| CrazyGamer2017 said: 1) As for what you are saying now about the "same exact outcome occurring if you are not married" First the issue here is rape INSIDE marriage right? At least that's what I have been discussing. All other outcomes or issues are real too and worthy of a debate too but I have been so far only speaking of the very specific issue of rape inside marriage and I never said that other outcomes outside marriage are impossible or cannot happen. 2) But I must say I feel a bit discouraged when you ask "how is the act of marriage in any way becoming responsible for the actions that led to the act (I assume you mean the act of raping)" because I have almost literally answered that a million times so here goes again: I do not say one is responsible for the act of raping (the victim I mean) or any other bad outcome, the criminal is the sole person responsible of the crime when there is a crime (like rape), the victim is in my opinion responsible of the CHOICES he/she made. Everybody must be responsible of the choices one makes. the CHOICES, as for the crime itself, the victim is obviously not responsible for that. 3) As for that part of your argument where you say that stuff happens against the odds, well I can see what you mean but I don't entirely agree with that either. Indeed you cannot control every possible outcome of every possible decision you take in your life, but you still can hedge your bets can't you? Let me use your own example as I think it can help. I agree when you say that if you think a shark could kill you then you'd end up never going to the beach (or I think that's what you are saying, sorry If I got you wrong). But you sill can make choices that will make a dire outcome in which a shark ends up killing you, a SUPER LOW probability. For example you can make the CHOICE of swimming in waters where sharks never go like in the beaches of northern Europe. But you can see a ton of people swimming in warm waters in southern beaches like the beaches of Australia. so to THOSE people I say, should a shark hurt you, it's not your fault but you are responsible of your CHOICE of swimming in waters where sharks are KNOWN to appear. Whereas I CHOOSE to only go to northern Europe's beaches where never a shark has been spotted or known to go to. My CHOICE in this example is RESPONSIBLE. I still could be attacked by a shark there but the odds are so incredibly low compared to someone who chooses to swim in southern hot Australian waters that in my opinion that person is NOT making responsible choices when swimming in such waters. 4) So the conclusion of my argument is that I agree we cannot control every possible outcome in our lives but our CHOICES if smart and RESPONSIBLE can seriously bring the odds in our favor. And my message to future victims of possible rapes is to take responsibility for their choices so that the odds can be in the victim's favor and maybe, just maybe the victim can end up not being a victim after all when making responsible choices. |
1) To act like "Marital Rape" is sufficiently different from "Spousal Rape" is to basically use semantics to build a wall where none exists. While "marital rape" does have some additional stigma, in effect, the two are extremely similar. This leads to point 2...
2) Your cutting of my sentence seems to have cut out all the context of my question. Go back and reread the whole sentence and you should see that you did not answer my question. My point was that, as marital rape and spousal rape are not sufficiently different, the act of marriage does not incur further risk in effect. This means that by getting married, all you are doing is changing the verbiage of abuse, not the effect or reality of said abuse. As such, there is no logic in saying that someone accepted the risk by getting married, as that risk was already there. Are you understanding what I'm saying?
3) To introduce these additional elements is to move the goalposts, more or less. Basically, you have been arguing from a position where responsibility of the raped individual for the actions that led to this occurrence is the default, assumed position. You are not arguing from specific circumstances where risk is more apparent, you are arguing from this broad statement, that responsibility is the default. This is the core of my problem with your argument. That these "mistakes" are inherent to the situation.
You are not asking for clarification as to whether these individuals were swimming in Australia or England (so to speak), you are simply placing the responsibility on the victim by default.
4) And finally, I would just like to stress that there is a pretty big difference between telling someone to make responsible decisions and telling someone that they have made poor choices. I'll add that one of my biggest problems with your arguments has been that you have been applying these criticisms to actions that someone took in the past. You have been pushing for telling a rape victim how their actions led to them being raped. I have no issue with, say, encouraging victims of domestic abuse to go to the police. I do have a pretty big problem with saying to victims of domestic abuse "You did say 'for better or for worse', so I mean, you shouldn't be surprised by the fact that you have been abused. You need to take responsibility for your actions."
