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.

(EuroNews)   Director of India's Central Bureau of Investigation: "if you can't prevent rape, you enjoy it". Yes, it is an actual quote   (euronews.com) divider line 95
    More: Sick, special agent in charge, Central Bureau of Investigation, Bharatiya Janata Party  
•       •       •

5909 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Nov 2013 at 11:08 PM (22 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-13 06:48:22 PM
Clayton Williams, republican candidate for governor of Texas in 1990, said almost exactly the same thing while campaign.
 
2013-11-13 07:14:03 PM
I don't think it works that way.
 
2013-11-13 07:35:17 PM
Gah, not really.
 
2013-11-13 07:45:39 PM
let's flip him over and prove it.
 
2013-11-13 08:08:27 PM

the801: Clayton Williams, republican candidate for governor of Texas in 1990, said almost exactly the same thing while campaign.


So did Bobby Knight.
 
2013-11-13 08:12:03 PM

the801: Clayton Williams, republican candidate for governor of Texas in 1990, said almost exactly the same thing while campaign.


Had this happened today, it would not have cost him the election
 
2013-11-13 08:12:09 PM
The article suggests he meant the opposite meaning--that he was using it as a counterexample. At least that's sense I get. A terrible counterexample prone to serious misinterpretation, but it doesn't sound like he actually agreed with the sentiment.
 
2013-11-13 08:21:07 PM

Somacandra: The article suggests he meant the opposite meaning--that he was using it as a counterexample. At least that's sense I get. A terrible counterexample prone to serious misinterpretation, but it doesn't sound like he actually agreed with the sentiment.


If I read it right, he's saying that people are going to gamble anyway, so why not legalize and tax it...like people are going to rape anyway, so why not lie back and enjoy it.

What kind of person - especially one in law enforcement in a country with a bunch of horrific rapes in the news recently - thinks that's a good analogy?
 
2013-11-13 08:33:57 PM
And if you enjoyed it, you must have wanted it, so you gave consent, so it's not rape!  See how easy that is?
 
2013-11-13 08:47:57 PM

God Is My Co-Pirate: If I read it right, he's saying that people are going to gamble anyway, so why not legalize and tax it...like people are going to rape anyway, so why not lie back and enjoy it.


No, he's saying that arguing that if people are going to gamble, you might as well legalize it is a stupid an argument as saying that if you are going to be raped, you might as well enjoy it. In other words, just because something is inevitable, it doesn't mean that condoning it is the right response.

He was condemning both situations, calling them foolish.
 
2013-11-13 08:49:28 PM
Also, Subby no, it's not an actual quote, it's a decontextualized quote that has the opposite meaning of what he meant.
 
2013-11-13 08:50:11 PM

nmrsnr: God Is My Co-Pirate: If I read it right, he's saying that people are going to gamble anyway, so why not legalize and tax it...like people are going to rape anyway, so why not lie back and enjoy it.

No, he's saying that arguing that if people are going to gamble, you might as well legalize it is a stupid an argument as saying that if you are going to be raped, you might as well enjoy it. In other words, just because something is inevitable, it doesn't mean that condoning it is the right response.

He was condemning both situations, calling them foolish.


Unfortunately, he didn't think about the sound bite.
 
2013-11-13 08:53:28 PM
WTF is wrong with you, india?
 
2013-11-13 09:02:42 PM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Unfortunately, he didn't think about the sound bite.


And he apologized for that. It's more unfortunate people can't look at a quote in context and see what he meant instead of running incorrect sensational headlines.
 
2013-11-13 09:16:57 PM

nmrsnr: No, he's saying that arguing that if people are going to gamble, you might as well legalize it is a stupid an argument as saying that if you are going to be raped, you might as well enjoy it. In other words, just because something is inevitable, it doesn't mean that condoning it is the right response.


That's precisely how I read TFA, although TFA is confusingly written. All I can say it was a seriously WTF nested loop of references and negatives. Obviously if he had put it in the way you did in your last sentence, it would have been no big deal and it would not have made Fark. I've made some seriously stupid comparisons in the past too--thankfully I didn't hold that kind of public authority or audience at the time.
 
2013-11-13 09:21:52 PM
India's police force is a 95% corrupt joke.
 
2013-11-13 09:43:08 PM

nmrsnr: Benevolent Misanthrope: Unfortunately, he didn't think about the sound bite.

And he apologized for that. It's more unfortunate people can't look at a quote in context and see what he meant instead of running incorrect sensational headlines.


Incorrect sensational headlines sell papers and get clicks.  It made it to Fark, didn't it?
 
2013-11-13 10:01:35 PM

God Is My Co-Pirate: Somacandra: The article suggests he meant the opposite meaning--that he was using it as a counterexample. At least that's sense I get. A terrible counterexample prone to serious misinterpretation, but it doesn't sound like he actually agreed with the sentiment.

If I read it right, he's saying that people are going to gamble anyway, so why not legalize and tax it...like people are going to rape anyway, so why not lie back and enjoy it.

What kind of person - especially one in law enforcement in a country with a bunch of horrific rapes in the news recently - thinks that's a good analogy?


That's not the same at all.

Gambling's a victimless crime. No one's forcing you to bet.

Rape is the opposite of a victimless crime, by defenition. If both parties are willing, it's not rape.

Of course, you have to regulate gambling in case they are forcing you to bet, but y'know caveat emperor penguins.
 
2013-11-13 10:17:00 PM

doglover: Gambling's a victimless crime. No one's forcing you to bet.


It is not.  Do you have any idea how many times Gambling has raped my wallet?
 
2013-11-13 10:43:47 PM

Lsherm: doglover: Gambling's a victimless crime. No one's forcing you to bet.

It is not.  Do you have any idea how many times Gambling has raped my wallet?


You rolls the dice, you takes your chances.

Gambling, drugs, prostitution: these are legal in civilized societies* because no one forces you to squander yourself on vice.

Theft, poisoning, and rape: these are illegal in civilized societies because someone IS forcing you to participate, sometimes quite violently.

*the implication being societies where such vices are not legal are not yet fully civilized. America kind of proves this with a vengeance.
 
2013-11-13 10:44:25 PM
Sounds Republican.
 
2013-11-13 11:10:23 PM
So that's the needful?
 
2013-11-13 11:15:37 PM
I read the headline as Indiana and it still sounded completely plausible.
 
2013-11-13 11:16:13 PM
And if that doesn't work, just smile, and say "Thank you, come again"
 
2013-11-13 11:17:03 PM

the801: Clayton Williams, republican candidate for governor of Texas in 1990, said almost exactly the same thing while campaign.


And that statement may very well be how we ended up w/GWB in the President's Office.  Williams was leading Ann Richards by double-digits, with almost no time left until the election when he said that.  She beat him, largely as a result of backlash over that statement.  Then she was defeated by GWB in the next election cycle.  Had that statement never been uttered, GWB almost certainly wouldn't have even run for governor of TX four years later since Willimas likely would seek reelection without a primary challenge, and GWB would have been in no position to make a serious attempt at the Presidency in 2000.

See how much better we'd all be if you Republicans would just STFU about rape?
 
2013-11-13 11:17:22 PM

hausman007: I read the headline as Indiana and it still sounded completely plausible.


Same here.
 
2013-11-13 11:18:11 PM
It was a terrible analogy, and taken horribly out of context.

It seems as if he meant to say: "Some crimes are going to happen, and they're nearly impossible to enforce. So they should be legalized and the state should tax them and regulate them. But to simply lie back and fail to enforce the laws against these crimes is futile--either they must be thoroughly enforced, or the crimes must be legalized." He then went on to say this was as ridiculous as saying it was like saying if rape can't be prevented it should be enjoyed--the point being obviously that is not an option. But he made it very very badly.

I don't think he should be forced to resign over this, since clearly he wasn't at all saying "rape can't be prevented and it should be enjoyed" nor was he saying rape laws can't be enforced in the context of his remarks. Now there may be more to his tenure as director of the bureau of investigations that might warrant his resignation; but one mangled analogy shouldn't do it IF he has otherwise been successful.
 
2013-11-13 11:19:47 PM

Somacandra: The article suggests he meant the opposite meaning--that he was using it as a counterexample. At least that's sense I get. A terrible counterexample prone to serious misinterpretation, but it doesn't sound like he actually agreed with the sentiment.


Yeah, pretty much. Also, this is why teleprompters exist.
 
2013-11-13 11:21:39 PM
He's got to be a Republican.

A Democrat would suggest urinating, defecating and throwing up on yourself to make yourself less appealing to the rapist.
 
2013-11-13 11:25:16 PM
He obviously wasn't talking about "rape rape" duh
 
2013-11-13 11:26:11 PM
4 out of 5 people enjoy gang rape.
 
2013-11-13 11:33:20 PM
When did Bobby Knight move to India?
 
2013-11-13 11:33:44 PM
Who wants to take a road trip to the Indian rape parlors with me? We can pick up some cheap cigarettes while we're there.
 
2013-11-13 11:34:19 PM
but if you enjoy it the body won't shut that whole thing down.
 
2013-11-13 11:35:40 PM

Molavian: He's got to be a Republican.

A Democrat

Ted Nugent would suggest urinating, defecating and throwing up on yourself to make yourself less appealing to the rapist draft board.

FTFY
 
2013-11-13 11:38:20 PM

Lanadapter: but if you enjoy it the body won't shut that whole thing down.


Even better. India is seriously underpopulated.
 
2013-11-13 11:39:00 PM
The juices don't flow.
 
2013-11-13 11:41:08 PM
lusipurr.com
 
2013-11-13 11:43:37 PM
And people wonder why the Assam Supreme Court ruled that the CBI was unconstitutional.
 
2013-11-13 11:44:17 PM

hausman007: I read the headline as Indiana and it still sounded completely plausible.


Came here to say this, sad that it is completely plausible that it was an American politician.
 
2013-11-13 11:44:52 PM
www.deltaattack.com
 
2013-11-13 11:45:22 PM
img.fark.net
would have a bullet or two to say about this....
 
2013-11-13 11:47:19 PM
Life gives you rapey lemons...
 
2013-11-13 11:51:41 PM

Peter von Nostrand: the801: Clayton Williams, republican candidate for governor of Texas in 1990, said almost exactly the same thing while campaign.

Had this happened today, it would not have cost him the election


Todd Akin and Murdock (sp?) both lost very safe Republican races in very Republican states directly because of their rape-related statements. Don't let your cynicism take over.
 
2013-11-13 11:55:11 PM

doglover: Lsherm: doglover: Gambling's a victimless crime. No one's forcing you to bet.

It is not.  Do you have any idea how many times Gambling has raped my wallet?

You rolls the dice, you takes your chances.

Gambling, drugs, prostitution: these are legal in civilized societies* because no one forces you to squander yourself on vice.

Theft, poisoning, and rape: these are illegal in civilized societies because someone IS forcing you to participate, sometimes quite violently.

*the implication being societies where such vices are not legal are not yet fully civilized. America kind of proves this with a vengeance.


So, when Mom can't pay the bills because Dad gambled away her paycheck, there's no victims?
 
2013-11-13 11:59:47 PM
Am I the only person on the entire farking planet who knows what quotation marks actually mean?
 
2013-11-14 12:02:48 AM

The Dog Ate My Homework: Am I the only person on the entire farking planet who knows what quotation marks actually mean?


What "do" quotation marks "mean"?
 
2013-11-14 12:03:18 AM

Somacandra: The article suggests he meant the opposite meaning--that he was using it as a counterexample. At least that's sense I get. A terrible counterexample prone to serious misinterpretation, but it doesn't sound like he actually agreed with the sentiment.


Agreed.  He was purposely using that statement as a counter to something.  It was meant to be a stupid suggestion.
 
2013-11-14 12:05:55 AM

Tobin_Lam: So, when Mom can't pay the bills because Dad gambled away her paycheck, there's no victims?


Legalized gambling isn't at fault. For the same reason the legal booze isn't to blame for daddy not being able to keep a job.  It comes down to personal responsibility.

As for your bad example, there are victims.  And the blame rests completely on the person who gambled away the grocery money.
 
2013-11-14 12:06:18 AM

The Dog Ate My Homework: Am I the only person on the entire farking planet who knows what quotation marks actually mean?


i.imgur.com
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report