Keenspot

by **pants** on Tue Aug 28, 2001 8:21 am

Oh, and:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Josh Phillips:
(So... how 'bout that local sports team?)
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Go Rams!
(and Blues!)[This message has been edited by pants (edited 08-28-2001).]

by **Winkie** on Tue Aug 28, 2001 8:40 am

I disagree with the statement above that murder is a lesser crime than rape.

by **slinky** on Tue Aug 28, 2001 9:01 am

Hey.
I'm a new reader....but i've caught up on the past 2 years in the last few weeks. I think you have a very honest grasp of the teenage perspective. Maybe the person giving you flak doesn't remember it so well. Don't take it to heart....lots of people will relate (and obviously do) to confusion and morals.

by **RevMe** on Tue Aug 28, 2001 9:28 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Winkie:
I disagree with the statement above that murder is a lesser crime than rape.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Well, while the victim has to live with being a victim of it for the rest of their life, with rape, it's a hell of a lot longer... At least with Murder, it's "Oh no, I'm being mu-*erk*". 
BTW, on the rape subject, is anyone else sorta unsettled by the new (Wednesday, 8-29) Diesel Sweeties ( <A HREF="http://www.clango.org" TARGET=_blank>http://www.clango.org</A> )? It's sorta a subtle Date Rape joke, and seeing as the way the Li'l Sis's (the one with the tooth-shirt in this strip) character's been set up, she's sort of a slut character, so, the undercurrent, at least as I can see it is "Well, she enjoyed/deserved/asked for it, so it's OK/No Big Deal/Whatever". Perhaps I'm reading _way_ too much into it, but... I don't know. Just something that struck me as odd.------------------
<A HREF="http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra" TARGET=_blank>http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra</A>
<A HREF="http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions" TARGET=_blank>http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions</A>
<A HREF="http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/" TARGET=_blank>http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/</A>
"If you hate supermarket music, then start making supermarket music" -- The Residents
Yeah.

by **RevMe** on Tue Aug 28, 2001 10:51 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by RevMe:
 Well, while the victim has to live with being a victim of it for the rest of their life, with rape, it's a hell of a lot longer... At least with Murder, it's "Oh no, I'm being mu-*erk*".
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hm. Realised that could be taken as flip/uncaring/crass. I honestly didn't mean it as such -- it's _actually_ the way I feel about the issue, and that's about the clearest way I could put it. It's not nearly as... concise as that, I suppose, but that's what it really boils down to. So, uh, yeah. Any possible offense I apologise for -- it was not intended.
------------------
<A HREF="http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra" TARGET=_blank>http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra</A>
<A HREF="http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions" TARGET=_blank>http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions</A>
<A HREF="http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/" TARGET=_blank>http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/</A>
"If you hate supermarket music, then start making supermarket music" -- The Residents
Yeah.

by **Atlas_v1.1** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 12:38 am

On Rape compared to murder:
Rape is worse. Believe me. I am knowing of a case here (and really trying to not disclose information I am not free to disclose) where the victim was raped at the age of 8. This has caused her all sorts of problems, most of which she has only overcome by virtue of having one of the strongest personalities I have as yet encountered. In the past 15 years since that incident, she has had nightmares, various sexual problems, claustrophobia and several other disorders. Not much fun. Only now is she beginning to really break free of the trauma. I am confident that she will recover completely... But that still makes a good 15 years of suffering for one man's deeds.
How can murder be worse?On Joe's restraint and related issues:
How is it that the sight of breasts is supposed to shut down the brain completely? It has, to date, NEVER happened to me. And not for lack of the sight, either. I mean, geeze, it's not like it's something you've never seen before is it? (* Atlas suddenly remembers that curious US law that prohibits women of going topless *) Say, is that law functional in Canada too? Because it's one of the most nonsensical laws I've heard of. Right up there with outlawing the shooting of buffaloes from secondstory windows.

