too mean to do to an ex?
Posted by asleep on a sunbeam on Dec 27, 2009 · Member since Aug 2009 · 287 posts
the site was a set of pictures of someones ex.
Is that too mean? too horrible, to put up?
for the sake of a reader I've summarised my current line of thinking here:
kmk is clicking on this topic really contributing to his disgusting-ness? if so we need to get it off vegweb!
Oh no, there used to be a link in his original post. He took it out. It's fine now.
This thread reminds me why I don't do relationships.
The best revenge on anyone, be it an ex, an abuser, or a previous BFF who turned out to be a twofaced snake in the grass, is living well. Getting past the hurt and moving on and living the rest of your life.
Every time we step back into revengeful behaviour, the person who hurt us wins again. Because that means they're still inside your head, controlling your responses.
What??? What happened to old skool get backs? Like keying the car, slashing tires, breaking windows, throwing there stuff out? Personally posting something that was sent to you and was meant just for you is wrong.
The best revenge on anyone, be it an ex, an abuser, or a previous BFF who turned out to be a twofaced snake in the grass, is living well. Getting past the hurt and moving on and living the rest of your life.
Every time we step back into revengeful behaviour, the person who hurt us wins again. Because that means they're still inside your head, controlling your responses.
yeah, I was gonna say living well is the best revenge, and besides, karma is a bitch.....what comes around goes around!
The best revenge on anyone, be it an ex, an abuser, or a previous BFF who turned out to be a twofaced snake in the grass, is living well. Getting past the hurt and moving on and living the rest of your life.
Every time we step back into revengeful behaviour, the person who hurt us wins again. Because that means they're still inside your head, controlling your responses.
yeah, I was gonna say living well is the best revenge, and besides, karma is a bitch.....what comes around goes around!
Agreed!
Holler.
i really never liked this guy anyway! seriously psycho... and btw i don't think he ever makes sense... get off vegweb seriously
kmk is clicking on this topic really contributing to his disgusting-ness? if so we need to get it off vegweb! i would never show explicit pictures i had/ have of anyone... i always delete them if the relationship is done with... why would you keep them AND share them with friends? so disturbing and disgusting... maybe it is a boy thing? i know i would never do that!
I think I'll start here.
Do you think for some reason I will take your order to get off veg web seriously? Or do you think by articulating your dislike, perhaps hate, for me is going to make me feel bad? I mean that seems to be the reason you were posting.
Personally I thought it was funny, other people disagreed, I took the link down.
Furthermore "maybe it is a boy thing".
To put it bluntly you can fuck right off and take your generalising sexist remarks and shove them up your arse.
Have a nice day.
http://images.contentreserve.com/ImageType-100/0128-1/%7B78F655C3-CE55-4384-BB07-A0A99EA06DA8%7DImg100.jpg
My main reason is because I don't want to burn bridges with my ex like that.
I'm a little surprised if you can't see the difference in application. You don't take an active role in being raped as far as I can tell?
And you appear to be nitpicking for the sake of argument. I see the parallel at actively agreeing to marry someone whom you believe loves you and trusting that they will do you no harm, to find out down the road they will rape you within your married relationship. This very closely mirrors being close enough to someone to agree to take compromising pictures of each other, only to have that trust breached in the future when they decide to distribute the pictures. To use your letter examples which you appear to be fond of, focusing on the act of a not being the same as c is not appropriate when you need to be focusing on the composite act of abc being the same as abc.
First perhaps it's best to admit I may not have articulated things very clearly at first, or even written things I did not meant to (I'll check my posts after replying to others on here).
What I'm saying is, if you go outside with your wallet, You are responsible for the safety of your wallet. It is not your fault if someone takes your wallet, but it is your fault if you put the wallet in danger. Whether or not is it stolen.
If you are raped, and you have actively put yourself in danger, then your a responsible for your safety, is up to you, and only you, to not put yourself in a dangerous position. However that doesn't make you responsible if someone rapes you for their actions. You are responsible for putting yourself in danger, and they for taking advantage of the situation.
So if you get married to X, you are still responsible for your own safety. Your own actions. Not other peoples. You have made a fault if you've compromised your safety. If you actively seek someone out who turns out to be bad for you you've at some point made an error in judgement.
Hypothetically if you did literally everything to protect yourself and didn't let other priorities interferer with this (which is rare if not impossible) then perhaps you would not be at fault. However in reality when does this ever happen? We take risks in life because the pay offs are nice, but sometimes things backfire.
http://images.contentreserve.com/ImageType-100/0128-1/%7B78F655C3-CE55-4384-BB07-A0A99EA06DA8%7DImg100.jpg
:-D ::)
The best revenge on anyone, be it an ex, an abuser, or a previous BFF who turned out to be a twofaced snake in the grass, is living well. Getting past the hurt and moving on and living the rest of your life.
Every time we step back into revengeful behaviour, the person who hurt us wins again. Because that means they're still inside your head, controlling your responses.
Which goes hand in hand with "if you want to annoy your enemies, learn to love them".
What??? What happened to old skool get backs? Like keying the car, slashing tires, breaking windows, throwing there stuff out? Personally posting something that was sent to you and was meant just for you is wrong.
Why is it okay to damage their possessions but not post sensitive information on the internet?
Moving on, if you put your trust in someone that will remain your responsibility, if they choose to spread around what you trusted them with that is their responsibility. As it stands it looks like the responsibility is split 50/50.
I'm not saying expect your partner to breach that trust, but if it does happen, it happens, and if you didn't want it to happen you shouldn't have opted in to give that person such intimate details of your life. People make mistakes, people trust people they later regret having trusted, but they actively did something.
My personal opinion is that if a did trust b and b really did post around sensitive information then b is twat. But that doesn't make a exempt from being responsibility for putting herself on the line.
No-one is forcing anyone else to be in a relationship or trust others, it's all a personal choice. We're condemned to be free.
That's just way too close to the "asking for it" point of view for my liking. That's like saying that whenever someone is the victim of manipulation, emotional abuse, blackmail or worse in a relationship they are 50% responsible because by trusting their partner they've put themselves on the line. It is never acceptable to exploit someone. There is no "consensual" exploitation. It is by definition an unequal process whereby one person seeks to gain at the cost of another.
Your theory is akin to implying that if a man didn't want to get robbed, he shouldn't have left his house with his wallet in his pocket. Sure, the pickpocket stole the money, but the man chose to put it in his wallet, right?
It's like suggesting that if a woman suffers marital rape, she should be jointly accountable because hey, she married him!
By positing that our fictitious Ms. A is jointly responsible when Mr. B posts her intimate pictures online, you diminish the severity of Mr. B's actions. Think for a moment about how utterly violated you would feel if your ex-partner spread around pictures of that nature. It's a vicious thing to do, specifically designed to hurt the person involved, when, as Fufuberry so elegantly expressed, the pictures were almost certainly "a gift given out of intimacy".
Stop trying to extrapolate this situation into some kind of philosophical exploration.
By marrying someone that has nothing to do with rape.
I'm in no way saying that if you get raped it's partially your fault, that doesn't fit in with what I've said.
With the pick pocket scenario you have gone out putting your wallet at a greater risk.
I wouldn't call it asking for it.
I'm not saying the person who does something you don't like isn't responsible for what they've done.
If someone does post something nasty about me, you're right, that would upset me. However that doesn't detract from what I've said. Just because you don't like the consequences of something doesn't make it wrong.
"Stop trying to extrapolate this situation into some kind of philosophical exploration."-why?
stupid mistake in this post.
Probably best to correct it.
It's not your fault if someone tries to rape you.
It's your fault if you've put yourself in a position where they can do it. But not that they are trying to do it.
I find this whole thread very annoying and confusing.
My 2 cents:
My racy pics are always without my face. always. :)
how does one put themselves in a position that makes it okay for them to be raped?
I might have missed a post but where does it say on this thread that it's okay for anyone to be raped?
how does one put themselves in a position that makes it okay for them to be raped?
I might have missed a post but where does it say on this thread that it's okay for anyone to be raped?
Implying that someone puts themselves at risk is pretty close to diminishing rape as a crime and exonerating the rapist. You'll see this way of thinking a lot in court cases and it's a very, very fine line. It taps into the mentality that men can't help themselves and therefore women should modify their behaviour.
"Of course, he did a terrible thing but if she'd been more responsible/less drunk/wearing more clothes..."
Additionally, you will find through a little research that the majority of rapes are perpetrated by someone the victim already knows, often in their own homes or another familiar place. The stereotype of the bad man waiting in the alley is a minority situation, and the consequence of the rapist's intent, not the victim's actions.
I appreciate that you're probably not intending to outright blame victims, but your attitude is certainly toeing that line and I would suggest that you do some research before you attempt to pass judgement.
I might have missed a post but where does it say on this thread that it's okay for anyone to be raped?
BP is talking about this post you made
It's not your fault if someone tries to rape you.
It's your fault if you've put yourself in a position where they can do it. But not that they are trying to do it.
how does one put themselves in a position that makes it okay for them to be raped?
I might have missed a post but where does it say on this thread that it's okay for anyone to be raped?
Implying that someone puts themselves at risk is pretty close to diminishing rape as a crime and exonerating the rapist. You'll see this way of thinking a lot in court cases and it's a very, very fine line. It taps into the mentality that men can't help themselves and therefore women should modify their behaviour.
"Of course, he did a terrible thing but if she'd been more responsible/less drunk/wearing more clothes..."
Additionally, you will find through a little research that the majority of rapes are perpetrated by someone the victim already knows, often in their own homes or another familiar place. The stereotype of the bad man waiting in the alley is a minority situation, and the consequence of the rapist's intent, not the victim's actions.
I appreciate that you're probably not intending to outright blame victims, but your attitude is certainly toeing that line and I would suggest that you do some research before you attempt to pass judgement.
In no way am I saying that rape is the fault of the women though. Unless she is the rapist (it's rare but it can happen).
What I'm saying is that if she puts herself in danger, it's her fault that she's in a compromised position.
Because clearly some fault of judgement must have happened.
If you marry someone who rapes you, you've mis-judged who they are, you've had a fault in your judgement.
That in no way excuses the person who tries to rape you.
I can't think of any excuse for rape off the top of my head, apart from perhaps (and I'm not sure I would say it is an excuse) it in some way being the only way to stop a million babies being X'd or Y'd. But I can't think how there would be a direct relationship between the two in the first place, and if I went into something like that it'd be as petty as the whole "you've vegan? so if you were on a desert island" (at which point I generally start aiming my imaginary shotgun at them).
Anyway, back on topic.
You marry X.
X tries to rape you.
You have had an error in judgement about who they are/will be.
This has no baring on them trying to take advantage of your error in judgement.
They have tried to do something which violates your rights, you may have put yourself in the situation, and it's partially (perhaps fully) your fault your in that situation.
But it's not your fault that the situation is how it is with X trying to rape you.
Like I said before, I can't ever imagine rape being excusable
Edit:
I looked very briefly into the whole rape scene (in a law, court case context, not in the context of talking to rapists/victims) and found that a stupidly small % of rapes were reported to the police and the reason was a stupidly small % were convicted for the rape.
Personally I disagree with the way the law functions in most ways, and think rehabilitation is better than punishment or retribution. I'm against the prison system as it stands. But find it hypocritical of the law to not convict/punish them by it's own standards.
To say on the basis of what I've said that someone shouldn't be convicted, is moronic at best.
I know that's not what you're saying, but I'm trying to make clear that anyone who does say that (and you've said many courts do, which I've heard about as well) is something I very strongly disagree with.
sunbeam, the fault in your reasoning is that you seem to feel there are certain things that a woman should look for making her judgment about a future partner. Clues that would tell her that he is a rapist. There aren't. There is no such thing as a fault in judgment about whether someone will rape you, because there are no defining characteristics of a rapist. Like catski said, rapists are usually familiar people. There is not much a woman can do to prevent someone close to her--someone whom she perhaps lives with, sleeps with, trusts, etc--from raping her.
Furthermore, regardless of any perceived error in judgment on the woman's part, the error in judgment on the man's part is obscenely higher. The decision to rape someone is one of the hugest errors in judgment that can be committed, and it far out-shadows the "you should have known this was coming" aspect that you are so keen on.
I find your attitude atrocious, and it pretty much epitomizes the attitudes that lead to and justify rape in the first place.
sunbeam, the fault in your reasoning is that you seem to feel there are certain things that a woman should look for making her judgment about a future partner. Clues that would tell her that he is a rapist. There aren't. There is no such thing as a fault in judgment about whether someone will rape you, because there are no defining characteristics of a rapist. Like catski said, rapists are usually familiar people. There is not much a woman can do to prevent someone close to her--someone whom she perhaps lives with, sleeps with, trusts, etc--from raping her.
Furthermore, regardless of any perceived error in judgment on the woman's part, the error in judgment on the man's part is obscenely higher. The decision to rape someone is one of the hugest errors in judgment that can be committed, and it far out-shadows the "you should have known this was coming" aspect that you are so keen on.
I find your attitude atrocious, and it pretty much epitomizes the attitudes that lead to and justify rape in the first place.
Ditto.
Pages