Take some fucking responsibility!

[Losty]

They can choose to go to jail instead. I mean....they won't be getting alcohol there either.

I'd say there's a huge difference between a chemical alteration as a result of stopping doing something vs a chemical alteration as a result of forcing something to be done.

I don't know if you're playing devils advocate here. I always have a really hard time imagining there are people who really believe that physically harming someone is ever an acceptable form of punishment.

I'm really not playing Devil's advocate here. I don't know where I stand on the issue and seek rational explanation. Part of me thinks, if chemical castration has no long-term effects, I'm fine with it, but another part of me thinks that taking out a person's sexuality is pretty drastic. This is why my posting in this thread has waffled so much.

I'm trying to reason my way through the weed-patch, and it ain't easy.

I get that. I imagine I would feel very violated if someone forced me to take pills that destroyed my sexuality. I wouldn't want anyone to feel that way for the same reason I wouldn't ever wish rape on a rapist. No one deserves to be violated, even if they're horrible, even if they've violated other people. No one deserves that.

It's just my opinion, but I do feel pretty strongly about it.

[LadyForCamus]

Ex-Stanford swimmer Brock Turner blames 'party culture' for sexual assault


http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/80...al-assault

Piece of shit.  Blaming everyone and everything except himself.

This whole thing gets right into my guts in the worst way.  I don't know who I'm more disgusted by; the kid for doing it, or the father for excusing it.  "He can't even eat his $8.00/lb ribeye anymore!"  I could just PUKE.

[Losty]

Ex-Stanford swimmer Brock Turner blames 'party culture' for sexual assault


http://www.stuff.co.nz/world/americas/80...al-assault

Piece of shit.  Blaming everyone and everything except himself.

This whole thing gets right into my guts in the worst way.  I don't know who I'm more disgusted by; the kid for doing it, or the father for excusing it.  "He can't even eat his $8.00/lb ribeye anymore!"  I could just PUKE.

What kind of world do we live in when a poor little rapist can't even enjoy his favorite snacks D:

/s

[Thumpalumpacus]

Yet your responses to me have leaned heavily on punishment. What is that if not an emotional response?

I honestly have no idea where you're going with this, Thump.  I also don't see why my position is so hard to understand.  I'm focusing on punishment because that is what the courts sentence a criminal for, in our current justice system; they are enforceable penalties for committing a crime.  I've explicitly stated multiple times that this sentencing of punishment should NOT be emotional, as best as we can make it anyway.  I've also literally agreed that if I experienced something like this personally, that I would be extremely emotional, and would very likely very much want the people who did that to me to be sentenced to death.  But hey, as I said, we don't make laws and sentencing based on the emotional response of the victims, because that's a can of worms on a slippery slope.

Is forcing someone to modify their body okay if it's not punishment? In some circumstances, yes, like mandatory vaccinations.  

I've ALSO said multiple times in this thread that I don't believe that prisons should be about punishment, and that they should be about rehabilitation.  WHICH IS WHY I'M AGAIN CASTRATION AND THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE FIRST PLACE.  You literally just asked me "what good do you think is served to society by punishing criminals as opposed to rehabilitating them?"  I've been saying that exact same freaking thing.  That's why I'm against these punishments.

It's a complicated issue, but I've clearly and explicitly said things that have already answered your objections, and it seems like you're implying that I am advocating for things which I am very obviously against.

I'm sorry to have imputed, inadvertently, a position to you. I'm asking questions because, as I said above, I have mixed feelings on this and think that both sides have both good and bad points.

Believe me -- I am not reading your posts in an antagonistic frame of mind, and if I'm coming across that way, you have my apologies.

I struggle with my own emotions regarding issues like this, for my own personal reasons.

I think that if chemical castration is reversible, it might be acceptable, but at the same time part of me recoils at the prospect of the government extirpating a part of a person's being -- their sexuality.

[Edwardo Piet]

I'm really not playing Devil's advocate here. I don't know where I stand on the issue and seek rational explanation. Part of me thinks, if chemical castration has no long-term effects, I'm fine with it, but another part of me thinks that taking out a person's sexuality is pretty drastic. This is why my posting in this thread has waffled so much.

I'm trying to reason my way through the weed-patch, and it ain't easy.

I get that. I imagine I would feel very violated if someone forced me to take pills that destroyed my sexuality. I wouldn't want anyone to feel that way for the same reason I wouldn't ever wish rape on a rapist. No one deserves to be violated, even if they're horrible, even if they've violated other people. No one deserves that.

It's just my opinion, but I do feel pretty strongly about it.

