1 2 3 4
No, actually, appropriate punishment would be for me to find a big burly S&M top to have his way with said rapist. Violation against his will, seems appropriate to me, if we're talking tit for tat punishment. Or perhaps you're right. The woman should have sex with him. i'll find the biggest strap on I can find, and she gets to have him until she's satisfied. Maybe even a nice sounding set...I hear some guys are into that. Still think it's such a shit hot idea, Bob?
1/28/2011 4:36:28 PM
Not fundie. Immature teenage crap.
EDIT: OK didn't read other comments or original blog. Grown man who was serious. I have new thoughts.
1/28/2011 5:01:06 PM
Thanks for pointing out how screwed up the "eye for an eye" rule is..any "god" who claims that rule is a demon!
1/28/2011 5:15:03 PM
That makes a lot of sense.
Provided, of course, that it's up the ass. With a strap-on - preferably a big one. And no lube.
1/28/2011 6:22:03 PM
His punishment can be her having sex with him.
I actually like this idea, as long as she is allowed to pick the orifice she wants to use. If he has none suitable for her needs, then give her a good, sharp scalpel, a drill with a hole saw bit, and a skull saw, and allow her to manufacture one to her liking. A small propane mini-torch can be used to minimize blood loss, if need be. Allow her to use her choice of tools for the "sex" part or design her own, and have a team of doctors standing by to keep him functional at least long enough for the sentence to be carried out to the satisfaction of the court. In the event of a male rape, then the male victim should be given the same right. Should the rape victim be unable or unwilling to carry out sentence, then the court can appoint one or more stand-ins to carry out sentence in the victim's stead.
Have I mentioned that I'm not particularly fond of rapists?
1/28/2011 7:04:36 PM
Rape is strictly forbidden in my raiding party. We sack cities, loot and pillage, but anyone caught raping gets to swim back home.
1/28/2011 7:30:10 PM
One thing to remember about eye-for-an-eye was that it was supposed to set a CEILING on how much retribution ought to be exacted for any given crime. Think of it as a ward against blood feuds. In later Judaism, because of the risk literal eye-for-an-eye and its ilk carried for taking life where it was not required, it became accepted to render monetary reparations equivalent to the loss of the eye/etc. and/or work that the lost element would have allowed.
The problem comes when people see eye-for-an-eye as the FLOOR of retribution.
Not looking at the weblog in question (I don't think I could steel myself for it), I'd guess that the first three sentences were from someone unconvinced that rape ought to merit the death sentence (although using the toe and fingernail as the analogs to rape doesn't exactly scream commiseration), and that castration was the furthest punishment of such could go before, for lack of a better way of putting it, hitting a rollover bug. Then Anon proceeds counter-argue and hit a rollover bug the OTHER way. That, and showing an utter failure to understand the true nature of the offense.
1/28/2011 8:35:05 PM
His entire blog makes me sick. How enormous can one person's ego be?
I also love how he calls any and all women (and men who support them probably) "squealing sows" yet he gets all defensive when one commenter pointed out he probably can't get laid.
1/28/2011 8:52:50 PM
If anyone needs me, I'll be over there in the bushes, vomiting.
1/28/2011 9:18:50 PM
1/28/2011 9:48:43 PM
Wow, that totally sounds like a horrible punishment!
1/28/2011 10:12:59 PM
Ignoring how stupid that "retribution" is, eye for an eye is retarded because revenge as justice never solves anything.
1/29/2011 1:20:36 AM
Balthazar The Wise
Heh, one anonymous genius even thinks that most women are man haters.
"Few "hate" men, unless the men are evil. Many women distrust or even dislike men, which is understandable. Not the same as hating."
What a bunch of bullshit. That is definitely the same as hating. Let's change the words:
"Few (whites) "hate" blacks, unless the blacks are evil. Many whites distrust or even dislike blacks, which is understandable. Not the same as hating."
Heh, put that way, the hypothetical white person sure sounds like a racist shit head to me.
Gotta love when they lie to make women sound like haters.
1/29/2011 4:24:01 AM
Actually, no. Rape is not simply "having sex." And...how would that be punishment?
1/29/2011 5:30:49 AM
No, what happened was she had a penis put in her.
So his punishment should be recieving a wang of his own, technically.
Though I'm sure that won't be the punishment handed down by the courts, there's a 40 stone 'woman' just waiting for him in a jail cell somewhere who will be happy to oblige
1/29/2011 10:16:05 AM
Re: GigaGuess'es comment
I see that GigaGuess has beaten me to the lubeless sounding set idea, although I seem to recall a certain flower, inserted into a man's urethra, and removed, has some nasty effects on the male urethra...
(Apprently,according to one story, someone decided to give his love a unusual floral tribute, unfortunately due to his choice of flower, he ended up in a A&E department, for emergency surgery...).
1/29/2011 1:22:56 PM
@ Balthazar --
Except you have the comparison backwards. It's quite understandable to be less than eager to trust people who have collectively treated you like shit your whole life -- which is quite different from a "learned distrust" of people you have privilege (which you profit from) with respect to. I don't particularly trust straight people -- though I recognize that this is because of social circumstances rather than a response to the inherent properties of straight people.
1/29/2011 3:05:34 PM
The only reason I voted meh here is because, contrary to popular belief, rape is not okay when it's female on male. This is actually funny, despite making no sense on close evaluation.
*EDITED FOR CLARITY*
And by having sex, I mean that the woman in question can perform the sickest and most disgusting acts of sadomasochism that she desires, but only if the rapist does not consent to such things, and if he does not feel physical pain, then it does not count as appropriate retribution.
There. Having read the other comments, I wanted to make it clear exactly what I think of this quote.
1/29/2011 3:32:52 PM
Balthazar The Wise
@Professor: Ignoring for the moment whether or not prejudice of any kind is ever justifiable, or whether the collective guilt of 'privilege' exists...
As a clearly learned man, surely you realize that putting people on the defensive, and pointing fingers of blame at the people you are trying to convince, regardless of whether it is true, will not sway them? Criminals often believe they've done a good thing rather than a bad thing, how much more so do normally decent people believe that way as well?
You might say that the privilege argument isn't blaming, but the point is that it sounds like it, and as my mother always said, avoid even the appearance of evil.
After all, the people you want to convince, unless they are particularly vulnerable to shaming and guilt trips, all they are going to hear is "blame whitey," so I believe a change in argumentation is desperately needed.
1/29/2011 3:43:18 PM
Two rapes make a right.
1/29/2011 7:08:38 PM
That's so profoundly stupid someone should hit you in the head (or perhaps groin) with a bat.
1/29/2011 7:18:10 PM
How about we just leave it as it is and have his punishment as having sex with Bubba in the state pen for 10-15 years?
1/29/2011 8:21:07 PM
1/29/2011 9:17:22 PM
Hey asshole, rape isn't sex. No wonder you signed on 'anon'.
1/29/2011 9:50:28 PM
yeah...whatever you say.
1/29/2011 11:17:09 PM
1 2 3 4