Why does the Christian God treat women as inferior to men?

[TruthSeeker0]

3 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

Humour is a known emotional coping/release mechanism. Humour can decrease the apparent power of a perpretator. It can offer positive detachment. That is why it is not impossible to think it would be useful. Did you watch the short video of the female comedians talking about this issue of rape jokes? Many ex cult and ex religious people joke about their period in the religion for example. 

        In that logic, anything can be used to justify anything so why speak at all ? If someone uses a joke as an excuse to justify violence that person would be violent anyway because he would find any rationalisation. So the whole responsability relies on the violent person not on the jokes some people made. I do not think I and no one in fact is responsabile for the gross misinterpretation and misuse of  language by people with clear background issues. I talk under the assumption , if not proven otherwise, I am not talking with a violent psychopath. This because mist people are not violent psychopaths.

    It is like saying a rape victim deserved to be raped because she was wearing a miniskirt. Neither the miniskirt nor the joke enables sexual assault. A psyche that searches will accept any excuse is the problem. 

      I mean is a knife production shop responsible for homicides made with their knives?

     Anyway things have gotten a lottle off topic

If you are under the impression that jokes about violence against women among men have zero influence on the behavior of men who are looking to justify the use of violence, then you're a tad deluded. 

 

Can you not accept that both of us made points? Why does one person need to be correct and the other wrong? 

 

I was simply pointing out that what you may think of as innocent light joking can have consequences. 

[Guest freedwoman]

3 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

If you are under the impression that jokes about violence against women among men have zero influence on the behavior of men who are looking to justify the use of violence, then you're a tad deluded. 

 

Can you not accept that both of us made points? Why does one person need to be correct and the other wrong? 

 

I was simply pointing out that what you may think of as innocent light joking can have consequences. 

Some big guy joked by saying he raped me and laughed! I shoved him on his back! His head hit the corner of another desk. He was trapped and I'm so mad at myself for not pummeling him. Then I turned him in. Come to find out he is a sex offender. Multiple other women came forth about how he sexually abused them. I wasn't the only one. Him and his "Rape" jokes my ass. Never funny. Never acceptable. I would have busted his balls if he dared touch me!  

[Guest freedwoman]

I would have made him look like this or worse if he tried. 

 

https://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/news/a50183/woman-fights-attacker/

 

 

[Guest freedwoman]

Basically don't touch me. These rapists got what they deserved. Knowing me I'd do the same thing. 

 

"Woman cuts off attempted

rapist’s penis | Inquirer News" https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1226768/woman-cuts-off-attempted-rapists-penis-after-he-breaks-into-her-home/amp

 

"Turkish woman awaits trial after beheading her alleged rapist - CNN" https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/05/world/europe/turkey-rape-beheading/index.html

[Guest freedwoman]

Anyway. Better leave this thread. Don't wanna break forum rules or get banned. 

 

[Myrkhoos]

20 hours ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

If you are under the impression that jokes about violence against women among men have zero influence on the behavior of men who are looking to justify the use of violence, then you're a tad deluded. 

 

Can you not accept that both of us made points? Why does one person need to be correct and the other wrong? 

 

I was simply pointing out that what you may think of as innocent light joking can have consequences. 

I did NOT say that. Please follow my point. I said the responsability lies solely with the agressor. No matter the so called minute influence that can have. As I said, in my argument, such a person would find a reason anyway, so something would make him snap. Consider someone who has a disease, that reacts to people with red hair and makes him  violent. On the street he sees a person with red hair. He then becomes violent. Is the person with the red hair responsible for that violence? No. Did that red hair influence him? Yes. So some jokes might influence someone to do a violent act. However, if the jokes had no clear intent of causing that, the sole responsability lies with the person enacting the violent act. We cannot be held responsible for the minute influences our behaviour, when grossly misinterpreted , has on someone. I have not met anyone saying he became a violent man because of some jokes. 

    I think you are tad bit deluded if you think jokes have THAT much influence anyway, that they can CAUSE violent behaviour or seriously augment it. 

 

I think your point is flawed. It is not about what I can or cannot accept or the general view of the fact that both parties can be right, or wrong. I think in this particular case your point is wrong. 

 

This is the last response I have on this subject here. I wanted to end earlier, but since you replied directly, I wanted to give one final answe. If you want to discuss further, gladly open a thread in the lion's den about responsability and influence. 

[Guest freedwoman]

Ah come on boys and girls lets be nice to each other. We're adults not children. Too much testosterone poisoning and estrogen toxicity around here! 

[TruthSeeker0]

3 hours ago, Myrkhoos said:

I did NOT say that. Please follow my point. I said the responsability lies solely with the agressor. No matter the so called minute influence that can have. As I said, in my argument, such a person would find a reason anyway, so something would make him snap. Consider someone who has a disease, that reacts to people with red hair and makes him  violent. On the street he sees a person with red hair. He then becomes violent. Is the person with the red hair responsible for that violence? No. Did that red hair influence him? Yes. So some jokes might influence someone to do a violent act. However, if the jokes had no clear intent of causing that, the sole responsability lies with the person enacting the violent act. We cannot be held responsible for the minute influences our behaviour, when grossly misinterpreted , has on someone. I have not met anyone saying he became a violent man because of some jokes. 

    I think you are tad bit deluded if you think jokes have THAT much influence anyway, that they can CAUSE violent behaviour or seriously augment it. 

 

I think your point is flawed. It is not about what I can or cannot accept or the general view of the fact that both parties can be right, or wrong. I think in this particular case your point is wrong. 

 

This is the last response I have on this subject here. I wanted to end earlier, but since you replied directly, I wanted to give one final answe. If you want to discuss further, gladly open a thread in the lion's den about responsability and influence. 

I didn't claim they CAUSE behavior, I indicated that they influence it. A big difference. 

 

You have your opinion, I'll have mine.