So It Wasn't Ole Girl's Fault That Brock Turner Took That Ass When She Passed Out ? By Dumpster
Options
Comments
-
You gonna dislocate ur spine if u keep reaching that damn hard for an argument
-
The Lonious Monk wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »
You said "the chick blacking out was instrumental in her being assaulted", and I argued back that is like saying, because I didn't lock my door, I was instrumental in being robbed. Which is not truthful, I didn't make someone walk up to my door and walk in without my permission(stick their ? in me). Someone taking advantage of me while I wasn't home(blacked out) is not me facilitating being robbed. But since there is no other way, I have to lock my door(stay sober) just to make sure I am not taken advantage of? And if I don't, I'm partially at fault?
I'm not sure what you're arguing here. When I say something is instrumental in something. I mean it plays a factor in it. There is no question that the chick being blacked out played a factor in the ? . Dude was clearly an opportunistic ? that looked for someone vulnerable and took advantage of it. Most of these rapists are not dudes knocking chicks over the head and taking the ? . Most of them are drugging females or find females that are in bad shape, and then ? them. In cases like that, the woman's actions most certainly play a role. Nothing she does prompts what the guy does, but it sure as hell is a factor.
Think of it like this. A couple weeks ago, my wife forgot to lock our car door at a parking lot. When she got back someone had opened the door and rummaged through the car. They stole like $40 my wife had in the glove box for some reason. Now it's not my wife's fault that someone was in the parking lot testing doors until they found one that was open, but the fact that she left the door unlocked was instrumental in what happened. Had she not done that. That $40 likely wouldn't have been stolen. None of us can say what would have happened if that woman hadn't blacked out that night. But if he was the coward I believe he probably is, she may not have been ? had she kept her faculties in tact. It's not blaming her to say that. It's just a matter of pointing out a possible truth.13 pages?
Yall really having a discussion about this
So instead of letting her like the rest of the world, yall saying he had a right to ? her and its her fault he did...
Move this ? to donkey
Literally no one is saying that. I don't know why some of you are so obsessed with that straw man argument.
Facilitate has a lot different meaning that instrumental, forgive me for rolling with the definition of instrumental. Maybe facilitate wasn't coming to mind and instrumental had to be used idk. But facilitate; (to make easier), leaving your door unlocked does make it easier for a criminal to take advantage of you, but its still quite an error to blame someone for the action of another because they didn't adequately inhibit facilitating them. We are lashing out at non criminal people for making it easier for criminals target them. Which is weird. -
When isn't a ? a woman's fault to some of yall? I'll give you real life 3 instances from people I know:
1 woman walking home at night, a man with a knife jumps from the bushes, holds a knife to her throat and rapes her. She was walking home alone at night. Her fault?
1 girl goes home with a guy she was seeing. She was 16, he was in his 20s. He gave her alcohol, she was going to sleep with him. When she asked him to get a condom, he forced himself in her raw, held her down and ? her. Held a gun to her and told her he'd ? her if she said anything. She went home with a grown man. Her fault right?
1 woman had her house broken into by an ex she had recently broken up with. He came in through a window while she was sleep and ? her. Her fault for breaking up with him?
@Westie
It's not the woman's fault in any of those examples.
Now, there's nothing that could've been done to prevent the 1st and 3rd examples.
However, in the second example........again, it's not her fault...........but she might not have been in that situation if she hadn't made a decision to go home with an older man.
That's also the result of a lack of adult supervision as well.
But wait..........weren't you and @Kat in my thread a few weeks back saying that it was nothing wrong with teenage girls having sex???
http://community.allhiphop.com/discussion/546074/so-i-just-found-out-that-one-of-the-young-ladies-at-my-church-is/p1
Told me to mind my business right?
Maybe the 16yr old who got ? could've benefited from the advice of someone who was concerned about her as much as I'm concerned about the young lady at my church.
But nah, all y'all wanna do is talk about how "creepy" it is for me to be worried about her.
Funny how your opinions can change when it's convenient for you.
So its funny a 16 year old got ? ? Teehee told ya so????
Show me where I mentioned adult supervision or an old random ? not minding his business. You know there wasn't one? You know the person I'm talking about?
Stop being salty people called you a creep.
Like you're really a ? weirdo taking joy out of a 16 year old being sexually assaulted and held at gunpoint, in an attempt to prove a point on a message board.
In a situation that is nowhere near parallel btw. You're actually a horrible person.
@Westie
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
I wasn't taking any joy out of a 16yr old getting ? .
I was taking joy in exposing your hypocrisy and bird logic.
Explain my hypocrisy and bird logic. -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »At least I do.
I do try to teach prevention from being in those situations.
Hold up.....
How is that any different than what I've been saying all along???
I'll tell you how it's different. Me teaching my daughters, who have never had anything happen to them to be aware of their surrounding and to not trust strangers drinks or be alone in settings like that is completely different than stating that a woman who has already been ? should have done all of those things. Its too ? late. Who are you helping with that? I have already said in this thread numerous times that it's fine to tell young women that before the fact but stating that she should have done this things after the fact helps no one. You also need to keep in mind that most women aren't ? because they are passed out. Some of you in here acting like only stupid decisions lead you to getting ? that is completely untrue. -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »At least I do.
I do try to teach prevention from being in those situations.
Hold up.....
How is that any different than what I've been saying all along???
I'll tell you how it's different. Me teaching my daughters, who have never had anything happen to them to be aware of their surrounding and to not trust strangers drinks or be alone in settings like that is completely different than stating that a woman who has already been ? should have done all of those things. Its too ? late. Who are you helping with that? I have already said in this thread numerous times that it's fine to tell young women that before the fact but stating that she should have done this things after the fact helps no one. You also need to keep in mind that most women aren't ? because they are passed out. Some of you in here acting like only stupid decisions lead you to getting ? that is completely untrue.
While it may not help after the fact. How does a grown, sane woman not know how to protect herself? It's unfortunate what happened to this young lady. Her poor choices led to life changing consequences. So, even if ? never crossed this young ladies mind, why didn't getting robbed, killed, or maybe even ? driving and hurting someone else cross her mind?
I get it people need someone to blame, a villain and want to live their lives doing whatever the ? they want despite the consequences. That is the American way. You know the cliche "this is a free country". I totally sympathize with this young lady but it's hard to not look at her and ask why the ? would you risk\gamble with your life like that?
-
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »At least I do.
I do try to teach prevention from being in those situations.
Hold up.....
How is that any different than what I've been saying all along???
I'll tell you how it's different. Me teaching my daughters, who have never had anything happen to them to be aware of their surrounding and to not trust strangers drinks or be alone in settings like that is completely different than stating that a woman who has already been ? should have done all of those things. Its too ? late. Who are you helping with that? I have already said in this thread numerous times that it's fine to tell young women that before the fact but stating that she should have done this things after the fact helps no one. You also need to keep in mind that most women aren't ? because they are passed out. Some of you in here acting like only stupid decisions lead you to getting ? that is completely untrue.
While it may not help after the fact. How does a grown, sane woman not know how to protect herself? It's unfortunate what happened to this young lady. Her poor choices led to life changing consequences. So, even if ? never crossed this young ladies mind, why didn't getting robbed, killed, or maybe even ? driving and hurting someone else cross her mind?
I get it people need someone to blame, a villain and want to live their lives doing whatever the ? they want despite the consequences. That is the American way. You know the cliche "this is a free country". I totally sympathize with this young lady but it's hard to not look at her and ask why the ? would you risk\gamble with your life like that?
You say her poor choices led to this. People make poor choices every day they don't result and ? . The fact is there was a ? around. He was a predator. She was in a location in a bad state which led to a predator being able to pray on her period. that doesn't put responsibility on her for what happened. And I'm sure this woman did not mean to pass out by the way. She couldn't handle her liquor, you've never been too ? ? And if you read more into the story and she wasn't even alone. She got ? up as many people do. How does that make her responsible for someone doing something that despicable to her? -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
-
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »At least I do.
I do try to teach prevention from being in those situations.
Hold up.....
How is that any different than what I've been saying all along???
I'll tell you how it's different. Me teaching my daughters, who have never had anything happen to them to be aware of their surrounding and to not trust strangers drinks or be alone in settings like that is completely different than stating that a woman who has already been ? should have done all of those things. Its too ? late. Who are you helping with that? I have already said in this thread numerous times that it's fine to tell young women that before the fact but stating that she should have done this things after the fact helps no one. You also need to keep in mind that most women aren't ? because they are passed out. Some of you in here acting like only stupid decisions lead you to getting ? that is completely untrue.
While it may not help after the fact. How does a grown, sane woman not know how to protect herself? It's unfortunate what happened to this young lady. Her poor choices led to life changing consequences. So, even if ? never crossed this young ladies mind, why didn't getting robbed, killed, or maybe even ? driving and hurting someone else cross her mind?
I get it people need someone to blame, a villain and want to live their lives doing whatever the ? they want despite the consequences. That is the American way. You know the cliche "this is a free country". I totally sympathize with this young lady but it's hard to not look at her and ask why the ? would you risk\gamble with your life like that?
You say her poor choices led to this. People make poor choices every day they don't result and ? . The fact is there was a ? around. He was a predator. She was in a location in a bad state which led to a predator being able to pray on her period. that doesn't put responsibility on her for what happened. And I'm sure this woman did not mean to pass out by the way. She couldn't handle her liquor, you've never been too ? ? And if you read more into the story and she wasn't even alone. She got ? up as many people do. How does that make her responsible for someone doing something that despicable to her?
Of course people make poor choices everyday. And some lead to harmful life altering experiences. In this case it was ? . Agreed there was a predator around. What is also a FACT is this young lady didn't take the proper precautions to protect herself. Failure to do so, makes her irresponsible. Whether she meant to black from INTOXICATION or not doesn't matter. Most of us don't intend to do the dumb ? we ultimately end up doing. No, I have never been too ? to be taken advantage of. Her getting as you say "? up" was a poor decision. I won't argue with you if, you are ok with "getting ? ". But the irony here is she literally got "got ? up". I cannot explain this any other way and it's a total shame that you are willing to absolve anyone who is willing to risk\gamble with their lives in such a manner. It's very scary to think people like you exist. It's dangerous to not reflect on ones poor choices in life and see where we gave control to someone else.
What was done to this young lady was despicable. The way she carried herself was also quite despicable. -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ? -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »
Facilitate has a lot different meaning that instrumental, forgive me for rolling with the definition of instrumental. Maybe facilitate wasn't coming to mind and instrumental had to be used idk. But facilitate; (to make easier), leaving your door unlocked does make it easier for a criminal to take advantage of you, but its still quite an error to blame someone for the action of another because they didn't adequately inhibit facilitating them. We are lashing out at non criminal people for making it easier for criminals target them. Which is weird.
Yeah, technically facilitate is alright to use too, but as I said to Maximus, I'd stay away from that term because the connotation when saying a woman facilitated a ? is that she actively helped the racist. That's an unfair way of phrasing things. Women don't help ? ? them, but sometimes they do make choices that make it possible for the ? to commit the act. And sometimes the act would occur no matter what the woman does. It's a tricky subject and I do believe it should be addressed with care. I just don't agree that it's wrong for people to instruct women to be careful and mindful of the evil out there. ? is pretty much the only subject where that seems to be out of line. No one gets mad at parents for telling their kids not to talk to strangers. It's essentially the same thing. -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ?
Passing out by yourself and sexually assaulting someone are two different things. But you want to start rationalizing ? so our convo is over. -
The Lonious Monk wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »
Facilitate has a lot different meaning that instrumental, forgive me for rolling with the definition of instrumental. Maybe facilitate wasn't coming to mind and instrumental had to be used idk. But facilitate; (to make easier), leaving your door unlocked does make it easier for a criminal to take advantage of you, but its still quite an error to blame someone for the action of another because they didn't adequately inhibit facilitating them. We are lashing out at non criminal people for making it easier for criminals target them. Which is weird.
Yeah, technically facilitate is alright to use too, but as I said to Maximus, I'd stay away from that term because the connotation when saying a woman facilitated a ? is that she actively helped the racist. That's an unfair way of phrasing things. Women don't help ? ? them, but sometimes they do make choices that make it possible for the ? to commit the act. And sometimes the act would occur no matter what the woman does. It's a tricky subject and I do believe it should be addressed with care. I just don't agree that it's wrong for people to instruct women to be careful and mindful of the evil out there. ? is pretty much the only subject where that seems to be out of line. No one gets mad at parents for telling their kids not to talk to strangers. It's essentially the same thing.
Imo instrumental was a worse word than facilitate lol. I'm leery to call it fault or even facilitate because we cannot control the actions of another, and those words imply some level of control over what someone else does. That is why I chose the word 'responsibility' because that is the only way we can somewhat guard ourselves against moral deviants, it's our duty to ourselves because others cannot control themselves. And it's sad it has to be that way in the first place but what else are we to do? -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ?
Passing out by yourself and sexually assaulting someone are two different things. But you want to start rationalizing ? so our convo is over.
The common denominator here is both were intoxicated and both of their judgment could have been impaired.
That's beside the point though. This is a unique circumstance. This young lady could have protected herself.
But I get it. Good day to you. -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »The Lonious Monk wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »
Facilitate has a lot different meaning that instrumental, forgive me for rolling with the definition of instrumental. Maybe facilitate wasn't coming to mind and instrumental had to be used idk. But facilitate; (to make easier), leaving your door unlocked does make it easier for a criminal to take advantage of you, but its still quite an error to blame someone for the action of another because they didn't adequately inhibit facilitating them. We are lashing out at non criminal people for making it easier for criminals target them. Which is weird.
Yeah, technically facilitate is alright to use too, but as I said to Maximus, I'd stay away from that term because the connotation when saying a woman facilitated a ? is that she actively helped the racist. That's an unfair way of phrasing things. Women don't help ? ? them, but sometimes they do make choices that make it possible for the ? to commit the act. And sometimes the act would occur no matter what the woman does. It's a tricky subject and I do believe it should be addressed with care. I just don't agree that it's wrong for people to instruct women to be careful and mindful of the evil out there. ? is pretty much the only subject where that seems to be out of line. No one gets mad at parents for telling their kids not to talk to strangers. It's essentially the same thing.
Imo instrumental was a worse word than facilitate lol. I'm leery to call it fault or even facilitate because we cannot control the actions of another, and those words imply some level of control over what someone else does. That is why I chose the word 'responsibility' because that is the only way we can somewhat guard ourselves against moral deviants, it's our duty to ourselves because others cannot control themselves. And it's sad it has to be that way in the first place but what else are we to do?
I don't see why you think that. From Webster's, instrumental just means serving as a crucial means. That fits what happened exactly. If this dude was an opportunistic ? , her being unconscious is what provided the means for him to attack. Saying that does not apply any culpability on her for the fact that he chose to ? her. It only points out the fact that her state is what opened up the possibility for him to do what he did. The fault for him doing what he did is still 100% on him. If she hadn't of blacked out and he instead knocked her out. Her unconscious state would still have been instrumental in her being ? . -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ?
Passing out by yourself and sexually assaulting someone are two different things. But you want to start rationalizing ? so our convo is over.
The common denominator here is both were intoxicated and both of their judgment could have been impaired.
That's beside the point though. This is a unique circumstance. This young lady could have protected herself.
But I get it. Good day to you.
This young lady could have protected herself but the young man shouldn't have controlled himself get the ? out of here. You are part of the problem hope you know that. -
lol That dude would have had to be really really ? up to not understand that randomly ? an unconscious woman was wrong. This ain't exactly the case to make that kind of argument.
-
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
He's a ? ? -
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »At least I do.
I do try to teach prevention from being in those situations.
Hold up.....
How is that any different than what I've been saying all along???
I'll tell you how it's different. Me teaching my daughters, who have never had anything happen to them to be aware of their surrounding and to not trust strangers drinks or be alone in settings like that is completely different than stating that a woman who has already been ? should have done all of those things. Its too ? late. Who are you helping with that? I have already said in this thread numerous times that it's fine to tell young women that before the fact but stating that she should have done this things after the fact helps no one. You also need to keep in mind that most women aren't ? because they are passed out. Some of you in here acting like only stupid decisions lead you to getting ? that is completely untrue.
I believe most ppl agree with this. Saying she is at fault is a terrible choice of words. Someone mentioned earlier that's it's normal for college kids/ppl to be passed out ? . That's the main problem. It shouldn't be normal and it shouldn't be accepted. That's all....
The white boy is a ? and ppl (not just women) have to be more responsible with their alcohol. -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ?
Passing out by yourself and sexually assaulting someone are two different things. But you want to start rationalizing ? so our convo is over.
The common denominator here is both were intoxicated and both of their judgment could have been impaired.
That's beside the point though. This is a unique circumstance. This young lady could have protected herself.
But I get it. Good day to you.
This young lady could have protected herself but the young man shouldn't have controlled himself get the ? out of here. You are part of the problem hope you know that.
Actually you are. I have a son and a daughter. Both are being taught to carry themselves properly in public. Which, includes not getting ? to the point of passing out and of course assaulting innocent people in any way. So, rest assured when either my children come across your drunken daughter passed out by a dumpster they will get her some help. When your daughter comes homes safely you guys can laugh about how great of a night getting "? up" was because it's her right to do whatever she pleases.
-
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ?
Passing out by yourself and sexually assaulting someone are two different things. But you want to start rationalizing ? so our convo is over.
The common denominator here is both were intoxicated and both of their judgment could have been impaired.
That's beside the point though. This is a unique circumstance. This young lady could have protected herself.
But I get it. Good day to you.
This young lady could have protected herself but the young man shouldn't have controlled himself get the ? out of here. You are part of the problem hope you know that.
Actually you are. I have a son and a daughter. Both are being taught to carry themselves properly in public. Which, includes not getting ? to the point of passing out and of course assaulting innocent people in any way. So, rest assured when either my children come across your drunken daughter passed out by a dumpster they will get her some help. When your daughter comes homes safely you guys can laugh about how great of a night getting "? up" was because it's her right to do whatever she pleases.
Yeah that's exactly what I teach my daughters to go out get ? and pass out in and out you got me. You truly are a ? . I hope you get falsely accused of ? and ? in the ass. -
Only the lowest of low lives bring children into arguments. Like seriously after you do that I have zero respect for you.
-
numbaz...80's baby wrote: »BiblicalAtheist wrote: »At least I do.
I do try to teach prevention from being in those situations.
Hold up.....
How is that any different than what I've been saying all along???
I'll tell you how it's different. Me teaching my daughters, who have never had anything happen to them to be aware of their surrounding and to not trust strangers drinks or be alone in settings like that is completely different than stating that a woman who has already been ? should have done all of those things. Its too ? late. Who are you helping with that? I have already said in this thread numerous times that it's fine to tell young women that before the fact but stating that she should have done this things after the fact helps no one. You also need to keep in mind that most women aren't ? because they are passed out. Some of you in here acting like only stupid decisions lead you to getting ? that is completely untrue.
I believe most ppl agree with this. Saying she is at fault is a terrible choice of words. Someone mentioned earlier that's it's normal for college kids/ppl to be passed out ? . That's the main problem. It shouldn't be normal and it shouldn't be accepted. That's all....
The white boy is a ? and ppl (not just women) have to be more responsible with their alcohol.
It is normal in College culture to binge drink. It shouldn't be because it is dangerous physically. Not just about what can happen to someone sexually. So I agree people should be more responsible but it's very hard to tell people who just want to party that. -
-
The message is that there are ? people in the world. Me and my daughters have already had a talk about things like this. And a boy in her class actually said she shouldn't have drank too much or she wouldn't be in the situation to which he was corrected by his male friends stating that that boy had no right regardless of what she did.
My children are very well-versed in how they carry themselves and not to put themselves in dangerous situations but they also know that if anything were to ever happen the fault only lies in the ? . -
By the way, this guy is 100% a villain and to blame. Is he a victim of circumstance to? He couldn't control himself? Can you control with your ? goes?
If, we apply your logic then no. From what little I know about the details he too was highly intoxicated.
Haven't you ever been too ? ?
Passing out by yourself and sexually assaulting someone are two different things. But you want to start rationalizing ? so our convo is over.
The common denominator here is both were intoxicated and both of their judgment could have been impaired.
That's beside the point though. This is a unique circumstance. This young lady could have protected herself.
But I get it. Good day to you.
So she could have protected herself but he couldn't control himself ????
@BiblicalAtheist .... Here is one example of justifying ? .
