4 ms·
> Asserting to 50% of the population that they are, by nature, literal rapists That’s not the assertion here at all. The assertion is that men are more likely
by CapmCrackaWaka 5y ago
> Asserting to 50% of the population that they are, by nature, literal rapists
That’s not the assertion here at all. The assertion is that men are more likely to commit rape, and that women have a _valid_ fear of this happening because of purely biological phenomena.
Calling a man a rapist, and telling him he is more likely to commit rape than a female is, are two completely different things. The healthy society I was referring to does not find anyone guilty of a crime they never committed, but acknowledges the fact that certain crimes are committed more often because of biological reasons.
- read_if_gay_ 5y agoRight, we're calling them "more likely rapists" instead of "rapists". That's still not a healthy message. Or would you also call black people "more likely murderers"?
- CapmCrackaWaka 5y agoI think you're mistaking 'healthy messages' with 'the truth'. Political correctness often separates the two. "Men are more likely rapists than women are" is simply a statistical fact that you are going have to come to terms with. Also, if you haven't understood why differences between men and women can't be compared to differences between black and white people, then there is no point in continuing this, to be honest.
- read_if_gay_ 5y ago> differences between men and women can't be compared to differences between black and white people Why not? You never argued this before. > "Men are more likely rapists than women are" is simply a statistical fact that you are going have to come to terms with. If you can't be bothered to explain the above, maybe you want to tell me instead: did you oppose the firing of James Damore due to his memo in which he argued "statistical facts that people are going have to come to terms with"?