Rape is terrible but murder is grand?

smash

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Why is that?

I guess it depends on the circumstances involved with a torture. Most result in death anyway. But for those who survive say in a war situation, once out of the environment and back home there's probably a small sense of closure. Where you often hear of women never trusting men again after a rape.

RDM_83 again

smash wrote: »

I never said I thought that. I do think that people could get over torture more than they could get over rape though.

Why do you believe that, or what evidence do you have, if you think about it logically it doesn;t even make sense, torture is something that has been practised since at least the Mesolithic with the aim of causing maximum suffering or gaining maximum coercive power its something that has been carried out for maximum psychological impact, while rape may be 'all about power' (thread on this in the LL) in some cases I doubt that most rapes are carried out with the express intent of inflicting maximum psycological harm and coercion.

obviously rape is one of the most commonly used methods of toture but I don;t think thats real what we're talking about.

ps the mesolithic bit implies we've been doing it a long time so we're pretty 'good' at torture

Scanlas The 2nd

The real reason rape is unacceptable is basically down to social conditioning. That's it pure and simple, it's not because rape has long lasting effects or is specific etc, those are just rationalisations after the fact to reconcile why you feel so negatively about rape and not murder.

smash

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Why do you believe that

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

The real reason rape is unacceptable is basically down to social conditioning.

Like I said earlier "A lot of people know victims of rape but I don't know 1 victim of torture. It's about saying something that hits a nerve."

And words like torture/murder have been accepted for a long time to have a double meaning. Rape hasn't.

Stark

ScumLord wrote: »

Murder victims just don't seem to mind so much if you joke about them, at least I've never heard of a murder victim getting all upset about a joke.

Sharrow wrote: »

When your dead your dead.
If you survive a rape or attempted murder or anything very traumatic you have to try and live with it and the post traumatic stress it causes you for the rest of your life, it can make the rest of your life a living hell.

Pretty much that.

Well murder victims do have families.

Earthhorse

Rape is something that many victims don't talk about so when you make a rape joke you are not sure if your audience has or hasn't been effected by it. Murder, on the other hand, comes with far less of a risk in that regard.

Rape is also something where there has been historically a lot of victim blaming so attempts to joke about it or casualise it could be seen as contributing toward that same flip attitude to victims.

Finally, this is a historical language thing; phrases such as "murder a pint" etc. have been in the vernacular for quite some time whereas the recent trend of "raping a cake" or what have you has no such lineage. Though technically it could be seen as a valid use of the word, I have to say that I find it a little unnatural; you wouldn't hear the same people say they'd "attack a cake" or "assault a beer" even though they also have similar connotations. In my opinion, and it is purely that - my opinion, there seems to be certain people who have an almost obsession with the word which has to be said, is pretty juvenile.

RDM_83 again

smash wrote: »

Like I said earlier "A lot of people know victims of rape but I don't know 1 victim of torture. It's about saying something that hits a nerve."

And words like torture/murder have been accepted for a long time to have a double meaning. Rape hasn't.

I was asking about why you thought torture was more recoverable than rape.

I'm not aware of knowing anybody thats been raped myself, but I do know a fair people that have been beaten up etc does that mean we should stop using phrases that imply that? In relation to the second point language and idiom changes (not necessarily for the better)

MarkHitide

There's one circumstance of rape that is frequently joked about and heartily laughed at: prison rape, especially in the USA. In fact, some people seem to think it's a part of the sentence, to be the repeated victim of sexual assault.

jester77

Blowfish wrote: »

This appears, not just in relation to rape, but to sexuality as a whole.

Basic example would be TV. It's somehow ok to show murder and violence during daytime TV, but not nudity or sex. The same applies to videogames, murdering is apparently fine, but if there's any nudity, there's generally uproar.

It's a little odd considering the difference morally between them.

Depends on where you are. People here in Germany would have the same views as what the OP is saying. But here you will find nudity at any time of the day on TV, whereas they have a bit of thing about violence (probably because of their history). Sex in video games is ok, but too much violence and the game will be banned.

History probably plays a big role. In Germany people have a very violent history behind them whereas in Ireland people were brought up in a very sexually repressed society because of the Catholic Church.

Earthhorse

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I'm not aware of knowing anybody thats been raped myself, but I do know a fair people that have been beaten up etc does that mean we should stop using phrases that imply that?

The point is that, you know they've been beaten up and they will likely be able to tell you privately if you use a phrase that upsets them, or if you know their sensitivity already you might edit yourself around them and choose a more appropriate phrase. Because rape victims are less likely to confide you simply don't know whether what you're saying is causing offense. I'd prefer to err on the side of caution personally.

In relation to the second point language and idiom changes (not necessarily for the better)

That's certainly true but I'm simply explaining why people find the phrase a jostling one; if it does enter the vernacular I'm sure people won't blink an eye at it but whilst it's entering the vernacular people will debate its merits.

grindle

Earthhorse wrote: »

Finally, this is a historical language thing; phrases such as "murder a pint" etc. have been in the vernacular for quite some time whereas the recent trend of "raping a cake" or what have you has no such lineage. Though technically it could be seen as a valid use of the word, I have to say that I find it a little unnatural; you wouldn't hear the same people say they'd "attack a cake" or "assault a beer" even though they also have similar connotations. In my opinion, and it is purely that - my opinion, there seems to be certain people who have an almost obsession with the word which has to be said, is pretty juvenile.

Language changes. What was once seen as unacceptable or tasteless (pointlessly), becomes... Not acceptable, or tasteful, but it becomes usable.
Who would've said ten years ago, on seeing a hot girl "Yeah, I'd smash that."?
If somebody says "I'm gonna fuck that burger in the ass.", I'm going to take it as a juvenile but novel way of saying "That's gonna taste good.", and my sphincter will not necessarily tighten up, unless that burger is on my ass.

smash

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I was asking about why you thought torture was more recoverable than rape.

I explained that earlier too

Earthhorse

grindle wrote: »

Language changes. What was once seen as unacceptable or tasteless (pointlessly), becomes... Not acceptable, or tasteful, but it becomes usable.

See my post above yours.

Who would've said ten years ago, on seeing a hot girl "Yeah, I'd smash that."?
If somebody says "I'm gonna fuck that burger in the ass.", I'm going to take it as a juvenile but novel way of saying "That's gonna taste good.", and my sphincter will not necessarily tighten up, unless that burger is on my ass.

Neither "smashing" or "f*cking in the ass" are rape, which has been historically something where victims have been not been taken seriously. They enter the vernacular less controversially as a result.

A Primal Nut

LyndaMcL wrote: »

Yes, there was a need for an apology. While some people find those comments funny, a lot of people find them highly offensive, for good reason.

If you're offended that's your problem, it doesn't give you a right to be apologised to.

Yakult

Its a funny one alright.. How murder is much more acceptable than rape, if you could say that.

ahnowbrowncow

smash wrote: »

Like I said earlier "A lot of people know victims of rape but I don't know 1 victim of torture. It's about saying something that hits a nerve."

And words like torture/murder have been accepted for a long time to have a double meaning. Rape hasn't.

Rape has been happening for as long as murder and torture have and also has had a double meaning too, as the Graeme Souness video shows.

You can't say rape is worse than murder or torture, there isn't a scale for this. I could say rape isn't as bad as murder because they have the chance to live on and recover from it and their family can help and see their loved one again, murder victims and their families don't get that chance.

People have just become over sensitive to rape in comparison to other forms of equal or worse violence.

RDM_83 again

Earthhorse wrote: »

The point is that, you know they've been beaten up and they will likely be able to tell you privately if you use a phrase that upsets them, or if you know their sensitivity already you might edit yourself around them and choose a more appropriate phrase. Because rape victims are less likely to confide you simply don't know whether what you're saying is causing offense. I'd prefer to err on the side of caution personally.

Good point I actually hadn't really considered the 'private' nature of rape, though the same could be said about a lot of other violence related phrases, people don;t necessarily advertise non rape related traumatic experiences.

grindle

grindle wrote: »

Why?
I'd just go "That person has a crude sense of humour, I like that."
Anybody thinking there're such things as psychopathic jokes needs to take a good look at themselves - if they're not instantly disappointed, they can either stay in - or move to - Mayo, to be near others of their kind.

Do you think it's ok to joke about rape? or to make comments such as biko's example "my parents are going to rape me when I get home"?

A Primal Nut

I think the worry some people have, is that if someone jokes about rape then they are indifferent to it or don't care about it. This is because throughout history and even now there are still some people who might think rape or sexual assault is ok or shouldn't be punished; or that it's not a big deal. So when people make rape jokes, other people think that person might be of the opinion that rape is not a big deal or a serious crime. I don't agree with that view about people who make rape jokes (hence, I'm not offended by them), but many people do think that and thus are offended (as they believe the person making the joke is indifferent to rape).

On the other hand, everyone (except a small few psychopaths) thinks murder is wrong so if someone makes a murder joke nobody thinks "oh that person is making little of murder and probably thinks it's ok to kill someone."

newport2

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

newport2 wrote: »

Because most perpetrators of rape are men and most jokes made about rape come from men. Most victims of rape are women. Work it out.

So a rape joke coming from a woman is as innocuous as a murder joke? By tha logic women telling rape jokes should be fine too.

I didn't mean that. While a lot of black people would find a black person telling racist jokes offensive or at least distasteful, there wouldn't be anything like the reaction there would be if it was a white person telling them. In the same way I think while a lot of women would not appreciate or approve of another woman making a joke about rape, it would be taken as far more offensive if it was coming from a man. I can see why anyone would be concerned if they felt a man did not take rape seriously.

Bad Panda

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think it's ok to joke about rape? or to make comments such as biko's example "my parents are going to rape me when I get home"?

It makes no sense that parents (in this context) would rape their child for being late home.

Parents would give out - the extreme of that is to kill, not to rape. So this argument doesn't make any sense at all.

Is OK to joke about rape? It's OK to joke about anything as far as I'm concerned however, the audience, the context and timing is important, otherwise it can be wrong and of course hurtful.

davet82

Bad Panda wrote: »

It makes no sense that parents (in this context) would rape their child for being late home.

Parents would give out - the extreme of that is to kill, not to rape. So this argument doesn't make any sense at all.

Is OK to joke about rape? It's OK to joke about anything as far as I'm concerned however, the audience, the context and timing is important, otherwise it can be wrong and of course hurtful.

100% agreed

Time and a place is all it comes down to really

RDM_83 again

smash wrote: »

I guess it depends on the circumstances involved with a torture. Most result in death anyway. But for those who survive say in a war situation, once out of the environment and back home there's probably a small sense of closure. Where you often hear of women never trusting men again after a rape.

This is your explanation for it, again it doesn;t really make sense to me, 1: the crime of murder is separate so not what we're talking about really (if most rape victims killed themselves afterwards would that make it less bad/offensive) 2: Does most torture end in death, I've no idea where we'd find figures but there is a lot of torture survivors.

In relation to the second part, consider the brutality of civil wars and repressive regimes both which often involve torture and occur in the 'home' area. Also think of the fear of people in authority and general trauma, you could argue the case as I'm sure there's torture survivors who never trust people as a whole again.

grindle

Earthhorse wrote: »

See my post above yours.

I saw it, I agreed, I reiterated. No harm no foul.

Earthhorse wrote: »

Neither "smashing" or "f*cking in the ass" are rape, which has been historically something where victims have been not been taken seriously. They enter the vernacular less controversially as a result.

Less controversially, but that's due to the problem-listener's biase. I don't go out of my way to use the word 'rape' too often (e.g. "This band are raping my ears." or "Man... this apple juice is tongue-rape."), but I've been given-out-to for it before, and I just thought..."What a prudish fucking sad-act."
If they know I don't mean actual rape, why are they confusing or condemning it? They should evolve along with the language and colloquialisms.

Actually, thinking about the tongue-rape, maybe inferring that rape is a good thing in some instances (Mmm, Copella Apple Juice) is something they might get offended by.
Oh well?

I've been mugged, and don't get offended by the word 'mug'.
I've been called a 'faggot' (or "fagit quare" for Limerick people) countless times - I don't recoil whenever I hear a song that says it, and neither should I.

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think it's ok to joke about rape? or to make comments such as biko's example "my parents are going to rape me when I get home"?

I do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b4hNaFkbZYU

Bad Panda

Bad Panda wrote: »

It makes no sense that parents (in this context) would rape their child for being late home.

Parents would give out - the extreme of that is to kill, not to rape. So this argument doesn't make any sense at all.

You make a fair point, I just grabbed a comment from the thread. What context would you (not you specifically) use "I would rape"?

Is OK to joke about rape? It's OK to joke about anything as far as I'm concerned however, the audience, the context and timing is important, otherwise it can be wrong and of course hurtful.

Which audiences are ok do you think? and which aren't?

professore

biko wrote: »

"I could murder a pint right now"
versus
"I could rape a pint right now"

"I'll be late home, my parents are going to kill me"
versus
"I'll be late home, my parents are going to rape me"

Ugh - now I have visions of someone raping a pint !!!

RDM_83 again

newport2 wrote: »

I didn't mean that. While a lot of black people would find a black person telling racist jokes offensive or at least distasteful, there wouldn't be anything like the reaction there would be if it was a white person telling them. In the same way I think while a lot of women would not appreciate or approve of another woman making a joke about rape, it would be taken as far more offensive if it was coming from a man. I can see why anyone would be concerned if they felt a man did not take rape seriously.

I know this isn't exactly the point same point you were making as men are also the perpetrators but in the USA men actually make up the majority of victims of rape (think the op alluded to this point.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/21/us-more-men-raped-than-women

smash

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Also think of the fear of people in authority and general trauma, you could argue the case as I'm sure there's torture survivors who never trust people as a whole again.

True. I guess you just learn to live with rape being a sensitive subject as it's a common occurrence in our so called civilised society and we can see the effect, where physical torture isn't.

newport2

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I know this isn't exactly the point same point you were making as men are also the perpetrators but in the USA men actually make up the majority of victims of rape (think the op alluded to this point.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/feb/21/us-more-men-raped-than-women

Maybe so, but I think outside prison and in everyday life women are far far more likely to be the victims of it than men. I don't know a single man who's ever worried about getting raped (although I'm sure some have). I know I never have. Every woman I know is very conscious of it.

Grayson

I don't know if anyone's mentioned gaming yet. The phrase rape is everywhere. Spawn raping etc... Half the flames I hear are about rape.

Now to be fair, the games do involve killing each other. So saying I'm going to kill you is stating the obvious.

But the main reason I mentioned this is because I recently read an article about gamers hostility to female gamers. They mentioned that a huge percentage said that they had been told by other gamers that they would be raped. However it made no mention of threats made against male gamers and I'd bet that the same percentage of males, maybe more because I've seen girls pop into lobbies and had guys fawning over them, have received the same abuse.

Boombastic

Is it ok whip cream and beat eggs, or where do we stand on that viewpoint?

Bad Panda

Deleted User wrote: »

You make a fair point, I just grabbed a comment from the thread. What context would you (not you specifically) use "I would rape"?



Which audiences are ok do you think? and which aren't?

Well I've used it the same way Graham Souness used it in that clip - in relation to football - more so to get the point across on just how easy say a winger gets past a full back - not that I can't get it across any other way, but it's simply an expression in this context.

I wouldn't use it any other way to be honest unless I was describing the crime of rape. In fact, I don't know what other way you could use it...

Well say you're out with your friends, you know none of them have been affected by rape personally, girls included. And you know they know you're a decent person and you don't actually think rape is funny and make a remark or a joke regarding rape in general - and I don't mean a joke about a woman getting raped, because that is NOT funny.

Having said all that, I can't remember when I last joked about it in any context, because it's really my style to be honest, but for those who do, I understand where they're coming from.

smash

Deleted User wrote: »

Which audiences are ok do you think? and which aren't?

I think it's more so the context rather than the audience. Like it seems acceptable to say "The government/tax man is raping us".

newport2

Deleted User wrote: »

Which audiences are ok do you think? and which aren't?

Someone made the joke (I think on boards.ie somewhere) the other day that a girl said to him that if he was the last person on earth she still wouldn't shag him. He replied that if he was the last person on earth she wouldn't have a choice.

Is this over-stepping the mark? Would many people find that offensive?

smash

newport2 wrote: »

Someone made the joke (I think on boards.ie somewhere) the other day that a girl said to him that if he was the last person on earth she still wouldn't shag him. He replied that if he was the last person on earth she wouldn't have a choice.

Is this over-stepping the mark? Would many people find that offensive?

If he was the last man on earth, she wouldn't have a choice of shagging another man but she'd still have the choice of shagging him or not.

It depends what way he meant it.

Bad Panda

newport2 wrote: »

Someone made the joke (I think on boards.ie somewhere) the other day that a girl said to him that if he was the last person on earth she still wouldn't shag him. He replied that if he was the last person on earth she wouldn't have a choice.

Is this over-stepping the mark? Would many people find that offensive?

I don't think it's all that offensive. I mean let's think about it: if he really was the last man on earth, of course she would.

She was making a joke about him not being attractive and he made one about it not mattering in the extremities of the situation. No big deal as far as I'm concerned.

I think it's silly we've to analyse it this much to be honest!

Edit: I mean it wouldn't matter in the situation as he'd be the last man on earth, not not mattering because he could simply force himself on her! Very heavy for a Friday of a bank holiday!

Lisandro

I think the central issue here is the extent to which these acts are engaged with the everyday situation of living in a modern society. Murder is something so far removed from the everyday life and moral compass of an ordinary person that saying, "Oh, I'll kill you if you do that again" is nothing more than a means of expressing an exaggerated sentiment without really meaning it (which is why it's generally said flippantly). It can be rationalised and framed in a humourous, mock-violence way. You can't do that with rape jokes, they are more pernicious however because they're intrinsically emotive subjects and because of the very real threat of being raped when out alone at night, something which is compounded by the culture of victim blaming that still has an unpleasant residue today.

smash wrote: »

I do think that people could get over torture more than they could get over rape though.

I think that's a little cheapening to the ordeal of being tortured. The memory of rape may permeate one's life because of trust issues with men, I'll accept, but the probability of an individual person "getting over it" shouldn't mitigate the fact that both are horrific experiences.

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

The real reason rape is unacceptable is basically down to social conditioning. That's it pure and simple, it's not because rape has long lasting effects or is specific etc, those are just rationalisations after the fact to reconcile why you feel so negatively about rape and not murder.

I don't even know where to begin...look, no one's saying that rape is worse than murder, what people are saying is that rape is a very real and visceral threat that happens to actual, often vulnerable people. Cartoon violence can be made to look comic and light, rape is a serious and abusive assault no matter what way you look at it or what context you frame it in. It's the reason that if I made a joke about paedophilia while having dinner at a friend's house, I would have a lot of explaining to do. Offence isn't arbitrary, there are reasons why some issues are more sensitive and emotive than others, and to say that disapproval of rape jokes is just comes from "rationalisations after the fact" is not only offensive, it's downright insulting to anyone who's been and has had someone they know raped.

newport2

smash wrote: »

If he was the last man on earth, she wouldn't have a choice of shagging another man but she'd still have the choice of shagging him or not.

It depends what way he meant it.

True, but often what matters with jokes in relation to offence being caused is how the joke is taken/interpreted. How it was meant often gets thrown out the window if someone gets offended!

newport2

newport2 wrote: »

Every woman I know is very conscious of it.

That's dreadfully sad really. I would never worry about such a thing unless I was walking through a park alone in the middle of the night.

When I read the OP I was thinking "it just is" but I didn't really know why, and I was curious to see other people's take on it.

Someone already touched on it there but I think the real reason is shame. Murder doesn't carry the same level of shame. It is something that is reported and in a very high volume of cases, the perpetrator will be convicted. It doesn't have the same level of victim blaming. Murder is something will absolutely be investigated no matter what. Only 1.5% of sexual assaults reported to the rape crisis centre will end in someone being convicted. As a country, we are still learning to deal with sexual assault and it's becoming a much bigger issue than any of us ever imagined it to be. So maybe that's got a lot to do with it? The fact that we are still trying to encourage people to come forward and report rape, and not to be afraid or to be ashamed, and by joking about it, we may appear not to take it seriously.

I'm just throwing thoughts down based on what I've read here, someone could easily argue my points and I may not be able to back it up, but that would be my feeling on why there is a difference.

johnjoe7

LyndaMcL wrote: »

I think both acts are equally bad.

How is suffering a bruised ego equally as bad as suffering the loss of your life?

aidan24326

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Anyways, I think both acts are terrible and are as awful as each other so if you are going to offended by one joke please by equally offended by the other, thank you .

Really? As awful as each other? With rape, at least you're still alive, have a chance to get over it eventually and at least have the possibility to go on and ultimately live a good life. Some rape victims do just that, even if some don't.

A murder victim has no such chance of doing anything at all other than decompose in a box, so I don't see how they can be equated other than by some feminist-driven agenda.

grindle

johnjoe7 wrote: »

How is suffering a bruised ego equally as bad as suffering the loss of your life?

If anything, it should be an inflated ego.

mod: banned

Earthhorse

grindle wrote: »

Less controversially, but that's due to the problem-listener's biase.

I'm not overly familiar with problem-listerner bias but I think it is okay for people to have a bias about a traumatic even in their life.

I don't go out of my way to use the word 'rape' too often (e.g. "This band are raping my ears." or "Man... this apple juice is tongue-rape."), but I've been given-out-to for it before, and I just thought..."What a prudish fucking sad-act."
If they know I don't mean actual rape, why are they confusing or condemning it? They should evolve along with the language and colloquialisms.

There's no should or shouldn't in my opinion; equally they could say, if you don't enjoy being given out to, you should avoid words you know cause controversy. They may be condemning it for the reasons I've already outlined. Personally speaking, I probably wouldn't and certainly not like that; I have asked people to stop making jokes about rape when we're out though.

Actually, thinking about the tongue-rape, maybe inferring that rape is a good thing in some instances (Mmm, Copella Apple Juice) is something they might get offended by.
Oh well?

Could be but I'd say it's just the phrase itself that has caused the reaction, I doubt they've reflected on it that deeply.

I've been mugged, and don't get offended by the word 'mug'.
I've been called a 'faggot' (or "fagit quare" for Limerick people) countless times - I don't recoil whenever I hear a song that says it, and neither should I.

Again, I don't think there's a should or shouldn't. I know a few people who've suffered from mental illness and during particularly distraught periods they visibly flinch at the use of words like "mad" or "nuts". You might just be saying "The traffic's 'mad' out there" and they'll react. It's not for me to say whether they should or shouldn't but it is certainly difficult to begin editing out what would normally be considered a harmless phrase.

As I've said already, I find the casual formulations using "rape" a little forced or something; it doesn't seem like the mot juste to me. People are free to use it, of course, but they should be aware of the connotations, the history of treatment of rape victims and the effect their words might be having when they do.

newport2

Deleted User wrote: »

That's dreadfully sad really. I would never worry about such a thing unless I was walking through a park alone in the middle of the night.

When I said they were "conscious" of it, I meant exactly what you said above. Maybe it was too strong a word to use, but I just meant that in certain scenarios like the example you give above, they would be conscious of it.

aidan24326

And before anyone says it I'm hardly making light of rape. Just saying it doesn't deserve equal footing alongside the ultimate of all crimes, that of terminating someone's life completely.

ahnowbrowncow

aidan24326 wrote: »

Really? As awful as each other? With rape, at least you're still alive, have a chance to get over it eventually and at least have the possibility to go on and ultimately live a good life. Some rape victims do just that, even if some don't.

A murder victim has no such chance of doing anything at all other than decompose in a box, so I don't see how they can be equated.

I was being diplomatic, some people think rape is worse, others think murder is. Where as I don't think you can say definitively which is worse. It depends on the individual case, a violent rape can be worse than a painless death and vice versa

KeithM89_old

johnjoe7 wrote: »

How is suffering a bruised ego equally as bad as suffering the loss of your life?

grindle wrote: »

If anything, it should be an inflated ego.

Banned.

Tordelback

I know I'm really too old to be astonished by the responses on this thread, but I am.

Yes, murder is almost certainly an objectively worse crime than rape: like Bill Munny's character in Unforgiven says: "It's a hell of a thing, killing a man...you take away all he's got, and all he's ever gonna have".

But.

Murder is broadly accepted as a terrible thing, worthy of society's strongest response to prevent and punish it, and it's also, thankfully, extremely rare. It's easier to joke about because you can assume that everyone you know accepts the wrongness of it, and the sanctions against its perpetrators: when you say you're going to murder someone, everyone knows you're not, you're just wildly exagerrating. Hence, the funny.

It's very unlikely that the person making humorous use of the word 'murder' is a murderer, or that his audience are the family of a murder victim. It's almost a certainty that the audience of person telling a rape joke has been affected directly or indirectly, and even quite possible that the person telling the joke has or will commit some form of sexual assault.

Rape is completely different. It's everywhere, everyone either is or knows the victim of a rape or sexual assault. And if you think you don't, you're wrong: you do. And by extension, you either are or you know a rapist or sexual abuser, even if you don't (and you probably don't, since so little is reported never mind prosecuted).

Its status, even its reality, is constantly doubted, in pub chat, in court, in the media. Jokes about and joking references to rape play into the diminishing of its seriousness, the pervasive idea that it's sort-of okay, because women really, deep down like it: sure otherwise they'd fight harder, they'd run faster, they'd leave the bastard, they wouldn't drink, they wouldn't dress like that.

In earshot of your joke is someone who's suffered all this, and more. It's a low, low thing for a man, in a position of power accorded him by society and accident of birth, to make jokes about rape.

RDM_83 again

Its actions like directly above that make me wish there was a dislike button on boards.ie especially if you read Grindles reasoned posts through this thread.

awaits infraction

Scanlas The 2nd

Tordelback wrote: »

I know I'm really too old to be astonished by the responses on this thread, but I am.

Yes, murder is almost certainly an objectively worse crime than rape: like Bill Munny's character in Unforgiven says: "It's a hell of a thing, killing a man...you take away all he's got, and all he's ever gonna have".

But.

Murder is broadly accepted as a terrible thing, worthy of society's strongest response to prevent and punish it, and it's also, thankfully, extremely rare. It's easier to joke about because you can assume that everyone you know accepts the wrongness of it, and the sanctions against its perpetrators: when you say you're going to murder someone, everyone knows you're not, you're just wildly exagerrating. Hence, the funny.

It's very unlikely that the person making humorous use of the word 'murder' is a murderer, or that his audience are the family of a murder victim. It's almost a certainty that the audience of person telling a rape joke has been affected directly or indirectly, and even quite possible that the person telling the joke has or will commit some form of sexual assault.

Rape is completely different. It's everywhere, everyone either is or knows the victim of a rape or sexual assault. And if you think you don't, you're wrong: you do. And by extension, you either are or you know a rapist or sexual abuser, even if you don't (and you probably don't, since so little is reported never mind prosecuted).

Its status, even its reality, is constantly doubted, in pub chat, in court, in the media. Jokes about and joking references to rape play into the diminishing of its seriousness, the pervasive idea that it's sort-of okay, because women really, deep down like it: sure otherwise they'd fight harder, they'd run faster, they'd leave the bastard, they wouldn't drink, they wouldn't dress like that.

In earshot of your joke is someone who's suffered all this, and more. It's a low, low thing for a man, in a position of power accorded him by society and accident of birth, to make jokes about rape.

Everyone knows rape is bad just like everyone knows murder is bad, that's a silly thing to say.

Saying rape is less acceptable due to social conditioning.

Why is retard such an acceptable word to say these days? Everyone knows someone who is affected by a handicapped child, it causes so much suffering.