User Tag List

First 91718192021 Last

Results 181 to 190 of 278

  1. #181
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    He plead guilty in the first place, so the question of guilt is not relevant in this case. He dodged sentencing, not prosecution

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Quite simply, I think that ideas like "justice" and "fairness" are outdated concepts. We shouldn't have a "justice" system so much as a "solution" system. Essentially, we should act less in terms of retribution and imposing a fixed framework of rules, and more in terms of "how can we act in this situation to create the most benefit for everyone involved." Basically, we can have judges decide on a case by case basis what to do when someone acts against the interests of another individual. We could enforce it, it's just that enforcement would have to be subjective.
    Humans need a level of predictability in their lives, as we do best when there is a pattern to be followed. When there is no predictability, people think things are happening in an unfair way. When that happens, the social structure begins to break down, because trust is not engendered. The American legal system actually works in a much more similar way to your idea than you think, because it's a common law system where judges have broad authority to impose consequences. However, when it comes to issues of fact, there have to be hard standards of what is something and what isn't.

    There's such a concept as de minimis non curat lex, that states that the law does not deal with trifles - consequently, a judge can dismiss prosecution if he thinks it's ridiculous that the case is being brought in the first place. As you can see, this is a lot of leeway. However, the principle of stare decisis is a powerful check on that power - there has to be predictability.

    The thing about justice is, it's really a human construct. It's not real, it's not something that physically exists. There's no universal law like gravity saying that consequences must eventually occur, etc. It's just an idea people have about how things should work. It being an idea and assumption, we can choose to operate upon a different idea. And I think perhaps we should.
    No, but the reactions humans have to certain kinds of behavior do physically exist. They are a material consequence of our evolution. Therefore, certain social rules are literally hard-wired into us. There are some things, most prominently incest, that all societies are going to deem wrong and try to counter, because we're wired to always think that is wrong.

    It's also unwise to underestimate the power of memes - they're pretty potent.

    I don't know, maybe justice is kind of a weird T thing I just don't "get." It seems pointlessly impersonal and petty/exacting, honestly.
    That's the thing - it's predictable. It's something a people can latch onto in a highly variable world. Most people aren't as OK with uncertainty as N-users are.

    There are several possible solutions, but the first one that comes to mind is...

    Monitor female children more closely, and make sure they're kept away from males over the age of 17 as much as possible. They shouldn't be allowed to associate closely enough for that to happen in the first place. I don't know why they let them associate so closely, anyway, it just looks like a crime waiting to happen. I know it always creeps me out when I see an older male anywhere near an underage girl.

    There are probably better solutions, but I'm not as good at this as I'd like to be...
    The problem there is that A. Teenage girls have very active sex drives and those drives are generally oriented toward older men in their 20s and B. The level of oppression required for this is pretty undesirable. People have a tendency to push the boundaries when they don't like what's going on.

    Oh, no, that's where YOU want to end it. That's not where it actually ends. You just have to know that someone brought this up so that they would look good in the eyes of the public for prosecuting a famous person. If it hadn't been for that, I'm sure it never would have come back to trial.
    No, they brought it up because it's their job. The reasons it's their job are the various things we've mentioned previously. Most people haven't even thought of Roman Polanski once in the last year. However, we do have to defend our system of equity almost constantly, as without it, society crumbles.

  2. #182
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Humans need a level of predictability in their lives, as we do best when there is a pattern to be followed. When there is no predictability, people think things are happening in an unfair way. When that happens, the social structure begins to break down, because trust is not engendered. The American legal system actually works in a much more similar way to your idea than you think, because it's a common law system where judges have broad authority to impose consequences. However, when it comes to issues of fact, there have to be hard standards of what is something and what isn't.
    You're probably right. That's probably why I find that people demand so much predictability/preparation and try to trap you into particular ways of doing things that may not match your goals.
    There's such a concept as de minimis non curat lex, that states that the law does not deal with trifles - consequently, a judge can dismiss prosecution if he thinks it's ridiculous that the case is being brought in the first place. As you can see, this is a lot of leeway. However, the principle of stare decisis is a powerful check on that power - there has to be predictability.
    Okay, that's good.

    No, but the reactions humans have to certain kinds of behavior do physically exist. They are a material consequence of our evolution. Therefore, certain social rules are literally hard-wired into us. There are some things, most prominently incest, that all societies are going to deem wrong and try to counter, because we're wired to always think that is wrong.

    It's also unwise to underestimate the power of memes - they're pretty potent.
    Really? I don't necessarily think incest is wrong if the person is over 18, but... eh. Maybe I have a few screws loose and things are more weakly wired into me than into other people.

    Do you know where I could find more information about these hard-wired rules?

    That's the thing - it's predictable. It's something a people can latch onto in a highly variable world. Most people aren't as OK with uncertainty as N-users are.
    Agreed. I actually dislike uncertainty as well, but it seems like I'm much more capable of figuring out a new ruleset quickly, and feeling like I have certainty even with change.
    The problem there is that A. Teenage girls have very active sex drives and those drives are generally oriented toward older men in their 20s and B. The level of oppression required for this is pretty undesirable. People have a tendency to push the boundaries when they don't like what's going on.
    Really? I always kind of thought it was the other way around... that you had perverted older men trying to be around teenage girls. I kind of don't understand why teenage girls would want to put themselves in such an obviously dangerous position, and especially not be... driven to do it. Why are they attracted to men in their 20s rather than their own age? That doesn't make much sense...
    No, they brought it up because it's their job. The reasons it's their job are the various things we've mentioned previously. Most people haven't even thought of Roman Polanski once in the last year. However, we do have to defend our system of equity almost constantly, as without it, society crumbles.
    Well, that's debatable, but until I can invent a better system than simple personal equity, I suppose we'll have to settle for it. You win for now.

  3. #183
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    You're probably right. That's probably why I find that people demand so much predictability/preparation and try to trap you into particular ways of doing things that may not match your goals.
    Subjectivity isn't the way of the world. That's all.

    Really? I don't necessarily think incest is wrong if the person is over 18, but... eh. Maybe I have a few screws loose and things are more weakly wired into me than into other people.
    You'd be in the far, far minority on that one. We have certain behaviors as a fail-safe to ensure genetic robustness.

    Do you know where I could find more information about these hard-wired rules?
    Evolution of morality - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a good place to start some of the discussions

    Agreed. I actually dislike uncertainty as well, but it seems like I'm much more capable of figuring out a new ruleset quickly, and feeling like I have certainty even with change.
    Yeah, it's even more of a particularly NP sort of deal. Which as you know, makes it ridiculously rare.

    Really? I always kind of thought it was the other way around... that you had perverted older men trying to be around teenage girls. I kind of don't understand why teenage girls would want to put themselves in such an obviously dangerous position, and especially not be... driven to do it. Why are they attracted to men in their 20s rather than their own age? That doesn't make much sense...
    You do - but it's not like they go after those girls for no reason. Isn't it usually the case that the "queen bee" in high school is often dating an older guy?

    Well, that's debatable, but until I can invent a better system than simple personal equity, I suppose we'll have to settle for it. You win for now.
    What's bad about equity, anyway?

  4. #184
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    There are several possible solutions, but the first one that comes to mind is...

    Monitor female children more closely, and make sure they're kept away from males over the age of 17 as much as possible.
    So only males over the age of 17 are capable of rape? Why don't you add "black" to "males over the age of 17", that way you'll have a complete package (racism, sexism, and ageism)
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

  5. #185
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Oh, no, that's where YOU want to end it. That's not where it actually ends. You just have to know that someone brought this up so that they would look good in the eyes of the public for prosecuting a famous person. If it hadn't been for that, I'm sure it never would have come back to trial.
    This seems like this is your strangely biased personal opinion. The man evaded trial for rape. Even if he weren't famous, if he had been caught, he would go through a similar thing. Except without other famous people trying to defend him.

    He isn't above the law. I don't care who he is. No one should be allowed to be above the law.

  6. #186
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    So only males over the age of 17 are capable of rape? Why don't you add "black" to "males over the age of 17", that way you'll have a complete package (racism, sexism, and ageism)
    Well, it's really only considered rape most of the time when a male over the age of 17 does... "that" to a younger girl. My idea was specifically to prevent statutory rape, which is what this case was about. Basically, I think prevention is more important than personal punishment. If they're both underage, it's just bad form and reckless behavior their parents should deal with.

    And what are you talking about with "sexism"? I don't see how I'm discriminating against women with that statement.

    I certainly don't see any reason to add "black" to that list. Race has nothing to do with it. But I'm sure you were kidding.

  7. #187
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Well, it's really only considered rape most of the time when a male over the age of 17 does... "that" to a younger girl. If he forced himself on her, that's rape at any age, and should be dealt with more harshly. My idea was specifically to prevent statutory rape, which is what this case was about. If they're both underage, it's just bad form and extremely reckless and immature behavior their parents should deal with.

    And what are you talking about with "sexism"? I don't see how I'm discriminating against women with that statement.

    I certainly don't see any reason to add "black" to that list. Race has nothing to do with it. But I'm sure you were kidding.
    This case isn't about stauatory rape. You are misinformed. It is about rape. What Polanski did is date rape, even if she were an adult. He drugged her and kept performing sexual acts on her after she said no.

  8. #188
    Revelation Lauren Ashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    3,067

    Default

    Lol. Athenian. He plead guilty to the crime, now he is facing the consequences. There is nothing to argue.

  9. #189
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marmalade.sunrise View Post
    This case isn't about stauatory rape. You are misinformed. It is about rape. What Polanski did is date rape, even if she were an adult. He drugged her and kept performing sexual acts on her after she said no.
    Oh.

    Well, then I suppose they DO need to do something, although I still very much think they should have found a way to do it 30 years ago. It's ridiculous that they took 30 years to figure out how to get him detained. Seriously, they obviously weren't even trying very hard until recently.

    I do think it's sketchy to just say "no one should be above the law." I can easily think of situations where people SHOULD be above the law. But this isn't one of them. I'm still rather disturbed by this whole creepy "Ooh! Consequences are important! The law should apply to everyone in exactly the same way!" mentality. It seems short-sighted to reify justice and consequences the way people tend to. It's like they deliberately ignore the fact that many things about reality and life are inherently unjust, and continue to live and decide things as if they were.

    Isn't there some way they could have pursued this more quietly rather than having it all out in the open, though? Must these things always be so public?

  10. #190
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Athenian200 View Post
    Well, it's really only considered rape most of the time when a male over the age of 17 does... "that" to a younger girl. My idea was specifically to prevent statutory rape, which is what this case was about.
    FYI, an adult woman having sex with an underaged male is also considered statutory rape.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

Similar Threads

  1. Over- and underconcentration
    By UnitOfPopulation in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-21-2007, 07:58 PM
  2. ENFP, over here!
    By Hexis in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 07-16-2007, 06:53 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO