|
I think I found what bugs me the most about any discussion that comes to "equal rights": Math. Or the belief that "equality" must result in "equal numbers".
tldr: Long evo post saying "liking boobs more than mantits is fine". Disregard if you hate long posts.
Let's assume a fictional job called "teamliquiding". Everyone gets paid 10 bucks for every hour he posts on teamliquid.net (awesome, eh?). If we now look at all the "workers" it's probably likely that the amount of female workers amounts to 5% or even less. Let's assume 5%. Just because 95% of the people working in teamliquiding are male that doesn't imply that the company teamliquid discriminates women. It doesn't mean they get treated unfairly by the executives. It doesn't mean women are worse at teamliquiding than men.
In a true, absolutely equal situation, the differences in numbers come exclusively from your gender, your race, your social and cultural background.
On a similar level it is wrong to judge the quality of school in a poor neighbourhood by the same grades on standardized tests as a school in a rich neighbourhood. In fact, if they get similar results it would mean that the school in the rich neighbourhood is underperforming by a very large degree.
Let's take the above example further. We now assume a fictional job called "redditting". Everyone who gets 10 upvotes for one of his posts gets payed 10 bucks. Let's again assume a rate for how many women there are, e.g. 30%. Further assume that all posts have a little avatar next to them that you can choose freely. Just based on those numbers we can safely assume that the vast majority (70%) will find similar avatars and points of view attractive enough to upvote. Suddenly we have that weird scenario where it becomes profitable for both men and women to use boobs as their avatars.
Again, this doesn't mean the company "reddit" is discriminating women. It doesn't mean 70% of the workers are misogynist pigs objectifying women. All it implies is that the majority of the workers like boobs more than e.g. dicks. Considering how reddit works cute kittens probably beat both though.
Now lets take the above examples back and look at "streaming a video game". The majority of viewers will like to see boobs more than... a guys head. Even better, when faced with the choice of a female head and female bouncing boobs the majority will probably rather watch the bouncing boobs. Again this doesn't mean they all hate women or they all want to treat the streamer like a sex toy. They just like boobs more than a guys head. Now the question of "boobs or guys head" isn't entirely correct, the question becomes - assuming different quality of content - "How much do I like seeing boobs more than a guys head and how much can that difference compensate for quality of content?"
Complaining that there is a part of your viewership that only watches your show for your boobs is like complaining as a man when going to a dancing class that some of the women just want to dance with you because you're a man. Both cases are simply mathematical results of the surrounding economy.
PS: This does not imply that calling the "boob-streamer" a "slutty bitch whore" is appropriate. However, it's impossible to not attract at least a few of those people. Let's call them idiots and move on.
|
On May 03 2013 15:52 TheExile19 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 15:43 sunprince wrote:
Your reading comprehension sucks. Luckily for you, I'm feeling patient today:
Every single measure I listed is normally used by sociologists to demonstrate that blacks are discriminated against. That is, they receive longer prison sentences, they are more likely to be victims of violent crime, they do worse in all aspects of the educational system, etc. that's cool bro are you ready to address the staggering, insurmountable difference between a system explicitly prejudiced against black people as a sociocultural, historically moral mode of discrimination, and a system that, not only as a byproduct of men being very clearly societally superior to women, but mostly just having nothing to do with any actual subjugation maintained by a gender conflict, i.e. the very core tenet of feminism, is a totally different matter of discussion?
Citation needed.
On May 03 2013 15:52 TheExile19 wrote:
are you ready? because you seem to think that this is your answer to feminism, and in reality it's just an answer to societal tendencies that, while generally as arbitrary, systematic and unfair as issues that feminism focuses on, is a subset of various sociocultural functions that don't have a goddamned thing to do with women other than when you co-opt them to serve as a non-sequitur foil to win an internet argument.
My "answer" to feminism on a philosophical level is simply that it is based on "patriarchy", an unfalsifiable conspiracy theory. My "answer" to feminism on a practical level is that they act like a hate group.
On May 03 2013 15:52 TheExile19 wrote:
I could elaborate further on the specific origins of the conflicts those stats of yours refer to, or try to since I'm not a genius or a sociology major, but I suspect quite highly that you have ulterior motives and biases here that go beyond any neutral interest I have in the subject. additionally, you are a boor. good day.
