Why aren't murder ''jokes'' as bad or worse than rape ones?

i never said i would kill myself. i said i would fight to the death.

And if you had to choose death or rape? Say the rapist has subdued you, and he says either I can rape you, or I can slit your throat now. Which do you want?

Emotionally I do think rape brings about worse feelings than murder. I've thought about this and tbh, I would be more comfortable around a murderer than a rapist.

lol i wouldn't participate in the choice.

but if it was a case where i was a in a prison shower and 3 guys with knives said they were gonna rape me or im dead i would fight them with the hope that they have to kill me to subdue me.

That's not how this game works, and if you'd truly rather death over rape, then you would choose to let him kill you every time. I thought you weren't afraid of death and you prefer it over rape, so what is the problem?

exactly. in the first scenario he could do either. by giving me the choice hes toying with me. its a power thing. by choosing your accepting he is in control.

What if they subdue you by holding you down face first, and then they rape you. Would you then kill yourself in the aftermath in order to follow up your preference for death over "dishonour"?

if they subdue me then so be it. theyve bested me.
i wouldnt kill my self in the aftermath. the whole death is BEFORE dishonour. i dont see much point in the japanese harikiri/seppoku system of being disgraced and then killing yourself. if they succeeded in the rape and didnt kill me after then i would get revenge. not self destruct.

I completely agree with all you've said there, and I couldn't agree more on the issue of revenge. Thus, I find the "fight to the death" attitude still somewhat puzzling.

Given you have accepted that if they subdued you and raped you, afterwards you would be resilient enough to bounce back, to take your revenge, and so on. So why not take that approach generally?

I mean, I certainly say fight a rapist off to the best of your ability, but when you get to the point of diminishing returns (say they have a huge knife, and you fighting will almost certainly result in your death), then I think being subdued rather than having them slice you open is better

i guess its to do with dignity. id rather go out in some blaze of glory than be subdued. but if im already subdued and the blaze of glory option has been taken away then i search for more pragmatic means of revenge.

1st choice would be whoop all the guys asses
2nd would be hold my own enough so that they lose taste for the fight
3rd would be me doing some william wallace meets remember the alamo stuff fight to the death stuff.
4th would be the unavoidable defeat and a slow bitter revenge plan that always risks never germinating.

Never said there was so few.

I understand that the dead are dead, and they don't have the chance to make their live better for themselves like other victims have the chance.
Just, that a rape victim and their family have to live through what's happened, plus, rape victims are grieving because they too have lost out, but murder has been glamourised so much it's not taken so seriously. It's like the growing trend of romanticising self harm and mental illness, and soon enough that'll be a joke like everything else.

I am talking about cases where it doesn't involve prisoners and situations where making the same joke about a woman would be completely unaaceptable. Just look at the male rape scene in Deliverance, it's the gold standard for ''LOL male rape is funny''. Would never happen if the victim was a woman.

And do you watch ''Loose women'' and other similar shows in both US and UK? If there were similar shows that had 1% of the vileness and ''banter'' but this time addressed to the other sex, they'd be pulled off the air the same week it started.

What does this even mean?



And a murder victim's family doesn't have to live through what's happened? And in what parallel universe is mental illness romanticised? Come on now.

Far too sophist an argument: violent assault does both i) ("e.g. I'll beat the living **** out of that guy") and ii) and there are significantly more cases of violent assault than rape, and the victim is not (usually) dead either.

I think this is a new phenomenon. For instance, consider this story from a few months ago of a Conservative councillor condemned for using rape in an analogy. What's weird about this story is that the councillor was a woman, but what makes it much less weird is that she is over 60. Her remark was clearly intended in the sense of wry resignation, like "If you have to kill a man it costs nothing to be polite." - not intended as a serious endorsement of cheerful and good-mannered murder! Unfortunately, she didn't realise the social context had changed and it is no longer taken for granted that anyone, even a respected woman in a position of authority, is not actually in favour of rape.

And I've got to agree with Cllr Driver that this modern phenomenon is unusual, if not downright creepy. It hasn't arisen in response to a movement to legalise or normalise rape; if anything, heterosexual conduct is a lot more repressed today that it was in the 60s or 70s, at least in practice if not in law, as the recent abuse trials have shown. Rather, it is being used by a rigid moralising movement as a weapon with which to bludgeon its enemies on unrelated social issues.

Not really, it's a culmination of the linguistic turn that's been going on in philosophy and social theory over the course of the last century, if not longer; language is no longer seen as unproblematic or apolitical, but as a site of social power.

Rape is a crime in which the victims continue to suffer through shame and humiliation long after the assault occurs. The added stigma towards rape jokes, is a result of a "social conscience", which seeks to discourage any behavior that potentially contributes to that enduring humiliation and shame.

Murder victims require no such protection.

That's not new; language was used to acquire and secure political power by the Greeks, Babylonians, and if your definition is broad enough, even by cats and rodents.

So the change is that some people now think there is a pro-rape movement that they need to counter. Is that a reality, or a paranoid conspiracy theory like "reds under the bed"? If the latter, which is the side really using language to wield power over others here?