Rice
 

Over at Philosophy Now there's a thread (On Ray Rice and Moral Absolutes).

The question there: "Is absolute non-violence against women a true and justified moral absolute?"

My answer: Of course not.

If she's comin' at you with a knife, you best defend yourself.

#

Three issues...

Rice's 'domestic violence': since his wife has 'forgiven' him, the rest of the world needs to shut the hell up and go about its business.

Rice's termination (from the team and all endorsements): these are contractual matters...if Rice violated contracts then, boo hoo for him...if the team and endorsers released Rice without an agreed-upon policy for such things in place then, Rice can seek redress in the courts.

'Domestic violence' (in general): I'm guessin' a fat percentage of what's reported is (like many reports of rape) not actually violence of man against woman, but a simple yanking of the man's leash by the woman.

Not sayin' men don't beat up and rape women...'am' sayin' that many of these accusations are horseshit.

Then why are you starting a thread about it?

A good question, glatt... ;)

Most analyses of probable levels of rape and reporting suggest that the number of false claims are very small. The number of actual rapes is very high.

And I find your comments about domestic abuse deeply disturbing. Having known several victims I can assure you it is a very real phenomenon.

But hey: clearly the real victims here are the menz.

Ffs.


http://www.refuge.org.uk/get-help-no...nce-the-facts/

Actually, as far as rape goes, a hell of a lot more cases go unreported than false claims made.

I have never looked up the statistics, but I'd stake everything I have on it as a fact.

Raywhonow?

Fuck him and feed him fishheads.

well what people believe is cultured behavior is pretty fluid, and always changes, no matter whether anyone has done the math to determine whether there's a justified moral absolute involved

normally in these cases all is forgiven but here the N. F. of L. is dependent on the good will of its fan base. including a huge number of men who are driven into a grilled meats and testosterone based frenzy every Sunday, but cherish the women in their lives and would never beat on them

and also let's not bring the ghetto into the N. F. of L. we are not supposed to notice the huge moral and cultural gap between the players and ourselves. pro players are supposed to at least be relatable to, in some way.

A crime is a crime. Society doesn't give her the right to "forgive" him from punishment any more than a murder victim's family can say, "no biggie, please don't prosecute." Often domestic violence has no third party witnesses, so it's difficult to prosecute without the woman's cooperation. But in this case it was caught on tape. She's welcome to ask for leniency at his sentencing.

The problem with gathering statistics on this, is in many cases it's he said, she said, with no way to prove the truth.

I know two women who were date raped.
The first was a very close friend who confided in me and was relieved when I said she'd been raped. She said, "I thought I was over-reacting."
And no, She didn't go to the police because this was in the 80s, she'd smoked dope that night and she just wanted to put it all beind not, not keep reliving it.

The other was a friend who dispassionately told what had happened one drunken night. We were drunk I mean. She didn't report it because she'd gone back to his flat. She wasn't naive, but she thought they were moving slowly towards a relationship, step by step. She trusted him. Because they'd been out together, because people had seen them together, she thought it could never be proved she said No and continued to say No. She lashed out at him and he threatened to smash her teeth in. There was no doubt he could do it.

Neither of these women had any reason to lie to me.
Neither felt they could report a crime, although in both cases the sex occurred under duress.
And neither were yanking the man involved's chain.

I know the plural of experience is not data, but I also doubt that a fat percentage of domestic violence or rape is solely the responsibility of the woman involved.
People ask why a woman doesn't walk away, leave, fight back etc. same can be said of the men. If a woman yanks your chain so hard you have to resort to violence in your own home, then get the fuck out of that relationship. Or otherwise the next time she burns your toast you might just get yourself sent to prison.

I get what you're saying Bruce, but like Sundae, i know many women who have been raped or sexually assaulted and didn't report it for exactly that reason. The woman is (almost always) the victim, and yet she is ALWAYS painted as some kind of temptress (putting it nicely) and so then has to defend her own shattered honour and prove it was forcefully taken.

Society across the board has a long way to go on this issue.

If you ask most women, you'll find that they know at least one other woman who has been raped or subjected to serious sexual assault. Most women also know at least one other woman who has experienced violence within a relationship.

Off the top of my head I know around 6 women who have experienced one of those.

One of the women who was abused in a relationship was my old boss when I taught literacy. By the time I knew her she'd left the guy and remarried. But I also knew her kids. And her kids remember the time their dad kicked their pregnant mum so hard she lost the baby she was carrying. That assault was the culmination of several years of brutal abuse and mind games - including locking the doors and windows when he went out to make sure she and the kids didn't run and making threats as to what he'd do if she ever left.

That final assault left her black and blue, with a broken cheekbone and a miscarriage - why was it so brutal? because he found a piece of note paper with the number of a refuge on it. She'd already sorted out a place - she got out with the help of the police and her husband served a few years for battery.

