(February 19, 2015 at 12:20 am)NuclearJaguar Wrote:

(February 19, 2015 at 12:16 am)Irrational Wrote: A victim of rape may be traumatized by the event, but the rapist would have taken pleasure out of it. What is the objective basis for considering one side's feelings but not the other party's?

Well if we're getting technical, consensual sex isn't exactly hard to get. And even if it is, I dunno. Porn? Sex toys? Wank? Cold showers? There are alternatives... why does it have to be rape?

No, no, I didn't ask you what's an alternative for would-be rapist to indulge themselves in instead.

You said rape is wrong no matter what society says ... and your reason was because it affects those who are raped, right? What within the nature of this so-called objective morality dictates that you only consider how the raped feel about this? What is the reason you won't consider the rapist's feelings about rape in spite of you implying that morality is objective (and not subjective)?

Not sure if I'm making sense with my question.

(February 19, 2015 at 12:29 am)Irrational Wrote:

(February 19, 2015 at 12:20 am)NuclearJaguar Wrote: Well if we're getting technical, consensual sex isn't exactly hard to get. And even if it is, I dunno. Porn? Sex toys? Wank? Cold showers? There are alternatives... why does it have to be rape?

No, no, I didn't ask you what's an alternative for would-be rapist to indulge themselves in instead.

You said rape is wrong no matter what society says ... and your reason was because it affects those who are raped, right? What within the nature of this so-called objective morality dictates that you only consider how the raped feel about this? What is the reason you won't consider the rapist's feelings about rape in spite of you implying that morality is objective (and not subjective)?

Not sure if I'm making sense with my question.

Your question makes sense.

I can't answer for Jaguar, but I can answer for me: We do take other people's feelings into account. Relatives and friends of the victims are also made unhappy by rapes. Women who are afraid to go out at night are made less happy by the rapes. And so on.

You can fold the reactions of the rapists into the moral calculation, but rape's tendency to decrease happiness is still a very strong one.

It's not like it's a near thing. It's not like including the rapists' votes might shift the balance.

Seems like it is wrong just because it's forcing someone against their own will, and 99.9% of the time it does tons of emotional damage to the victim

(February 19, 2015 at 12:40 am)wiploc Wrote:

(February 19, 2015 at 12:29 am)Irrational Wrote: No, no, I didn't ask you what's an alternative for would-be rapist to indulge themselves in instead.

You said rape is wrong no matter what society says ... and your reason was because it affects those who are raped, right? What within the nature of this so-called objective morality dictates that you only consider how the raped feel about this? What is the reason you won't consider the rapist's feelings about rape in spite of you implying that morality is objective (and not subjective)?

Not sure if I'm making sense with my question.

Your question makes sense.

I can't answer for Jaguar, but I can answer for me: We do take other people's feelings into account. Relatives and friends of the victims are also made unhappy by rapes. Women who are afraid to go out at night are made less happy by the rapes. And so on.

You can fold the reactions of the rapists into the moral calculation, but rape's tendency to decrease happiness is still a very strong one.

It's not like it's a near thing. It's not like including the rapists' votes might shift the balance.

Ok, what if there was a society or world where people who are raped do not feel traumatized by it but just happen to be neutral about it? Would rape still be wrong in this case?

In this world, people tend to have their happiness reduced by being raped, yes. But rapists have their happiness increased by raping, right? Who's to say their happiness does not increase more than the raped happiness decreases (along with the loved ones of the raped)? What are the objective measures you are using?

If you put whatever criteria you want to find out whether something is objectively right or wrong, it'll most likely still be ambiguous and people will still feel differently about each term proposed in the criteria (like well-being, happiness, health, etc.).

It's not as simple as stating 1 + 1 = 2 and then going from there. It's way too complicated (and pretty much impossible) to make morality into an objective thing due to differences in subjective experiences regarding feelings of pleasure and such.

One can have very good reasons to believe rape is always wrong, but that depends on one's personal experiences and genetics and so still no objective basis for why rape is objectively wrong.

I don't think you would truly know if rape was wrong or right until you have been raped yourself, I myself was raped when I was a teenager, and it wasn't fun.

I really wish I had never looked in on this thread. I'm really, actually, crying right now. The idea that this subject is even debatable is making my chest deflate. I don't think I'll be back to check in.

(February 19, 2015 at 1:38 am)rexbeccarox Wrote: I really wish I had never looked in on this thread. I'm really, actually, crying right now. The idea that this subject is even debatable is making my chest deflate. I don't think I'll be back to check in.

Its life, no use pretending it doesn't happen.

(February 19, 2015 at 1:25 am)psychoslice Wrote: I don't think you would truly know if rape was wrong or right until you have been raped yourself, I myself was raped when I was a teenager, and it wasn't fun.

This logic suggests I cannot comment with any conviction my great dissatisfaction with being on the receiving end of a guillotine unless I've experienced it. You should rethink and amend your post.

(February 19, 2015 at 1:53 am)Cato Wrote:

(February 19, 2015 at 1:25 am)psychoslice Wrote: I don't think you would truly know if rape was wrong or right until you have been raped yourself, I myself was raped when I was a teenager, and it wasn't fun.

This logic suggests I cannot comment with any conviction my great dissatisfaction with being on the receiving end of a guillotine unless I've experienced it. You should rethink and amend your post.

Well of course you can have your opinion, I am not saying you can't. but until you have experienced rape, its just an opinion, maybe a good one at that.

(February 19, 2015 at 12:42 am)Ghost2282 Wrote: Seems like it is wrong just because it's forcing someone against their own will, and 99.9% of the time it does tons of emotional damage to the victim

I totally agree. I've never been raped, but I have dealt with sexual harassment with a few incidents involving physical advances. These supposedly less severe encounters combined with being a feminine male, just recently(at the time) coming out as an asexual, and folks in the LGBT+ and Asexual communities reporting something called "corrective rape" (first time I had ever heard of it) had driven me crazy and led to an intense fear of being out at night fearing I would fall victim to sexual assault, and this fear lasted for a while. This had also contributed to my depression, and I ended up considering suicide a few times, so, I can agree that sexual misconduct of any severity, be it on the sexual harassment end of the spectrum or the sexual assault/rape end, all of this can do some major damage to a person emotionally.