You're so so so so empathetic and compassionate. What a truly wonderful person you are, Losty.

[FatAndFaithless]

I honestly have no idea where you're going with this, Thump.  I also don't see why my position is so hard to understand.  I'm focusing on punishment because that is what the courts sentence a criminal for, in our current justice system; they are enforceable penalties for committing a crime.  I've explicitly stated multiple times that this sentencing of punishment should NOT be emotional, as best as we can make it anyway.  I've also literally agreed that if I experienced something like this personally, that I would be extremely emotional, and would very likely very much want the people who did that to me to be sentenced to death.  But hey, as I said, we don't make laws and sentencing based on the emotional response of the victims, because that's a can of worms on a slippery slope.

Is forcing someone to modify their body okay if it's not punishment? In some circumstances, yes, like mandatory vaccinations.  

I've ALSO said multiple times in this thread that I don't believe that prisons should be about punishment, and that they should be about rehabilitation.  WHICH IS WHY I'M AGAIN CASTRATION AND THE DEATH PENALTY IN THE FIRST PLACE.  You literally just asked me "what good do you think is served to society by punishing criminals as opposed to rehabilitating them?"  I've been saying that exact same freaking thing.  That's why I'm against these punishments.

It's a complicated issue, but I've clearly and explicitly said things that have already answered your objections, and it seems like you're implying that I am advocating for things which I am very obviously against.

I'm sorry to have implied, inadvertently, a position to you. I'm asking questions because, as I said above,  I have mixed feelings on this and think that both sides have both good and bad points.

Believe me -- I am not reading your posts in an antagonistic frame of mind, and if I'm coming across that way, you have my apologies.

I struggle with my own emotions regarding issues like this, for my own personal reasons.

I think that if chemical castration is reversible, it might be acceptable, but at the same time part of me recoils at the prospect of the government extirpating a part of a person's being -- their sexuality.

I get that it's complicated, I just try my best to be as clear as I can.


But this thing you said..

 but at the same time part of me recoils at the prospect of the government extirpating a part of a person's being -- their sexuality.

Doesn't that sound cruel and unusual to you?  Hell, holding people in solitary confinement without any light for 23 hours a day in a closet-sized box is reversible, and I still think solitary confinement is cruel and unusual. The 'reversible-ness' of the punishment doesn't automatically make it not cruel or not unusual, in my mind.

[Thumpalumpacus]

 but at the same time part of me recoils at the prospect of the government extirpating a part of a person's being -- their sexuality.

Doesn't that sound cruel and unusual to you?  

It absolutely does, yes. But at the same time, not doing that means that that person still gets to express their sexuality, perhaps to the detriment of others. I know they won't be locked up with children, but I don't know that that sexuality cannot find another form of expression hurtful in and of itself.

[FatAndFaithless]

Doesn't that sound cruel and unusual to you?  

but I don't know that that sexuality cannot find another form of expression hurtful in and of itself.

The same can be said for any sort of dangerous tendency.  Violence, for example.  We don't take time to disable every violent offenders' arms and legs on the chance that they use those for violence in prison.  The rapist is already locked in prison for (hopefully) a hugely significant portion of their life.  I don't see who it helps, or what problem it solves, to castrate them. It's cruel, and it's unusual, it shouldn't be done.

[AkiraTheViking]

Privileged asshole.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

 Of course if you had been locked up in a dungeon all that time you had no choice.  But if you were free to go about your daily activities and continually returned to the "rapist" of your own free will I'm not buying your story.  If you've been raped that many times then being raped is your favorite way of having sex.

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.  Was Wyrd of Gawd always this fucking insane?  Have I just not seen his other horrific posts?

The poster ratted herself out.  I responded to her comment based on common sense and the norms of our society.  She claimed that she had been raped countless times.  So if she wasn't confined she was a willing participant and kept putting herself in the very position that she claims was so horrible for her.  That indicates a total lack of good sense.  Fully grown adults are supposed to have sense enough to protect themselves.  Sure, she could have been a legitimate victim of the first rape.  That wouldn't be her fault.  But to go on and constantly repeat the experience over the course of months or years is simply stupid.  There are countless people she could have reported her situation to and received the necessary help to remove herself from danger.  

I'm not giving gold stars to stupid people.  If people don't want to be considered to be stupid then they should stop ratting themselves out for doing stupid things year after year.  

Everyone does something stupid once in a while.  But people quickly learn from their mistakes and change their behavior to protect themselves.  The poster was a slow learner and the experiences must have been tolerable.  Now she has buyer's remorse.   And the thread is about "taking some fucking responsibility!"