I have read Ted's posts. I have NOT read the entire thread - but I don't need to.
The fact of the matter is that he was accused by a participant of the thread of ignoring certain facts about female reaction to rape which allegedly was part of the problem of presentations made in a sexualized manner. He responded by citing statistics which either disprove or ameliorate the contentions made.
You can argue the statistics - if you HAVE an argument against them - but to turn his response into his being a "rape apologist" when his responses in that regard are QUITE CLEAR is just disgustingly intellectually dishonest. I assume Garrett has a personal agenda with Tso behind this attack, or Garrett has some other agenda in mind.
People frequently like to prove they are "morally superior" to other people, and I suspect this ad hominem attack falls into that category.
Beyond that, the notion that sexual material that might be used in a presentation anywhere has to be prohibited because certain women do not like it for whatever reason is in my view ridiculous. If you think the definition of rape is uncertain, try defining "offensive". The courts use the ridiculous and vague "community standards" definition. Any other is even less rationally justifiable.
As well-known comic Bill Hicks said: "Another thing. This idea of "I'm offended". Well I've got news for you. I'm offended by a lot of things too. Where do I send my list? Life is offensive. You know what I mean? Just get in touch with your outer adult. And grow up. And move on. Reasonable people don't write letters because... A: They have lives and B, they understand it's just TV. C: If they see something they don't like, something they do like might be on later. I've seen many comics I've hated. I've seen many shows that have offended me. I've never written a letter. I just go about my life."
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Totally Unjustified Ad Hominem Attack
Date: 2012-11-06 01:36 am (UTC)The fact of the matter is that he was accused by a participant of the thread of ignoring certain facts about female reaction to rape which allegedly was part of the problem of presentations made in a sexualized manner. He responded by citing statistics which either disprove or ameliorate the contentions made.
You can argue the statistics - if you HAVE an argument against them - but to turn his response into his being a "rape apologist" when his responses in that regard are QUITE CLEAR is just disgustingly intellectually dishonest. I assume Garrett has a personal agenda with Tso behind this attack, or Garrett has some other agenda in mind.
People frequently like to prove they are "morally superior" to other people, and I suspect this ad hominem attack falls into that category.
Beyond that, the notion that sexual material that might be used in a presentation anywhere has to be prohibited because certain women do not like it for whatever reason is in my view ridiculous. If you think the definition of rape is uncertain, try defining "offensive". The courts use the ridiculous and vague "community standards" definition. Any other is even less rationally justifiable.
As well-known comic Bill Hicks said: "Another thing. This idea of "I'm offended". Well I've got news for you. I'm offended by a lot of things too. Where do I send my list? Life is offensive. You know what I mean? Just get in touch with your outer adult. And grow up. And move on. Reasonable people don't write letters because... A: They have lives and B, they understand it's just TV. C: If they see something they don't like, something they do like might be on later. I've seen many comics I've hated. I've seen many shows that have offended me. I've never written a letter. I just go about my life."
Garrett, go on with your life...