Should convicted rapists be castrated

JTPB

Sleepy wrote:

I don't know whether to take that as condecension, naieveté or just the words of a sanctimonious prick.

It *is* condecension, I *do* consider msyelf to be superior to you, I'm afraid.

Kell

lisa.c wrote:

how can you say that not every waster who rapes is on the dole. rape is about power. people who rape do it for the power they feel not because they have no money to.people who have money and live in good homes and have good jobs rape to. that has to be the daftest statement i have ever heard

Erm, I dont actually recall pointing out that people from disadvantaged backrounds are rapists. Rape is an across the classes type crime, and thanks for reminding of that.

As many people here have been banging on about socio-economic factors that influence crime (I think we left the rape debate long ago and are now talking about crime in general), I was merely painting in broad brush strokes how things are panning out and the unliklihood of ever being able to re-habilitate the masses of people who do not conform to the law of the land.

I was pointing out that trying to rehabilitate repeat law breakers it is a waste of time resources and money. Someone cited an example earlier of repeat sexual offenders in an area of the states where the re-offending rate is 3.5%. By my calculations, that equates to 300 odd repeat sex crimes. Dont know about you, but I am not happy to accept these figures.

K-

Zulu

Kell wrote:

I think I am correct in thinking that you pointed out earlier that rehab/execution/imprionment etc werent an economics issue?

I don't think in did - but, if I did, it wasn't in this context. I probably said that they shouldn't be an economics issue. Naturally, of course, in todays society, they unfortunately, are.

Kell wrote:

Lets look at how things are panning out globally, and even look close to home for examples. Certain groups within socitey have learnt that it is OK to scrounge off the system for the duration of their life and earn a bit of cash on the side through crime. That group, through ignorance and a "I dont give a fúck" attitude, produces an excess number of children in relation to what the welfare state can sustain and that group of children learn the same principles of their miguided parents.

This is a very limited argument. Agreed in Ireland we has a big culture of it, but in Sweden say, that culture barely exists. It all depends on the society.

Kell wrote:

Slowly but surely, supporting this growing group of wasters and scroungers eats into economic budgets and drains resources from elsewhere, while the scrounging group, whom some have classified as "scumbags" increasingly run "out of things to do" and joy ride, rape, mug etc to get their kicks.

So lazy, unmotivated people, inevitable become joy riders/rapists/muggers? :rolleyes: That attitude is just a little snobby.

Kell wrote:

Over more time, the welfare state starts to eat so much into economic budgets that the nice law abiding people who think lofty thoughts of world peace and a society rid of crime, get repeatedly fúcked over and the tide of scumbags continues to rise.

So everyone on welfare is now a scumbag??? :eek:

Kell wrote:

Re-habilitate all of them? Charge you, me, and all the nice people for their re-integration into normal society? Fúck them. Fúck all of them. In fact, I am being honest in stating "shoot the fúckers".

I would gladly give 75% of my salary, if I believed that we had an effective rehabilitation system; if crime was being tackled successfully; if the world was becoming a safer/better place.

Kell

Zulu wrote:

So lazy, unmotivated people, inevitable become joy riders/rapists/muggers? :rolleyes: That attitude is just a little snobby.

So everyone on welfare is now a scumbag??? :eek:

I would gladly give 75% of my salary, if I believed that we had an effective rehabilitation system; if crime was being tackled successfully; if the world was becoming a safer/better place.

I dont limit unlawful activities to lazy un-motivated people, however, the hi-dependency, disadvantaged areas do possess higher crime rates.

Not everyone on welfare is a scum bag. Had you read my post correctly you would have seen that I did point out that the people who have decided to ride the system are scum bags. I didnt mention genuine merit for being on welfare i.e. disability, loss of job. People who have never contributed to society in terms of taxation and have never worked through choice, not circumstance, dont deserve welfare.

I am in agreement with your last point. If I got decent roads, affordable housing, good healthcare, equal education opportunities for my kids, dole that might just support me should I lose my job, I wouldnt mind paying 75% tax. Sad fact of the matter is that we dont get any of the above.

Oh and tell me, why do you incessantly cite Sweden as your utopia? How many countries in the world are there and you can only cite one example of how society can work properly? Sounds to me like you're clutching at a very lonesome straw.

K-

Zulu

Kell wrote:

I dont limit unlawful activities to lazy un-motivated people, however, the hi-dependency, disadvantaged areas do possess higher crime rates.
Not everyone on welfare is a scum bag. Had you read my post correctly you would have seen that I did point out that the people who have decided to ride the system are scum bags. I didnt mention genuine merit for being on welfare i.e. disability, loss of job. People who have never contributed to society in terms of taxation and have never worked through choice, not circumstance, dont deserve welfare.

Fiar enough - you were just sounding a little bad.

Kell wrote:

I am in agreement with your last point. If I got decent roads, affordable housing, good healthcare, equal education opportunities for my kids, dole that might just support me should I lose my job, I wouldnt mind paying 75% tax. Sad fact of the matter is that we dont get any of the above.

I know, but that is (imo) what we should strive for.

Kell wrote:

Oh and tell me, why do you incessantly cite Sweden as your utopia? How many countries in the world are there and you can only cite one example of how society can work properly? Sounds to me like you're clutching at a very lonesome straw.

LOL fair cop gov! I cite Sweden, because I've spent quite alot of time there and was very impressed with how the system worked. VERY impressed. They have alot of things sorted out. The reason I don't cite other societies, because a) I don't have first hand experience and b) unfortunatly, most of the world is too poor, and underdeveloped. They don't make for good examples frankly.

It might be a lonesome straw - but it's a valid one.

JTPB

Hanging people for stealing sheep never stopped sheep thieves. There will always be rapists; there will always be too many rapists no matter what is done.

This being the case, the salient variable is the level of barbarism in punishing the criminal.

elivsvonchiaing

JTPB wrote:

Hanging people for stealing sheep never stopped sheep thieves. There will always be rapists; there will always be too many rapists no matter what is done.

This being the case, the salient variable is the level of barbarism in punishing the criminal.

In certain crimes I'm in favour of a descent back to barbarism. Crimes where the victims life is ruined/massively compromised. Yes. Where a bank, a farm, any business whatsoever is massively compromised - no. I believe our judicial system has lost sight of this.

I remember a case going back to early eighties (can't remember the details). A bunch of arseholes beat the be-jeesus out of the husband gang raped the wife, while he watched. All were released when both husband and wife were still catatonic in mental institutions.

There is the dilema of innocent convictions - but where the evidence is 99% good - the hammer should fall hard.

My implementation of chemical castration involves nitric acid.

Georgiana

A few more thoughts on the subject

The questions we are looking at are

1. What should society do about those who have commited acts of violence, aggression etc on others and how? (Leave aside the question of why people commit violent actions for the moment)

2. Why should society choose any given line of action (This second important question has not been adequately explored so far on this thread-Rather people are making assumptions)

Now-what are the options and why might society pursue them?
Here are some of the obvious ones

a. Do Nothing-Why?- There is no good argument for this line of action as it provides no protection to society from further offences and does not hold an offender accountable

b. Remove the offender from society-Why? It protects society from further offence and may act as a deterrant to others-It also means the offender is made accountable for his/her abusive inappropriate behaviour. Most people agree it has merit

c. Aim to reform the offender so that he/she will not re-offend and will behave within regular codes of conduct. If this can be done there is no good argument for not doing it. Evidence suggests that there is considerable scope for such an approach but that it does not work in every case. There is no good argument for not trying to aim for maximum results by working to reform offenders behaviour as much as is possible. Psychologists and educators are key players in this arena but cannot be expected to reform all
criminals.

d. Engage the offender in activity whereby he/she repays something to society or to victims. Why? Because the offender owes a debt, holds him/her accountable and because it may have a reforming influence.

e. Confront offenders with the consequences of thier crimes. This has been tried in the UK where offenders meet victims who are willing to do so or families of victims. It is very successful in relation to reform of criminal behaviour which is why it is worth trying.

f.. Aim to make the offender suffer, to punish him or her. Why would we choose this option? This option is chosen because it brings about a feeling of satisfaction and perhaps relief for others. It can make victims of crime or other members of society feel satisfied to know that a perpetrator of crime is suffering. Some would claim it is "to teach them a lesson", to ensure that "justice is done". Teaching them a lesson makes the "teacher" feel superior and good about him/herself. It is very important to be clear on why we choose or recommend a line of action. The reason someone wants to castrate a rapist is simply because it makes him/her feel good, satisfied and on the high moral ground. In fact what has happened is that by making the offender suffer, the person or society who creates the suffering is simply repeating the aggressive action of the criminal. Anyone who has ever studied communication or conflict will know that to respond to aggression with more aggression creates a downward spiral which has no positive outcomes.


This is the truth and anybody who is honest knows it is the truth.

Georgiana

PS: I will concede that some criminals are so brutalised that they exude and expect aggression and conflict. Others are difficult to reform because of personality, mental health or drug problems. This does present a significant challenge. Basically these people have to be kept out of circulation. However, I believe there is no case in any circumstances for violence against people who have commited crime, no matter how bad the crime. And you can list all the Jamie Bolger etc cases. Further violence can do no good to anyone. It dehumanises the perpetrators.

elivsvonchiaing

Georgiana wrote:

PS: I will concede that some criminals are so brutalised that they exude and expect aggression and conflict. Others are difficult to reform because of personality, mental health or drug problems. This does present a significant challenge. Basically these people have to be kept out of circulation. However, I believe there is no case in any circumstances for violence against people who have commited crime, no matter how bad the crime. And you can list all the Jamie Bolger etc cases. Further violence can do no good to anyone. It dehumanises the perpetrators.

I have to agree with this. But I firmly stick by the premise that if the victim is severely brutalised - they need some form of justice. Whether the perpetrator is castrated by nitric acid or just two pirhanas in jamjar. The perperator gets locked up and the key disolved in nitric acid. I think either is good for the victim.

However, I feel the need to add that there are some crimes that make the perpetrator sub-human. Social environment doesn't figure here. E.g Charles Manson.

galwaydude18

anyone who committs rape should be shot dead!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: nothing else will suffice!!!!!! they will almost 100% certainly do it again once relased from prision! :mad: :mad:

JTPB

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

In certain crimes I'm in favour of a descent back to barbarism. Crimes where the victims life is ruined/massively compromised. Yes. Where a bank, a farm, any business whatsoever is massively compromised - no. I believe our judicial system has lost sight of this.

I remember a case going back to early eighties (can't remember the details). A bunch of arseholes beat the be-jeesus out of the husband gang raped the wife, while he watched. All were released when both husband and wife were still catatonic in mental institutions.

There is the dilema of innocent convictions - but where the evidence is 99% good - the hammer should fall hard.

My implementation of chemical castration involves nitric acid.

How charming. But why do you not suggest to arrange for beatings and rapes of the arseholes involved, as "an eye for an eye" doctrine - or is it that you want to exceed what that doctrine allows?

JTPB

galwaydude18 wrote:

anyone who committs rape should be shot dead!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: nothing else will suffice!!!!!! they will almost 100% certainly do it again once relased from prision! :mad: :mad:

Official US government and Canadian stats, which I have posted a link to elsewhere in this thread show that in actual fact , sex offenders have the second-lowest rate of re-offedning, so I am afraid we could not base Government policy on your outburst.

Georgiana

I would challenge the contributors here whether they are capapable of discussing the subject without resort to emotive language and opinion based on misinformation and false assumption. The level of the debate is frankly, for the most part a bit depressing.

People commit violent acts because it gives them some feeling of satisfaction. This is true in all cases, whether carried out by the original criminal or upon the criminal. Can people discuss this reality instead of venting your own need for satisfiction like a baying mob.

Zulu

galwaydude18 wrote:

anyone who committs rape should be shot dead!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: nothing else will suffice!!!!!! they will almost 100% certainly do it again once relased from prision! :mad: :mad:

"Almost" and "100% certaainly" don't sit well together.
Care to back this comment up with facts - or are you prepared to concede that it's just blantant sensationalism with on real meaningful imput to the discussion?

elivsvonchiaing

JTPB wrote:

How charming. But why do you not suggest to arrange for beatings and rapes of the arseholes involved, as "an eye for an eye" doctrine - or is it that you want to exceed what that doctrine allows?

"An eye for an eye" is from Exodus which puts it at about 1200BC. Since then I think mankind has worked out that theres more to justice than this. Ghandi had a go at it for what it is - primitive.

As I pointed out earlier there is a huge difference between crimes against property and crimes against the individual/human spirit. You could get an army of big-ass sex-offenders who could overpower these arseholes in their cells and rape them constantly. This will probably never traumatise them as much as they did their victims.

JTPB

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

"An eye for an eye" is from Exodus which puts it at about 1200BC. Since then I think mankind has worked out that theres more to justice than this. Ghandi had a go at it for what it is - primitive.

Not withstanding that the "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" doctrine is indeed primitive, belonging to Biblical times, it would be more merciful and more advanced than the punishment you have proposed with nitric acid et cetera, which sounds like something out of Australopithecus times.

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

.......You could get an army of big-ass sex-offenders who could overpower these arseholes in their cells and rape them constantly. This will probably never traumatise them as much as they did their victims.

If rape is a traumatic experience then logically there is every reason to assume that it will traumatise whoever experiences it, whether they are a rapist or not.

However, I do realise that when you make the (rather unbelievable) assertion that rapists would never really be traumatised by being raped constantly, it clears the way for you to propose punishments that are more traumatic than being raped.

johnKarma

Dr johnKarma prescribes hearty doses of the Brass Eye Paedophilia Special to all.

elivsvonchiaing

JTPB wrote:

However, I do realise that when you make the (rather unbelievable) assertion that rapists would never really be traumatised by being raped constantly, it clears the way for you to propose punishments that are more traumatic than being raped.

I believe these people are in a place where since early childhood they have become immune to pain.

I've thought a bit about this and how to reach them - and therefore punish them. I have to eat my own words and say an "eye for eye" applies here.

Give them transexual surgery. When they are almost healed up put em in the cell with the rapist in it. This is truly an eye for an eye. :cool:

JTPB

Georgiana wrote:

I would challenge the contributors here whether they are capapable of discussing the subject without resort to emotive language and opinion based on misinformation and false assumption. The level of the debate is frankly, for the most part a bit depressing.

People commit violent acts because it gives them some feeling of satisfaction. This is true in all cases, whether carried out by the original criminal or upon the criminal. Can people discuss this reality instead of venting your own need for satisfiction like a baying mob.

I agree; I thought the quality of the contributions were better at the start of this thread than later, but I am aware that there are those whose feelings on the subject have a certain primal quality, and I had expected that elements of a "baying mob" would materialise. However, these primal emotions and their origins need to be addressed if progess is to be made, because otherwise they will lead to confusion.

JTPB

johnKarma wrote:

Dr johnKarma prescribes hearty doses of the Brass Eye Paedophilia Special to all.

Tension-laden ideational content causes hilarity when the tension is suddenly discharged in unexpected ways; I think it was Freud who said that.

I would indeed like take your perscription at some stage, :cool: however, right now I feel it might divert my attention from the more serious task of examining the tensions in this issue.

Who knows, it's possible that material suitable for another Brass Eye program might turn up here.

JTPB

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

I believe these people are in a place where since early childhood they have become immune to pain.

I've thought a bit about this and how to reach them - and therefore punish them. I have to eat my own words and say an "eye for eye" applies here.

Give them transexual surgery. When they are almost healed up put em in the cell with the rapist in it. This is truly an eye for an eye. :cool:

A couple of comments, but first a couple of questions:

1)Would you want the surgery carried out without anaesthetic?

2)Do you have any theories on how they became immune to pain?

Georgiana

JTPB wrote:

I these primal emotions and their origins need to be addressed if progess is to be made, because otherwise they will lead to confusion.

I agree that the primal emotions need to be addressed but society at large cannot/should not, in my view, legislate to satisfy such primal emotions. This is what is happening in the case of capital punishment in the US, but that a whole other subject. Some people would say "thats democracy" but democratic decisons/legislation reflect the state of maturity or otherwise of the population and is very culture related. If you grew up under Sharia Law, you might agree with it. Sounds like some of the people here agree with its key principles. Mature leadership and informed debate go some way to mature decision making rather than primal emotion based reaction.

Also I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "confusion".

pretty-in-pink

the only real suffering, that would make a perpee feel better, imo, is knowing that the perp is suffering from the weight of his/her conscience. i cant imagine anything worse then waking up and having to face yourself everyday if you truly regret what you have done.

you can lock someone up, but it most likely will make the problems worse regardless of the type of prison. if you brutilise someone they will eventually turn on society. just look at the movie "sleepers", based on a real situation. did the boys change into ultra perfect, decent members of society? no 2 of them went much much worse then they ever were, were just shells of people, the other 2 while they didnt turn into shells, they were unable to function as normal human beings.

anyone that has been attacked, raped, had someone taken from them, would you really wish that on someone else?on their family?what if ti was your brother/mother.father/sister/aunt/uncle/cousin etc? surely the disgust that those closest to the perp would hold for them would be the worst.

now i know there are cold attacks, or ones where the whole family are nearly in favor of such actions, so what do you do there?

rehab can work, if the person wants it to, if they dont nothing that we can do will change them, so do we kill them? i dont think so. castration wouldnt work either, as the many arguments here againnst it prove. there is no solutuoon for those who want to keep hurting people, who couldnt care less, dont focus so much on vindication but look more at preventing the whole sorry situation.

earlier when i said make them see the long term effects, i meant by facing up to people who have been attacked, andseeing the scars, facing the anger etc.

JTPB

Georgiana wrote:

I agree that the primal emotions need to be addressed but society at large cannot/should not, in my view, legislate to satisfy such primal emotions. This is what is happening in the case of capital punishment in the US, but that a whole other subject. Some people would say "thats democracy" but democratic decisons/legislation reflect the state of maturity or otherwise of the population and is very culture related. If you grew up under Sharia Law, you might agree with it. Sounds like some of the people here agree with its key principles. Mature leadership and informed debate go some way to mature decision making rather than primal emotion based reaction.

Also I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "confusion".

Society at large certainly should not legislate to satisfy such primal emotions, but they do need to be addressed and their origins analysed, because otherwise they will filter through to influence government policy in democratic societies.

An understanding of the nature, origin and intensity of these emotions/tensions is a critical step towards awareness of the factors which influence group decision-making, and hence is also a critical step towards recognising and removing irrelevant factors which would otherwise contaminate the decision-making process.

By "confusion" I mean confusion in the decision-making process due to contamination with emotional inputs of unidentified origins - origins which may be only marginally related to rape.

In other words, it needs to be known why people feel as they do about rape, and why people's feelings about it differ - some being very extreme - during the decision-making process.

Sleepy

My opinions on adopting a hard line to crime are, I must admit, entirely economic. To my mind, neither myself, nor any other tax-payer has a duty of care towards someone who repeatedly violates the laws of the state which our tax supports. If someone who is through their own choice a burden to society, they should not be supported by society. If you can provide a viable option for these people to pay for their own incarceration and (possible?) rehabilitation I'd be very open to it, and would in fact favour of it.

To be fair, this debate has changed my attitudes towards the idea that castration is probably an ineffectual "cure" for a rapist. Naughty_girl makes a very good point that if the perpetrator can be made to feel genuine remorse for their actions, it is probably the most effective punishment they can receive. However, in this scenario, one would have to assume that counselling would be required for both parties in order to stop the perpetrator from killing themselves when they've been exposed to the gravity of their crimes. I'm not sure that I could justify spending tax money on this when it is needed so badly by law-abiding citizens for health , education etc.

This is the main stem of my argument for killing career criminals. It's certainly not an ideal solution but until society has endless amounts of money we have to consider the question: is it right to punish society for the acts of one person who doesn't contribute to or respect that society?

As I've already stated, my arguments are heavily based in the econmic realities of this issue. Whilst economics aren't perfect, they are the best tool we have at our disposal for the running of nation states. Granted that if sensible economics were applied to other areas of society (the health system, government contracts etc. etc.) it might, at some stage in the future bring us to a point where we could rationalise spending money in an attempt to reform these people but even at that point it would be hard to convince me that spending money on criminals is better than spending it on law-abiding citizens of the nation.

JTPB

Sleepy wrote:

My opinions on adopting a hard line to crime are, I must admit, entirely economic.

I find much merit in your position. I just would be worried about over-reacting to the point that the State would actually be perpetrating a greater crime on the criminal than the criminal had committed.

I think the role of a criminal sub-culture may have had a lot to do with what the children in question did - an environment where "hard men" are looked up to, revered, and feared. Maybe they became that way because you'd have to become tough and a "hard man" yourself in order to get by in that environment. I'd say it has less to do with poverty and poor facilities than this business of being a "hard man".

Look at the feuds between criminals - gangland killings etc. That type of environment does not tend to breed polite people.

Georgiana

My arguments are heavily based in the econmic realities of this issue. Whilst economics aren't perfect, they are the best tool we have at our disposal for the running of nation states.


Economics is an extremely narrow limited basis on which to make decisons on questions of such moral complexity

test999

willy removal by sword (purely for dramatic affect) would be
a deterrent for all future rapists.

elivsvonchiaing

JTPB wrote:

A couple of comments, but first a couple of questions:

1)Would you want the surgery carried out without anaesthetic?

2)Do you have any theories on how they became immune to pain?

1) Absolutely not - they should be given the impression that their appeal is likely to work - get out the next day - given a congratulatory meal with a Mickey Finn in it. When they wake up they are now a woman. There is also the danger they may enjoy the pain of the surgery - I'm talking seriously twisted here - not just some pervert who hides in a bush and jumps on women cause he can't help himself.

2) Possibly (ok I'm really not basing this on any body of work that's been done on this - if you must call it bull**** - please feel free - but please mention your source that demonstrates this -i.e. prove me wrong) they endured some trauma in childhood that caused the invention of a god-like/demon-like personality that doesn't feel pain on many levels. Doesn't feel anything - sociopathically needs to perperate misery on others to feel anything. The alter-ego of the child is supressed very deeply by the more dominant personality and never resurfaces. Hence they are not diagnosed with MPD. Note: this just a theory

I should really have empasised more in my previous post - my suggested punishment would only apply where the victims are quite literally destroyed by the crime. Some college jock get drunk and perpetrates a date rape - I think just 20 years in the nick should suffice

Sleepy

Georgiana wrote:

Economics is an extremely narrow limited basis on which to make decisons on questions of such moral complexity

What else have we?

Zulu

Sleepy wrote:

What else have we?

Morals? Ethics? Principles?

BuffyBot

Morals? Ethics? Principles?

But..but..they cost too much........................

Georgiana

If we based all our decisons on economics it would be a rather grim world. Having kids makes poor economic sense if you are capable of providing for your own retirement. Keeping old folks alive in nursing homes is a terrible economic decision. Holidays and recreation for those capable of working make no economic sense. Religion, philosophy, art and literature are a total waste of good economic resourcs.

Sleepy

Zulu wrote:

Morals? Ethics? Principles?

Who's?

Georgiana wrote:

If we based all our decisons on economics it would be a rather grim world. Having kids makes poor economic sense if you are capable of providing for your own retirement. Keeping old folks alive in nursing homes is a terrible economic decision. Holidays and recreation for those capable of working make no economic sense. Religion, philosophy, art and literature are a total waste of good economic resourcs.

You speak of personal decisions, not matters of state. However, supporting Art & Literartue can actually make economic sense as they can generate revenue through sales, festivals, exhibitions etc. Holidays and recreation make economic sense as an unrested worker will simply burn out and productivity will suffer. Keeping old folks alive is an economic debt assuming they've paid taxes during their lives and having kids makes economic sense as though you may be able to afford your own retirement, you'll still require state services such as health, transport and law enforcement, all of which require a tax base to provide their funding.

