All of these are singular examples of events that are presumably violations of existing law, except the last frame which is about changing policy and affects the state’s position on all events in the future. They are not the same.
And also, the vast majority of men are in favor of criminalizing rape of any kind.
The majority of men there think it’s wrong based on NFHS survey data from 2021. Men’s “rights” groups claim that a law against marital rape would be misused to bring about false accusations (which this comic points out) and this gets amplified by the algorithm.
The criminalization of marital rape is sadly a fairly recent concept in human history and only began in the mid 1900s. Germany criminalized it as recently as the late 1990s and the UK a few years before that.
India is looking to significantly overhaul its legal codes, much of which are derived from outdated colonial/Victorian norms, which is long overdue.
well that’s the proportion that thinks it’s wrong, not the proportion that thinks it should be criminalized. one reason is what you’ve pointed out in your first paragraph.
and even this statistic comes with a caveat. according to https://thebetterindia.com/134673/survey-nfhs-marital-rape-india/, it’s 42%, which places only 58% of men as against marital rape. that is a majority but it’s not what i’d call a “vast” majority at all. it seems plausible that at least 50% could be against criminalization if 42% don’t even think it’s morally wrong. (interestingly, 52% of women don’t think it’s morally wrong either.)
…presumably violations of existing law … changing policy … They are not the same.
This is kind of bonkers. Women’s advocacy doesn’t split this hair, gay advocacy doesn’t split this hair, trans advocacy doesn’t split this hair, racial advocacy doesn’t split this hair. The challenges facing any identity or demographic group are often only weakly affected by the law.
All of the problems listed are cultural problems, problems caused in no small part by men’s own values and attitudes about what manhood should be.
In a comment last week somewhere, I posted about a 68 year old man who told me he had been raped by a man when he was a child.
this 68 year old man, is an old biker dude whos been in and out of jail, now sober 15+ years, however, he cannot get through two sentences without making a sexual joke about women.
for example, a mild example, we were ording dinner for a group, and my sister went up to him with the menu to ask him what he wanted from the resturant, he responded, “a red head, a blonde, and a brunette with a big ass”.
the day we creamated my father, I had had enough. I yelled at him for this innapropriate habit. he stopped. i was so happy he stopped. but I had to bring up ive been raped to get him to stop though. dumb, but he was repectful after.
then, he told me later that day, or the next I dont remember, he told me verbatiem, that making those jokes is how he copes with the trauma first listed in this comment.
and jokes like this help him through all traumas.
tell me how, after being best friends with my father, for 45 years, he had no idea he gave up his rights to 3/4 children, and the one he kept, he denied being his until she was 13? The shock on his so called best friends face, not knowing most of us werent legally his best friends children, only biologically, shocked me. He had no idea his best friend gave up all his children, and thats why we were estranged.
maybe making jokes as the only form of coping, isnt coping, but masking real issues.
When in my DV realtionship, he was clear, he believed hitting women was wrong, very strong moral code of his.
control, financial abuse, blocking doorways, yelling “your worthless” stealing for ones own benefit, isolating the woman from family and friends, and rape, were all okay by him though.
Yeah, that’s why as soon as someone gets accused of rape, if you dare say that they’re a piece of shit you get a ton of “innocent until proven guilty”
Even on lemmy, people keep on defending rapists. When I dared to complain about the term “allegedly raped” about the son of the princess of whatever that was good friends with epstein who had fucking literal videos that he took of the rape, people started defending it by saying that he’s innocent until proven guilty. Inescapable evidence? Believing the many, many victims that reported him? No, let’s instead pretend that we are in a court of law so that we can support the rapists.
Most men are definitely not against rape. I’m not sure that most people are, in general.
They might be superficially against the idea, but practically speaking they don’t want to disturb the social status quo that protects rapists by pretending that rape victims are liars.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is about not prematurely judging when you don’t know the facts. It’s not about defending rapists - it’s about defending people who are possibly not rapists.
Are you a judge or a lawyer? Or even, a newspaper?
If not, then why do you have to follow a legal safeguard?
Why are people not saying that Trump is allegedly doing bad stuff, he hasn’t been formally condemned, so innocent until proven guilty?
If it’s not about defending rapists, then why is it that people only say that when it protects rapists and the like, but not for other criminal activities?
And last but not least, saying innocent until proven guilty about a rapist, is prematurely judging that the victims are lying. So you’re deciding to trust someone, and you’re trusting the one accused of rape rather than the victims.
Ah, you’re one of those team-rapist that consider that it’s more common for victims to lie about getting raped, than not? That it’s fun to say to the world “hey I’ve been sexually abused and treated like a worthless crap”, while knowing that it’s very unlikely that anything will ever happen to the culprit? That’s pathetic.
If people accuse me of rape, I’m going to address it. And then you can form your opinion, just like with everything else. This is not. A. Court. You have the right to have a brain on your own, even though you visibly don’t use that right.
On top of that, you didn’t even just say “accused” but “credibly accused”, which means with a relatively good level of credibility. If in a case like that, you decide to still believe that the victims are lying, I’m sorry but you are part of the group of pieces of shit that defend, support and ultimately protect rapists. You decide to say “I will ignore all evidence, and believe a rapist until the victim manages to prove the rape legally, which is in most cases impossible”.
All of these are singular examples of events that are presumably violations of existing law, except the last frame which is about changing policy and affects the state’s position on all events in the future. They are not the same.
And also, the vast majority of men are in favor of criminalizing rape of any kind.
not in India, where this comic’s from
The majority of men there think it’s wrong based on NFHS survey data from 2021. Men’s “rights” groups claim that a law against marital rape would be misused to bring about false accusations (which this comic points out) and this gets amplified by the algorithm.
