If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Opposing Views)   If you rule as a judge that a sex workers rape was only a "theft of services," you can bet on it that people will have a problem with your ruling   (opposingviews.com) divider line 115
    More: Asinine, sex workers, RH Reality Check, Philadelphia Daily News, miscarriage of justice  
•       •       •

7629 clicks; posted to Main » on 02 Nov 2013 at 5:37 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



115 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-02 01:09:46 PM

Churchill2004: DerAppie: At the end of the day, after being ripped off, both the bricklayer and the prostitute still possess the tools of their trade.

Wow, someone straight-up arguing that "you can't rape a whore". That's.... special, to put it mildly.
If I break your arm, that's not assault, it's just destruction of property, right?


By the way, my stance on this subject is pretty much this
 
2013-11-02 01:12:23 PM

log_jammin: armor helix: KawaiiNot: Let me guess: The judge is old, white and... a women?

Really?

Oh, we're being racist. Ok.

no kidding. when I think "judge" the image of a young, black, lesbian is always the first thing that comes to mind. what kind of a sick mind would assume a judge in America would be an old white person??

damn racists make me sick.


And some unfunny sarcasm to go with it. Got it.
 
2013-11-02 02:02:42 PM

Shedim: Triumph: Shedim: Triumph: No you are trivializing armed robbery. Threatening someone with a gun is a life and death matter. I disagree with the judge's logic on not calling it rape, but I agree with her that the gun crime is the main issue. There's a difference between getting in a fist fight and having your face pounded while a gun is held on you.

I see - we seem to have different interpretations on what the "main issue" is.

Why do you think the gun crime is the major issue, compared to the rape?

Because her life was unquestionably threatened. That makes it the top crime. The judge's logic apparently is that she already had conspired with the men to commit a sex crime, so she's looking at it like it's comparable to a drug deal gone bad or something. Yeah, that's messed up, but the main thing still is that he brought a gun to the party and threatened her life.

Okay, I can follow that logic, and I still agree that the judge is showing terrible logic by dismissing the rape charges. To me, however, the judge is implicitly saying that the presence of a firearm is more important than the rape of a woman; that the presence of a weapon is, as far as her interpretation of the law is concerned, more important than the rape.

Frankly, a rapist doesn't need a gun to rape someone; the guy was likely to rape her no matter what weapon he brought with him. You can threaten someone's life with your bare hands. That's why I see the rape as the main issue, because it was going to happen no matter what; the presence of a firearm, while a notable issue, is not the principal crime that occurred.

Not only that, but dismissing the rape charges stinks of "blaming the victim" - the judge is implicitly saying that if she hadn't been a prostitute she wouldn't have been raped, that the perpetrators transgressions against polite society are more important than what the perpetrator actually did to the victim. That's why I said that I felt it was trivialising rape before.


 I'm curious why rape would be the main issue in this case though. Especially since rape in our culture carries more of an emotional and mental baggage than anything else pertaining to it (assuming no STDs and damage to the physical tissues or pregnancy).

 I can understand for someone who does not engage in sex often/at all and attaches significant importance to the event, why rape would be mentally disturbing. 

 But for someone who has sex as their vocation. Does it quite frequently, and attaches little to no significance to it. It ought to come across as more irritating and pissing you off to do something you don't want, then mentally scaring. 

 Now, adding a gun to the mix, yeah the whole threatening of their lives would definitely be mentally traumatic. 

 But I'm not sure why we would attach the same psychological importance to it socially, if the two women view it that differently? 

/from a legal precedent, if it qualifies as rape, it definitely should be prosecuted as such.
//I'm speaking more to the media blitz and such that usually surrounds these types of cases.
 
2013-11-02 02:33:06 PM

LoneWolf343: Sid_6.7: However, if a guy screws a prostitute, and then refuses to pay, I'd say no crime took place.

It's a crime in spirit, and it's just assholish.

/not to mention suicidal. Those prostitutes do no take kindly to being stiffed.
//neither do their pimps.


I never said it wasn't morally wrong.
 
2013-11-02 02:43:32 PM
When I read about judges like this, it makes me wonder about the law schools they went to.
 
2013-11-02 03:37:12 PM

Churchill2004: The prohibition of prostitution means more prostitutes get raped. It's that simple. If you actually care about these women, you'd make it possible for them to go the police like any other person who's been wronged, and more importantly they'd be able to work surrounded by security and co-workers at licensed brothel instead of on their own, meeting random guys at hotel rooms. Anyone who thinks rape and prostitution are inextricably linked, I invite you to go to a legal Nevada or German brothel and try to touch one of those women without their permission. If you're lucky, they'll call the police... eventually.


Pretty damn much. Legalize it. Let these women have a legal income, and legal recourse, and get the pimps and criminal element out of things. And then we can really crack down on human trafficking on top of it.
 
2013-11-02 04:58:40 PM
I think the key here would be timing. If she consented to sex under the assumption that she would be paid, then they had sex, then he refused to pay her, that would not be rape. It would be theft of services (you cannot revoke consent after the fact.) On the other hand, if she consented to sex, then decided not to, or if she went with him to have sex and then he pulled a gun and raped her, then those conditions would be rape. The comments mention a gun, was there a gun? (Did not read the full wharrgarrbl)
 
2013-11-02 05:07:50 PM

hubiestubert: You're correct, in this is NOT a Right vs Left issue, but it IS being latched onto by folks who are typically on the Left, as advocates for women's issues. I think that latter portion of that statement is the more pointed: advocates for women's issues. That advocates for women are seen as "Left" IS something that is sort of telling about where the country is at this moment.


I think you're off on that one. This is a Left v. Left issue, where two different waves of feminism are clashing over which ideology should be dominant.
 
2013-11-02 07:14:33 PM
Anything done at gunpoint is not consensual. She was raped.

You people who seem to know how a sex worker *should* feel about rape when it happens to them should check their empathy. Same with those that think prostitution is the sale of a body part rather than a service.
 
2013-11-02 09:09:09 PM

AirGee: Anything done at gunpoint is not consensual. She was raped.

You people who seem to know how a sex worker *should* feel about rape when it happens to them should check their empathy. Same with those that think prostitution is the sale of a body part rather than a service.



It can't be real "rape" rape. The female body has a way of shutting these things down.
 
2013-11-02 10:48:27 PM
I wonder what the statistics on judges actually being voted out are. Local elections hardly ever seem to include any common sense, because no one bothers to get off their ass and just vote, even if they complain every day about their city or county.
 
2013-11-02 11:11:36 PM

Bomb Head Mohammed: If the definition of rape is "sex that is not consensual", then this was not rape as the sex part clarly was consensual.  The "not consensual" part was the not paying for it.

I have no problem whatsoever with this judge's ruling, and stereotyping morans like Benevolent Misanthrope and brantgoose should learn to RTFA.

Let's be clear: there WAS consent for sex.


She consented to sex with two men, but four showed up and the gun was pulled out. That negated the original consent since the terms had changed. Consent was gone at that point, so rape.
 
2013-11-03 12:32:55 AM

silvervial: Bomb Head Mohammed: If the definition of rape is "sex that is not consensual", then this was not rape as the sex part clarly was consensual.  The "not consensual" part was the not paying for it.

I have no problem whatsoever with this judge's ruling, and stereotyping morans like Benevolent Misanthrope and brantgoose should learn to RTFA.

Let's be clear: there WAS consent for sex.

She consented to sex with two men, but four showed up and the gun was pulled out. That negated the original consent since the terms had changed. Consent was gone at that point, so rape.


still seems like a contract dispute to me.
 
2013-11-03 02:31:32 AM
Sorry, but if you sell it, it's no longer special, now is it? I pretty much have to agree with the judge.

Rape is a horrible thing, but that horrible thing is horrible because of the huge violation of intimacy bordering on something sacred for love's sake. If on the other hand your crotch has seen as many served as McD's, there's nothing really "special" about what you're selling. At most, assault...

If you're claiming rape is special for any other reason, than it really is just plain old assault on another region.
 
2013-11-03 03:51:05 PM

Polyhazard: If you hire a house cleaner and decide that instead of paying them, you are going to brandish a lethal weapon and threaten to kill them until your house is clean, that is NOT theft of services. It's assault and false imprisonment.

fark this judge.



Yes, to me that is a good analogy. I don't see how this is right.
 
Displayed 15 of 115 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report