In other words, you have no answer to any of the evidence I have supplied, so you resort to ad hominem and leave. Got it.
|
@sunprince, you're taking extremists with stupid ideas and making their ideas out to be even stupider (your links are always more tame than the words you put to them) and claiming that they represent the whole of feminism.
That's just silly. What you're doing is no different than people who claim that Islam is evil because there are lots of vocal terrorist groups who hurt people and claim that their reason is Islam. The vocal minority =/= the majority.
The majority of what 'true' (i.e. not crazy) feminists and MRAs fight against is the same - genderized cultural standards.
People like you are why MRAs are well on the path to becoming just as ignored as 'feminists' - you're starting to believe that EVERYONE is out to get you.
|
On May 03 2013 16:16 dcemuser wrote:
@sunprince, you're taking extremists with stupid ideas and making their ideas out to be even stupider (your links are always more tame than the words you put to them) and claiming that they represent the whole of feminism.
None of those examples are "extremists". One of the examples I used, the National Organization for Women is the foremost feminist group in America. It is well funded, and extremely powerful politically.
Similarly, the other "extremists" I showed are powerful feminist groups, speaking through their actions. Not your armchair Internet feminist who supports equality. Not the "good" feminists that the political advocates hide behind. The powerful. The leaders of feminists.
That's not even getting into what influential academic feminists have said (ranging from calling for male gendercide to calling all men rapists), because I wanted to ignore mere words and focus on actual actions.
On May 03 2013 16:16 dcemuser wrote:
That's just silly. What you're doing is no different than people who claim that Islam is evil because there are lots of vocal terrorist groups who hurt people and claim that their reason is Islam. The vocal minority =/= the majority.
The majority of Muslims condemn terrorists. The majority of feminists do not condemn their "vocal minority"
On May 03 2013 16:16 dcemuser wrote:
The majority of what 'true' (i.e. not crazy) feminists and MRAs fight against is the same - genderized cultural standards.
No. Feminists fight for double standards when it suits them; I've given plenty of examples. MRAs are mostly pathetic Internet whiners (though this is somewhat understandable considering many of them are broken men who have been screwed by divorce, domestic violence, and rape), and don't do much fighting, but when they do, it's actually against legal discrimination against men.
|
I suspect most of the sexist commentary comes from teenagers. If so, then you can hardly change anything, because new generations of uninformed, prejudiced, angry kids will keep flowing in.
|
sunprince and r.Evo deserve medals for bringing the truth to light. Well done fellas.
|
On May 03 2013 16:28 Daswollvieh wrote:
I suspect most of the sexist commentary comes from teenagers. If so, then you can hardly change anything, because new generations of uninformed, prejudiced, angry kids will keep flowing in.
Precisely. These are also the same teenagers that call men faggots.
The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory applies regardless of whether you are a man or a woman:
![[image loading]](http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/325/699/4fc.jpg)
|
On May 03 2013 16:10 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 15:45 Ghostcom wrote:On May 03 2013 15:27 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 15:20 Ghostcom wrote:
There is a distinction to be made between the "unfounded" and "false". You failed to make that distinction between r.Evo. The data is simply of too low quality to really say anything about rates of false accusations, but unfounded rate could be an indicator variable. "Unfounded", however, is the same term applied to all of the FBI's definitions. They simply use that term instead of "false" because they do not want to dig into whether the accusation was deliberately malicious or not. But regardless, there are far more accusations of rape that are not factually correct, even if they weren't done on purpose. From the Uniform Crime Report, they state specifically that "The “unfounded” rate, or percentage of complaints determined through investigation to be false, is higher for forcible rape than for any other Index crime. Eight percent of forcible rape complaints in 1996 were “unfounded,” while the average for all Index crimes was 2 percent." Actually "unfounded" is a bit broader than malicious or not and I almost find it intellectually dishonest that you are linking just the index of the Uniform Crime Report as a means of backing up your claim. Here is an article written specifically discussing what "unfounded" means when it is used in connection with forcible rape: http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/ You can use the index's sidebar to actually navigate to individual chapters. Chapter 2 has the relevant quote I pulled, which you can use Ctrl-F to find. I assume most TLers have basic computer skills. The article you quoted corroborates my point. Not all unfounded cases are proven to be false, no. However, that doesn't change the fact that law enforcement cannot find any evidence for them, or that the rape accusation turned out not to actually be forcible rape as defined by law. The same, however, applies to unfounded accusations of any crime. So when we find that the unfounded rape accusation rate is 8%, and the unfounded crime accusation rate is 2%, we're still comparing apples to apples, which is a pretty good indicator that false rape accusation rates are higher.
