Is rape worse than death

[Princess Arabia]

@trentonWatch this video, it might help.

 

 

[LordFall]

@NoSelfSelf What do you mean by game in this context? 

[NoSelfSelf]

@LordFall There is a process to enter the game where mind keeps you a prisoner so you are stuck,same part of the mind that pushes you towards red pill to hate the women is same mind that stops you to grow, but when you enter the game mind leaves you alone.Why you think mind leaves you alone when you are watching tv vs when you look to advance yourself.

[Basman]

I think the reason why rape feels more heinous than murder to people is that it is especially upsetting to have ones sexual boundaries crossed for one, in addition to the sense of helplessness and injustice that accompanies rape. Finding justice for a murder is much more straightforward because of the objective evidence of a death compared to a rape, which is essentially he-said-she-said in most cases.

A sense of injustice creates strong negative emotions. Killing can be just and justice is more straightforward to find. Therefor murder doesn't have the same emotional charge as rape. I can't think of any times where rape is just.

The only way for us to mend injustice is by being better people. We realized that rape is a crime for a start.

[trenton]

@Basman I have been struggling to think of anytime when rape could possibly be justified. Not even AI could come up with any examples.

The first example I looked for was the unit 731 dilemma. But in that case the people held at gunpoint and forced to have sex with each other are mutual victims, thus it is two counts of rape. I thought The prisoners were being forced to rape people to save their lives, but they are not considered rapists. The military justified these actions as biological warfare necessary to defeat the enemy who would do the same. This operation killed 300000 innocent people.

The closest example to justified rape I can think of would be if it were done as part of an effort to sabotage an evil organization from within. This could include a situation in which someone is drafted into the Nazi military or coerced into becoming a terrorist in the hopes of saving their family who is being held hostage or maybe as an operation in which someone is trying to expose a sex trafficking ring to prevent future victims. In cases like these people often receive direct orders to rape people. From the point of view of the saboteur raping people becomes a survival strategy within an evil organization in the hopes of ultimately undermining these organizations leading to a safer and more just future. The problem with these situations is that it sounds like a stretch because it likely involves a lot of moral luck as the operations may fail, leading to more rape victims due to forced participation in evil organizations.

If these are not justified examples of rape, then I don't think rape is ever justified even under extreme conditions. It is only justified from the point of view of the rapist who thinks "she deserved to be raped" or thought that rape was a valid method of biological warfare to terrorize the civilian population into submission. Only from the point of view of a twisted and corrupt worldview is rape justified.

[Schizophonia]

You and your weird topics.

Would you not prefer leave actualized, eat an ice cream and go to an actually psychiatrist ?

 

[trenton]

@Schizophonia I actually have been considering leaving actualized. For several years I was hoping to use personal development to find a sense of purpose in life. In the end it looks like I have to pursue some practical career just for the sake of money and survival. I see no way for me to live a fulfilling life.

I have tried reading the books, going to therapy, medication, life coaching, and so on. I don't want to give up because my life would be horrible if I did. At the same time I genuinely don't know what to do. I'm just going to be told that I am being a victim and my mind is trapping me.

I used to be deeply intelligent, but now I feel like I'm getting dumber. I was able to use my research to improve so many people's lives. I wanted to build a career as a researcher so I could do this more often. I helped a woman get 60,000 dollars in debt forgiven. I used what I learned in emotional mastery to help my suicidal brother and several other victims who were either raped or suicidal. I even used political research to stop my family from fighting through aligning them with the facts. I saw beauty in being as impartial and objective as possible because of the person I would have to be to let go of my biases and so forth. I wanted to get a career in which I could use my research to continue improving people's lives, but I cannot afford a PhD.

I'm now starting to doubt the value of personal development, conventional wisdom concerning emotional mastery, and other things. In the end I have to make major life decisions based on circumstances, not ideals and passions. My passions have been crushed multiple times, so I know following your passion doesn't actually work.

The thing is I don't know what else to do if I leave actualized. The alternative seems to be just give up and be miserable forever. I don't know what else to do.

Sorry for being weird.

[Schizophonia]

33 minutes ago, trenton said:

@Schizophonia I actually have been considering leaving actualized. For several years I was hoping to use personal development to find a sense of purpose in life. In the end it looks like I have to pursue some practical career just for the sake of money and survival. I see no way for me to live a fulfilling life.

I have tried reading the books, going to therapy, medication, life coaching, and so on. I don't want to give up because my life would be horrible if I did. At the same time I genuinely don't know what to do. I'm just going to be told that I am being a victim and my mind is trapping me.

I used to be deeply intelligent, but now I feel like I'm getting dumber. I was able to use my research to improve so many people's lives. I wanted to build a career as a researcher so I could do this more often. I helped a woman get 60,000 dollars in debt forgiven. I used what I learned in emotional mastery to help my suicidal brother and several other victims who were either raped or suicidal. I even used political research to stop my family from fighting through aligning them with the facts. I saw beauty in being as impartial and objective as possible because of the person I would have to be to let go of my biases and so forth. I wanted to get a career in which I could use my research to continue improving people's lives, but I cannot afford a PhD.

I'm now starting to doubt the value of personal development, conventional wisdom concerning emotional mastery, and other things. In the end I have to make major life decisions based on circumstances, not ideals and passions. My passions have been crushed multiple times, so I know following your passion doesn't actually work.

The thing is I don't know what else to do if I leave actualized. The alternative seems to be just give up and be miserable forever. I don't know what else to do.

Sorry for being weird.

I mean you have a big ego, you spend a lot of energy in this horrible giant knot of rumination.

Maybe you should do other stuffs more chill to change your inner world's matter. 

Edited August 6 by Schizophonia

[eos_nyxia]

On 2024-08-01 at 8:27 PM, trenton said:

Is rape worse than death? How would you feel about being raped as a man or as a woman? How severe does rape have to be for you to kill yourself?

Personally, if I were raped it would be severely disturbing and traumatizing. I would be damaged forever, but maybe I would survive. I think I could live with being raped once, but probably not multiple times with no hope of escape. I would definitely rather die than be a sex slave. For me I think it depends on how brutal the rape is, how many times, and what kind of STDs for me to fear it more than death.

You might gain more insight from talking to people who have been through the traumas than anyone here telling you not to fixate on it because it's not beneficial for you as a personal entity, especially on an emotional level. Though it might be true, it's really just a similar type of rationale dressed up in "spiritual" or highfalutin language.  Don't care if you don't want to get your hands dirty, but why go through so much effort to rationalize your choice? At some point, the world does rely on people who care about something outside of themselves, who see the world as themselves and are willing to take action, to guide any sort of social change, particularly to social systems. The other side of this is that everyone must change for themselves; these are not mutually exclusive processes.

Though do you consider it to be a morbid curiosity? Outside of this particular bubble, there are people who would care that you care, because a lot of people outside the bubble don't actually care as well. Or it's a performative sort of caring.

Personally: death is death. It's intrinsically neutral to me. I am aware that dying is not actually painful after the point of no return. A quick death is more merciful and painless than a death that drags out for years and years IMO. But then, people are weird about death.

In my own experience, it was about 15-20 years to get out of the hole, and that's with actively and perpetually putting in the work to heal. I've seen at least a couple of other people describe it that way, though I have no idea if there's any universality to it. What has felt hopeless to me was being younger, as a teenager, and having people describe themselves as lifelong survivors on a perpetual "healing journey", whether it's of war-based trauma, CSA, or sexual assault. Like if it's going to be your baggage your whole life no matter what you do, what is even the point? 

Feel free to ask me anything you're curious about; I'm not that sensitive about direct questions.

Though personally, I consider CSA (especially by a family member) to be a different enough trauma than rape as a war crime. I don't mean the damage to your body and nervous system, but I mean the emotional qualities of it. For the latter, there are many first-hand accounts you can read. If you're curious, it's worth reading as many as you can in order to form a balanced perspective on it (or as many as you can stomach).

Edited August 6 by eos_nyxia

[Basman]

4 hours ago, trenton said:

@Basman I have been struggling to think of anytime when rape could possibly be justified. Not even AI could come up with any examples.

The first example I looked for was the unit 731 dilemma. But in that case the people held at gunpoint and forced to have sex with each other are mutual victims, thus it is two counts of rape. I thought The prisoners were being forced to rape people to save their lives, but they are not considered rapists. The military justified these actions as biological warfare necessary to defeat the enemy who would do the same. This operation killed 300000 innocent people.

The closest example to justified rape I can think of would be if it were done as part of an effort to sabotage an evil organization from within. This could include a situation in which someone is drafted into the Nazi military or coerced into becoming a terrorist in the hopes of saving their family who is being held hostage or maybe as an operation in which someone is trying to expose a sex trafficking ring to prevent future victims. In cases like these people often receive direct orders to rape people. From the point of view of the saboteur raping people becomes a survival strategy within an evil organization in the hopes of ultimately undermining these organizations leading to a safer and more just future. The problem with these situations is that it sounds like a stretch because it likely involves a lot of moral luck as the operations may fail, leading to more rape victims due to forced participation in evil organizations.

If these are not justified examples of rape, then I don't think rape is ever justified even under extreme conditions. It is only justified from the point of view of the rapist who thinks "she deserved to be raped" or thought that rape was a valid method of biological warfare to terrorize the civilian population into submission. Only from the point of view of a twisted and corrupt worldview is rape justified.

There are justified cases of rape in modern society, but it would be extremely rare.

The fact that we stigmatize rape as bad is sign of our level of development. We don't need it to survive anymore. But at some point in your ancestry, rape is why you exist today. Rape is a function of survival and common in nature.

[eos_nyxia]

23 hours ago, Basman said:

There are justified cases of rape in modern society, but it would be extremely rare.

The fact that we stigmatize rape as bad is sign of our level of development. We don't need it to survive anymore. But at some point in your ancestry, rape is why you exist today. Rape is a function of survival and common in nature.

You literally just summed up the naturalistic fallacy.

This doesn't just mean "nature is good" but also is in the vein of "nature is justified" and "all results of potential natural selection are better and are (or were) necessary, because it's natural selection".

[Basman]

1 hour ago, eos_nyxia said:

You literally just summed up the naturalistic fallacy.

This doesn't just mean "nature is good" but also is in the vein of "nature is justified" and "all results of potential natural selection are better and are (or were) necessary, because it's natural selection".

I'm not justifying rape morally. I'm merely trying to understand why it happens.

The problem with trying to understand behavior via ethics is that morality is inherently a self-referential system that works relative to a species relative needs and levels of development. Rape is unethical today because its bad for modern survival. There are social consequences for rape and people normally are horrified by it. But at one point in human history, barbarians would be elated at the chance to rape women who weren't part of their tribe most importantly due to a lack of social consequence. It wouldn't be seen as bad.

Ethics are relative and can't be trusted to fully understanding something. Just because something is bad doesn't mean it doesn't have a purpose if your willing to look. Incentive-based understanding explains what ethics pussy foots around due to social conventions.

[foofoobunny]

Quote

 But at one point in human history, barbarians would be elated at the chance to rape women who weren't part of their tribe most importantly due to a lack of social consequence. It wouldn't be seen as bad.

Rape wasn't seen as bad to the barbarians who did it to women who weren't part of their tribe, yes. But obviously it was bad to those who were dealt pain from that very act.

The idea of it being bad isn't just because it is inferred from morals or social landscape; it's that pain was dealt, thus it is regarded as bad to those who were dealt that pain.

Morals and ethics aside, you can't take into account the reasons behind rape yet omit the direct, physical consequences it has on the victims. 

Edited August 8 by foofoobunny

[eos_nyxia]

@Basman

There is an issue with people trying to say, with absolute certainty, how much of human behaviour is raw “biological wiring” and how much is pure socialization, as if there was always some clear, definite line dividing one from the other. There is probably not and it is an exceptionally hard thing to trace as causality rather than making loose links of causative association, if it is not already entirely impossible.

Asserting a definite link of causation appears to be very common from people with various agendas, in various ideological camps... and is based in what, exactly? Some narrative people invented about the Paleolithic area?

What about the people of Mohenjo-daro, were those people definitely rapists because some proportion of human males are always inclined to rape, or were peaceful people simply all wiped out and replaced with the ancestors of murderers, rapists, and opportunistic exploiters? What about the Neanderthals? If it’s not purely a raw biological impulse (divorced from the past), then how much of it is some amorphous factor like ancestral or inter-generational memory? (With the latter, take a look at how much CSA tends to reoccur in families where this is not just a learned behaviour, but magically and "mysteriously" skips generations.)

A lot of these narratives could go an which-way, really, and ought to be constructed carefully and not in a meme-like fashion where people co-opt the narrative for whatever specific personal agenda they have. Consider also that we are learning new details from anthropology about our paleolithic ancestors decade by decade.

Other than that, yea. Rape happens and did happen in nature. Female ducks evolved anti-rape vaginas, etc.

IMO rape is antithetical to our development as a social species, period. It is the literal definition of antisocial behaviour (unless, of course, society endorses or looks away from it in certain circumstances, with certain types of people who get othered).

Collective ethics serves a function: without collective ethics, social norms, and a degree of shaming, I question how many people would behave in a way which is either for the collective good, or at least does not actively destroy lives. There appears to be some sort of necessity to it, unfortunately, though it has its downsides. It is a prime motivator. It might (potentially) stop people who would unknowingly, carelessly rape, but it also makes intelligent people with sociopathic tendencies hide themselves better, instead of letting it all hang out in the open because they truly do not give a shit. That makes it hard for those who would be predated upon to avoid them, unfortunately.

However, there is no rule that says judgments or moral prioritization has to wholly influence what you are allowed to perceive, or are willing to perceive.

Edited August 8 by eos_nyxia

[Basman]

On 08/08/2024 at 9:09 AM, foofoobunny said:

Rape wasn't seen as bad to the barbarians who did it to women who weren't part of their tribe, yes. But obviously it was bad to those who were dealt pain from that very act.