I know too many women who've had the shit kicked out of them by men who didn't know how to control their temper, or who had a profound need to control their women, not to find this whole thread kinda icky.

Since a lot of useless and unverifiable anecdotes are being foisted up ('I knows 4 and 1/2 bodies who done got raped, beaten, shot, and then abducted by ufo alien Jeezus [who probed their rectums!]!'), allow me to foist up my own...

I self-employ doing criminal and civil research.

Over the past decade I've spent a god-awful amount of time in the hard-copy and virtual archives of ten parish courthouses (and in the company of defenders, prosecutors, accused, and accusers).

A goodly chunk of my criminal research involves claims of child abuse (sexual and non) and 'domestic violence/rape'.

Over a decade: I've looked at the end results of, or occasionally have participated (peripherally) in, a hundred-plus (child abuse and 'domestic violence/rape') investigations.

A great many of these claims (woman claims man beat her; woman claims man beat child; woman claims man raped her; woman claims man raped child) turn out to be utter crap...lies that are recanted, or, proven false.

Not saying' 'most'; am sayin' 'a great many'.

Many of the stats foisted up (to illustrate the numbers of women and children abused) are based on arrests, not convictions and so -- in my experience -- are suspect.


#

"A crime is a crime."

Sure. I'm simply inclined to let the victim (as a free agent) have a (primary) say in things. Mrs. Rice 'forgives' Mr. Rice. Since he didn't beat me (or you), I'm thinkin' Mrs. Rice should be allowed to live with her choices (and the consequences of her choices).

Since (insofar as I know) Rice isn't goin' to trial, seems to me 'society' (at least in the Rice case) agrees with me.

Perhaps only because he's famous.

Probably.

Fair enough. But given that there are also likely to be many genuine cases; and given that there is likely to be an under reporting of genuine cases (of the women i know who have been raped or beaten only one involved the police ), it might be good if you didn't phrase things in such a dismissive manner.

I don't doubt that there are some people who lodge false complaints. And i absolutely believe that the accused should be considered innocent until proven guilty. But the experience of women who do report rape - and I mean women who have been subjected to deeply damaging attacks - is that they are often automatically disbelieved. They are treated as guilty of lying unless they can prove otherwise.

Studies into police practice have shown that in many cases women have been persuaded not to take action, on the grounds that they will not be believed and on the grounds that they cannot prove that it was rape - even when they have evidence to back it up. The attitude of those who investigate is often one of disbelief as a default setting. Women are often assumed either to be lying, or to have brought it upon themselves.

The result of that culture of disbelief is that the majority of victims do not report.

Henry, I'm hearing a fairly solid endorsement of wife-beating there...:eyebrow:

I have anecdotes too, several guys that lost everything and 2 that went to prison over trumped up lies. But they're no more evidence than anyone else's anecdotes.

There's something I wonder about though. Over the years I've heard/read a number of jokes which involved the same theme, what she's thinking, and what he's thinking. There's probably one or two in the humor thread. Sometimes she's writing in a diary, or talking to a friend, laying out a whole thought process that goes on and on about what she thinks he's feeling, what she thinks he's thinking, about a sexual encounter or their relationship. The punch line is always he isn't, he's wondering why his bike didn't want to idle, or why he hasn't heard from the taxidermist stuffing his fish.

This theme keeps popping up because it's funny. It's funny because most people can relate to situations where you find a significant other is thinking entirely different than you are. the same reason the Mars / Venus thing comes back like a cucumber sandwich. We do think differently, if for no other reason than we're raised differently. The cultural influences, the parental expectations, the education system, all shape our thought processes.

That long winded excursion was to say maybe the differences in descriptions of an incident can stem from how people view them, how they think about them. Most everyone agrees rape is bad, but it's harder to get a consensus on a definition of what constitutes rape. I'll never accept it's rape if you change your mind after, or regret your decision.

That's because that is not rape.

However, if you go home with a guy, or take him home with you and then decide you do't actually want sex but he forces himself on you, that is rape. And if you are too unconscious from alcohol and a man decides to have some fun with your body when you're too out of it to know what's happening - that is rape.

Get so far into the act and realise it's actually hurting you (something I have had experience of ) and say - wait, stop, this hurting me. And he refuses to stop, lays his whole weight on you and keeps on going whilst covering up your mouth with his hand to shut you up - is rape.

Having sex that you then regret having? Not rape.

Knowing, as most women do, what you are likely to face if you accuse someone of rape, I cannot imagine many women would throw themselves into that lion's den, just because they had sex they regretted. Most women who go through real and serious rape wuoldn;t want to. Most women who experience date rape don't want to. Most girls who are abused by older men don't want to.

