick reminder if someone was headed out the door needing to go to an area where they would likely be solicited or pressured to join the trade. A refresher that primes their mind and body could help prevent being frozen or unable to make a decision in the moment about what to do when confronted or at least shorten the lack of response, which can help moving to a more effective tactic (fight, flight, or fawn). Of course, any refresher would be much more effective if a solid foundation was laid exploring circumstances and signs to look for and especially options of response, what works and what won’t, and practicing those responses, etc. Hmmm….sounds familiar. ***bolded so less likely to be missed

Is this supposed to be offensive? Seems like a reasonable statement on global nature of rape culture to me. I think many women would take offense at being characterized this way. If I thought your headspace was due to women actually soliciting you on the regular as often as men cross boundaries with me, I would not be offended because I know I’m not prostitute. Okay. Again, though, I think many women would take offense at being characterized as "potential prostitutes," or "potential pedophiles," or "potential rapists," and so on. Thanks, -Smac

But when I try to talk about the topic, you take it and change it, so what am I supposed to do? Take and change what? The topics here have been A) the sheriff in Arizona, B) the Cornell matter, and C) the "all men are potential rapists" slogan. I'm not sure how to apply this. Let's talk about the topics, please, none of which is me. Thanks, -Smac

Good point. I don't see a logical fallacy here. The rush to judgment has been patent. It surely isn't based on the evidence, which was not good at the outset and is looking worse and less credible as time goes on. So the rush is, in my view, based on emotion (rage), not evidence or reasoning. Same as above. Same as above. Nehor and SU have both libeled me extensively in this thread. It's not a logical fallacy to not that. I think much of what they have said is not based on any sort of dispassionate analysis of the evidence, and is instead, well, "performative emotionalisms and accusations and mobocratic rage." That is my assessment. It's not a logical fallacy AFAICS. Logical fallacies in a discussion are certainly fair game. I'm not sure you have marshalled any. I am not. Feel free to point out what you see to be logically fallacious, and explain why. I am certainly willing to listen to what you have to say. Thanks, -Smac

Okay. Message received. Now please, back to the topic. Thanks, -Smac

So do I. But using gold and other expensive materials to glorify God and keep His commandments does not require killing. That is the distinction I draw. I retain belief in the divinity of the commandments associated with this practice, but I struggle with it still, as it doesn't quite work with my personal moral code. I maintain belief because part of my faith requires me to accept that "man doth not comprehend all the things which the Lord can comprehend" (Mosiah 4:9). So I trust that where my moral barometer does not sync with what I understand to be God's commandments, I need to take a serious look at my own understanding. Thanks, -Smac

But when I try to talk about the topic, you take it and change it, so what am I supposed to do? If the topic is about how blue the sky is and I say it is rather grayish blue right now, I prefer the intense blue in the evening on a clear day and you call me out for saying the sky is orange, kind of have to resolve the orange misrepresentation first in order to talk about how I see the sky is blue. And after many posts of trying to point out .i said blue, not orange while still getting told I said orange, I would doubt it would surprise anyone to see me start wondering ‘why are you insisting I am saying orange when I am clearly saying blue’, judging how clear I was by others telling me I am saying blue and talking about blue skies in response to me as well…except with you.

If I thought your headspace was due to women actually soliciting you on the regular as often as men cross boundaries with me, I would not be offended because I know I’m not prostitute.

Is this supposed to be offensive? Seems like a reasonable statement on global nature of rape culture to me. Okay. I think many women would take offense at being characterized this way. Thanks, -Smac

Is this supposed to be offensive? Seems like a reasonable statement on global nature of rape culture to me. This is actually inherently true even if one frames it as “latent”….which btw is not how those using ‘potential rapist’ are typically using it. I say this based on how many women are forced into prostitution, often with human trafficking. Also given the numbers claimed for forced prostitution, those women may be higher in numbers than those who consented to participate. If you include when the options are starvation, homelessness, etc, I have seen the numbers go up to 80%. It is easy to see this could be any of us in such a situation, female or male. Maybe some of us would prefer to starve, but if handcuffed and stuffed with drugs, choice is not part of the equation. Humans do horrible things to other humans. Thankfully being forced to be a rapist is rarely a thing. I doubt it would be possible with everyone as being drugged or even being under restraint can’t force one to act. One doesn’t have to act or even be conscious for a trafficker/pimp to get paid.

Oh yes, seeing smells and being able to track that way looks fun (only seen it on shows, might not work that way). And watching an orchestra play without the help of Disney***….what about feeling sound as touch…I am almost there with sounds that overwhelm me, lol, but I am thinking more like how I feel immersed in water and how it flows around me. How lovely that could be…depending on the sound of course. So only if I can turn it off and on though… or have greatly increased processing power to absorb and understand stimuli as otherwise it just feels like I am in the middle of a dodgeball game. ***I recommend Fantastia for those who haven’t see it yet. I got it a couple of times in music class at school.

That is understandable as it looks like a waste of resources in a time when many were at or below survival level. I see those as similar to using gold and other expensive materials in the temple to show respect to God. I doubt he’s that into such things and is fine with us taking care of a lovely garden to worship in instead if it was about his own desires. I assume he has us do these things on occasion (burnt offerings were limited to high, holy days iirc, so an occasional thing) so we can figure out how much our respect of God matters to us rather than matters to him. So I am okay with that as much as I am okay with investing massive funds into temples…meaning sometimes I am quite uncomfortable about it…especially when my favorite temple is beautiful and has little gold and shiny things in it that I remember. Though it had lots of wood and that might be more expensive. But in mortality most of us constantly get chances to decide what we are willing to sacrifice for what and who we love. Makes sense God gets included in that.

Smac your thoughts plz

Good point. There are quite a few more…. If you are now saying you see this as inappropriate, I look forward to the absence of such in your posts. I will try and refrain from doing more than just pointing out when you are arguing with strawmen….because like you I know best what I think and how I define things and if someone chooses to ignore half of what I and others say in their response, I just might mention that.

A person who understood what is being said, would be incapable of making this argument. This is not a disagreement, but you fundamentally not understanding the argument put forward. How in the world could you possibly believe that " the objection to “all black men are potential rapists” is that it is an over-broad, prejudicial character claim that ignores individual variation". You are not listening. You are not understanding. It appears willful and belligerent at this point.

Maybe we could return to discussing the topic instead of me personally. That sure would be nice. Thanks, -Smac

Yes. People who A) are drunk and B) driving a motor vehicle are more likely to be unsafe while driving in that condition. In contrast, "All women are terrible drivers" is not something with which I would agree. Sounds good. Thanks, -Smac