by **RevMe** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 2:25 am

Well, the thing is, the way I've always been told from people who had knowledge of the law (or at least purported to..), and that if both parties were drunk or otherwise incapacitated, it wasn't really rape. (_TECHNICALLY_, according to these people, in the eyes of the law, both would be rapists, but it sorta cancels each other out, to reduce to the absurd, there.)Also, it's not merely a drink or two -- they have to actually be drunk. Some people _DO_ get drunk on a drink or two, but I would venture to say most people, especially those who go to bars, don't. As for the emotional one, it's something to be decided on a case by case basis. Yeah, I think "Oh, everyone in my family died today" would be a better grounds for rape than "Oh, my favorite sports team didn't beat the spread, so I lost 40 bucks", and I'd venture that the courts would see it the same way. ------------------
<A HREF="http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra" TARGET=_blank>http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra</A>
<A HREF="http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions" TARGET=_blank>http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions</A>
<A HREF="http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/" TARGET=_blank>http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/</A>
"If you hate supermarket music, then start making supermarket music" -- The Residents
Yeah.

by **kelvin** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 2:45 am

REgarding Rape versus Murder:
Perhaps it would be most correct to say that while Rape is more painful, you can't ever get over Murder. 6 of one, half dozen of the other?Regarding responsibility for rape, stupid excuses, mental incapacity...
IMO, the saddest mental incapacity is the inability or unwillingness to make decisions to protect yourself. Don't want to get date-raped? Don't go to that rave/bar/quad party with that guy and his friends and get so stoned/drunk you can't move your legs. Make sure you have friends that look out for you, and you for them. Make the decision not to imbibe mind-affecting amounts of alcohol or drugs (including perscription anti-depressants taken with a bottle of wine).God forbid we should take responsibility for our own actions and the situations and experiences we make concious choices to be in... it sure would clear up a lot of situations that are morally ambiguous as "she was really drunk and they slept together and now she regrets it... was it date rape?"BTW, I do speak from experience, both as the powerless victim and the willing victim. The hardest lesson of my adult life was learning that I *could* make the decisions that would help keep me safe and then choosing to make them.

by **David Adrian** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 2:59 am

Whoo, I seem to have blown the lid off of something here.Okay, revisions/clarifications time. An important part of what I was saying, and one that seems to have been glossed over, is that I believe the circumstances I described fulfil the MORAL definition of rape, not the LEGAL one. This is a subtle distinction, but an important one.As to the whole rape/murder comparison: yes, I firmly believe that rape is an even worse assault on the victim than murder is. The comparison is a moot point, however, since I feel the only safe way to deal with either criminal is to eliminate them - execution, immediate and final. Needless to say, comparing which criminal deserved it more is a fine point suitible for debate among theologians, but not otherwise significant to the world at large.One final point - to RJ Shep: by my 'statutory rape' comment I did NOT mean children shouldn't be protected. My comment was pointed at a LAW which is so badly phrased and so poorly enforced that it weakens the legal structure. While I agree with the sentiment behind it, the 'statutory rape' laws currently on the books are so badly written that the only time they are actually used in court is when both parties were clearly consenting, thus invalidating the actual 'full' rape charge. Thus, this particular law is ONLY good for prosecuting those who are NOT morally criminals.

by **Winkie** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 3:22 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by David Adrian:
While I agree with the sentiment behind it, the 'statutory rape' laws currently on the books are so badly written that the only time they are actually used in court is when both parties were clearly consenting, thus invalidating the actual 'full' rape charge. Thus, this particular law is ONLY good for prosecuting those who are NOT morally criminals.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>This is not the first time I've heard this, and it's always seemed strange to me. You'd think that proscecutors would *prefer* charges of statutory rape to charges of rape, because it's a lot easier to prove that a person is underage than to prove that a sexual act wasn't consensual. The statutory rape laws must be very badly written indeed.

by **Sir Forsyth** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 4:06 am

Josh, may i make the point that you don't need to appologize for anything. It's your comic, it's your choice how the story runs and others have no right to make forceful or rude suggestions, comments or complaints to you. If they don't like it then it's their problem. I can understand that you might not want to bite peoples heads off but they're in the wrong for complaining about somthing they have no control over. you have nothing to feel sorry about.(oh boy...i can feel a battle brewing over this little post...)

by **David Platypus Formosa** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 6:53 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Atlas_v1.1:
On Rape compared to murder:
(* Atlas suddenly remembers that curious US law that prohibits women of going topless *) Say, is that law functional in Canada too? Because it's one of the most nonsensical laws I've heard of. Right up there with outlawing the shooting of buffaloes from secondstory windows.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>No its not, there was a resonalbly famious case where there law was challened in court and thrown out. It is perfectly legal for a woman to go round topless in Canda but IANAL so check with the relivent people.

by **Josh Phillips** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 7:05 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by David Platypus Formosa:
 No its not, there was a resonalbly famious case where there law was challened in court and thrown out. It is perfectly legal for a woman to go round topless in Canda but IANAL so check with the relivent people.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>It is legal for women to be topless in Canada. It doesn't mean that they *do*...And as far as I know, nudist colonies were *always* legal... the only difference is that toplessness is now permitted in public. The obvious question is, "Why? Wouldn't they be cold? It's Canada, right?" ;-)

JOSH.------------------
Josh Phillips - <A HREF="mailto:josh@avalonhigh.com">josh@avalonhigh.com</A>
Avalon - <A HREF="http://www.avalonhigh.com" TARGET=_blank>http://www.avalonhigh.com</A>

by **Winkie** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 7:38 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Atlas_v1.1:
On Rape compared to murder:
Rape is worse. Believe me. I am knowing of a case here (and really trying to not disclose information I am not free to disclose) where the victim was raped at the age of 8. This has caused her all sorts of problems, most of which she has only overcome by virtue of having one of the strongest personalities I have as yet encountered. In the past 15 years since that incident, she has had nightmares, various sexual problems, claustrophobia and several other disorders. Not much fun. Only now is she beginning to really break free of the trauma. I am confident that she will recover completely... But that still makes a good 15 years of suffering for one man's deeds.
How can murder be worse?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Would be better if she were dead?Would you be willing to kill her in order to spare her from being raped again?I don't want to make light of your experiences, or hers. But murder is not just a rhetorical device for emphasizing how bad rape is.

by **Hatamoto** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:46 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Josh Phillips:
 It is legal for women to be topless in Canada. It doesn't mean that they *do*...And as far as I know, nudist colonies were *always* legal... the only difference is that toplessness is now permitted in public. The obvious question is, "Why? Wouldn't they be cold? It's Canada, right?" ;-)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Those who live in Vancouver should know the answer to that question. ;-)

Actually, out in Maple Ridge (a burb of Vancouver, where I usedta live til I packed up and hauled out 6154km to Halifax... there's a helluva drive, let me tell you!) there was a woman last summer who was exercising her rights on a regular basis. Good. The world needs more people to do that sorta thing.As for J and C and the Big Naked Powwow... OF DOOM (*cough*), setting aside the morality of whatever, or the relative benefits of being merely axe murdered over sexually tortured, it seems to me that Joe is, indeed, showing incredible amounts of restraint for a presumably sexually active teenage male. It wasn't so long ago when I was that age... and if a girl sitting naked on a bed was happening right on the heels of the two of us agreeing to become an item... well, as the magic 8-ball would blithely comment: "ALL SIGNS POINT TO 'YES'!". Regardless of the morality of that, it's reality.*Offensiveness Warning*
Beware the following opinion if you're easily offended.
*Offensiveness Warning*The idea of someone taking advantage of another person who's judgement is impaired being considered rape is in my opinion dangerous and myopic, as it puts the ENTIRE onus of foreknowledge and responsibility on the part of the so-called "rapist". By this reasoning, any woman who gets bought a drink or two by any guy (or vice versa!) has impaired judgement and blammo, date rape ensues.Worse yet, it opens up arguments like "I was in emotional disarray because [I Lost My Job/I Broke Up With My Mate/My Dog Died/The Habs Lost The Stanley Cup] when I engaged in sex with so-and-so. I was taken advantage of!" That idea sets my hair on end, and that EXACT sort of argument HAS been used. Yeech.In my opinion, for an action to be criminal, criminal intent or negligence has to exist. If I guy buys a girl 23498732 drinks or spikes one so he can shovel her into a bed at home and molest her as she's passed out, that's criminal intent. If the two of them are having fun, drink a little too much and BOTH of them decide "what the hell", that's kosher (and indeed, what many people attempt to accomplish in pubs, clubs and bars every weekend). "Drinks" here can be substituted with anything that'd make someone think differently than "normal". It could be any sort of pharmaceutical, emotional or physical influence (ie. near-death "narrow escape" experiences have a tendancy to make people wanna reproduce).Taken to the Avalon instance, would Joe be labeled as a "rapist" if he and C decided to bump nasty? He didn't cause C's "altered mental state", nor deliberately contribute to it (and, arguably, was completely obtuse and unaware that everything was not 100% emotionally... keep in mind that many men are a little developentally stunted in that arena <IMG SRC="http://www.keenspot.com/KeenBoard/wink.gif"> ). Moreover, there were fair number of cues given by C that she was truly interested (asking to go steady and sitting on the bed naked are major indicators). I'd say Joe would have been safe if they got together... unless, of course, Ceil emphatically told him NO, in which case Joe goes home and reacquaints himself with the Victoria's Secret catalogue.[This message has been edited by Hatamoto (edited 08-29-2001).]