The idea of it being bad isn't just because it is inferred from morals or social landscape; it's that pain was dealt, thus it is regarded as bad to those who were dealt that pain.

Morals and ethics aside, you can't take into account the reasons behind rape yet omit the direct, physical consequences it has on the victims. 

Yes you can. Survival doesn't work on what is "right" but what works. If you want to understand something, find its incentives. Consideration does not incentivize rape but it still happens, I.E. it doesn't matter how victims feel. This is not a moral argument, this is contemplating why rape happens.

It is only humans that treat the morals of their society as self-evident. But those morals only work to the degree that its enforced, I.E. morals are not self-evident nor are they inherently good. For a lot of people, what is good is what is good for them personally. Its hypocritical to think otherwise.

14 hours ago, eos_nyxia said:

@Basman

There is an issue with people trying to say, with absolute certainty, how much of human behaviour is raw “biological wiring” and how much is pure socialization, as if there was always some clear, definite line dividing one from the other. There is probably not and it is an exceptionally hard thing to trace as causality rather than making loose links of causative association, if it is not already entirely impossible.

Asserting a definite link of causation appears to be very common from people with various agendas, in various ideological camps... and is based in what, exactly? Some narrative people invented about the Paleolithic area?

What about the people of Mohenjo-daro, were those people definitely rapists because some proportion of human males are always inclined to rape, or were peaceful people simply all wiped out and replaced with the ancestors of murderers, rapists, and opportunistic exploiters? What about the Neanderthals? If it’s not purely a raw biological impulse (divorced from the past), then how much of it is some amorphous factor like ancestral or inter-generational memory? (With the latter, take a look at how much CSA tends to reoccur in families where this is not just a learned behaviour, but magically and "mysteriously" skips generations.)

A lot of these narratives could go an which-way, really, and ought to be constructed carefully and not in a meme-like fashion where people co-opt the narrative for whatever specific personal agenda they have. Consider also that we are learning new details from anthropology about our paleolithic ancestors decade by decade.

Other than that, yea. Rape happens and did happen in nature. Female ducks evolved anti-rape vaginas, etc.

IMO rape is antithetical to our development as a social species, period. It is the literal definition of antisocial behaviour (unless, of course, society endorses or looks away from it in certain circumstances, with certain types of people who get othered).

Collective ethics serves a function: without collective ethics, social norms, and a degree of shaming, I question how many people would behave in a way which is either for the collective good, or at least does not actively destroy lives. There appears to be some sort of necessity to it, unfortunately, though it has its downsides. It is a prime motivator. It might (potentially) stop people who would unknowingly, carelessly rape, but it also makes intelligent people with sociopathic tendencies hide themselves better, instead of letting it all hang out in the open because they truly do not give a shit. That makes it hard for those who would be predated upon to avoid them, unfortunately.

However, there is no rule that says judgments or moral prioritization has to wholly influence what you are allowed to perceive, or are willing to perceive.

Humanity as a species is not a collective. Humans form collectives which then compete with other collectives for survival. It is only with time and development that different collectives tend benefit more from cooperation or are conquered and we get higher order collectives. This when you see an expanded circle of concern.

It is no longer viable to exploit people from other groups with reckless abandon for the most part because of our globalized world. But that is only a relatively recent phenomena. Neither is that a quality inherent to base human behavior. If society collapses, humans will revert to exploiting others because its works. Does who don't do it will tend to be out competed in a lot of cases.

15 hours ago, eos_nyxia said:

However, there is no rule that says judgments or moral prioritization has to wholly influence what you are allowed to perceive, or are willing to perceive.

You can't understand evil through moralizations. Exploring why evil exists requires you to see why evil is good from the perspective of an evil-doer.

[Bobby_2021]

@trenton You have a great sense of empathy and compassion. Appreciate you going extraordinary lengths to understand the plight of human suffering. 

Most people wouldn't get this so don't bother too much about the negative comments. This post has been pretty enlightening imo.

[Schizophonia]

10 hours ago, Jade123 said:

@trenton

   Do you like pudding? I heard it's cheaper to get when you're in the UK.

What an hellish country.

Edited August 11 by Schizophonia

[eos_nyxia]

I'm not disagreeing with you and you're not telling me anything I don't already know, with what you said.

On 2024-08-09 at 7:59 AM, Basman said:

You can't understand evil through moralizations. Exploring why evil exists requires you to see why evil is good from the perspective of an evil-doer.

This especially.

Quite a few people who have been raped, molested, etc. have spent ungodly amounts of time and energy putting themselves in the positions of the perp in order to understand, well aware that the reverse happens much more rarely with perps. 

Often it's an unavoidable part of working your shit out, sometimes it's an attempt at preventing something similar from happening in the future, and for everyone else, it's moreso a morbid, compulsive curiosity or a luxury.

Edited August 13 by eos_nyxia