Instead of the petty attempt at questioning my computer skills you should probably have spent 30 seconds more reading the article I linked and thinking about it.
This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship. Similarly, a report might be deemed unfounded if there is no physical evidence or too many inconsistencies between the accuser's statement and what evidence does exist. As such, although some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated, not all unfounded cases are false.
He explicitly gives you examples of how just within rape there are different criteria for "unfounded" depending on which jurisdiction you collect data from. It is thus not the same criteria used for all crimes (it is in fact not even the same criteria for a single crime) that will get a case labeled as "unfounded". You are trying to compare two round fruits, but one of them is orange and with a non-edible shell whereas the other is green and with an edible shell.
EDIT: I will say that I only just now realised that filing a false report is only considered a misdemeanor in the US and not a felony which I find appalling. The ancient Chinese had it right: The accuser would face the same punishment as the accused if the accusation was proven to be fabricated.
|
Northern Ireland23721 Posts
The majority of Muslims condemn terrorists. The majority of feminists do not condemn their "vocal minority"
Actually quite a good point, in my experiences I, and others have been told that those who feel threatened or whatever by feminism (or what they perceive it to be) are to blame for not understanding, not 'feminists' portraying it badly.
That said, despite moderate Muslims decrying extremism, Islamophobia is still pretty prevalent
|
I agreed with her until this
Then, of course, there are comments that seem nice but are equally inherently sexist. In the picture above, ‘JackArtStudios’ has thanked me for wearing uncomfortable t-shirts and used some hugely negative stereotypes. Some women may exploit their sexuality for views but others do it for comfort, or because they didn’t want to change their clothing. Or because they didn’t consider anyone would be indecent enough to harass them because they’re physically female. There is no logical reason to assume that any woman has changed her apparel to appeal to you.
(Shes assuming he thinks she is doing it only for him. What a bitch.)
By ‘thanking’ a woman for catering her clothing to your ideals, you are telling her you’d respect her much less if she hadn’t worn what you consider to be decent. While I always, always appreciate positivity (and the comment on the content, hooray!) this just further reinforces the idea that women can’t wear whatever they like without compromising perceptions of their professionalism. There is no choice here, and the same kind of comments regularly apply to make-up. If you’re wearing obvious amounts of make-up or wearing a certain kind of clothing, it’ll likely be assumed you want attention and your content or integrity will be disregarded, even though you probably aren’t wearing either of those things to appeal to anyone but yourself.(Well if you dress like a fucking slut. I will consider you a person wearing a sluts uniform. Dave Chapelle said it best.)
She can go (excuse my langauge) fuck herself. Someone was being nice and supporting her yet she degrades him. I don't think she understands that SHE IS A FEMALE there is a big difference between sexism and someone just commenting on something they found nice that you did. It would be like if a female thanked me for wearing clothing to cover up my muscles, but no he is sexist for supporting HER CHOICE.
I will never understand women but this "sexism" thing has gotten out of hand. You are a womAn, things that pertain to that gender will always be there period. The same way I am a male and will always have certain standards placed upon me. DEAL WITH IT
|
On May 03 2013 16:34 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 16:28 Daswollvieh wrote:
I suspect most of the sexist commentary comes from teenagers. If so, then you can hardly change anything, because new generations of uninformed, prejudiced, angry kids will keep flowing in. Precisely. These are also the same teenagers that call men faggots. The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory applies regardless of whether you are a man or a woman:
Calling someone a faggot doesn't actually mean anything. It's like calling someone a fuckwad. The actual meaning of the word (if there actually is any..) has no relevance to the implications (to just insult someone). But I would agree what sunprince said.
Also, here's really good advice:
If you ever want your article to be taken seriously, don't post it on Kotaku.
I thought the article was so-so, though.
|
On May 03 2013 16:35 Ghostcom wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 16:10 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 15:45 Ghostcom wrote:On May 03 2013 15:27 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 15:20 Ghostcom wrote:
There is a distinction to be made between the "unfounded" and "false". You failed to make that distinction between r.Evo. The data is simply of too low quality to really say anything about rates of false accusations, but unfounded rate could be an indicator variable. "Unfounded", however, is the same term applied to all of the FBI's definitions. They simply use that term instead of "false" because they do not want to dig into whether the accusation was deliberately malicious or not. But regardless, there are far more accusations of rape that are not factually correct, even if they weren't done on purpose. From the Uniform Crime Report, they state specifically that "The “unfounded” rate, or percentage of complaints determined through investigation to be false, is higher for forcible rape than for any other Index crime. Eight percent of forcible rape complaints in 1996 were “unfounded,” while the average for all Index crimes was 2 percent." Actually "unfounded" is a bit broader than malicious or not and I almost find it intellectually dishonest that you are linking just the index of the Uniform Crime Report as a means of backing up your claim. Here is an article written specifically discussing what "unfounded" means when it is used in connection with forcible rape: http://www.theforensicexaminer.com/archive/spring09/15/ You can use the index's sidebar to actually navigate to individual chapters. Chapter 2 has the relevant quote I pulled, which you can use Ctrl-F to find. I assume most TLers have basic computer skills. The article you quoted corroborates my point. Not all unfounded cases are proven to be false, no. However, that doesn't change the fact that law enforcement cannot find any evidence for them, or that the rape accusation turned out not to actually be forcible rape as defined by law. The same, however, applies to unfounded accusations of any crime. So when we find that the unfounded rape accusation rate is 8%, and the unfounded crime accusation rate is 2%, we're still comparing apples to apples, which is a pretty good indicator that false rape accusation rates are higher. Instead of the petty attempt at questioning my computer skills you should probably have spent 30 seconds more reading the article I linked and thinking about it. Show nested quote +This statistic is almost meaningless, as many of the jurisdictions from which the FBI collects data on crime use different definitions of, or criteria for, "unfounded." That is, a report of rape might be classified as unfounded (rather than as forcible rape) if the alleged victim did not try to fight off the suspect, if the alleged perpetrator did not use physical force or a weapon of some sort, if the alleged victim did not sustain any physical injuries, or if the alleged victim and the accused had a prior sexual relationship. Similarly, a report might be deemed unfounded if there is no physical evidence or too many inconsistencies between the accuser's statement and what evidence does exist. As such, although some unfounded cases of rape may be false or fabricated, not all unfounded cases are false. He explicitly gives you examples of how just within rape there are different criteria for "unfounded" depending on which jurisdiction you collect data from. It is thus not the same criteria used for all crimes (it is in fact not even the same criteria for a single crime) that will get a case labeled as "unfounded". You are trying to compare two round fruits, but one of them is orange and with a non-edible shell whereas the other is green and with an edible shell.
There are different criteria for "unfounded" for all crimes between jurisdictions. In reality, the differences aren't that great for major crimes between US jurisdictions, and this applies for all the crimes.
"Unfounded" rape accusations is to "unfounded" crimes, period. All of those are oranges.
While it is true that it is difficult to truly identify the total number of false rape accusations (these "unfounded" cases also leave out falsely convicted men, which the Innocence Project has revealed appalling numbers of for rape cases), what we do know is that it is that false rape accusations are probably a few times more common than false accusations of all crimes. We can also use the fact that women can easily get away with it to logically infer that there is less of a disincentive to make a false rape accusation, and economics will tell you what this causes.
On May 03 2013 16:35 Ghostcom wrote:
EDIT: I will say that I only just now realised that filing a false report is only considered a misdemeanor in the US and not a felony which I find appalling. The ancient Chinese had it right: The accuser would face the same punishment as the accused if the accusation was proven to be fabricated.
On top of that, false rape accusations are rarely ever prosecuted in the US, even when there is obvious evidence (see the Brian Banks case for a recent example). The reason for this is that women's groups create an uproar anytime it's even considered, arguing that prosecuting false rape accusers could discourage real rape victims from coming forward.
|
Australia285 Posts
You know what would help - if sites like twitch and youtube channel owners and mods could effectively ban commenters without them taking 30 seconds to create a new account and be back spewing retarded filth because they don't understand that using technology to interact with other people doesn't make said other people less real nor regular social decency any less relevant.
|
On May 03 2013 16:33 prOxi.FighT wrote:
sunprince and r.Evo deserve medals for bringing the truth to light. Well done fellas.
Just doing my part to reveal the truth of all sorts.
It's interesting, though. When I support gay rights, criticize religious conservatives, or defend abortion rights, I never get the same vitriol that I get the second I criticize feminism...
|
On May 03 2013 16:34 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 16:28 Daswollvieh wrote:
I suspect most of the sexist commentary comes from teenagers. If so, then you can hardly change anything, because new generations of uninformed, prejudiced, angry kids will keep flowing in. Precisely. These are also the same teenagers that call men faggots. The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory applies regardless of whether you are a man or a woman:
I don't think it's the same for both genders, though.
For example, I don't think there can be a female equivalent of Day9. Public, mostly composed of boys and men, would imo treat her very differently and also take her less seriously.
|
Men can do anything women can. And do it better. And do it with one hand tied behind their backs. --Barack Obama (sex flipped)
When a woman strikes a man, she strikes all of society. --Hillary Clinton said exactly that about violence against women.
|
On May 03 2013 16:16 dcemuser wrote:
@sunprince, you're taking extremists with stupid ideas and making their ideas out to be even stupider (your links are always more tame than the words you put to them) and claiming that they represent the whole of feminism.
That's just silly. What you're doing is no different than people who claim that Islam is evil because there are lots of vocal terrorist groups who hurt people and claim that their reason is Islam. The vocal minority =/= the majority.
The majority of what 'true' (i.e. not crazy) feminists and MRAs fight against is the same - genderized cultural standards.
People like you are why MRAs are well on the path to becoming just as ignored as 'feminists' - you're starting to believe that EVERYONE is out to get you.
I feel as if the most prominent logical fallacy in debates on feminism is the "no true scotsman". The fact that you actually used the phrasing "true feminists" is the cleanest example I've ever seen, though. While the vocal minority =/= the majority you can't simply take them out from under the banner of feminism because they don't act the way you'd like to believe "true feminists" would.
|
On May 03 2013 15:59 sunprince wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 15:38 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 03 2013 15:34 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 15:25 Wombat_NI wrote:
Those aren't to do with rights but are manifestations of a genderised culture So by that logic, blacks aren't discriminated against, right? After all, every measure I gave you is used to prove that blacks are victims of systemic discrimination, only the gender divide is much worse. So it's okay that black men get much more prison time, amirite? On May 03 2013 15:25 Wombat_NI wrote:a la the same stuff feminists also bemoan Nope. Feminists are only too happy to fight for gender roles when it suits them. I posted plenty of examples earlier in this thread. They have the same 'rights', if end results are different it's due to cultural or socio-economic reasons. Im neither with or against you on this, just feel the moniker is badly chosen By "rights", the reference is to "equal rights". You know, like how blacks fought for "equal rights" such as desegregated schools. But sure, let's get into legal, institutionalized discrimination: - By directive of the US Department of Education, a rape accusation does not need to meet the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to end a college student's career. One guess which gender this has a massive disparate impact on. - DOJ will not investigate white male bullying victims. Men are screwed by child support laws, even when they are not fathers. - Domestic violence laws, including the Violence Against Women Act, protect only women and allow women to accuse virtually any man due to expanded definitions which include things like "getting annoyed if she disagrees'.-The Duluth Model (upon which VAWA is based), in particular, makes it mandatory for police to arrest the larger partner in any domestic violence call. Yep, that would usually be the man. - Obamacare discriminates against men. Canadian health care funding does the same.
The laws are built as if women are inferior and thus need special protection when in a conflict with men. That's all historical. This is all from a time when women had zero power regarding this matter, everyone involved in constructing the laws and policing were men, it was a all built in a true patriarchal society. Regarding laws for rape, for example in Common Law, the sentence was once death. Over time it got changed to transportation, then later to penal labor. This all happened before there was feminism. If you compare the current situation, the sentence for rape is nowadays not very different as what you'd expect for assault, rapists get two years or something and there's parole.
Feminism is simply not done with the job it set out to do, you should support it.
|
On May 03 2013 17:03 Spidinko wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 16:34 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 16:28 Daswollvieh wrote:
I suspect most of the sexist commentary comes from teenagers. If so, then you can hardly change anything, because new generations of uninformed, prejudiced, angry kids will keep flowing in. Precisely. These are also the same teenagers that call men faggots. The Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory applies regardless of whether you are a man or a woman: I don't think it's the same for both genders, though. For example, I don't think there can be a female equivalent of Day9. Public, mostly composed of boys and men, would imo treat her very differently and also take her less seriously.
I don't recall Anna Prosser being treated poorly when she ventured into esports participation. If she was a serious gamer, I'm sure she could have done commentary.
Hazel has also done fine.
|
On May 03 2013 17:04 Ropid wrote:Show nested quote +On May 03 2013 15:59 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 15:38 Wombat_NI wrote:On May 03 2013 15:34 sunprince wrote:On May 03 2013 15:25 Wombat_NI wrote:
Those aren't to do with rights but are manifestations of a genderised culture So by that logic, blacks aren't discriminated against, right? After all, every measure I gave you is used to prove that blacks are victims of systemic discrimination, only the gender divide is much worse. So it's okay that black men get much more prison time, amirite? On May 03 2013 15:25 Wombat_NI wrote:a la the same stuff feminists also bemoan Nope. Feminists are only too happy to fight for gender roles when it suits them. I posted plenty of examples earlier in this thread. They have the same 'rights', if end results are different it's due to cultural or socio-economic reasons. Im neither with or against you on this, just feel the moniker is badly chosen By "rights", the reference is to "equal rights". You know, like how blacks fought for "equal rights" such as desegregated schools. But sure, let's get into legal, institutionalized discrimination: - By directive of the US Department of Education, a rape accusation does not need to meet the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt to end a college student's career. One guess which gender this has a massive disparate impact on. - DOJ will not investigate white male bullying victims. Men are screwed by child support laws, even when they are not fathers. - Domestic violence laws, including the Violence Against Women Act, protect only women and allow women to accuse virtually any man due to expanded definitions which include things like "getting annoyed if she disagrees'.-The Duluth Model (upon which VAWA is based), in particular, makes it mandatory for police to arrest the larger partner in any domestic violence call. Yep, that would usually be the man. - Obamacare discriminates against men. Canadian health care funding does the same. The laws are built as if women are inferior and thus need special protection when in a conflict with men. That's all historical.
Did you even read what I've been writing in this thread at all? It's not "historical". Nearly all of the examples I gave are in fact extremely, extremely recent, and promulgated by feminists.
Feminists created and advocated the Tender Years Doctrine that gives default custody to women instead of men. Feminists created and advocated the Duluth Model, which views domestic violence as "patriarchal terrorism". Feminists have pushed and are continuing to push for a removal of presumption of innocence in rape cases.
On May 03 2013 17:04 Ropid wrote:
This is all from a time when women had zero power regarding this matter, everyone involved in constructing the laws and policing were men, it was a all built in a true patriarchal society. Regarding laws for rape, for example in Common Law, the sentence was once death. Over time it got changed to transportation, then later to penal labor. This all happened before there was feminism.
This doesn't change the fact that feminism is responsible for many, many wrongs since its conception.
On May 03 2013 17:04 Ropid wrote:If you compare the current situation, the sentence for rape is nowadays not very different as what you'd expect for assault, rapists get two years or something and there's parole.
The average convicted rapist in the United States was 11.8 years, as of 1992. That number has likely gone up, due to increasing mandatory sentencing laws.
On May 03 2013 17:04 Ropid wrote:
Feminism is simply not done with the job it set out to do, you should support it.
Feminism acts like a hate group. Of course I won't support it, any more than I would support the KKK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