by **Cannonshop** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:14 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Winkie:
I disagree with the statement above that murder is a lesser crime than rape.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Rape leaves the victim alive to relive the crime over and over again for the rest of their life.
Imagine that.
Imagine being helpless every night for the rest of your LIFE, never being safe.
Can you really tell me that murder is greater than the slow death of the soul?
Can murder be greater than torture for life?
Rape is at the very least Equal of murder, and, in my mind, it is more horrible.
After all, if you're dead, you aren't suffering it over and over again...

by **Cannonshop** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:16 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Winkie:
I disagree with the statement above that murder is a lesser crime than rape.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Rape leaves the victim alive to relive the crime over and over again for the rest of their life.
Imagine that.
Imagine being helpless every night for the rest of your LIFE, never being safe.
Can you really tell me that murder is greater than the slow death of the soul?
Can murder be greater than torture for life?
Rape is at the very least Equal of murder, and, in my mind, it is more horrible.
After all, if you're dead, you aren't suffering it over and over again...

by **Kerrle** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:21 am

That's not a very complete view - the taking of a life is the most heinous crime there is.Yes, rape is a truly horrible thing, and I'm not suggesting otherwise - but it can be overcome. And most victims do, though it may take years or more.There is no recovery from death.

by **rchanen** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:25 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Pauline Hewitt:
 Even with the smiley that deserves a slap.
If you have something worth saying and you can't make it interesting without using cheap trick then, in hind sight, you were wrong about it being worth saying.As to Joe's sexuality: he's doing OK so far by me. He makes more sense than most of the guys I know but I hope that just means that I haven't met enough guys yet. I used to think he was a bit childish but under pressure he seems to be delivering the goods.Fight your corner for reasonable thinking Josh, and don't feel too bad about stomping down on those that go too far.PJH<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I would like to disagree with that. A reply or an argument may well be polite, verbose, and in every way a suitable argument and a brilliantly debated point. But when you disagree with someone, and if you are disagreeing with something they care deeply about you are bound to give offense. If I go up to a bunch of Christians and initiate a theological debate in which I attempt to prove that God does not exist (I am a Christian BTW) I am bound to cause offense. Never mind that I was being polite. Never mind my attempts to be quite reasponable. I will cause offense. That is the manner in which people live. If you debate with someone about an issue they feel deeply about you are bound to cause offense if you take a contrary opinion. On a further note two opinions: I would rather spend time with an opinonated, rude, and offensive person, than a person who did not want to give offense. I like vertabrates that way (apologies for any misspellings). My second opinion is that is is much easier to criticize than to get up off one's *** and do something. (In the final respect that may include me).------------------
All hail ale and whores

by **RevMe** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:33 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Kerrle:
That's not a very complete view - the taking of a life is the most heinous crime there is.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well, let's just take that to the extreme, there. So, you're saying that a person who tortures someone else, but keeps them alive is better than someone who murders someone else quickly? (I realise we both agree that these people are _terrible terrible human beings_, I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing degree, I suppose). Even if there's the possiblity that the Torturer is caught and it stops, the person who was tortured will be broken beyond belief. There are some things you can't get over. I'd venture to say Rape is one of them. There's a difference about becoming more-or-less functional, and getting over it. It's still there. Time may make things easier, but it's still there. It's a difficult thing, but I don't know. I still think that murder's the lesser crime -- not by _MUCH_ mind you, but still. ------------------
<A HREF="http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra" TARGET=_blank>http://www.dangeruniversity.net/todcra</A>
<A HREF="http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions" TARGET=_blank>http://www.mp3.com/TODCRAProductions</A>
<A HREF="http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/" TARGET=_blank>http://filmfunnies.keenspace.com/</A>
"If you hate supermarket music, then start making supermarket music" -- The Residents
Yeah.

by **RJ Shep** on Wed Aug 29, 2001 11:55 am

I'll have to favour the opinion that Torture (including Rape) is far more damaging than Death. I can think of several situations where death is PREFFERABLE to life. We (I mean USA) have legal defenses to killing another human; I know of no defense to excuse Torture.

by **Atlas_v1.1** on Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:12 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Winkie:
 Would be better if she were dead?
Would you be willing to kill her in order to spare her from being raped again?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Not for me. The person in question means a lot to me, and I would have never known her if she had been killed instead of 'just' raped. And I'll admit, I got to know her relatively recently, thus missing the brunt of her emotional turmoil... But I have been listening to her telling her tale. Nobody deserves to have to live through that. Noone has enough sins on her back to deserve that.My personal suggestion for a punishment for rapists is a method that was applied in the Middle Ages, at the Court of Ribe in Denmark. The punishment is called 'Death of a Woman'. The rapist is tied down in public view, and then has his genitals carved off. Penis, scrotum, testicles, all of it. This will usually not kill him, and so he instead bleeds to death from the wound. This I find is a quite suitable punishment for rape. And I am sworn to justice and mercy both. As you can see, my opinion of rapists is quite harsh.

by **TomServo** on Thu Aug 30, 2001 1:34 am

Shoot me for trying to throw a bit of levity into a very serious conversation... but here goes. ^^Could it be that the emailer has a crush on Celidh? Since she's animated (unless there's a real Celidh that Josh isn't telling us about), maybe he's so horny for her he wants to bone her at any given opportunity, and is therefore living vicariously through Joe?Not that I condone Joe going "GREAT! YOU'RE TOPLESS! LET'S MAKE WITH THE SEX0RZING!" (apologies for the leetspeek), but that thought occurred to me while reading Josh's original post.Before you start flaming me, give me a chance to get my asbestos suit ready... ^^;------------------
AAAH! We got movie sign!
TS

by **David Adrian** on Thu Aug 30, 2001 1:46 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>This assertion raises fascinating questions: What other acts can cause one to forfeit one's right to be a human being? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>I REALLY don't have space here to go into my view on this topic: suffice it to say that more than one doctoral thesis has been written on the topic. However, they aren't particularly readable. For probably the most readable version, pick up Robert Heinlein's 'Starship Troopers' and read it. (Don't bother with the movie! The movie ignored all the important parts of the book!) Pay particular attention to anything relating to the classes on 'History and Moral Philosophy'. This is probably the most readable touchstone for a heirarchy of values I've ever seen.Now, getting back to the question: a MINIMUM qualification for being a human being (as opposed to an upright animal) is reaching some level on this heirarchy higher than the individual self. The creature that I've labeled a 'rapist' in previous posts does not reach any higher level - a person who did could not perform those actions.Hm. Longer than I wanted, shorter than I expected. I hope it was coherant...

by **Klaus Petersen** on Thu Aug 30, 2001 3:55 am

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by TomServo:
Shoot me for trying to throw a bit of levity into a very serious conversation... but here goes. ^^
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>(Klaus unslings his trusty Steyr AUG, raises it, switches to burst-fire, and aims just over TomServo's head: BRAKAKOW! Zip! Ziou! Zing!) <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Could it be that the emailer has a crush on Celidh? Since she's animated (unless there's a real Celidh that Josh isn't telling us about), maybe he's so horny for her he wants to bone her at any given opportunity, and is therefore living vicariously through Joe?
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That would offer a partial explanation - but still no excuse. The suggestions made by the mailer are, at the very least, in extremely poor taste. Communicating such poor taste to someone you don't know personally - whether in jest or not - is a stunning demonstration of social ineptitude. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Not that I condone Joe going "GREAT! YOU'RE TOPLESS! LET'S MAKE WITH THE SEX0RZING!" (apologies for the leetspeek), but that thought occurred to me while reading Josh's original post.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>That would be the direct, unrestrained, animal response to the situation. However, higher standards are expected of civilised, well-adjusted people. Taste, sensibility, respect and restraint are skills we acquire through upbringing, social experience, and the intellectual stimulation from various forms of fiction - Avalon included.The mailer has shown Josh a personality that is seriously underdeveloped in these respects. We should pity him - he's in for a rough experience in real life. Hopefully Josh's reply has given him a kick in the right direction. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>
Before you start flaming me, give me a chance to get my asbestos suit ready... ^^;
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Hmmm, I would rather suggest kevlar. And that you run - real fast! (Starts changing magazine on the AUG, wearing a wicked smile).

Keenspot

Excuse me while I vent.

Who is online