'Crying rape' is not an easy out. There may be occasional circumstances - such as a young woman in a very strict environment, caught out in willing sex, who may hide behind a claim of rape. And some people have mental issues. In much the same way that some people will confess to a crime they haven't committed. There may even be cases where a woman has chosen to take revenge against man or skew a decision on child custody. But the reality of what it actually means to report a rape would put most people off. It's not like reporting a burglary. The police don't turn up assuming you're the victim or that you didn't invite the criminal into your body.

Even if he just used his hand and not duct tape? Just kidding, I agree.

Yes, but I've seen girls claim it to their friends, their social circle. Not confront the man, or going to the authorities, but using it to shuck the responsibility for their decisions. "I was very drunk and then he forced me". :headshake

This is the vast majority of false accusations, I believe. Divorces get very nasty very fast, and it is easy to allege abuse or marital rape as part of the proceedings without actually going to the police to file a report. Your lawyer may even try to talk you into it. My father has a friend who was trying to hire an aggressive divorce lawyer known for always winning, and the lawyer asked her, "Did he ever threaten you?" She said no, and he said firmly, "I'm asking you... did he ever do anything to make you feel afraid? Make you nervous about having him in the home?" She insisted no, and he refused to take her case.

Innocent until proven guilty does not apply in family court, because the judge just gets to decide who they believe more. Poof, kids are gone.

That's appalling. And may explain why many people seem to have great difficulty in believing that a lot of women are actualy beaten and abused - and indeed a lot of children (by either parent).

Not sure if it's the same here or not. Certainly family courts are not the same as main courts; but as far as I know if there is an accusation of violence or abuse then the judge would seek documentary evidence for that and would require some form of evaluation (of the father, of the child) and a risk assessment to decide whether access should be supervised.

I have no doubt that there are abuses of that system. However, I also know of cases where the father has done a bang up job of presenting himself as a reasonable and loving dad despite having previously kicked ten shades of shit out of his wife and shown little to no interest in the children during the previous years. I can imagine it must be deeply traumatic for a dad who loves his kids to have them withheld from him on the basis of a lie. I also know it must be just as traumatic to have no choice aout waving your children off to go spend a weekend with a man you know to be dangerous and violent.

From a 2004 report by Women's Aid:

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-conte..._homicides.pdf

It's a difficult thing to work out what's true in cases of family breakdown. But the implications for not taking accusations of abuse seriously are very clear.

The implications for taking accusations at face value without any evidence are also appalling - unnecessarily separating parent and child.

It isn't just violent dads of course. There are also cases of children abused or killed by the woman's new partner (and indeed with her assistance or collusion) where the father has had no chance of being able to protect his child from harm. And not all family abusers are men. Sometimes the violent abuse is at the hands of wives and mothers - though statistically it is more often men.

Ah, on the standard of proof required for such things - from that report:

Another point... everyone gathering data, compiling statistics, keeping/graphing records, has an axe to grind. Every one.

Whether working for a women's, children's, or men's, advocacy group. Or depending on impressive results to secure a further grant. Or working for some think tank or religious organization. Everybody has a stake in the results, or they wouldn't be doing it.

Probably the only ones you can trust are doing it for money, only for money. :haha:

"Henry, I'm hearing a fairly solid endorsement of wife-beating there..."
 

Not from me, you're not.

"Probably the only ones you can trust are doing it for money, only for money."
 

Don't know why that would be.

Folks makin' money on 'this' or 'that' have a vested interest in seein' 'this' and 'that' continue (and if the money-makin' folks have to tweak stats, they will).

My point: when it comes to 'hot' issues like 'domestic violence', 'rape', 'child abuse', 'abortion', 'race', etc. money-makin' folks on both sides (on any side) are suspect.

Really: any and all passionately invested in any 'hot' issues are suspect.

Folks will lie to preserve jobs, to further legal agenda, to revenge themselves on another.

Friends will lie to friends, family will lie to family, folks will lie to cops/courts, for profit, for ideal, for 'justice'.

Real bad guys (and gals) and victims get lost amidst the horse shit foisted up by all the liars and profiteers.

I stand corrected.

But, I won't stand with you in an elevator.

"I won't stand with you in an elevator"
 

Wise choice, especially if you plan to slap, and spit on, me.

I will not spit on you.

Well, maybe, if you ask nicely.

:p:

HA!

No, not my cuppa tea.

Here's a short speech by a sportscaster on the subject of domestic violence. Well done.

I still don't get it. The hotel has proof Rice committed a crime, they give it to the cops, the DA decides what to do about it. What the fuck does the NFL have to do with it?

Nutshelled: this ain't about 'justice' but about 'profit' (and control).

Very.

:yesnod: