|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 8:45 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| A rape apologist is someone who makes excuses for rapists and talks about women 'crying rape' when that very rarely happens. |
Again with the claims. Where did I mention women crying rape?
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| It is not something you should want to be and so I understand your panicked attempts to try an deny what you wrote. |
More unsubstantiated claims! I directly quoted you quoting myself. Where did I deny that I didn't say those things?
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| However, it doesn't have to be this tortuous. |
Apparently it does: You have the reading comprehension skills of a block of peat.
If you really are too thick to see how both of your quotations fail to prove that I explicitly claimed that this is a scam - which I did not - I really just don't know what to tell you anymore. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| A rape apologist is someone who makes excuses for rapists and talks about women 'crying rape' when that very rarely happens. |
Again with the claims. Where did I mention women crying rape?
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| It is not something you should want to be and so I understand your panicked attempts to try an deny what you wrote. |
More unsubstantiated claims! I directly quoted you quoting myself. Where did I deny that I didn't say those things?
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| However, it doesn't have to be this tortuous. |
Apparently it does: You have the reading comprehension skills of a block of peat.
If you really are too thick to see how both of your quotations fail to prove that I explicitly claimed that this is a scam - which I did not - I really just don't know what to tell you anymore. |
If you didn't say those things, you will have no problems making the following statements.
Show empathy to the victim, stop doubting her story and make a clear statement that the the guy in question is a rapist. Once you have done this you will no longer be a rape apologist and you can go on with your life safe in the knowledge that you are a 'nice guy'.
Compliance will be rewarded. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| If you didn't say those things, you will have no problems making the following statements. |
I did say those things. Holy crap! Learn to read! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2014 3:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
Simply empathise with the victim, stop doubting her story and make a clear statement that the the guy in question is a rapist. Once you have done this you will no longer be a rape apologist and you can go on with your life safe in the knowledge that you are a 'nice guy'.
Compliance will be rewarded. |
Aq8kynus, you are making an error in judgment- You are interpreting Underwaterbob's skepticism towards this story as being skeptical about rape, and therefore he is a rape apologist. This story could have been about a car accident or a fistfight or vandalism, or any number of things and I think he would have been just as skeptical given the nature of the evidence.
Would he be a vandalism apologist? A car accident apologist?
He is a skeptic in general, not just about rape.
Say we had a story about a Canadian NET injured in a car crash a year ago that somehow made the newspapers. Then we get an anonymous story written up on some Canadian AM news station's site with no linkage about how she as getting screwed out of medical bills or getting sued or whatever and linked to a gofundme, but she chose to remain anonymous, there were no more details, no follow ups on the other boards, only person could seemingly vouch for her, the person who set up the page, and the only update was an after the fact post about "fundraiser shots night at Dilinger's". Wouldn't that at least be cause for pause? The words "somewhat dodgy" might apply?
| Quote: |
| Once you have done this you will no longer be a rape apologist and you can go on with your life safe in the knowledge that you are a 'nice guy' |
Dude, who the heck appointed you the Arbiter of Rape Apology? Is this a title that is bestowed by some organization? No, IT IS YOUR OPINION. So far it is an opinion shared only by you. And of the few other people who have posted on this since this bruhaha started, none have supported your rape apologist claim. You calling him a rape apologist, doesn't make it so.
So basically, the guy has to either admit to being a rape apologist or be declared a rape apologist, and this all involves doing exactly as you say. I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound rational, fair, or logical. It DOES sound like a false choice at a witch trial, which is not surprising given your shabby grasp of such concepts as speculation, hearsay, accuracy of statements, words such as "maybe" and "could", due process, and skepticism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| If you didn't say those things, you will have no problems making the following statements. |
I did say those things. Holy crap! Learn to read! |
No you didn't, you kept trying to make out the guy was 'innocent until proven guilty'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 1:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Steelrails"][quote="aq8knyus"]/quote]
We are not talking about his views on whether or not it was legit.
He kept going on and on and on about the guy being innocent until proven guilty and how the police error that freed him was good enough for him to be called innocent.
If he doesn't want to be misunderstood as a rape apologist, then just make a clear statement to clear up any doubt.
Instead of panicky denials wouldn't a simple sentence be better?
He should comply. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
He was doing more than just expressing doubt and even went beyond the Benghazi boys claiming it was a scam.
He discussed the case as if it were real and supported the decision to free him, quibbled over what indecent assault meant and made excuses for the actions of the rapist.
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
Forgive me: the case was thrown out of court
but basic legal rights are still basic legal rights. If the evidence to convict him wasn't there or was inconsistent, then the court was right to not convict.
If someone yells rape, and the court drops the case due to inconsistencies in the case, and I agree with the court, I'm a rape apologist? We should just throw the entire judicial process to the wind in cases of rape and automatically assume the defendant is guilty? If that makes me a rape apologist, at least I'm not a totalitarian.
He was found innocent in a court of law. The only thing that suggests he is guilty is the word of some random stranger on the Internet.
Settling out of court is not a bribe. Maybe he didn't want his name dragged through the muck?
Again: he wasn't convicted.
Ever hear of innocent until proven guilty?
"Indecent assault" as I understand it these days could be something as benign as dude took a whiz in a public place and someone complained
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| If you didn't say those things, you will have no problems making the following statements. |
I did say those things. Holy crap! Learn to read! |
No you didn't, you kept trying to make out the guy was 'innocent until proven guilty'. |
I did or I didn't... What the hell are you even trying to say anymore?
| Quote: |
| He kept going on and on and on about the guy being innocent until proven guilty and how the police error that freed him was good enough for him to be called innocent. |
I think I made one post about innocence before proven guilty. Right after you decided that due process did not apply to this case.
| Quote: |
| Instead of panicky denials wouldn't a simple sentence be better? |
The one panicking here is you. The only thing I've denied in this thread is your assertion that I claimed that this case was a scam. And you've yet to prove otherwise because I did not.
According to you, one minute I said something that proved that I claimed that this case was a scam, the next I denied that I said it after agreeing with you that I said those exact things, then I didn't say it at all. You've clearly lost your mind. Maybe you'd better just stop now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2014 9:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| Rambling |
What you wrote was wrong, if it was a misrepresentation, then you should clear up any doubt with a simple clarification.
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
Forgive me: the case was thrown out of court
but basic legal rights are still basic legal rights. If the evidence to convict him wasn't there or was inconsistent, then the court was right to not convict.
If someone yells rape, and the court drops the case due to inconsistencies in the case, and I agree with the court, I'm a rape apologist? We should just throw the entire judicial process to the wind in cases of rape and automatically assume the defendant is guilty? If that makes me a rape apologist, at least I'm not a totalitarian.
He was found innocent in a court of law. The only thing that suggests he is guilty is the word of some random stranger on the Internet.
Settling out of court is not a bribe. Maybe he didn't want his name dragged through the muck?
Again: he wasn't convicted.
Ever hear of innocent until proven guilty?
"Indecent assault" as I understand it these days could be something as benign as dude took a whiz in a public place and someone complained
|
[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 3:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
He kept going on and on and on about the guy being innocent until proven guilty |
What a crazy thing for people to go on and on about. The presumption of innocence in a criminal case. 
Anyways, Underwaterbob is advocating for a healthy dose of skepticism in these unreliable cases where money is being solicited. That's it. I think your putting wayyyyyy too much into what he is saying.
I also think you need to understand the strict standards many people will have regarding evidence, especially when that "evidence" is being used to solicit mass donations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 4:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| What a crazy thing for people to go on and on about. The presumption of innocence in a criminal case. |
It is when the guy has a suspended sentence and was originally convicted only to get off due to a police error.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Anyways, Underwaterbob is advocating for a healthy dose of skepticism in these unreliable cases where money is being solicited. That's it. I think your putting wayyyyyy too much into what he is saying. |
He has made a number of problematic statements and refused to clarify his meaning which leads me to believe he actually harbours those views.
All he needs to write is one simple sentence and then no more doubt about his character will exist.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| I also think you need to understand the strict standards many people will have regarding evidence, especially when that "evidence" is being used to solicit mass donations. |
We have good evidence pointing to this being real and the campaign was very, very unlikely to be a hoax.
Pages and pages and pages of posts from the Benghazi boys calling this a hoax with not a scrap of evidence was simply a stupid distraction to what should have been a short thread trying to spread awareness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 6:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8kynus wrote: |
| Pages and pages and pages of posts from the Benghazi boys calling this a hoax with not a scrap of evidence was simply a stupid distraction to what should have been a short thread trying to spread awareness. |
You just love going in circles, don't you? I never, not once, nada times, zero zilch ever said this was a hoax. Grab a dictionary, look up the word "doubt", stop insisting I somehow need to redeem myself, put this thread out of its misery and get a bloody life. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 8:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| aq8kynus wrote: |
| Pages and pages and pages of posts from the Benghazi boys calling this a hoax with not a scrap of evidence was simply a stupid distraction to what should have been a short thread trying to spread awareness. |
You just love going in circles, don't you? I never, not once, nada times, zero zilch ever said this was a hoax. Grab a dictionary, look up the word "doubt", stop insisting I somehow need to redeem myself, put this thread out of its misery and get a bloody life. |
You have made many problematic statements in regards to the rapist, suggesting the he is innocent or a victim himself. If you dont want to be considered a rape apologist then simply clarify with a claer staement to the contrary.
If you are not a rape apologist a simple sentence supporting the victim's account and condeming the rapist shouldn't be too difficult.
Stop wasting your time pretending, either clarify or stop posting, it is getting tedious.
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
Forgive me: the case was thrown out of court
but basic legal rights are still basic legal rights. If the evidence to convict him wasn't there or was inconsistent, then the court was right to not convict.
If someone yells rape, and the court drops the case due to inconsistencies in the case, and I agree with the court, I'm a rape apologist? We should just throw the entire judicial process to the wind in cases of rape and automatically assume the defendant is guilty? If that makes me a rape apologist, at least I'm not a totalitarian.
He was found innocent in a court of law. The only thing that suggests he is guilty is the word of some random stranger on the Internet.
Settling out of court is not a bribe. Maybe he didn't want his name dragged through the muck?
Again: he wasn't convicted.
Ever hear of innocent until proven guilty?
"Indecent assault" as I understand it these days could be something as benign as dude took a whiz in a public place and someone complained
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2014 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| You have made many problematic statements... |
Then why do you keep quoting the exact same one over and over and over? And how is it "problematic"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Underwaterbob
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Location: In Cognito
|
| Posted: Fri Nov 21, 2014 12:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Underwaterbob wrote: |
| Ever hear of innocent until proven guilty? |
"Problematic"
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
