Is it wrong to question the validity of a rape claim? Is the personal political?

Watch
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
Is it wrong to question the validity of an unsubstantiated rape claim if that rape claim is used as a political weapon within the confines of a political discussion to amass political capital?

Is the personal political? Would you ever utilise anecdotal evidence - which you can't substantiate - within the confines of a political discussion? Would you feel this adds validity to your beliefs (emphasis on the word beliefs, simply because invoking a personal experience invariably means you are relying on beliefs to form political viewpoints)?

Would you intervene on someone's behalf if you witnessed this - someone being challenged on an unsubstantiated rape claim - happening? If so, why? Why do you deem they need protection, when they introduced the argument in a public place?

Surely, in refusing to question the validity of your unsubstantiated rape claim, I'm treating you like less than an equal, or less of an individual? Surely claims, particularly within the confines of political discussions, need to be verified to hold legitimacy?

I, personally, am impervious to emotional manipulation and guilt-tripping. However, a great number of people seem to succumb to it, or let people drag their personal experiences into threads, or public discussions, for the purposes of shutting down debate (a bit in the manner they use 'white privilege' to invalidate any and all contrary opinion).
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
it depends on the context, because what some people consider rape, some people do not, because the matter of "consent" is so relative. for example, I personally don't think alcohol invalidates consent.
0
reply
Saoirse:3
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#3
Report 5 years ago
#3
Yes, it is, because it's a reaction that's likely to greatly hurt rape victims and which also never seems to apply to any other crime. When people say I've been mugged, I've been assaulted, I've been stolen from, the first reaction is very rarely "prove it" or "was it really a mugging? Did you fight back? Were you drunk?" Instead it's sympathy, as it should be. Leave the trial for the courts and remember people's humanity.
3
reply
math42
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 5 years ago
#4
Well considering we are in a forum section in which we are generally meant to debate, ultimately it is not wrong (here), but it depends on the context as to whether it is really all that appropriate. If someone says "x happened to me and this is why I am y", I think it's rather unnecessary to question them. If someone says "x happened to me and this is why argument y is valid" then they are using an unproved assertion as part of the debate, which is just bad (and unfair) debating. There are blurred lines here, of course. Stating your justification for your own belief can be seen as stating a justification for that belief in general. I guess it is a bit of a matter of interpretation.
I am no fan of disharmony and would feel uncomfortable calling someone out for something like this, but I wouldn't say it is immoral or unfair to do so in this context. In a friendly conversation or on the chat forum though...that would be rather harsh.

I saw the other thread hence why I'm talking about this forum but I would say the same for any situation where somewhat serious political debate is going on (not that TSR is a sanctuary of sincerity)
1
reply
Normaleila
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
Rape is a crime. It is for the police to investigate and the judicial system to decide. As for alcohol not invalidating consent - it's not clear what situation you are thinking of. Do you mean someone drunk is not 'allowed' to withdraw consent? Or that someone too drunk to say No is assumed to give consent?
0
reply
elohssa_59
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
(Original post by Normaleila)
Rape is a crime. It is for the police to investigate and the judicial system to decide. As for alcohol not invalidating consent - it's not clear what situation you are thinking of. Do you mean someone drunk is not 'allowed' to withdraw consent? Or that someone too drunk to say No is assumed to give consent?
If someone drunk says yes, then it means yes. I think that's what he meant. It's what I believe anyway.
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#7
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
Yes, it is, because it's a reaction that's likely to greatly hurt rape victims and which also never seems to apply to any other crime
With respect, in the context of a political discussion - where they have introduced the argument to amass political capital i.e., they are actually using their 'too sensitive to talk about' personal topic to amass political capital - what does it matter whether their feelings are hurt?

So, they can politicise the situation, but I can't argue about it politically, even though they are incentivised to lie? Doesn't that seem grossly unfair, one-sided and illogical to you?

Can I stop you questioning the validity of my unsubstantiated personal assertions on the basis you may hurt my feelings?
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by elohssa_59)
If someone drunk says yes, then it means yes. I think that's what he meant. It's what I believe anyway.
Yeah, like this. See, she's using lies - and straw men - to discredit me and to amass political capital.
0
reply
Saoirse:3
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#9
Report 5 years ago
#9
(Original post by TheCitizenAct)
With respect, in the context of a political discussion - where they have introduced the argument to amass political capital i.e., they are actually using their 'too sensitive to talk about' personal topic to amass political capital - what does it matter whether their feelings are hurt?

So, they can politicise the situation, but I can't argue about it politically?

