Sex to boost film career is 'not rape': Weinstein lawyer - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53181671]It's actually completely different but okay[/QUOTE] No it’s not, actually.

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53181646]Sorry for getting a little hostile but "not all men" logic really pisses me off.[/QUOTE] I don't get why some forms of generalization are super acceptable, and others aren't It's just a pet peeve I don't understand. You can't say "I'm more afraid of black men", but take the word "black" out, and it's a socially acceptable phrase. But why?

Yeah, but to be fair black people being attested for more crimes isn't equal to men being more statistically violent towards women than the other way around

[QUOTE=Quq;53177597]Threadjacking will NOT be tolerated. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Backseat moderating/Why reply?" - Novangel))[/highlight][/QUOTE] Context: WP494 is the "patch note guy" for TF2's, CSGO's, and some other games' subreddits, he used to do it for Dota 2, but another user named SirBelvedere overtook him in popularity on the Dota 2 subreddit and I think he would post this whenever people mentioned the "struggle" between them. (he went on "strike" from CSGO patch notes for a few days because someone beat him to it once lol) On topic: nothing that hasn't been said before but get fucked weinstein, if this will be their defense if/when he does get charges he must have shitty lawyers or they know he's guilty and will try to get him on lesser charges than rape. edit: I was wrong the source of the phrase is even stupider. One time WP494 posted a update thread with no info just so he could be first when Belevedere was away, then Belevedere decided not to make a second thread so he posted the patch notes in WP's thread's comments, WP got mad and said the phrase and deleted the thread so people couldn't see Belevedere's patch notes. edit2: fixed extra new line before WP's edit3: well I didn't really mention the source at first so he may have posted it after whenever people mentioned the feud, I don't know whether he did or not. edit4: I guess the origin of my initial version could have been that they WP was trying to keep threads on topic without talk of the "feud" but I was wrong about the origin

Shouldn't it be considered prostitution?

[QUOTE=thegrb93;53181750]Shouldn't it be considered prostitution?[/QUOTE] If it was offered by the women for getting some bonus in return, maybe. But this is the opposite

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53181646]Sorry for getting a little hostile but "not all men" logic really pisses me off.[/QUOTE] Telling a group of people you inherently don't trust them based on some arbitrary factor is inherently going to be insulting and getting insulted back at them trying to defend themselves isn't exactly a smart thing to do.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;53181763]Telling a group of people you inherently don't trust them based on some arbitrary factor is inherently going to be insulting and getting insulted back at them trying to defend themselves isn't exactly a smart thing to do.[/QUOTE] Tbh, only if you take it as a personal attack rather than an experience caused caution.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53181764]Tbh, only if you take it as a personal attack rather than an experience caused caution.[/QUOTE] Who's allowed to take it personally, and who's not? Are black people allowed to take the statistical inference they're more dangerous "Not personally"? I genuinely want to figure out where the line is on what's okay and what's not okay in this "intersectional" way of thinking

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;53181770]Who's allowed to take it personally, and who's not? Are black people allowed to take the statistical inference they're more dangerous "Not personally"? I genuinely want to figure out where the line is on what's okay and what's not okay in this "intersectional" way of thinking[/QUOTE] You can take it personally if you want, but that doesn't make it more of an insult. Black people are made to look more dangerous due to statistical manipulation, men just straight up physically attack people more

As a woman, I feel like I've been programmed to not trust strange men when I'm alone. It's not something conscious but instead is more like a reflex. I've just had it ingrained into my head since my birth that there's a possibility a man could hurt me if I'm alone with them, even as I very much know it's a small fraction of men who would ever do so. I'm not sure how to feel about it.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53181788]You can take it personally if you want, but that doesn't make it more of an insult. Black people are made to look more dangerous due to statistical manipulation, men just straight up physically attack people more[/QUOTE] Except there aren't so many men who commit assault that they outnumber those who don't. The generalization is still idiotic.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53181788]You can take it personally if you want, but that doesn't make it more of an insult. Black people are made to look more dangerous due to statistical manipulation, men just straight up physically attack people more[/QUOTE] It's one of those instances of "Well I'm not implying any offense, so you can't take offense". I'm not personally offended. I just see a hypocrisy in the "left" and it's approach to topics of personal offense. Like for instance, you're saying that black men "are made to look more dangerous" due to statistical manipulation, but don't acknowledge that the whole statistic of "men being more violent" is just as subject to manipulation. It's ultimately just weird to me, because if you said "i'm afraid of black men" you're a racist, but if you say "I'm afraid of men" you're a totally sane person no one can say anything to. But what's the actual practical difference in what was said? It's still looking at a whole group, judging them by the aspects of them that are the worst, and saying "yes, this is the best way forward".

