1170
I really would
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2026
1170 points (98.3% liked)
Political Memes
12815 readers
2897 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
No the fuck you won't. They ruined it with their choices and actions. He'll face consequences for what he did, not for what someone else said.
It's coming from the same cohort of people who lynched black men for looking the wrong way at a white woman. There's no unforgivable deed to them, only in groups and out groups.
Conservative morality is built on the principle that there are good people and bad people. Everything the good people do is good; everything the bad people do is bad. And it's not just rhetoric, they actually see the world this way.
It's why they can be outraged about a tan suit, but not give a shit about hosting a closed-door meeting with known Russian spies. Wearing a tan suit was done by a bad person, so it's bad. Meeting with Russian spies was done by a good person, so it's good.
Their morality is defined not by their actions, not by the consequences of their actions, nor even the intention of their actions -- it's defined by identity. If you're part of the 'good people' group, you can do no wrong, and even if you do terrible things, it was probably for the benefit of the good people group, so you're forgiven. If you're part of the 'bad people' group, nothing you do is ever good enough, and even the slightest deviation from any norm will be treated as an act of pure evil, and if you ever do anything that seems good, it must be a trick, nothing but false pretenses.
It's deeply intertwined with religion, where they first learn such morality: everything God does is good because (by definition) God is good. 'Good' is defined in relation to godliness. Everything Satan does is bad because (by definition) Satan is evil. If something good happened to you, God did it. If something bad happened to you, Satan did it. When that forms the basis of your morality, it begins to extend into in-groups and out-groups, and that's where you get mainstream conservative morality from.
The last paragraph makes no sense in the context of, well, the Bible minus Paulian nonsense ("it rains on the just and unjust alike", "the race doesn't always go to the fast, time and chance happens to us all"), and what do God and Satan have to do with us?... but I'm sure it makes entire sense to a good chunk of intellectually lazy and immature chuds who simply want to give themselves moral allowances, be murderous maniacs, settlers and rapists and feel alright about it.
On the other hand, I do think the Roman/Paulian/Trinitarian "Jesus died so our sins are forgiven as long as we believe that man is God" line of thinking is soul poison and evidently completely against every belief held by any God-fearing monotheist, Jesus included. Taking that lie to heart can only lead to immorality, and taking it to heart as a community can only make it worse, genocidally worse.
'Consider if you go the New Testament for instruction on how to live, you are told to give away all your possessions, make no plans for the future, reject your family if they disagree with you, and stay celibate if you can (see respectively Matthew 19.21, Matthew 6.25, Matthew 12.48, and 1 Corinthians 7). This is the outlook of people who sincerely believed that the Messiah was going to return next week or next month, anyway very soon. It is an unlivable ethic, and when after several centuries the Second Coming had still not materialised and hope of it had been deferred sine die, more was needed in the way of ethics. Where did it come from? From Greek philosophy – not least from the Stoics – and from the Roman Republican virtues of probity, honour, duty, restraint, respect, friendship and generosity that Cicero, Seneca, Virgil, Horace, and countless others wrote about and enjoined ceaselessly. ‘Christian values’ are largely Greek and Roman secular values. So Christianity is not even Christianity.
An associated point reinforces this. The early Christians, such as St Paul, were Jews. They believed that when you die, your body sleeps in the grave until the Last Trump, at which points the graves open and all the dead rise to be judged. St Paul said that the faithful will ‘see no corruption’ – that is, their bodies will not rot in the grave. But anyway, at the Last Trump when all rise, the faithful will be clothed in ‘new bodies,’ resplendent and fine. But “When Christianity had become the official religion of the Roman Empire (which it very quickly did; it was legalised by Constantine’s Edict of Milan in 313, and made the empire’s official religion by Theodosius IX in 381; within the next few decades all other religions were proscribed) and churches were being built apace, all requiring relics of the martyrs and saints, these latter were found to have rotted (‘seen corruption’) in their graves. This embarrassing problem was quickly got over by importing another useful idea from Greek philosophy: Plato’s doctrine of the immortal soul, which entered Christianity via the Neo-Platonism of Plotinus and his followers. That is why, starting from several centuries after the lifetime of Jesus of Nazareth, Christians believe in such a tianity is not Christianity but borrowed Greek philosophy. It would in fact it would be right to say that ‘we are Greeks and Romans’ and meant that we are defined by the following words – and therefore concepts – of classical Greek and Latin origin: democracy, liberalism, values, history, morality, comedy, tragedy, literature, music, academy, alphabet, memory, politics, ethics, populace, geography, energy, exploration, hegemony, theory, mathematics, science, theatre, medicine, gymnasium, climate, clone, bureaucracy, dialect, analogy, psychology, method, nostalgia, organ, encyclopaedia, education, paradox, empiricism, polemic, rhetoric, dinosaur, telescope, system, school, trophy, type, fantasy, photography…take almost any word denoting political and social institutions, ideas, learning, science and technology, medicine, and culture, and it derives from the language – and therefore the ideas and the history – of ancient Greece and Rome.'
Anthony Clifford Grayling
Pretty interesting read! I do disagree with the notion that "Christianity is not Christianity", because it is exactly what it is. If they wanted to believe in earnest, like Jesus, they'd be Abrahamic/Mosaic/Solomonic/etc monotheists, not Western manworshipping polytheists (with all due respect).
This is true. I remember trying to argue the hypocrisy of them passing supreme court seats after RBG died. They basically did the, "we won we get to decide. Who cares?"
Very well said
And what if they didn't actually SA'd and it is a false claim?
Well that'd be a different context entirely. The premise here was that they had, but it would be unfair to make them face the consequences of their actions.
Yeah, but what I'm pointing out is that almost never is clear if they actually SA'd or not. My problem with this kinda posts, thus, is that they're oversimplifying a really complex problem by creating a manichean vision of reality where man = always abusers and woman = always victims, but false allegations do exist so it's more like a grayscale full of nuances.
Yes but that "grayscale and nuance" is also what stops people from reporting stuff that actually was SA. A fair judicial process is what solves this. Raise the claims if the are true, that is what justice is for, but know that if you raise false claims you are also entering yourself into that justice system. Malicious acts against people and groups should be punished, and victims should be able to seek help.
Yeah, I'm not saying is not like that. The problem is that forgetting that actually the world is that grayscale, is a double-edged sword, as it will polarize and/or cause extremism or maximalism from one side, or another, or both.
I totally agree that sexual abusers are scum and should be tortured until die, but what I don't see as fair is that the (even if really few) victims of FA have to pay for the crimes of other people they don't represent.
I often feel depressed thinking about this and the fact that there's not easy way out of this septic pit, and that things seem to be worse every fucking second. I hate this world.
I think the problem here is that you're addressing an entirely different question.
The question of if someone should report someone who raped them is entirely separate from the potential chance for false allegations.
If someone is raped, they should report it. If someone isn't raped but wants to make a false allegation, real cases of rape being reported won't change that person's decision to file a fake claim.
The entire point here is just "if you are raped, you should report it, even if that could ruin the rapist's life in some way, because they raped you, so they deserve consequences". It doesn't make a judgement call on how we can combat false allegations.
It is overwhelmingly men that rape other men, women, and children.
The more important stat that only 8% of rape and sexual assault cases see a courtroom I have stated elsewhere in this thread.
False rates of sexual assault happen at the same rate of false reporting of any other crime, between 2-5%.
I can pull sources for each and every one of these statistics.
Actually, the most reliable source goes from 2-8%
It's still small, but it should be zero just as any other crime. That's at least my Utopia.
It's the same rates as any other crime. There are false reports for other crime. Stop lying.
If you trust the Americans justice system to keep incarcerating those judges guilty, then why don't you trust their system to judge appropriately for those that SA people? I get the feeling from this comment that a very large part of it is just plain misogyny. It is a fact that women already suffer harsher prison terms for comparable crimes to men. Even with the inappropriate harsh terms minorites serve. It's clear from studies on this subject and all your comments do it discourage all genders from reporting. The American justice system seems fine with their jailing of other innocent's, just to "make sure ppl feel safe". It's broken all over the place, people are suffering, I don't have a solution. I do encourage speaking up! The Constitution and Bill of Rights ensure the option of speaking publicly about problems to attempt to solve them. Be a part of the solution, stop preventing discussion of the issues!
Then the courts will sort it out
I hope courts were efficient. They're not, unfortunately. Both victims of SA and the (even if few) victims of FA live hell in earth there. It's depressing.
Ok but name a better alternative.
That's why I say it's depressing. I don't see a clear exit to this mess.
In any case, just because I (for now) can't name a better alternative doesn't mean that the current option is good or desirable, nor that a better alternative doesn't exist. Your making a TINA and a false dilemma fallacy.
Right but I mean there really isn't a huge issue with false accusations of any other crime, sonindont see why anyone cares so desperately about these false accusations.
If you did the crime then fuck you, if you didn't then I feel for you and I'm sure it's going to be a hellish time, but going somewhere you are innocent until proven guilty is your best possible place to be as an innocent person accused of a crime
I have such an issue because I lived a false allegation, and not, is not the same as being falsely accused of theft or name any other minor crime. That shit hits different, as if you were falsely accused of killing someone.
CW: SA
I've suffered SA two times, too, one of them being a children, so I'm not speaking from the ignorance, and that's why I'm so vindictive towards actual rapists, as others of my comments in this thread reveal.It's literally just a way to discredit rape victims and defend rapists.
Oh, I know. Thank you though.
Yeah, thanks back to you for holding it down in here.
False reports of rape and sexual assault fall in line with false reporting of other crimes. Between 2-5%.
Again, one of the most important challenges for successfully investigating and prosecuting cases of non-stranger sexual assault is the idea that many – or even most – reports are false. As long as this belief is accepted by law enforcement professionals, prosecutors, jurors, and others, our efforts to improve the criminal justice response to sexual assault will have only limited impact. Only those cases that look like our societal stereotype of “real rape” will be successfully investigated and prosecuted.
Well, your own sources say the opposite, so you are contradicting yourself, or perhaps you didn’t actually read your own sources, but instead sent whatever you thought supported your biases.
They are inextricably entwined. When people only consider a certain type of rape "real rape", it impacts which cases are investigated and prosecuted and what is considered a false claim.
Yes they are intertwined, but still there's an important difference and I think it's useful to be clear. But apparently we can't talk about it here or messages get deleted. Oh well, enforce the hive mind at all costs, I guess.
Then why didn't you admit they were intertwined with your initial comment? You didn't because you falsely asserted that they are two different concepts.
Some false accusations are labeled as such because of people's perception of what entails rape.
They are distinct things that are interrelated. Like the pressure and temperature of a gas. Distinct things to measure and understand, yet one tends to affect the other unless you're very careful. In the topic of this thread, it's very important to make the distinction: an accusation is not a false just because it doesn't follow the stereotypical definition. So we need to be clear when we're talking about false accusations, ie if we're not talking about incorrect definitions - but real malicious or erroneous false accusations. And that's an important facet of this discussion because although it's quite small and similar to other crime accusations; this particular type of false accusation is very hard to defend oneself against and it can ruin lives. And even more importantly, can make it harder for real victims, especially when you add on the problem where different people have different definitions of the crime.
Then... don't report him....
I was gonna write a reply to this, but I felt it was more appropriate as a top comment, so I'm gonna paste the link here.