Can I stop you questioning the validity of my unsubstantiated personal assertions on the basis you may hurt my feelings?
Because they're a human being and I generally wish to spend my life making people happy, not upset. I'm not saying it should be illegal or anything, it's just my personal moral opinion. I don't know what political capital you'd hope to gain out of it anyway to be honest.
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#10
(Original post by 13 1 20 8 42)
I think it's rather unnecessary to question them. If someone says "x happened to me and this is why argument y is valid" then they are using an unproved assertion as part of the debate, which is just bad (and unfair) debating.
Agreed.
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#11
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
Because they're a human being and I generally wish to spend my life making people happy, not upset. I'm not saying it should be illegal or anything, it's just my personal moral opinion. I don't know what political capital you'd hope to gain out of it anyway to be honest.
'I've been raped, conversation closed.' That's pretty much how it goes.

It always happens within the confines of 'the personal is political.' Logic gets discarded like it's blasphemous and suddenly, this unsubstantiated rape claim is enough to verify her every belief or feeling, even though there's absolutely no evidence said rape happened, and she's clearly incentivised to lie about it to advance her own agenda.

To give you an example, a woman recently accused a Primark security guard of snatching her baby while she was breastfeeding. The ENTIRE MSM reported on the issue - everyone was shocked. There was zero evidence to back any of this up - I knew it was bull**** the first moment I heard it - but popular Facebook breastfeeding groups ran with it, and made a host of damning allegations against Primark.

What happened? It was bull****. She lied about the whole thing. Even after her lie was exposed, even to this day, people still believe the story was true. People still leverage it to accrue political capital - 'what about that lady who had her baby snatched?!'
0
reply
Saoirse:3
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#12
Report 5 years ago
#12
(Original post by TheCitizenAct)
'I've been raped, conversation closed.' That's pretty much how it goes.

It always happens within the confines of 'the personal is political.' Logic gets discarded like it's blasphemous and suddenly, this unsubstantiated rape claim is enough to verify her every belief or feeling, even though there's absolutely no evidence said rape happened, and she's clearly incentivised to lie about it to advance her own agenda.

To give you an example, a woman recently accused a Primark security guard of snatching her baby while she was breastfeeding. The ENTIRE MSM reported on the issue - everyone was shocked. There was zero evidence to back any of this up - I knew it was bull**** the first moment I heard it - but popular Facebook breastfeeding groups ran with it, and made a host of damning allegations against Primark.

What happened? It was bull****. She lied about the whole thing. Even after her lie was exposed, even to this day, people still believe the story was true. People still leverage it to accrue political capital - 'what about that lady who had her baby snatched?!'
What exactly does that have to do with rape?
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#13
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#13
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
What exactly does that have to do with rape?
It as example of someone making stuff up - lying - to amass political capital.
0
reply
Saoirse:3
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#14
Report 5 years ago
#14
(Original post by TheCitizenAct)
It as example of someone making stuff - lying - up to amass political capital.
Whereas my question was how a rape claim could be used to generate any significant political capital, it seems somewhat farfetched.
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#15
(Original post by Saoirse:3)
Whereas my question was how a rape claim could be used to generate any significant political capital, it seems somewhat farfetched.
Rape, in the absence of an actual incident of rape, is used to amass political capital all the time (often even by people who haven't been raped and merely want to exploit genuine victims of rape to further their own agenda).

The 'Jackie' story on Rolling Stone Magazine was found to be a complete lie (she accused 4 boys in a fraternity of raping her - this resulted in death threats for the Associate Dean of the University and the boys having their lives turned upside down).

Yet, the original intent behind it was to find an example of 'rape culture' on university campuses, for the purposes of amassing political capital - to falsely portray the severity, or extremity, of the actual situation. With no basis in proof, it went straight to the front page.

When the narrative is ramped up, we are forced to deal with it - ergo, boys are now being cajoled into attending consent classes at universities, as if masculinity is pathological.
0
reply
Underscore__
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#16
Report 5 years ago
#16
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
it depends on the context, because what some people consider rape, some people do not, because the matter of "consent" is so relative. for example, I personally don't think alcohol invalidates consent.
No matter how much the woman drinks?


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
DannyYYYY
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#17
Report 5 years ago
#17
(Original post by TheCitizenAct)
When the narrative is ramped up, we are forced to deal with it - ergo, boys are now being cajoled into attending consent classes at universities, as if masculinity is pathological.
You don't think learning what classes as consent is worthwhile?
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#18
Report 5 years ago
#18
(Original post by Underscore__)
No matter how much the woman drinks?


Posted from TSR Mobile
so long as she's still awake/conscious - I hear a lot of people talking about "passed-out drunk" - passed out isn't conscious so that's an obvious line
0
reply
TheCitizenAct
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#19
(Original post by DannyYYYY)
You don't think learning what classes as consent is worthwhile?
No, because male sexuality isn't a disability. Nor are males ****ing morons.

If they don't know the difference between 'yes' and 'no' by the age of 18, despite being students of higher education, they never will. It's nothing more than a dehumanising ploy, and wouldn't be accepted in the context of ANY identity type other than 'male.'

For example, maybe we should teach black men not to rape? Would you deem that 'offensive'?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have the space and resources you need to succeed in home learning?

Yes I have everything I need (325)
55.75%
I don't have everything I need (258)
44.25%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed