REMINDER: I AM POSTING A NEW TOPIC ABOUT ONCE A WEEK OR PERHAPS TWICE A WEEK. HOWEVER, IF YOU DON'T FIND A NEW TOPIC POSTED, THERE ARE AS OF MARCH 2013 OVER 900 TOPIC THREADS TO WHICH YOU CAN READ AND WRITE COMMENTS. I WILL BE AWARE OF EACH COMMENTARY AND MAY COME BACK WITH A REPLY.
TO FIND A TOPIC OF INTEREST TO YOU ON THIS BLOG, SIMPLY TYPE IN THE NAME OR WORDS RELATED TO THE TOPIC IN THE FIELD IN THE LEFT HAND SIDE AT TOP OF THE PAGE AND THEN CLICK ON “SEARCH BLOG”. WITH WELL OVER 900 TOPICS, MOST ABOUT GENERAL OR SPECIFIC ETHICAL ISSUES BUT NOT NECESSARILY RELATED TO ANY SPECIFIC DATE OR EVENT, YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIND WHAT YOU WANT. IF YOU DON’T PLEASE WRITE TO ME ON THE FEEDBACK THREAD OR BY E-MAIL DoktorMo@aol.com
IMPORTANT REQUEST TO ALL WHO COMMENT ON THIS BLOG: ALL COMMENTERS WHO WISH TO SIGN ON AS ANONYMOUS NEVERTHELESS PLEASE SIGN OFF AT THE END OF YOUR COMMENTS WITH A CONSISTENT PSEUDONYM NAME OR SOME INITIALS TO HELP MAINTAIN CONTINUITY AND NOT REQUIRE RESPONDERS TO LOOK UP THE DATE AND TIME OF THE POSTING TO DEFINE WHICH ANONYMOUS SAID WHAT. Thanks. ..Maurice
FEEDBACK,FEEDBACK,FEEDBACK! WRITE YOUR FEEDBACK ABOUT THIS BLOG, WHAT IS GOOD, POOR AND CONSTRUCTIVE SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT TO THIS FEEDBACK THREAD
Viewing the World Through a Microscope
Doesn't anyone on this blog feel as I do on the topic of exotic and energetic debate? What do I mean by that kind of debate? Look at this week's Time magazine (Feb.12, 2007 ,p59)and the description of what is going on in the courts and by activists on one side or another on the subject of when rape starts, how many seconds (or less) after the woman says "no". As the descriptive sub-title states "When a woman says yes and then changes her mind, how fast must a man stop before it is a crime?"
And then of course there is the issue of when an embryo (or even earlier!) becomes a person. Why is it that people get so energized and upset by such issues? I worry that we worry too much about trivialities in our world and really ignore the important. It's like folks like to use a microscope rather than a wide angle lens to look at what is going on around us. Why is that? ..Maurice.
2 Comments:
Suppose a couple is in the middle of consensual intercourse, and the woman changes her mind, and the man takes 6 seconds to stop. Is that really the same crime as attacking a stranger in a dark alley and raping her?
In the former case, the woman has said "yes", and consensual sex has started. It is simply unrealistic to get someone into a state of intense sexual arousal and then expect them to instantly stop if you change your mind.
It should go without saying that either party has the right to change a "yes" to a "no", and the other person should respect it.
However, one can imagine an entire continuum here:
1. She says "yes". The begin to have intercourse. She changes her mind and says "no" 1 second before he climaxes -- at a point when it is physiologically impossible for him to avoid climaxing.
2. She changes her mind and says "no" when he is ALMOST beyond the point of no return described in #1 above -- imagine a point where he could stop if he INSTANTLY ceases his activity, but not if he takes 2 or 3 seconds to stop.
One can then imagine earlier and earlier stages and/or imagine it taking the man longer and longer to stop his activities. What if he waits 5 seconds? 6? 10? 20?
What if intercourse has not yet started but penetration is just about to occur?
What if the man does not yet have an erection but the couple are nude and kissing?
What if disrobing has just started but is not yet complete?
What if they are both fully clothed and she says "no" as they walk into the bedroom, before they even kiss?
At the end of this continuum, I am describing situations that -- I hope -- everyone would agree is rape in the true sense of the word. At the beginning, I am describing a situation that -- I hope -- no one would consider rape. Yet, in this sequence, no matter where you draw the line, I can point to a VERY similar situation that is *JUST* on the other side of your line.
I think that this is another example of what Richard Dawkins refers to as the "Tyranny of the Discontinuous Mind". This term refers to the difficulty that people have with dealing with things that fall on a continuum. People like to put everything in nice, neat, distinct categories, even things that clearly fall on a continuum. We want to point to two acts and say "THAT is rape and THAT is not."
Our legal system, in general, is poorly designed to deal with situations that fall on a continuum. We ask our courts and our representatives in congress to classify human actions into nice, discrete categories, some of which we classify into nice, neat, distinct categories of crimes. The reality of life, though, is very much messier.
Ideally, it seems to me that the farther one goes along the continuum I described above, the more serious the penalty should be. If you ask a man to stop 1 second before he climaxes, well that's just too late and no crime occurs if he "finishes". At some point, though, failure to stop becomes a conscious decision to ignore the woman's wishes, rather than simply difficulty in instantly turning off the "throes of passion".
Where that line should be drawn probably depends on how long a reasonable person would take to stop when asked, and that's not an easy question to answer. If a man takes a LITTLE too long, perhaps that should just be a misdemeanor. As the failure to stop becomes worse, though, it becomes an increasingly serious crime that, at a certain point, becomes no different than jumping a stranger in a dark alley.
I don't pretend to know what penalties should be given for acts that fall on different parts of the continuum I described, but I do think that the penalties should fall on a continuum just like the crime does.
I fully agree that the psychological and physiologic aspects of the act of sexual intercourse is on a continuum and has the parameters that Annonymous described. That's why I think that this whole microanalysis of the continuum and its dissection is foolishness and a waste of energy by activists and the courts. Why not simply follow the criterion which has been with humanity for years and years. If the woman says "No" but nevertheless that is followed by penetration, it is the penetration aginst the woman's permission that is the rape. The woman has to take the responsibility to make the decision before penetration. To say "go ahead" before but "No" afterward should not set the clock running to some matter of seconds before the moment rape is defined as such. Saying "No" after penetration should simply characterize the beginning of an unfortunate event, which can be subsequently discussed by the parties involved, but not a crime characterized as rape. ..Maurice.
Post a Comment
<< Home