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;53181854]Except there aren't so many men who commit assault that they outnumber those who don't. The generalization is still idiotic.[/QUOTE] There doesn't need to be, the fact is that more men are violent, so while out-right assuming someone is going to attack you is silly, being more careful is not.

[QUOTE=thegrb93;53181750]Shouldn't it be considered prostitution?[/QUOTE] No, that's not the same. Prostitution is paying for sex, there's clear expectations for both parties that sex will be involved. This is like making a prostitute act in your film before paying her, except reverse-ways.

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53181627]I don't blanket fear men. I just tend to trust them less by default, until I'm convinced they're safe. It's not a conscious decision, it's just a result of what I've been exposed to. I'm sure of you ask a lot of women they'll say the same thing. I picked up on this shit a long time ago and felt unsafe before I knew why.[/QUOTE] I always see dads being hyper defensive of their daughters and telling them the to watch out for dudes. This attitude of "men are dicks" at least partially comes from those dads, imo.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;53181763]Telling a group of people you inherently don't trust them based on some arbitrary factor is inherently going to be insulting and getting insulted back at them trying to defend themselves isn't exactly a smart thing to do.[/QUOTE] "Very high chance of being physically or sexually assaulted by a man" ceases to be an arbitrary factor when you are on the receiving end of this situation.

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53182476]"[B]Very high chance [/B]of being physically or sexually assaulted by a man" ceases to be an arbitrary factor when you are on the receiving end of this situation.[/QUOTE] Really? [I]Very high chance?[/I] Based on what?

[QUOTE=Bertie;53182505]Really? [I]Very high chance?[/I] Based on what?[/QUOTE] Compared to women probs

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;53182508]Compared to women probs[/QUOTE] While there is a discrepancy, it isn't [I]that[/I] massive. People believe there's a much bigger gap than there really is due to the sustaining of certain stereotypes as well as the particularly taboo nature of the subject when it comes to men being assaulted or abused by women, or women being abused by other women. To me, the logic that you need to show extra caution around certain people because they're statistically the most likely to commit one particular crime is a terrible crutch to rest on. There are situations in which you can end up which warrant extra careful behavior but trying to sort out how careful you should be based on statistical factors is a perfect way to end up ignoring legitimate threats because you were too fixated on one particular factor. We want to find patterns in everything and after any trauma it's obviously one of the first thing we try to find so that the trauma does not occur again, but it's still an unhealthy thing to do in the long run.

[QUOTE=Bertie;53182505]Really? [I]Very high chance?[/I] Based on what?[/QUOTE] 1 in 6 women will be victims of sexual violence in their lifetimes. I don't like those odds.

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53182584]1 in 6 women will be victims of sexual violence in their lifetimes. I don't like those odds.[/QUOTE] I'm not sure if this is the definition that that statistic cites, but if it's this one: [url]https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/definitions.html[/url] then "Unwanted sexual contact" registers you as one of the six. I.E, getting groped once ever. Which isn't unimportant, but one in six also is not shocking if you count that. "Unwanted sexual contact" also isn't necessarily even something that's that big of a deal. Of course, it [I]can[/I] be, but it's not like having your ass grabbed is going to affect you the same way that being raped will.

[QUOTE=phygon;53182619]I'm not sure if this is the definition that that statistic cites, but if it's this one: [url]https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/definitions.html[/url] then "Unwanted sexual contact" registers you as one of the six. I.E, getting groped once ever. Which isn't unimportant, but one in six also is not shocking if you count that. "Unwanted sexual contact" also isn't necessarily even something that's that big of a deal. Of course, it [I]can[/I] be, but it's not like having your ass grabbed is going to affect you the same way that being raped will.[/QUOTE] how about you get sexually groped by a stranger who is more physically powerful than you and then report back to me on how it wasn't "that big of a deal"

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53182986]how about you get sexually groped by a stranger who is more physically powerful than you and then report back to me on how it wasn't "that big of a deal"[/QUOTE] Okay, done. For me, it wasn't. I didn't want to mention it because I felt that using it as an anecdote would come across as an emotional appeal and wasn't entirely relevant. I've had somebody with a foot or so on me grab my ass [I]hard[/I] and then try to make other advances. When I said to stop, he did, which is probably why that particular instance wasn't that big of a deal for me. Yeah, it spooked me a bit, but it didn't have any lasting effects; nor did the other couple of times it happened at conventions and pride rallies, probably because I wasn't being backed into a corner or anything. Context matters a lot. Somebody groping you at a party while drunk, in a convention, or at a rally of some sort in public is absolutely nowhere near as frightening as somebody feeling you up while you're alone. Also, I didn't even say it wasn't "that big of a deal". I said it wasn't as bad as [I]rape[/I].

[QUOTE=phygon;53183069]Okay, done. For me, it wasn't. I didn't want to mention it because I felt that using it as an anecdote would come across as an emotional appeal and wasn't entirely relevant. I've had somebody with a foot or so on me grab my ass [I]hard[/I] and then try to make other advances. When I said to stop, he did, which is probably why that particular instance wasn't that big of a deal for me. Yeah, it spooked me a bit, but it didn't have any lasting effects; nor did the other couple of times it happened at conventions and pride rallies, probably because I wasn't being backed into a corner or anything. Context matters a lot. Somebody groping you at a party while drunk, in a convention, or at a rally of some sort in public is absolutely nowhere near as frightening as somebody feeling you up while you're alone. Also, I didn't even say it wasn't "that big of a deal". I said it wasn't as bad as [I]rape[/I].[/QUOTE] Augh. I'm sorry you experienced that and I'm sorry I said that. I'm in a horrible mood and should know when to keep my mouth shut.

I'm still kinda confused by why you guys think saying "I'm more careful around men" because of statistics is okay, but not when it comes to, say, African Americans or middle-eastern immigrants. Now I'm not that saying that's okay (okay?), but I'm unsure why you guys think it's materially different.

[QUOTE=AtomicSans;53183086]Augh. I'm sorry you experienced that and I'm sorry I said that. I'm in a horrible mood and should know when to keep my mouth shut.[/QUOTE] No, it's okay. It is completely impossible to understand every interpretation of an event from every perspective. Most people don't talk about non-scarring events like this because it can be used by horrible people to cheapen actual scarring events of abuse, so I can't blame you at all for being unaware (or forgetting) how it's possible. With that being said, I personally think that using a metric that includes events as extreme as rape and as (relatively) non-serious as groping in an argument isn't necessarily very useful, primarily because the opposing camp can just totally bounce the stat by making the claim that "most" of the events are non-serious, whether or not that's true. It just kinda makes the argument not really go anywhere. I'd be very interested in seeing the numbers on essentially everything under the "Sexual assault" umbrella with groping removed, primarily because I just don't feel like it fits in with the severity of the other items on the list, which are: "rape (forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration or drug facilitated sexual assault), child sexual abuse or the torture of the person in a sexual manner." - Wikipedia

[QUOTE=phygon;53183105]I'd be very interested in seeing the numbers on essentially everything under the "Sexual assault" umbrella with groping removed, primarily because I just don't feel like it fits in with the severity of the other items on the list, which are: "rape (forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration or drug facilitated sexual assault), child sexual abuse or the torture of the person in a sexual manner." - Wikipedia[/QUOTE] Not sure about groping, as there is a definite possibility for a severe instance of it, but I would really like to see some actually accurate statistics for sexual assault. I've seen the one-in-six statistic thrown around as a way to justify distrusting men on principle, in this very thread no less, but it's inflated and disingenuous because of some of the things that are classified as "sexual violence", particularly "Noncontact unwanted sexual experiences". That's a broad category that covers everything from catcalling to open harassment to overhearing a lewd joke to revenge pornography. It's not useful. Under this definition, I would be a victim of sexual violence. I'm not, but according to the cdc I am just as much a survivor of sexual violence as an actual rape victim because I was subjected to meatspin in counter-strike. That is ludicrous.

[QUOTE=Pitchfork;53183174][B]Not sure about groping, as there is a definite possibility for a severe instance of it[/B], but I would really like to see some actually accurate statistics for sexual assault. I've seen the one-in-six statistic thrown around as a way to justify distrusting men on principle, in this very thread no less, but it's inflated and disingenuous because of some of the things that are classified as "sexual violence", particularly "Noncontact unwanted sexual experiences". That's a broad category that covers everything from catcalling to open harassment to overhearing a lewd joke to revenge pornography. It's not useful. Under this definition, I would be a victim of sexual violence. I'm not, but according to the cdc I am just as much a survivor of sexual violence as an actual rape victim because I was subjected to meatspin in counter-strike. That is ludicrous.[/QUOTE] I'm not saying that groping isn't serious. It definitely can be. It just isn't as intrinsically damaging as rape (any form), child sexual abuse, sexual torture, etc.

[QUOTE=Zukriuchen;53178869]speaking as someone who actually calls himself a feminist, you don't have to distrust people for being men (?????) to care about women's problems. come on.[/QUOTE] I never said I didn't trust men, I said I don't trust many. Not all men are bad, but I never said I didn't trust all of em. I said I didn't trust MANY, key word MANY. Could've worded it better, but I was in a hurry. [QUOTE=prinner;53178886]I don't get when men say this... Do you trust extreme feminist propaganda over your own thoughts and emotions, or are you a rapist yourself?[/QUOTE] Asking me if I'm a rapist? Go fuck yourself dude. I mean how the fuck are you gonna go there dude? I get what I said might of not been smart, but you're a real fuckhead for that. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Mezzokoko))[/highlight]