IMMIGRATION thread

[Greyblades]

It is quite important as it indicates that the social consequences of rape accusations are minimal

No it doesnt. It indicates that the Legal consequences of rape accusations are minimal.

unless you go so far as to assume that in all the unreported cases and all the cases that do not see court, there are still fewer 'true rapes' than there are spurious trials, and that in such unreported cases and cases that do not see court, that the accused are so much as inconvenienced, let alone penalized by employers and peers who never hear word of the matter anyway.

If they dont hear a word of the matter. If they do, like say through the internet or social media, it is highly damaging to the accused reputation and may result in termination of employment.

That's more to do with fundamental disagreements over what constitutes "rape" than any legitimate methodological or statistical complaint.

My point being that the USA putting all sexual crimes, from misemeanours like groping to felonies like rape, all under one umbrella term is highly detrimental to the statistic's value in this argument.

What privatized medicine? Rape kits are virtually never tested, as they are tested in-house and police see their priorities as (anywhere) else.

...he's not arguing about the rape kit's usefulness he's arguing the rape kit's price. Which was a consequence of having free market healthcare not this "rape culture"

Seriously do you even finish reading before you start replying?

Inebriation legally precludes consent.

Alcohol is and has long been humanity's most powerful external tool for sellf replication. To automatically assume that intoxication percludes consent results in absurdity; if that was true at least 50% of all men and women in recorded history who have bred are rapists, including a good number of your ancestors.

Sexual history would be even less relevant here than a record of plagiarism.

If we take consent earlier in an encounter or in an earlier encounter to be meaningful, then we must ask of those who insist that this is so how it can be judged to affect the case in any principled way.

If they have a history of agreeing to fuck every man/woman in sight it would add validity to an argument in court that the prosecution was doing the same with this one, only they regretted it later.

How do you figure that?

Common sense.

[Montmorency]

No it doesnt. It indicates that the Legal consequences of rape accusations are minimal.

So what indicates the opposite for the non-legal? That feminists take such things seriously? What a paradox you place yourself in.

If they dont hear a word of the matter. If they do, like say through the internet or social media, it is highly damaging to the accused reputation and may result in termination of employment.

Most employers overreact at any legal trouble on a low-level employee's part. This has nothing to do with your position.

My point being that the USA putting all sexual crimes, from misemeanours like groping to felonies like rape, all under one umbrella term is highly detrimental to the statistic's value in this argument.

It's not clear that you understand what the figure actually encompasses.

...he's not arguing about the rape kit's usefulness he's arguing the rape kit's price. Which was a consequence of having free market healthcare not this "rape culture"

Seriously do you even finish reading before you start replying?

The free market does not pay for rape kit tests as I plainly said.

Alcohol is and has long been humanity's most powerful external tool for sellf replication. To automatically assume that intoxication percludes consent results in absurdity; if that was true at least 50% of all men and women in recorded history who have bred are rapists, including a good number of your ancestors.

It is not a very ambiguous legal standard.

If they have a history of agreeing to fuck every man/woman in sight it would add validity to an argument in court that the prosecution was doing the same with this one, only they regretted it later.

And how do you figure that? Your common sense again?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

The UK is not a "Rape Society".

A man accused of Rape is tarnished for the rest of his life unless he can positively disprove it.

[Montmorency]

Again, what evidence is there beyond your personal ideal?

A businessman would never commit fraud as any of his subordinates or associates would report him immediately for such a vile distortion of free exchange and he would never be involved in enterprise again unless he could conclusively demonstrate to independent auditors that everything is above-board.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Again, what evidence is there beyond your personal ideal?

A businessman would never commit fraud as any of his subordinates or associates would report him immediately for such a vile distortion of free exchange and he would never be involved in enterprise again unless he could conclusively demonstrate to independent auditors that everything is above-board.

An orgy of evidence - such as the Oxford student who was accused but against whom the case was dropped.

He now lives under a cloud.

It's like saying we're a "Murder Society" because people kill other people.

Rape is not permissible in the UK under any circumstances even if it might have been 50 years ago.