Even with that said, economics is something I'd believe in for the ruling of state, it doesn't apply so much to the governing of one's individual decision process.

pretty-in-pink

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

1) Absolutely not - they should be given the impression that their appeal is likely to work - get out the next day - given a congratulatory meal with a Mickey Finn in it. When they wake up they are now a woman. There is also the danger they may enjoy the pain of the surgery - I'm talking seriously twisted here - not just some pervert who hides in a bush and jumps on women cause he can't help himself.

2) Possibly (ok I'm really not basing this on any body of work that's been done on this - if you must call it bull**** - please feel free - but please mention your source that demonstrates this -i.e. prove me wrong) they endured some trauma in childhood that caused the invention of a god-like/demon-like personality that doesn't feel pain on many levels. Doesn't feel anything - sociopathically needs to perperate misery on others to feel anything. The alter-ego of the child is supressed very deeply by the more dominant personality and never resurfaces. Hence they are not diagnosed with MPD. Note: this just a theory

I should really have empasised more in my previous post - my suggested punishment would only apply where the victims are quite literally destroyed by the crime. Some college jock get drunk and perpetrates a date rape - I think just 20 years in the nick should suffice

i think if you researched properaly you would find that date rape is as bad ,sometimes worse, then a random attack. its a different kind of rape, but its still entry of an object into any orpheus where consent is withheld.

thats like saying you can accidently rape someone. there has to be some level of knowledge that what you are doing is wrong. by your reckioning can a boyfriend or husband rape their partner? surely it would just be a "harmless rape". all rape is soul destroying, you will never understand the guilt of it, and maybe the perpee in a date rape. or drug rape- nearly identical- feels worse because they feel that they didnt try hard enough and thats a view a lot of people seem to hold. "why didnt you scream, hit, bite, kick, cry out? "bottom line you shouldnt have to....and whats worse is that even when you fight it, it makes it worse, the perp gets off on it more. unless you go through it you can never comprehend the complexities and pain of rape.

do you then think that indecent assualt is any less damaging? picture a girl, alone with a bunch of guys, and they force them selves onto her body, touch her down there, grab her hands and make her give a hand job, head maybe?threten her the whole way through. no sounds would be heard.....loud music playing so she is completely defenceless as she is being pinned and no screams would ever be noticed outside the room, a second and third group of guys are outside the room waiting their turn. how much more damaging does this become if the girl has never done more then kiss a guy before? if when she breaks free, runs for her life, away from being gang raped by oh i dont know 10 guys?, finds someone she thought she could trust, gets blamed for it by the guy...and later discovers he anted in too? that her ex, who she thought had become a friend told her the assualt was her fault ,and that he wanted to be there, to pin her, to touch her, to rape her with a whole room full of guys doing the same thing?

anything like that is bad, really really bad. like half waking up to find your boyfriend has drugged you and is forcing himself up your ass, that the next moring there are 20 odd condoms on the floor.......and you have no clear memories of anything, just blurs involving 1/2/3 people at various points? these kind of perps dont deserve anything but to stew in their own conscience and to go to hell when they die, the lord will judge them, and they will all get what they deserve. noone on earth will ever be able to give someone what they deserve, these perps deserve our pity cause they need to hurt people to feel good, and its definatley a classless thing............cause all my experiences are from rich boys, and the so called scumbags have treated me really well. its not a poverty thing, its an evil thing

Zulu

Some posts I wish I never read - that was one.
No offence - but I could live my life happier not having read it.

pretty-in-pink

apologies for dragging ya down, bit of an outburst, sorry, i just know to many peopel who have been hurt by guys esp rich boys who are not used to the word NO

Zulu

naughty_girl wrote:

apologies for dragging ya down, bit of an outburst, sorry, i just know to many peopel who have been hurt by guys esp rich boys who are not used to the word NO

No your point was perfectly valid and apt. Just a little too valid and apt.

pretty-in-pink

yeah sorry bout that, its a big horrible issue, and sometimes a girl need to let off steam.

at least i dont hate all men though, cause iv had planty of good experiences to

JTPB

test999 wrote:

willy removal by sword (purely for dramatic affect) would be
a deterrent for all future rapists.

Hmmm, I'd like to enquire further but I am on holidays from today on and may not find it possible to post.

ruby_s

if a person chooses to rape or in anyway force themselves upon another person, i think it is wholly justifiable that the punishment suit the crime, granted there is no possible way of making a rapist experience, in any measure, the soul destroying emotional aspect of being raped, but i definitely think castration is a step in the right direction. society wouldn't convict a murderer and then arm them with their weapon of choice, nor should it be acceptable that a rapist is found guilty and NOT be castrated.

elivsvonchiaing

naughty_girl wrote:

anything like that is bad, really really bad. like half waking up to find your boyfriend has drugged you and is forcing himself up your ass, that the next moring there are 20 odd condoms on the floor.......and you have no clear memories of anything, just blurs involving 1/2/3 people at various points? these kind of perps dont deserve anything but to stew in their own conscience and to go to hell when they die, the lord will judge them, and they will all get what they deserve. noone on earth will ever be able to give someone what they deserve, these perps deserve our pity cause they need to hurt people to feel good, and its definatley a classless thing............cause all my experiences are from rich boys, and the so called scumbags have treated me really well. its not a poverty thing, its an evil thing

I stand corrected. I appologise for my ignorance of date-rape. Such people really don't belong in society.

If the precedent was there - i.e. they knew someone who will die behind bars - maybe sixty years from now - they wouldn't rape. They would keep this in mind no matter how drunk they got or what drugs they took - until they take the wrong drug - rape, get locked away forever, and their mates stop taking that one.

I'm not making a naive statement here - severe penalties for rape will not eliminate rape - but it will curtail it. The idea that rapists get out only to re-offend makes my blood boil.

Silent Grape

elivsvonchiaing wrote:

I should really have empasised more in my previous post - my suggested punishment would only apply where the victims are quite literally destroyed by the crime. Some college jock get drunk and perpetrates a date rape - I think just 20 years in the nick should suffice

cant believe you said that. you think there should be different levels of punishment for different 'levels' of rape? there are no different levels, no matter how you're raped, its still rape. even like myself you were too drunk at the time and can only remember flashbacks. you think that because naughty girls rape appears more evil and clear cut as a rape case, her attacker should ve pnished more severly than mine??

somebody else may have recovered in half the time, or twice as long, from what i experienced. maybe if i was sober at the time id have all the facts and wouldnt still be questioning myself as to whether i didnt lead him on. does that make my attacker any less of a rapist than the old stereotype of a man raping a girl in an alleyway? no, it doesnt.

elivsvonchiaing

Silent Grape wrote:

cant believe you said that. you think there should be different levels of punishment for different 'levels' of rape? there are no different levels, no matter how you're raped, its still rape. even like myself you were too drunk at the time and can only remember flashbacks. you think that because naughty girls rape appears more evil and clear cut as a rape case, her attacker should ve pnished more severly than mine??

somebody else may have recovered in half the time, or twice as long, from what i experienced. maybe if i was sober at the time id have all the facts and wouldnt still be questioning myself as to whether i didnt lead him on. does that make my attacker any less of a rapist than the old stereotype of a man raping a girl in an alleyway? no, it doesnt.

You've obviously not read the intial post (reply). Here I detailed that victims were catatonic 10 years after the event - not just irate - as you are - deserve superior justice. Because you posted - I know this does not apply to you - you are a survivor. There are many others who are not. The degree - is differentiating between survivors and non-survivors - yes - there is actually a difference - there are degrees of rape actually! I do concede that the same event by the same perpetrator on different women will lead to survivors - and non-survivors - those who never get back to their normal lives.

I believe sentencing in all personal assualt crimes should be based on the trauma the victim has received.

Silent Grape

you cant really judge that, though, can you.
i am not 'just' irate, i have dealt with this and am still dealing with numerous different sexual attacks occuring over the last four years. dont you have the audactity to tell me i am 'just' irate!

so your basing punishment on the victims coping capablities.
so lets say another person was raped in the same way i was, drunk, in a field, lots of blurring of what happened going on. takes me nearly three months to actually admit it happening. three suicide attempts. repeated stays in mental hospital, family breakdown (as a result of my depression and self harm).
the other victim remains 'catatonic' after her rape. your saying her attacker should get a worse punishment than mine, because she was less able to deal with it?? we both went through the same thing!! thats absurd to even suggest it. if a man rapes and buggers someone, he should be senteced to 2 counts of rape, if he also beats her, he should be charged with assault as well. u cant just rely on emotion.

so your saying that we wait and see how the victim is dealing, and then sentence the perp to the apropriate punishment? that is extraordinarily unfair to all rape and sexual assault victims.

you think because im posting here its all sunshine? you think im EVER going to be the girl i was before it happend? no victim of rape can ever fully get over it, i believe, we can deal with it and move on, but it will always have happened. whether its brutal, down an alley rape or lying in a field stoned and drunk, its the same crime, same time, not 'hang on, she appears to be okay now, so we'll giver her attacker less than the other attacker, whose victim is still in a mental home'

and, which assault crimes are 'non personal'?

i am absolutely disgusted with your attitude, and the way you spoke to me. just because i am a 'survivor', does not mean my rapist should get any less of a sentence than if he did the same thing to someone else, except they wernt as strong emotionally as me.

its laughable that you think im 'just irate' about this.

Iago

In many ways date rape or rape by someone you know,is far worse than being raped by a stranger, from a physical point of view the scars are the same, from a mental point of view as well. Emotionally though you enter a whole new world with date rape, this is someone you know, you trust, you have faith in. Someone you believe would never hurt you in a million years, probably someone that you look to for help and guidance. They take that trust, that belief and they completely destroy it, not only that but they leave you wondering what you did wrong? you must have done something to give the impression that you wanted it, that led him on...and afterwards the shock makes you numb inside, makes you question yourself over and over. You find yourself alienated because whereever you go he's there, the shame of it makes you want the ground to open up and swallow you..your faith in men, and in kindness can never be recovered, no longer will you be the happy person you were before, you may smile in the right places and laugh when it's required but inside there's a part of you that died that night and can never be born again....

I'm not a girl and I've never been raped, but I've known a couple of girls that where, and whether it's a stranger, a friend, boyfriend or even family member, it makes no difference they should be slaughtered like the animals they are.

I would happily spend my life in prision for killing one of these scumbags, prison doesn't rehabilitate them, it simply locks them up with other scum so that they can share stories and get themselves off. They should be castrated and or killed, they deserve nothing more.

Sleepy

naughty_girl wrote:

i think if you researched properaly you would find that date rape is as bad ,sometimes worse, then a random attack. its a different kind of rape, but its still entry of an object into any orpheus where consent is withheld.

thats like saying you can accidently rape someone. there has to be some level of knowledge that what you are doing is wrong. by your reckioning can a boyfriend or husband rape their partner? surely it would just be a "harmless rape". all rape is soul destroying, you will never understand the guilt of it, and maybe the perpee in a date rape. or drug rape- nearly identical- feels worse because they feel that they didnt try hard enough and thats a view a lot of people seem to hold. "why didnt you scream, hit, bite, kick, cry out? "bottom line you shouldnt have to....and whats worse is that even when you fight it, it makes it worse, the perp gets off on it more. unless you go through it you can never comprehend the complexities and pain of rape.

do you then think that indecent assualt is any less damaging? picture a girl, alone with a bunch of guys, and they force them selves onto her body, touch her down there, grab her hands and make her give a hand job, head maybe?threten her the whole way through. no sounds would be heard.....loud music playing so she is completely defenceless as she is being pinned and no screams would ever be noticed outside the room, a second and third group of guys are outside the room waiting their turn. how much more damaging does this become if the girl has never done more then kiss a guy before? if when she breaks free, runs for her life, away from being gang raped by oh i dont know 10 guys?, finds someone she thought she could trust, gets blamed for it by the guy...and later discovers he anted in too? that her ex, who she thought had become a friend told her the assualt was her fault ,and that he wanted to be there, to pin her, to touch her, to rape her with a whole room full of guys doing the same thing?

anything like that is bad, really really bad. like half waking up to find your boyfriend has drugged you and is forcing himself up your ass, that the next moring there are 20 odd condoms on the floor.......and you have no clear memories of anything, just blurs involving 1/2/3 people at various points? these kind of perps dont deserve anything but to stew in their own conscience and to go to hell when they die, the lord will judge them, and they will all get what they deserve. noone on earth will ever be able to give someone what they deserve, these perps deserve our pity cause they need to hurt people to feel good, and its definatley a classless thing............cause all my experiences are from rich boys, and the so called scumbags have treated me really well. its not a poverty thing, its an evil thing

That is, and I don't use the word often, shocking. Little in life surprises me but that one girl can experience that amount of depravity stuns and disgusts me. I think I can see where our difference of opinion comes from though, you believe in God, and I therefore assume hell. I don't. Which is possibly why I want to see these scum (it's not an economic term afaic) punished while you believe they'll get it in the afterlife?

I'm amazed your mental health seems as good as it does and must admit, that after reading that, have an enormous amount of respect for you.

pretty-in-pink

Sleepy wrote:

That is, and I don't use the word often, shocking. Little in life surprises me but that one girl can experience that amount of depravity stuns and disgusts me. I think I can see where our difference of opinion comes from though, you believe in God, and I therefore assume hell. I don't. Which is possibly why I want to see these scum (it's not an economic term afaic) punished while you believe they'll get it in the afterlife?

I'm amazed your mental health seems as good as it does and must admit, that after reading that, have an enormous amount of respect for you.

thanks very much for saying that. it means a lot, because every so often i question my own sanity, and the kind of vibes i give out that attracts people who just want to hurt others.

i didnt believ in god for a while, for a lot of reasons, but i do now. its the rock i cling too, and if someone has actaully repented as opposed to just saying it then only god will know. so in my opinion only god can dole out a suitable punishment. but i know that a lot of people would not agree with me on that. i try not hold onto the scarring emotions of the past, try to live my life as fully as i can. im not afraid anymore, cause i reckon if despite everything i went through, including a very deep patch of depression, i can come out alive, iv got to have a purpose, and that i will not be able to acchieve it if i dont try. also if im meant to die, or meant to go through something then nothing i can do will prevent it, so why be afraid?


does that make sense? i dont know how to explain it any more clearly but i can try if ya need me to

df001i6876

women rape men too do you castrated them too or is this just for men only. I remember a story a few years ago in a local

news paper were a woman had rape a school boy.

i also seen a article on castration . it the brain that makes you rape.

castration stops kid from being born..