The criminalization of marital rape is sadly a fairly recent concept in human history and only began in the mid 1900s. Germany criminalized it as recently as the late 1990s and the UK a few years before that.
India is looking to significantly overhaul its legal codes, much of which are derived from outdated colonial/Victorian norms, which is long overdue.
well that’s the proportion that thinks it’s wrong, not the proportion that thinks it should be criminalized. one reason is what you’ve pointed out in your first paragraph.
and even this statistic comes with a caveat. according to https://thebetterindia.com/134673/survey-nfhs-marital-rape-india/, it’s 42%, which places only 58% of men as against marital rape. that is a majority but it’s not what i’d call a “vast” majority at all. it seems plausible that at least 50% could be against criminalization if 42% don’t even think it’s morally wrong. (interestingly, 52% of women don’t think it’s morally wrong either.)
This is kind of bonkers. Women’s advocacy doesn’t split this hair, gay advocacy doesn’t split this hair, trans advocacy doesn’t split this hair, racial advocacy doesn’t split this hair. The challenges facing any identity or demographic group are often only weakly affected by the law.
All of the problems listed are cultural problems, problems caused in no small part by men’s own values and attitudes about what manhood should be.
Id like to add comment, as I agree with you.
In a comment last week somewhere, I posted about a 68 year old man who told me he had been raped by a man when he was a child.
this 68 year old man, is an old biker dude whos been in and out of jail, now sober 15+ years, however, he cannot get through two sentences without making a sexual joke about women.
for example, a mild example, we were ording dinner for a group, and my sister went up to him with the menu to ask him what he wanted from the resturant, he responded, “a red head, a blonde, and a brunette with a big ass”.
the day we creamated my father, I had had enough. I yelled at him for this innapropriate habit. he stopped. i was so happy he stopped. but I had to bring up ive been raped to get him to stop though. dumb, but he was repectful after.
then, he told me later that day, or the next I dont remember, he told me verbatiem, that making those jokes is how he copes with the trauma first listed in this comment.
and jokes like this help him through all traumas.
tell me how, after being best friends with my father, for 45 years, he had no idea he gave up his rights to 3/4 children, and the one he kept, he denied being his until she was 13? The shock on his so called best friends face, not knowing most of us werent legally his best friends children, only biologically, shocked me. He had no idea his best friend gave up all his children, and thats why we were estranged.
maybe making jokes as the only form of coping, isnt coping, but masking real issues.
There’s a significant number of men who don’t realize marital rape is even a thing, here in the US.
So they completely agree that “rape of any kind” should be criminalized, as well as going home and raping their wives cuz “god said so.”
When in my DV realtionship, he was clear, he believed hitting women was wrong, very strong moral code of his.
control, financial abuse, blocking doorways, yelling “your worthless” stealing for ones own benefit, isolating the woman from family and friends, and rape, were all okay by him though.
as long as you dont hit them
Yeah, that’s why as soon as someone gets accused of rape, if you dare say that they’re a piece of shit you get a ton of “innocent until proven guilty”
Even on lemmy, people keep on defending rapists. When I dared to complain about the term “allegedly raped” about the son of the princess of whatever that was good friends with epstein who had fucking literal videos that he took of the rape, people started defending it by saying that he’s innocent until proven guilty. Inescapable evidence? Believing the many, many victims that reported him? No, let’s instead pretend that we are in a court of law so that we can support the rapists.
Most men are definitely not against rape. I’m not sure that most people are, in general. They might be superficially against the idea, but practically speaking they don’t want to disturb the social status quo that protects rapists by pretending that rape victims are liars.
“Innocent until proven guilty” is about not prematurely judging when you don’t know the facts. It’s not about defending rapists - it’s about defending people who are possibly not rapists.
Are you a judge or a lawyer? Or even, a newspaper?
If not, then why do you have to follow a legal safeguard?
Why are people not saying that Trump is allegedly doing bad stuff, he hasn’t been formally condemned, so innocent until proven guilty?
If it’s not about defending rapists, then why is it that people only say that when it protects rapists and the like, but not for other criminal activities?
And last but not least, saying innocent until proven guilty about a rapist, is prematurely judging that the victims are lying. So you’re deciding to trust someone, and you’re trusting the one accused of rape rather than the victims.
But thanks for proving my point.
why do we have ideals? does the fact that you have carved an exception in “innocent until proven guilty” out for rape say more about you or us
What are you even trying to say?
Are you really implying that ideals should overcome justice, even when those ideals have been proven many times to not work?
Are you really saying that rape victims are able to get believed through the legal system, and that rapists get punished?
Keep on defending rape bro.
BTW solumbran has been credibly accused of rape. What should we do about them?
Oh now you see the problem?
Ah, you’re one of those team-rapist that consider that it’s more common for victims to lie about getting raped, than not? That it’s fun to say to the world “hey I’ve been sexually abused and treated like a worthless crap”, while knowing that it’s very unlikely that anything will ever happen to the culprit? That’s pathetic.
If people accuse me of rape, I’m going to address it. And then you can form your opinion, just like with everything else. This is not. A. Court. You have the right to have a brain on your own, even though you visibly don’t use that right.
On top of that, you didn’t even just say “accused” but “credibly accused”, which means with a relatively good level of credibility. If in a case like that, you decide to still believe that the victims are lying, I’m sorry but you are part of the group of pieces of shit that defend, support and ultimately protect rapists. You decide to say “I will ignore all evidence, and believe a rapist until the victim manages to prove the rape legally, which is in most cases impossible”.
You sound like a very nice and likeable person.
You should really try an argument style that isn’t “put words in the other person’s mouth and then argue against that”