[Montmorency]

An orgy of evidence - such as the Oxford student who was accused but against whom the case was dropped.

He now lives under a cloud.

It's like saying we're a "Murder Society" because people kill other people.

Rape is not permissible in the UK under any circumstances even if it might have been 50 years ago.

I can't tell what specific case you are referring to, so I can't say that you aren't falling into the exact foolish fallacy I pointed out a number of posts ago.

The one point you have is that the tautological formulations of "rape culture" do suffer from bordering on your formulation of "murder culture".

A rape accusation causes that overraction and bars the accused from later jobs, that's a social consequence that even you admit happen.

Not a rape accusation, but a public circus over a public accusation, usually before any charges are filed or considered. So, no.

counting it as it's own crime, so I'm not sure why its presented as proof of a rape culture.

I am trying to be generous to you, but do you really not understand that in legal terms and in statistical terms "sexual assault" and "rape" are indeed two distinct crimes that are treated differently, but that both fall under the broader category of sexual crime?

So you agree with me.

Let me be more straightforward: municipalities pay for rape kits and their testing. Don't be obtuse.

So I can have sex with a willing woman but if she has any amount of alcohol in her it's rape?

No - the legal standard is that, like juveniles and animals, an intoxicated individual is incompetent to give consent. When intoxication results for a given individual under given circumstances, or the wider philosophical questions surrounding the nature of law in light of philosophy of mind, do not change that this is the given legal standard that we rule by.

[Fragony]

I wouldn't call it a public accusation but just more information slipping in. If that information is true I simply can't know but it looks pretty bad so far for those who bagatilise/relativate what seems to have happened.

[Greyblades]

Not a rape accusation, but a public circus over a public accusation, usually before any charges are filed or considered. So, no.

Except you dont even need a media circus. As you said "Most employers overreact at any legal trouble on a low-level employee's part", even if it doesnt end up in the paper; if an employer gets wind of a rape allegation that employee is prone to being jettisoned just to make sure future developments cant damage the company.

I am trying to be generous to you, but do you really not understand that in legal terms and in statistical terms "sexual assault" and "rape" are indeed two distinct crimes that are treated differently, but that both fall under the broader category of sexual crime?

Except when it doesnt: "In some places, such as New South Wales, the crime of sexual assault has replaced the traditional crime of rape, and is being defined as non-consensual penetrative sex"
Some places also include Texas, a part of the USA, explaining my confusion over which definbition the FBI uses.

Not that any of this matters, if the FBI reports include rape the statistics Don Corleone used are too broad to be of use as I said earlier. If it doesnt include rape: it is fundamentally useless in determinining the existance of rape culture.

Let me be more straightforward: municipalities pay for rape kits and their testing. Don't be obtuse.

Go back and read the argument step by step; Don Corleone used the fact that rape kits needed to be bought until 2 years ago as proof of a rape culture, I challenged it by saying it's a problem of free market medicine, not rape culture.

Could you explain what your problem with that is? Four posts later I still have no goddamned idea, nor why you are still going on about it.

No - the legal standard is that, like juveniles and animals, an intoxicated individual is incompetent to give consent. When intoxication results for a given individual under given circumstances, or the wider philosophical questions surrounding the nature of law in light of philosophy of mind, do not change that this is the given legal standard that we rule by.

"No, it's not rape, except yes it is" Which is it?

[Greyblades]

So what indicates the opposite for the non-legal?

This:

Most employers overreact at any legal trouble on a low-level employee's part. This has nothing to do with your position.

A rape accusation causes that overraction and bars the accused from later jobs, that's a social consequence that even you admit happen.

It's not clear that you understand what the figure actually encompasses.

Again, stealing the words from my mouth.

Considering we dont even have a source for his stats noone can. The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network defines sexual assault as "unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape, counting it as it's own crime, so I'm not sure why its presented as proof of a rape culture.

The free market does not pay for rape kit tests as I plainly said.

So you agree with me.

It is not a very ambiguous legal standard.

So I can have sex with a willing woman but if she has any amount of alcohol in her it's rape?