White Privilege, clear cut.

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

It is absolutely disgusting how far some will go to make their point. Now you are defending rape just because a "liberal" says it's bad. There is something wrong here.

What about all the folks that are supporting Cosby being released from prison? They're mostly black from what I call tell. Am I allowed to say that?

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

This thread is laughable.

Way too much aggressive behaviour.

Anyone just my two cents:

The differentiating factor between low and high crime rates is not Race, its a mixture of socio-economic factors, both external and internal. Internal factor for example would be culture, external factor would be police presense, or educational facilities. Boiling down something that professionals have studied for thousands of years to a single factor is dumb.

The "my body my choice" argument is dumb. It is essentially liberalism to its max which is a form of anarchy. By definition as soon as you join a society of people, there are limitations on what you and your body can and cannot do. For example, it is not in dispute in western society that specific class A drugs such as Cocaine should be illegal.

So the my body my choice argument fails. It is really not a question of your body or your choice, but instead a sliding scale of how much government control the population would prefer to have. Me personally, I think minimal government is best. When it comes to personal rights, the government should only interfere at the absolute minimum that is required for a functional society. For example the government should protect and punish someone from harm by another. It should protect free speech including protest against the government and so forth.


The my body my argument I most commonly seen in America used to argue about legalizing abortions for any reason. Its funny, because no where in Europe can you get an abortion for any reason. Abortions are either heavily restricted or/and in some cases require a specifically licensed professional. In the UK for example there must be a pressing reason for the abortion, for example birth threatens the mother's health.

Whenever, I see americans arguing about it, I usually see a lot on the republican side have the 4 exceptions to when abortion is allowed. Health, Rape etc.



White privilege doesn't exist. A person is not privileged because of the colour of their skin and even if they were it would certainly not be in white dominated societies. It is instead socio-economic factors that are much more determinent. Probably the only places you could argue that being white has its advantages is in third world countries, and in reality its not the "whiteness", but the "western" status, and the associated wealth that people believe you to have. This is born from the influence that the west has had on the rest of the world during the imperial and post imperial (rise of america) age.

I've read multiple texts now about "whiteness" and its literally just racist babble, by people who are not able to source any empircal evidence, make broad sweeping statements as if they are fact, and confuse even themselves in their own linquigistic novelties and mind bending logical leaps.

Don't know where this dude come from but he's obviously given some thought to this. Good post.

[Copier Addict]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

This thread is laughable.

Way too much aggressive behaviour.

Anyone just my two cents:

The differentiating factor between low and high crime rates is not Race, its a mixture of socio-economic factors, both external and internal. Internal factor for example would be culture, external factor would be police presense, or educational facilities. Boiling down something that professionals have studied for thousands of years to a single factor is dumb.

The "my body my choice" argument is dumb. It is essentially liberalism to its max which is a form of anarchy. By definition as soon as you join a society of people, there are limitations on what you and your body can and cannot do. For example, it is not in dispute in western society that specific class A drugs such as Cocaine should be illegal.

So the my body my choice argument fails. It is really not a question of your body or your choice, but instead a sliding scale of how much government control the population would prefer to have. Me personally, I think minimal government is best. When it comes to personal rights, the government should only interfere at the absolute minimum that is required for a functional society. For example the government should protect and punish someone from harm by another. It should protect free speech including protest against the government and so forth.


The my body my argument I most commonly seen in America used to argue about legalizing abortions for any reason. Its funny, because no where in Europe can you get an abortion for any reason. Abortions are either heavily restricted or/and in some cases require a specifically licensed professional. In the UK for example there must be a pressing reason for the abortion, for example birth threatens the mother's health.

Whenever, I see americans arguing about it, I usually see a lot on the republican side have the 4 exceptions to when abortion is allowed. Health, Rape etc.



White privilege doesn't exist. A person is not privileged because of the colour of their skin and even if they were it would certainly not be in white dominated societies. It is instead socio-economic factors that are much more determinent. Probably the only places you could argue that being white has its advantages is in third world countries, and in reality its not the "whiteness", but the "western" status, and the associated wealth that people believe you to have. This is born from the influence that the west has had on the rest of the world during the imperial and post imperial (rise of america) age.

I've read multiple texts now about "whiteness" and its literally just racist babble, by people who are not able to source any empircal evidence, make broad sweeping statements as if they are fact, and confuse even themselves in their own linquigistic novelties and mind bending logical leaps.



Also I don't why you get into anecdotal arguments about rape and all this other nonsense. If a woman is going to a Playboy Mansion (literally where whores go) and she ends up having sex, and then later claims she was raped, then there is a massive evidential barrier by clear nature of circumstance as to prove she is telling the truth. We operate on a innocent until proven basis in society. The burden is always on the claimant to prove what they are claiming. So it is understandable when a woman goes to a building that exists purely on the basis of sexual encounters, that people question her motives when she later makes a claim that she was raped. (edit: I read she was underaged, if she was underaged then consent laws change, so it would depend possibly on what the alleged perpetrator reasonably believed. Parents are dumb as f though if they let her go there. Like why?)


Could you imagine the response I would get if I spent 5 days texting a chick I met at a bar, we send each other nudes and other lewd material, and I invite her over to my place while my wife is out of the house, and then my wife finds out that someone was there and I tell her I was raped. It later comes out in court about our message history, previous interactions etc.
You think anyone would convict her?

You're kinda all over the place here dude. First you say people can't do whatever they want with their bodies , but then you say if a woman goes to the Playboy mansion it is perfect okay to use your body to rape her.

[Crowfeather]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

You're kinda all over the place here dude. First you say people can't do whatever they want with their bodies , but then you say if a woman goes to the Playboy mansion it is perfect okay to use your body to rape her.

I see you have good english comprehension.

Also why are you working on the assumption that she got raped. She claimed she got raped. Doesn't mean what she is claiming is true. She has the burden of proof. She has to prove her claims.

Which by the sounds of it, she failed to do.


If you are going to have a discussion with someone you should at least do it in good faith. You are putting words into my mouth that contradict the point I am making in an effort to make it seem like I'm arguing something completely different, and this is very bad faith.

[Copier Addict]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

I see you have good english comprehension.

Also why are you working on the assumption that she got raped. She claimed she got raped. Doesn't mean what she is claiming is true. She has the burden of proof. She has to prove her claims.

Which by the sounds of it, she failed to do.


If you are going to have a discussion with someone you should at least do it in good faith. You are putting words into my mouth that contradict the point I am making in an effort to make it seem like I'm arguing something completely different, and this is very bad faith.

Why are you working on the assumption that she is lying.
I am discussing in good faith. You said that just because a woman goes to a place that exists purely based on sexual encounters and claims rape she has no credibility.

[Crowfeather]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

Why are you working on the assumption that she is lying.
I am discussing in good faith. You said that just because a woman goes to a place that exists purely based on sexual encounters and claims rape she has no credibility.

At no point are you discussing it good faith, when you misstate my position in such a ludicrous way.


I did not say there was no credibility. I said by nature of circumstance the evidential barrier in proving the claim is greater. By neccesity we work on the basis innocent until proven guilty, ergo she was not raped until she can prove that she was.


But I'm not going to sit here going back and forth discussing singular cases with someone that has made no attempt to honestly discuss something in good faith and instead is actively engaging in bad faith discussions. So this will be my last response to you.

[Copier Addict]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

At no point are you discussing it good faith, when you misstate my position in such a ludicrous way.


I did not say there was no credibility. I said by nature of circumstance the evidential barrier in proving the claim is greater. By neccesity we work on the basis innocent until proven guilty, ergo she was not raped until she can prove that she was.


But I'm not going to sit here going back and forth discussing singular cases with someone that has made no attempt to honestly discuss something in good faith and instead is actively engaging in bad faith discussions. So this will be my last response to you.

Thank you so much. I was about done with you anyway.

[Debs1964]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

But my question still remains valid, "What the hell did she expect to happen to her at a party at the Playboy Mansion?" No one in the news media seemed interested in asking that question. I can only wonder if the answer would not have fit the picture that the media was trying to paint.

I don't know what she expected, as I'm not that woman, but I can definitely tell you what she wasn't expecting, she wasn't expecting to be raped.

By your argument, if I go to a bar, I should expect someone to force alcohol down my throat, after all, what did I expect going into a place where people drink alcohol.

Let's take this one step further, how about the woman who gets into the marital bed at night, the place where, in all probability, most of the sex within the marriage takes place, are you telling me that the woman should expect sex, that she cannot be raped, let me assure you, SHE FUCKING CAN!!!!

I don't care what establishment, or otherwise, someone went into, if she says no, it means NO. Isn't it about time that men learnt to have some self control

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

I don't know what she expected, as I'm not that woman, but I can definitely tell you what she wasn't expecting, she wasn't expecting to be raped.

By your argument, if I go to a bar, I should expect someone to force alcohol down my throat, after all, what did I expect going into a place where people drink alcohol.

Let's take this one step further, how about the woman who gets into the marital bed at night, the place where, in all probability, most of the sex within the marriage takes place, are you telling me that the woman should expect sex, that she cannot be raped, let me assure you, SHE FUCKING CAN!!!!

I don't care what establishment, or otherwise, someone went into, if she says no, it means NO. Isn't it about time that men learnt to have some self control

Debs is absolutely right. Just because rap music portrays women as tricks and ho's doesn't mean they are. Just because some women falsely claim rape because they're gold diggers doesn't mean that all women lie about rape. Just because a lot of women walk around with with their ass hanging out and most of their boobs showing doesn't mean they are whores. All it means is that they are wearing the uniform of a whore. (Sorry, couldn't resist the Chappelle joke.)

On a serious note, I do agree with Debs. It doesn't matter what she expected. Men need to keep their dick in their pants.

[robinsonad86]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

The my body my argument I most commonly seen in America used to argue about legalizing abortions for any reason. Its funny, because no where in Europe can you get an abortion for any reason. Abortions are either heavily restricted or/and in some cases require a specifically licensed professional. In the UK for example there must be a pressing reason for the abortion, for example birth threatens the mother's health.

Sorry I just meed to correct this you do not need an issue such as a health risk for an abortion in the UK for the first 24 weeks of the pregnancy. Up until this time it can be anything from an unwanted preganncy to a health risk and anything inbetween.

After 24 weeks there has to be a high risk factor such as a risk to the mothers life or a
previously undiagnosed birth defect that would risk the babies life or quality of life even in these situations the final choice lies with the mother

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

Sorry I just meed to correct this you do not need an issue such as a health risk for an abortion in the UK for the first 24 weeks of the pregnancy. Up until this time it can be anything from an unwanted preganncy to a health risk and anything inbetween.

After 24 weeks there has to be a high risk factor such as a risk to the mothers life or a
previously undiagnosed birth defect that would risk the babies life or quality of life even in these situations the final choice lies with the mother

In other words, after 24 weeks we (men) can tell women what they can do with their bodies. I attempted to make this point earlier but liberals don't like to admit the truth.

[robinsonad86]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

In other words, after 24 weeks we (men) can tell women what they can do with their bodies. I attempted to make this point earlier but liberals don't like to admit the truth.

No Billy up to 24 weeks they have free choice. After 24 weeks the law -which will have been decided by men and women- states there needs to be a specific reason. Even if for example a male doctor advises an abortion after 24 weeks for a medical reason the mother still had the choice to say no to one. Seems much fairer to me than say Texas which has effectively made abortion illegal

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

No Billy up to 24 weeks they have free choice. After 24 weeks the law -which will have been decided by men and women- states there needs to be a specific reason. Even if for example a male doctor advises an abortion after 24 weeks for a medical reason the mother still had the choice to say no to one. Seems much fairer to me than say Texas which has effectively made abortion illegal

Trust me, I understand how abortion laws work. It's not complicated. It's time for liberals to stop saying that men have no say in telling a woman what she can do with her body. That's not the way it works.

Abortion isn't only about a woman. It's also about the baby. Men (scientists) play a key role in determining abortion laws. Not to mention male lawyers and judges. And even voters in general. Women are no more qualified to write abortion laws than a man.

[robinsonad86]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.

Trust me, I understand how abortion laws work. It's not complicated. It's time for liberals to stop saying that men have no say in telling a woman what she can do with her body. That's not the way it works.

Abortion isn't only about a woman. It's also about the baby. Men (scientists) play a key role in determining abortion laws. Not to mention male lawyers and judges. And even voters in general. Women are no more qualified to write abortion laws than a man.

[BillyCarpenter]

Re: White Privilege, clear cut.


I say this in all seriousness. If you want to have a serious debate you need to learn to tell the truth. The truth is that this is a liberal vs. conservative thing. Just admit it and let's get on with it.

Secondly, learn to comprehend my words. I said that I couldn't support abortion in the case of rape. That's my personal stance. However, I also said that I could understand those that support abortion in the case of rape. In other words, there's room for compromise with me on this point.

There's much more to be discussed on the issue of abortion but I'm not willing to go any further with you until you start telling the truth. Don't play games with me and waste my time.