Debate Why Don't Feminists Fight for Muslim Women ???

[Angela]

One can disagree without resorting to insults and calling out specific national or ethnic groups. Cut it out or I'm going to have to start issuing infractions.

 

[Wanderlust]

I'm sorry, but Tomenable didn't mention any 'high culture', it is Wanderlust in post n° 128 who did.

As usual in this debate, you don't know what you're talking about. I never said anything about "high culture."

Wanderlust,

you say the Europeans have disrupted so many peacefull, harmonious an advanced civilizations

Please quote and highlight where I said that. You enjoy putting words in my mouth and words where there were none. In fact, what I have actually said was

One of biggest problems is that in places like Africa and Asia (including the Middle East), for centuries or even thousands of years, there had already been intra-continental fighting between national/ethnic/religious groups with longstanding grievances. The West conquered and colonized these places and either took advantage of and exploited the sectarian differences or ignored the differences and treated the conquered peoples as one. Worse, certain groups were favored over others and the allocation of resources were unequally distributed which exacerbated already existing tensions. And then during major political upheavals like WW1, WW2 and decolonization, there were many "arbitrary" borders constructed that didn't take into consideration the prior grievances and disputes amongst the peoples on the land and unsurprisingly, all hell broke loose, eg. Jews/Palestinians, Hausa-Fulani/Igbo, Hutu/Tutsi, Sunni/Shia/Kurds, etc....

I acknowledged that the societies Europe colonized and conquered already had pre-existing histories of war and dissention. I never said or implied that they were "peaceful, harmonious" peoples. Maybe one day you will properly quote me.

Their goal is to make all Europeans and Americans feel guilty and responsable for whatever goes wrong in the world.
I strongly reject that. Most things are the responsability of the local actors on the field themselves. The attitude of blaiming the west is actually an excuse for those who are realy guilty in the facts. This attitude is certainly not helpfull.

Laughable...and so sad. When disenfranchised groups take Europeans to task for the things we or our ancestors have done, I don't feel guilty at all. And I don't know a single ethnic European who shares my views that feels guilty. We don't feel guilty because we know that we are not being criticized as individuals, but that it's the white supremacist/Eurocentric systems and institutions from which we have benefited from that are rightfully being criticized or "blamed," to use your word.

We also know that we aren't shitty people who hold hateful, racist, bigoted views and so there is no reason to feel guilty. People only feel guilty when they know that there is some or a lot of truth to the critique. Moreover, because my sense of pride, esteem and integrity are not attached to Europe (they are attached to my own successes and failures), I can be more partial. But for you people who are Belgian or European before you are an individual, I understand why you feel so threatened--your integrity and self esteem are on the line. You have a lot in common with the super sensitive, fundamentalist Muslims, actually.

P.S. Are you Belgian? If so, then I truly understand your need to deny the atrocities your country committed in the Belgian Congo.

 

[Tomenable]

Wanderlust,

because you can't refute my actual arguments at face value.

You never posted any "strong" arguments so far, unless I missed something.

I will check again to see if I missed anything. If I did, I will reply to it later.

But then I think of wild dogs that become caged dogs and for years, are so neglected, isolated, used, abused, traumatized, and divorced from their empathetic core, that they revert to a vicious feral state and become an unstable, unpredictable danger to everyone around them. And I think, would it be better to just end their misery (and mine) and take them out back and put them down with a bullet to the brain (Final Solution style)? Or is it more humane and compassionate to just endure their long road to recovery and tolerate their stunted development?

Last time when Germanics tried to end Slavic misery, it backfired on them and ended up on the streets of Berlin:

Feel free to try again, but this time Sweden should openly declare war rather than just secretly supplying thousands of Aryan volunteers to the ranks of Waffen SS, and tons of resources to the Nazis, while at the same time being officially a neutral nation.

What your enslaved mind is incapable of grasping is that Sweden helps all people, because it is a humane and humanitarian nation. It hasn't always been that way, and has done its fair share of colonizing, conquering and pillaging (like when it ransacked and destroyed Poland), which is even more reason why Sweden should give and help. Because Sweden is a wealthy nation, it helps not only those that it has wronged, but those who simply need help, regardless of who they are and where they come from. That's admirable.

"That's admirable" ??? Oh, so you are not just a typical Germanic supremacist, but also a narcissistic one. Maybe you should let Non-Swedes judge what is admirable about Sweden ??? When I achieve something, I don't go around telling people: "Look at me, I have just won this contest and it's admirable, now you must admire me". You are very self-important and overly narcissistic.

Randomly letting in thousands of refugees is one thing, integrating them into your society is another thing.

You managed to let them in (not a big achievement!), but so far you have failed to integrate them, failed to ensure that each of them has a job, etc. So nothing to admire! I also recall that one Swedish politician wanted to settle refugees in forests - he said that you have a shortage of housing units to accomodate them, but that you have enough forests, so there is no problem.

This just shows in what kind of delusional utopia you are living up there in the North.

(like when it ransacked and destroyed Poland)

You were very efficient in slaughtering civilians, but your invasion was - eventually, after a few years - repulsed by Poland.

So what "destroying" are you talking about?

It was Russia which destroyed Poland, together with Prussia & Austria. Much later. Yes, you invaded Poland in the same time as the Cossack Uprising and the Muscovite Invasion. So - fighting on three fronts - Poland suffered a lot, and got permanently weakened.

How fascinating it is that you are the exception to your (narrow minded) rule. So, you are not religiously Catholic? According to your belief in genetic determinism, you must be religiously something else then, right? Because one can't escape his genes, correct? LOL You stereotyped yourself and your own people, but then conveniently, you don't fit that stereotype.

Yes, I am an exception to the rule.

Can you distinguish between statistical group characteristics and individual characteristics ???

According to your belief in genetic determinism, you must be religiously something else then, right?

My believes are quite close to Deism (even though I don't call myself a Deist):

http://www.religioustolerance.org/deism.htm

Basically I believe that some supernatural power could indeed "start" all of this.

Not that I'm extremely convinced about it, but I don't exclude such a possibility.

But you have no problem stereotyping all Muslims. Of course you accuse me of doing the same intellectually dishonest things you do.

I am not stereotyping all Muslims - when I talk about Muslims as a group, I am referring to statistical averages.

Of course not every single Muslim individual is like an average Muslim, but statistically - as a group - they are.

And then I remember that I actually want to be a better person than my impulses drive me to be. I'm smart enough to handle that and I have enough character and integrity to do it. I'm actually brave and not driven by fear. If only others could be that way or at least learn how to be, the world would be a better place. But the residual effects of physical, mental, spiritual, political and economic slavery on a population can not be undervalued.

I am also trying to overcome my impulses and weaknesses.

What makes you think that I'm driven by fear, not by reason?

 

[davef]

The extreme left and the extreme right are both bonkers in my humble opinion. Turn your back on all these irrational nut jobs. Join me in the sane, humane, centrist cluster.

Can I point out that her quest to end racism would've resulted in an innocent native German man spending time in prison while she gets to sit there in her fancy dining hall eating expensive gourmet meals?

And the men who raped her are probably still out and about, ready to rape her again....but wait.,.why even call the authorities if you won't even let them track down the actual criminals?

 

[Wanderlust]

You've most certainly crossed a boundary. You are now insulting European Slavs on behalf of Muslims.

"On behalf of Muslims?" Of course, the most "hard-line" and "proud" and "bad ass" are always the most sensitive: you types of people can always dish it out but never take it. I was trying to illustrate a point. When you subscribe to racial/ethnic/religious hierarchies, there will always be someone who is "superior," "better" or "on top." Just as several East European slavs around here love to denigrate Muslims, there are many who also see you as inferior heathens. I'm not one of them, but my point is that it sucks to have people shit on you because of who you are. You think that it's ok for you to do that to others but not for it to be done to you and that's ridiculous.

I don't see race, ethnicity, nationality and religion in a hierarchical way: Atheists > Christians > Muslims or Scandinavians > Poles > Serbians. Instead, I see Scandinavians = Poles = Serbians = Christians = Atheists = Muslims. No one is perfect; no nation, people or empire have lived a perfect, unblemished, glorious history; we all have faults just as we all have strengths.

In your mind you are so intelligent and well-educated that anyone who disagrees with you is irrational and of inferior intellect. Also, cultural relativism is all that exists in most universities as ethnocentrism is frowned upon as "racist". It makes little sense to engage with someone who is blind to reports of ghettos, rapes, robberies, mob behavior, etc. You don't want to hear the facts because they are inconvenient to your liberal utopian multicultural ideals.

Wrong. I'm never opposed to facts. But the "facts" that many of your ilk spout are "facts" taken out of context and intentionally presented in a way as to mislead or support a biased agenda. Several times in this debate, I have acknowledged the problems that some Muslims and refugees may present--I'm not blind at all. I just choose to have compassion and treat them like the humans they are. Big difference.

And ethnocentrism never works out well which is why it should be abandoned. You can love your people and your culture without hating others or thinking that you are better. Because if I become ethnocentric, and support Nordicism, then that means you and your people are inferiors and that Hitler and Mussolini should've rid the world of you.

In case you've missed it, the neo-nazis in Britain (who are few and far between) hate Slavs as much as Muslims. They insult "Polish vermin".

Which is why you should have some humility and compassion because you should understand what it's like to be openly despised and discriminated against. But you lack empathy.

 

[davef]

Can I point out that her quest to end racism would've resulted in an innocent native German man spending time in prison while she gets to sit there in her fancy dining hall eating expensive gourmet meals?

And the men who raped her are probably still out and about, ready to rape her again....but wait.,.why even call the authorities if you won't even let them track down the actual criminals?

I hope people don't misinterpret this as me blaming her for being against racism. Her crime is putting innocent people at risk for being arrested.

 

[Tomenable]

Wanderlust,

Because if I become ethnocentric, and support Nordicism

I think you are confusing Nordicism with Germanicism.

Nordicists considered people with a certain skull shape and physical traits to be superior, regardless of what language they spoke. And although this Nordic skull type is common in Sweden, the majority of Swedes are still Non-Nordic (there is no any nation where Nordic type is in majority). Nordicists were people like Hans Friedrich Karl Günther (1891-1965), who opposed Germanic supremacism:

http://www.friendsofsabbath.org/Further_Research/Genesis X and Origins/Races of Europe_McMahon.pdf

(...) Günther found the overwhelming majority of Germans racially mixed, just 6-8% pure Nordic ... (Proctor 1988: 151; Günther 1933: 57 & 112). (...)

(...) Unlike scientific anthroposociological elitism, mystical, cultural Germanicism made almost all Germans into superior Aryans, even if as blond as Hitler, as dolichocephalic as Rosenberg, as tall as Goebbels, as slender as Göring, and as manly as Streicher , as an anti-Nazi joke put it (Huxley & Haddon 1935: 26). While Lenz criticised the mythical, irrational excesses of Nazi race propaganda, and Günther declared the Nordic movement will always ruthlessly reject Germanicist enthusiasm , his Nordicist rival Clauß advocated a less biological and more culturally defined northern supremacism, while Kaup led a more populist campaign for an inclusive German national race (Wiercinski 1962: 12; Lutzhöft 1971: 17 & 22-23; Graham 1977: 1159). (...)

Some Waffen SS members were also Nordicsts, and therefore they considered Non-Nordic Germans to be subhumans as well:

(...) Ackermann claims the more extreme SS men began to take Nordic supremacy to its logical conclusion that non-Nordic Germans were inferior, and that five to ten percent of the population, its best selection would ultimately rule the rest [of Germans] (1970: 174). (...)

Heinrich Himmler on the other hand was a not a Nordicist, so he considered even Nordic Jews to be inferior subhumans:

(...) Nazis strained to be Nordicists, but within limits: Himmler, watching Jews going to the gas chamber, picked out a blond, blue-eyed boy and asked him if he were a Jew and if both his parents were Jews. When the boy answered in the affirmative, Himmler replied: What a pity, then I cannot save you. (Mosse 1978: 221). (...)

 

[Angela]

OK, that's it, or I'm going to have to close this thread and issue infractions. COOL OFF!

That applies to you too, Wanderlust. I know you're new, so I gave extra latitude, but your singling out of Slavs and Poles in particular is just as objectionable as doing it to Muslims.

 

[Tomenable]

Angela, your posts are enthralling as always.

I have a feeling that Jarls were R1b-U106, Karls were R1a-Z284, and Thralls were I1-L22: ^^

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrall

 

[Tomenable]

Wanderlust,

Just as several East European slavs around here love to denigrate Muslims

I know some former Muslims (born to Muslim parents) and Non-Muslims from the Near East, who denigrate Muslims with a passion.

For example in Poland one of the most fervent critics of Muslims and Islam is Miriam Shaded, who is of Syrian descent.

By the way, is "not wanting your country to become majority-Muslim" really the same as "denigrating Muslims" ???

Since "Muslim" is not a race - is criticizing Islam racist ??? After all, one can always change one's religion. It is not innate...

=======================

Anti-Semitism is different, as it targets Jews on ethnic basis (Atheist Jews & Jews who converted to Christianity were also targeted).

Criticism of Judaism, or criticising behaviour and customs of Orthodox Jews, is not the same as Anti-Semitism.

 

[Wanderlust]

This is when leftists really lose people: Migrant rape isn't as bad as indigenous rape

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/214479

Rape is rape. Put them in jail for a very long time. If they keep doing it, chemical castration is what I recommend. For child rape, I might even go for the death penalty. It's better than putting them into the general prison population where some guard will turn his back and the other inmates will kill him.

I agree.

I've talked a lot about how many of these refugees and migrants are maladapted, psychologically wounded, traumatized people and though I think that warrants some compassion and consideration, that does not absolve them of their crimes.

But there are different types of "rape sub-culture," depending on the culture, that may be more rooted in ignorance than they are in actual malice. Of course, the underlying factor and commonality that unites them all is sexism and misogyny but in more progressive cultures, the sexism can still be a bit more nuanced. On college campuses all around the US, they've had to create various initiatives to combat date rape because this notion of "playing hard to get" or "girls say 'no' when they really mean 'yes' so they don't actually want you to stop" is culturally pervasive. And in North Africa and the Middle East, there is a cultural perception that Western women, especially Scandinavian women (who are stereotyped for being sexually 'liberal'), are loose and usually down for one night stands and the like. This, coupled with the fact that there are some islamic tenets that permit the belief that women's bodies belong to men, it's not surprising that their own particular rape culture lends to the "rape epidemic" in Sweden. By the way, marital rape is often included in the rape statistics and that's another sad but pervasive cultural phenomenon.

But what I think that politician was getting at is that Swedish society has done a lot to minimize rape culture by way of hardcore, feminist initiatives over the past several decades. Swedish men don't even "check women out" in passing because they'd see that as a violation of a person/woman's right to privacy. "Cat calling" and all of that is virtually non-existent. Therefore, a Swedish man, born and raised with Swedish ethics and values, who rapes, would more likely be of the pathological variety. And I think it's fair to say that not every criminal is created equal. I do think that there is a difference between someone who has been taught (by way of the rabidly sexist and misogynist culture we live in--all over the world) that "girls say 'no' when they really mean 'yes' so they don't actually want you to stop" and commits date rape VS. a pathological, sociopathic rapist who specifically targets the vulnerable in order to assert his power over them.

And most justice systems in the world measure intent when they make charges. The Nordic prison system is more concerned with rehabilitation than it is purely punitive. They know that culture, drugs, mental illness, etc... can all play a role in why people do the things they do. The fact that they have some of the lowest recidivism rates in the world would suggest that they're doing something right.

 

[Tomenable]

It's no wonder that many who form the foundation of these far right, nationalist movements are perpetually insecure and afraid, un/under-educated, unemployed, and usually have nothing going on for themselves; therefore, their only or primary source of pride is rooted in vague, malleable cultural abstractions of nationalism or achievements by others who share their nationality; they piggyback off of the exploits and achievements of others, as if that gives them value and worth, too. And they are wrong. Just because Bach and Nietzsche were brilliant, doesn't mean all Germans are. Why should some pig farmer in Choppenburg feel better about himself because of Goethe?

Care to show us any statistics proving that supporters of right-wing and nationalist parties are losers?

Because, you know, people with such views as yours, are also being stereotyped. In the following way:

 

[Wanderlust]

That applies to you too, Wanderlust. I know you're new, so I gave extra latitude, but your singling out of Slavs and Poles in particular is just as objectionable as doing it to Muslims.

I know, that's what I was trying to show! And as expected, they became very touchy, sensitive, wounded and defensive, as anyone would, when they are being mocked and made fun of for being "inferior." Discrimination does not feel good. But I apologize for sewing any discord. Occasionally, I like to employ unconventional teaching methods to make a point but I understand if that's a bit too radical around here. Again, sincerely, my apologies to you.

Angela, your posts are enthralling as always.

I have a feeling that Jarls were R1b-U106, Karls were R1a-Z284, and Thralls were I1-L22: ^^

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrall

1.) You're telling on yourself again. You're showing how important hierarchies matter to you and that you so desperately need to feel superior to someone. Fortunately, Odin be praised, that's not me. I don't give a damn. I could come from thralls, whores, thieves, murderers (I'm actually certain about this one) and that would be fine because THEY ARE NOT ME. They may have given me some interesting yet questionable genes (that I'm pretty satisfied with) but everything else I do with myself and make of my life is all on me. Perhaps one day you'll understand that and learn to value yourself. Trust me, it will free and liberate your soul.

2.) Having said that, unlike you, I can trace my family back over 19 generations ago...on paper. And we may have very well been someone's thrall at some point in time but rest assured, we certainly didn't end up that way.

 

[Tomenable]

Wanderlust,

unlike you, I can trace my family back over 19 generations ago

What makes you think that I can't ??? Did I write so ???

You are reading too much into what I wrote. You quoted a Bible passage saying that everyone is responsible for sins of his/her ancestors up to four generations ago. That's why I wrote, that I know my ancestors from that period, and that no of them did any harm to people from other continents. I did not, however, write that I don't have any knowledge about my ancestors who had lived before that.

Obviously everyone have numerous lineages of ancestors (from both mother's side and from father's side).

I can trace one lineage back to the 14th century, while most of other lineages to the 18th or 19th centuries.

I didn't say, that I can trace back all of my family ONLY to the 4th generation ago.

I can trace my family back over 19 generations ago

19 generations ago everyone could have even up to half a million ancestors.

So I don't think that you were able to trace all of those thousands of people.

Let's do the math for you:

You - 1 person
1st generation back (parents) - 2 people
2nd generation back - 4 grandparents
3rd gen. - 8 ancestors
4th gen. - 16 ancestors
5th gen. - 32
6th gen. - 64
7th gen. - 128
8th gen. - 256
9th gen. - 512
10th gen. - 1024
11th gen. - 2048
12th gen. - 4096
13th gen. - 8192
14th gen. - 16384
15th gen. - 32768
16th gen. - 65536
17th generation back - 131072
18th generation ago - 262144
19th generation ago - 524288 ancestors

So 19 generations ago, everyone could have up to half a million ancestors.

Of course the number is usually smaller, due to so called "pedigree collapses":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedigree_collapse

But we are still left with many thousands of ancestors living at that time.

 

[Angela]

I agree.

I've talked a lot about how many of these refugees and migrants are maladapted, psychologically wounded, traumatized people and though I think that warrants some compassion and consideration, that does not absolve them of their crimes.

But there are different types of "rape sub-culture," depending on the culture, that may be more rooted in ignorance than they are in actual malice. Of course, the underlying factor and commonality that unites them all is sexism and misogyny but in more progressive cultures, the sexism can still be a bit more nuanced. On college campuses all around the US, they've had to create various initiatives to combat date rape because this notion of "playing hard to get" or "girls say 'no' when they really mean 'yes' so they don't actually want you to stop" is culturally pervasive. And in North Africa and the Middle East, there is a cultural perception that Western women, especially Scandinavian women (who are stereotyped for being sexually 'liberal'), are loose and usually down for one night stands and the like. This, coupled with the fact that there are some islamic tenets that permit the belief that women's bodies belong to men, it's not surprising that their own particular rape culture lends to the "rape epidemic" in Sweden. By the way, marital rape is often included in the rape statistics and that's another sad but pervasive cultural phenomenon.

But what I think that politician was getting at is that Swedish society has done a lot to minimize rape culture by way of hardcore, feminist initiatives over the past several decades. Swedish men don't even "check women out" in passing because they'd see that as a violation of a person/woman's right to privacy. "Cat calling" and all of that is virtually non-existent. Therefore, a Swedish man, born and raised with Swedish ethics and values, who rapes, would more likely be of the pathological variety. And I think it's fair to say that not every criminal is created equal. I do think that there is a difference between someone who has been taught (by way of the rabidly sexist and misogynist culture we live in--all over the world) that "girls say 'no' when they really mean 'yes' so they don't actually want you to stop" and commits date rape VS. a pathological, sociopathic rapist who specifically targets the vulnerable in order to assert his power over them.

And most justice systems in the world measure intent when they make charges. The Nordic prison system is more concerned with rehabilitation than it is purely punitive. They know that culture, drugs, mental illness, etc... can all play a role in why people do the things they do. The fact that they have some of the lowest recidivism rates in the world would suggest that they're doing something right.

You say you do but you actually don't.

I don't know much about the Swedish system of jurisprudence, but I have more than a passing acquaintance with the American system, and thankfully there are no ifs, ands or buts here where rape is concerned. I, and the courts here, don't care what your culture or your religion might be; if you live here you follow our laws, and that includes the one that makes rape a reprehensible crime. Whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that someone has committed a rape, that person should be arrested, charged and tried. If convicted, during the sentencing phase the courts may take certain mitigating factors into consideration, but there are obvious common sense limits. If having been in a war zone and being assumed to be traumatized for that reason is an excuse for rape, then I guess we're supposed to look at events like the Rape of Nanking, or the mass rape of German women by the Russian army with more "compassion"? I utterly reject that kind of reasoning.

As for recidivism among sex offenders, most of these studies showing there isn't that much recidivism among them are based on looking only at subsequent convictions, and only at certain very short intervals. That totally obscures the reality of the situation from my experience. There is very high recidivism among what we call "serial rapists", and especially among certain types of pedophiles. No one knows how to fix these people, and that includes the Swedes. Until we can cure them, they belong behind bars to protect us and our children. End of story, in my opinion.

In terms of murder, I do agree that certain murderers kill under a very specific set of circumstances, and the likelihood they'd do it again is pretty low. I therefore think there should be more latitude in sentencing than currently is permitted. However, for certain types of murders the only possible sentence is life imprisonment without possibility of parole. You could put the members of the Manson family in that category. We could never be sure they're "cured", and prison is not just for rehabilitation. It's also for retribution and to serve as an object lesson. They're all going to die in jail, as so they should, and people like them.

 

[bicicleur 2]

Looks to me that you have the cart before the horse. You make it sound as though domestic corruption is a phenomenon onto itself. It is western corporations that are raping Nigeria due to the corruption they have fostered with Nigerian authorities. These western companies want Nigeria's oil at the least possible cost. Meanwhile, Nigerians are starving and suffering from a murderous civil war at the same time. Westerners (and their Nigerian partners in crime) simply rub their hands together and watch their bank accounts grow.

so you have no plan at all
blaiming the west allready makes you feel better
who says domestic corruption isn't a phenomen on itself?
it is very widespread among all layers of the population
and the west can't resolve the problem, it is a domestic problem

 

[bicicleur 2]

As usual in this debate, you don't know what you're talking about. I never said anything about "high culture."



Please quote and highlight where I said that. You enjoy putting words in my mouth and words where there were none. In fact, what I have actually said was

2.) Let's remember that while Europe was still ensnared in the Dark Ages, there had been the Mayans, the Kingdom of Pagan, the Ghana Empire, the Incas, the Mali Empire, and don't even get me started on the kingdoms of India and dynasties in China--my point is, for most of the peoples who currently occupy the "Third World" or are considered to be developing nations, they were not culturally and economically impoverished pre-European Colonialism and Imperialism.

Tomenable allready told you about the sub-sahara African empires.
And the way the Mayans and the Incas treated their enemies, you couldn't have picked a worse example.

 

[bicicleur 2]

Laughable...and so sad. When disenfranchised groups take Europeans to task for the things we or our ancestors have done, I don't feel guilty at all. And I don't know a single ethnic European who shares my views that feels guilty. We don't feel guilty because we know that we are not being criticized as individuals, but that it's the white supremacist/Eurocentric systems and institutions from which we have benefited from that are rightfully being criticized or "blamed," to use your word.

We also know that we aren't shitty people who hold hateful, racist, bigoted views and so there is no reason to feel guilty. People only feel guilty when they know that there is some or a lot of truth to the critique. Moreover, because my sense of pride, esteem and integrity are not attached to Europe (they are attached to my own successes and failures), I can be more partial. But for you people who are Belgian or European before you are an individual, I understand why you feel so threatened--your integrity and self esteem are on the line. You have a lot in common with the super sensitive, fundamentalist Muslims, actually.

P.S. Are you Belgian? If so, then I truly understand your need to deny the atrocities your country committed in the Belgian Congo.

I never said the Europeans didn't commit any atrocities.
I only said that your comments are not nuancated and that your arguments are very one-sided.
The Eureopeans did commit a lot of atrocities, but in this they were not different from other peoples who got the chance.
But your one-sided bias makes me think that either you're brainwashed or you have a special purpose to do so.
I must tell you, it doens't work.
I hope you've noticed for yourself by now.

And for your information, I am not proud to be a Belgian.
Come to Belgium and you will notice very few Belgians are.
It is the country in which I was born and where I live and who's laws I obey because it is a practical arrangement and it makes a safe and peacefull society.
The atrocities were commited by the Belgian royal familie and the Belgian establishment at the time.
None of my family ever benfited from that.
Have you noticed my profile don't carry the Belgian flag?
Do you know what the flag in my profile stands for?
These people were discriminated and despised by the Belgian establishment at the time of the Belgian Congo.

I am proud to be an European though, who liberated themselves from religious dogmas, who created the industrial revolution of which the whole world benefits today.
I'd rather be an American though. They've done better the last 2 centuries.

 

[Tomenable]

A very interesting discussion:

 

[Wanderlust]

You say you do but you actually don't.

I don't know much about the Swedish system of jurisprudence, but I have more than a passing acquaintance with the American system, and thankfully there are no ifs, ands or buts here where rape is concerned. I, and the courts here, don't care what your culture or your religion might be; if you live here you follow our laws, and that includes the one that makes rape a reprehensible crime. Whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that someone has committed a rape, that person should be arrested, charged and tried. If convicted, during the sentencing phase the courts may take certain mitigating factors into consideration, but there are obvious common sense limits. If having been in a war zone and being assumed to be traumatized for that reason is an excuse for rape, then I guess we're supposed to look at events like the Rape of Nanking, or the mass rape of German women by the Russian army with more "compassion"? I utterly reject that kind of reasoning.

So we're clear, I'm not equivocating whatsoever on what constitutes rape or that rape is a reprehensible crime. Date rape, marital rape, doesn't matter, it's all vile and abhorrent. And like you said, anybody reasonably believed to have committed a rape should be arrested and prosecuted, which is how it works in Sweden as well. Most of my comment was more concerned with the sentencing outlook. And even then, by no means do I think offenders deserve a slap on the wrist.

But as I'm sure you're well aware of, the criminal justice system in America most certainly has its flaws, especially concerning its glaring racial disparities that occur at almost every part of the process. I followed the case of that vile Stanford Student Brock Turner--who violated an intoxicated, unconconscious girl behind a dumpster and tried to run away when he was caught--and was sentenced to 6 months and 3 years probation because the judge thought a harsher sentence would have too "severe" an impact. Seriously gross. And baffling enough, despite the victim's account and her being found unconscious and partially naked, he wasn't even charged with rape, but attempt to commit rape. Meanwhile the Brian Banks of the world, a black ex-football star who also had a promising future, at 16 made out with a girl with no type of sex taking place, was accused of rape, charged with rape and kidnapping, tried as an adult and served 5 out of 6 years, before he was exonerated for a crime he never committed. Tragic. Both Turner's case and Bank's case, disgusting on multiple levels and most certainly, miscarriages of justice in my opinion. Regardless of the judicial standards it professes to hold, it seems the American justice system does actually consider what someone's race, culture, ethnicity AND social class is. There was nothing "common sense" about the sentencing for either of these cases and it's not as if these are remote outliers within the system at large.

And I never said that trauma was an "excuse" for rape; a lot of people have traumas and yet they don't rape others. Nor do I think that one must have compassion for them on a personal level but I do think that the justice system should have the highest ideals. I certainly believe that justice for the victimized (raped, murdered, etc...) is important, as well as there needs to be an example made for the rest of society that deters them from committing the same or similar behaviors; but I also think that a focus on rehabilitation (for those who can be) is important and that purely punitive justice is problematic, particularly when we live in a world where everyone isn't treated equally. When it comes to criminal justice and mass incarceration, the American system doesn't have the best record of success. And Sweden's is certainly not ideal--I do think that the Leftist agenda has gone too far in some cases, where there are those who aren't held as accountable as they should be. The conundrum is how do we deliver equalized outcomes and just sentences for all people that also demonstrably send a strong message about our zero intolerance for rape and rape culture?

As for recidivism among sex offenders, most of these studies showing there isn't that much recidivism among them are based on studies looking only at subsequent convictions, and only at certain very short intervals. That totally obscures the reality of the situation from my experience. There is very high recidivism among what we call "serial rapists", and especially among certain types of pedophiles. No one knows how to fix these people, and that includes the Swedes. Until we can cure them, they belong behind bars to protect us and our children. End of story, in my opinion.

In terms of murder, I do agree that certain murderers kill under a very specific set of circumstances, and the likelihood they'd do it again is pretty low. I therefore think there should be more latitude in sentencing than currently is permitted. However, for certain types of murders the only possible sentence is life imprisonment without possibility of parole. You could put the members of the Manson family in that category. We could never be sure they're "cured", and prison is not just for rehabilitation. It's also for retribution and to serve as an object lesson. They're all going to die in jail, as so they should, and people like them.

Yes, definitely agreed.