How is this Biden border policy - like the Trump policy before it - even an option? I can't see how it's even marginally legal. According to an expert on refugee law:
Is the policy legal?
In 2019, the Trump administration proposed a rule very similar to that put forth by Biden, prohibiting asylum for migrants who did not first apply in countries of transit. The courts struck down the policy for violating the 1980 Refugee Act, which guarantees the right of all migrants who reach the United States to apply for asylum.
A bipartisan Congress passed the Refugee Act to bring the U.S. into compliance with its international obligations under the U.N.‘s 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol, which prohibit returning refugees to any country where their lives or freedom would be threatened.
In striking down the Trump-era rule, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals pointed out that the Refugee Act is very specific about the circumstances under which the government can deny asylum for failure to apply in a transit country. Under the act’s “safe third country” provision, that can happen only if the transit country is safe and has both a robust asylum system and a formal treaty with the United States agreeing to safe third-country status. The court found the Trump administration lacked all three conditions for imposing such a ban.
The Biden rule is somewhat different from Trump’s. It does not apply to individuals who schedule an asylum appointment at ports of entry through the CBP One app.
But this does not make the policy lawful. The Refugee Act expressly permits asylum seekers to access protection anywhere along the border – not just at ports of entry. And it does not require appointments to be made in advance.
In addition, CBP One has been plagued with significant technical problems, preventing many from even making appointments, and has raised serious equity and privacy concerns.
And
more importantly, there is no getting around the fact that most
countries of transit neither are safe for migrants nor have functioning
asylum systems.
=========
This is just wrong and I don't understand anyone going along with it. Seeking asylum is a basic human right.
39 comments:
Sorry, here's the link:
https://www.govexec.com/management/2023/02/bidens-border-crackdown-explained-refugee-law-expert-looks-legality-and-impact-new-asylum-rule/383350/
Marshal said (in a now-deleted comment because of the childish vulgarities and ineptly boorish and rude nature of the comment) that he disagrees with the 1980 Refugee Act - without giving any reason more than it was BS and "it likely never anticipated what we now face along our border thanks to Biden and other open borders..." supporters. Again, with no support for what any of that means or why we should care about his opposition. He seemed to object that people could say they're fleeing danger when he doubts it. Again, based on nothing, just an empty claim.
Marshal complained that progressive and rational people are concerned about actual white supremacy and nationalism in our nation and then asked why any refugees would want to come here. Ignoring the point that self-determination is a human right.
Marshal said he didn't care about other nations offering asylum or doing so in a way that wasn't safe for refugees, that it's all about we who are here (read, "the white people like me who are here and don't want them here...") and ended with an appeal to national sovereignty, ignoring that a nation that is sovereign but turns away refugees is not a good nation. Marshal also ignores that we are HURTING for employees and WE would benefit from more workers coming here, if he's wanting to be just selfish about it and ignore the human rights side of things.
Marshal, you can make comments like this if you want, BUT I'm fully expecting that you'll lose the vulgarities and hateful talk. I also expect that you'll give SUPPORT for any claims you make.
This will be at least a reasonably adult blog with rational respectful conversation.
Facts and myths about immigration...
https://www.carnegie.org/our-work/article/15-myths-about-immigration-debunked/
That last was me.
And Marshal, I get that you personally don't care about the laws (and common sense) that ensure as a basic human right the liberty to seek asylum, but it IS the law. If nothing else, we need to adhere to the law. Change it if you can and don't like it, but I can't fathom WHO is opposed to people seeking asylum? WHO is opposed to people leaving an impoverished area to try to find a less impoverished area to be able to support themselves?
The right to self-determination is a basic human right.
Can you at least affirm that much?
If the place - the nation - where you live became dangerous and you couldn't live there and feed yourself, would YOU want the freedom to move - immediately! - to some place that is safe and where you could feed yourself?
This is a very basic Golden Rule, Do Unto Others, CHRISTIAN tenet, is it not?
1951, 1967, 1980. Nothing about those laws address the 21st century and the next 100 years of climate crisis and the global civil strife that will result. The right to asylum from violent oppression is indeed a right.
But we must convene and build global partnerships to share the unprecedented and burgeoning burdens.
We should be spending millions of dollars in combined national partnerships to assist Ukraine. This is a clear moment to defend freedom over fear.
We should build far more robust international - and here, interstate - means to carefully adjudicate and care for the refugee and muster support for nations experiencing long term environmental disaster.
Marshal continues with his vulgar and obscene and disgusting attacks and refusal to answer questions, so they were all deleted. But Marshal did something further this time: He included a threat of violence. Marshal, you should know that I've saved your comments including screenshots of what you've said, so that IF you ever tried to act out your threats of violence, I have it on record.
Not that I take your impotent, childish threats seriously. Racists, conservative extremists and their allies tend to be all talk and not serious about their threats. They tend to thrive on attempted bullying and threats but aren't stoopid enough to act out their threats. But as we regularly see, one of these nut jobs actually act out the violence that lives in their hearts.
Here's the threat (which, in his seething rage and idiot incoherence, I believe he got mixed up)...
Marshal:
"Just so you know with whom you're dealing...
if I ever hear that your wife or kids are seriously harmed...
or worse...by an illegal alien,
I'm going to find you."
Of course, we reasonable, decent citizens are MUCH more threatened by white conservative extremists (like the deviant who's posting this attempted threat) than we are by immigrants, according to the data. It's not for naught that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies list white extremists/nationalists as the more serious threat to decent citizens.
In their furious inane rage at being "replaced" and having "them" "take the country" from "us good conservative citizens," they sometimes lose their minds and act out their violent fantasies.
And here, I suspect what he was trying to say was that if "illegal aliens" (ie, migrants from another nation who by and large are good, decent people not prone to waste their time with threats of violence against innocent people) were to hurt someone in HIS family (not mine), but who knows what the insane mean when they write their revenge fantasies?
Marshal, get help. You're acting insane and violent and that's not good for anyone.
All of Marshall's mouth-foaming nonsense is summed up in this exchange. I said...
"The right to self-determination is a basic human right."
Marshal vented/responded...
Not when it conflicts with mine or my fellow Americans'.
Your self-determination does NOT trump anyone else's. YOU are free to live where you live or move to some place else and IF you are starving or threatened where you live, then it's rational to move somewhere else. But regardless, YOU are free to make that self-determining call for yourself.
And doing unto others as you'd have done to yourself, OTHER people can make that decision for THEMSELVES.
White conservative US citizens do not get to trump the right of others just because they're outraged or they fear being "replaced." Your fear and xenophobia does not mean you get to deny other people's human rights.
Now go away. You're foaming at the mouth.
Responding to Marshal's comment:
I have no opposition to anyone seeking a better life. We're in no way obliged to provide it for them. They need to prove they're a benefit to us. It's a two-way street at worst, Dan, not a freakin charity.
The data shows that we have a net gain from immigrants being here, not a loss. The data is what the data is. You can't ignore the data just because some bigots are telling you "they" are "taking jobs..."
Marshal...
Can you guarantee the work ethic of every [vulgar obscenity used to refer to immigrants] who insists he's fleeing harm? We aren't hurting for employees, but hurting for good ones.
By suggesting that immigrants aren't generally going to be "good" employees, Marshal betrays his xenophobia/racism. Again, the data shows that immigrants mainly come here for the chance to work and improve their lives and get away from dangers. It's only racists/xenophobes who would suggest that somehow immigrants aren't as good workers as US citizens.
Dan,
I applaud you for your negative reaction to the immigration policy of a democrat president. I don't recall you opposing the P-BO policies, although I do recall you opposing Trump's continuation of P-BO's policies.
In the hope that this will not be deleted, I'll limit my participation to applauding your courage.
Me, criticizing Obama's immigration policy. When the choice is between bad immigration policy from the Democrats and much, much worse immigration policy from the GOP, it can be difficult to spend too much energy in criticizing the merely bad, but that doesn't mean it's acceptable.
https://throughthesewoods.blogspot.com/2018/01/deported-and-killed.html?m=1
Dan
Dan,
Again, the fact that you criticized P-BO one time is also impressive. As you suggest, you spend very little time criticizing bad things on the left, and when you do I feel like I should acknowledge you for your efforts.
Craig wrapping himself in higher-than-though attitude is shit.
Craig is sick in the head:
“Trump was found "liable" for "sexual harassment" and "defamation" and fined $5 million dollars. This was NOT in criminal court, but CIVIL court, and the burden of proof in civil court is significantly lower than in criminal court. But this should put a dent in the "Trump is a rapist" crowd, although it's likely it won't.”
He has always shielded the image of Trump when the only decent - and also christian thing - to do is to renounce Trump and all his works.
It does strike me as curious, this overt support of Trump by the Marshals of the world and the quiet support and defense of Trump by the Craigs of the world. I think Craig thinks he's actually spoken out in condemnation of Trump and his supporters but it's been so tepid and mild in comparison to the rank atrocities of Trump, MTG, Santos, DeSantis, et al... and then, he offers these sorts of defenses of Trump.
Of course, they offered no such defense for the lesser crimes of Bill Clinton, for instance, while people like me called for his removal and wouldn't vote for him because of his problems.
"The Trump is a rapist' crowd" = actually attacking those who stand opposed to Trump on moral grounds given his deeply harmful perversions and overt sexism/misogyny... INSTEAD of joining with us in condemning the unacceptable, he joins the Trump supporters...
Then tries to act as if I'm doing something out of character in opposing policies from Democrats as an exception rather than the rule.
It just makes no sense.
I'm very sorry that pointing out the realities of the low burden of proof in civil court, and the fact that they couldn't even prove rape with that significantly burden of proof is such a problem.
Again, Dan, I commend you for your second example of criticizing the actions of a DFL president without being prompted. It's very brave of you.
And again, instead of denouncing a perverted deviant abuser and molester of women and children, you continue to defend him by casting aspersions on a US jury and the US system of justice. IN SPITE of Trump's own clear words that he's a misogynistic, molesting deviant, YOU continue to make excuses.
Keep your commendations, Craig. Coming from someone who defends the indefensible and excuses molesters, your commendations are not worth much.
May you find that kind of "bravery" (really, it's just basic decency and honesty) one day.
He can’t help himself: he doesn’t “like” brutality but he supports it. And because becoming conscious of this about himself is intolerable, he has to deflect by switching attention from our noting HIS OWN behavior - which he has to remain unaware of - to diving deep into legal demurrals about Trump’s legal status rather than his moral behavior.
Apparently, another "stone cold christian" is coming soon to rise up in furious defense of an amoral, hedonist demagogue who has zero solutions for the country other than targeting groups of people whom whiteness has oppressed for centuries.
Notice, Dan, he even has to erase what he said earlier about testing the waters here and coming back soon with bullshit.
He's so fragile he has to erase his own trail of changing his gutless mind.
Apparently, another "stone cold christian" is coming soon to rise up in furious defense...
Who is that?
Please link to a quote by Trump where he says in his "own clear words that he's a misogynistic, molesting deviant". I'll wait here while you don't.
Marshal erased his fake bravado comments where he said he was coming soon here to tell you - who have no balls to hear the "truth" - how Trump is a 13th disciple.
But when I wrote what I wrote, he fled and erased his trail. Gultess, self-castrating liar. Can't face me.
Please link to a quote by Trump
You of course know this. It's quite obvious to anyone who isn't also a deviant or beholden to deviants and actual perverts.
"I'm automatically attracted to beautiful women — I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. When you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
Understand: THESE are the words of a sexist, a misogynist, a indecent pervert. And it doesn't even matter if he did/does these things are not (although you're some kind of dupe/fool/pervert yourself if you doubt for one second that Trump isn't exactly as he portrays himself.
A gentleman/human who loves and respects women does not speak about them as if they are a hunk of meat to take advantage of/abuse/assault/rape. Not as a joke. Not as "locker room talk." Not as merely wishing to abuse women by virtue of your power and wealth. It's sick, deviant and sexist/misogynistic talk.
And not only that, it's OBVIOUSLY sick, deviant, misogynistic talk. I suspect that perhaps you claim you can't see it because YOU are a pervert who engages in what you all call "locker room talk," which is just empty code words for "wannabe rapist talk."
ASK ANY WOMAN who isn't brainwashed if this is language that is not sexist and misogynistic and not acceptable.
In the meantime, ANY PERVERT who defends this as "locker room talk" should be kept away from all children and women, including their daughters and nieces and, well, really any people. They're sick. This is not the "good old days" where men could abuse, molest and laugh it off. It's indecent, it's harmful, it's oppressive, it causes harm - just the talk itself causes harm, much less the actions he boasts and laughs about. This language gives a pass to rapists and child abusers. This language tells women, "You are deserving of being raped, so long as it pleases a sick rapist-type."
You have blinded yourself and castrated your manhood and humanity by your continued choice to ignore this overt perversion and thereby be complicit in the culture of rape.
And of course, this is not the only time that Trump engaged in misognystic, woman-hating behavior.
Get help, and in the meantime, don't talk to women with your sick, perverted, rape-supporting words and insanity. You are part of the problem and rapists, no doubt, love you and the way your defend them.
First of all, since you're a liar, here's the actual video in full...AGAIN!!!! (How many times do I have to provide this before a liar...that is, Dan... speaks of it truthfully????)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrKiezp0ATY
The important thing to note is the difference between his crass talk in the bus with his actions in front of the camera when confronted with the hot babe. What it demonstrates clearly is that his talk was just that...talk. He didn't grab the woman. He didn't "just start kissing" her. It wasn't even evident he was going to touch her beyond the initial handshake until Bush invited her to hug Trump. It was the briefest of hugs with a peck on the cheek. Yeah. That's criminal!!!
"Understand: THESE are the words of a sexist, a misogynist, a indecent pervert. And it doesn't even matter if he did/does these things are not (although you're some kind of dupe/fool/pervert yourself if you doubt for one second that Trump isn't exactly as he portrays himself."
This is what you choose to believe about Trump. And while I'm content to disparage his many affairs and divorces and contemptible, I'm not the type enough of a "grace embracing" fake Christian progressive to insist he's worse than that, because we don't know. His crude talk isn't more than crude talk until you can prove he acts on anything he says. This video is evidence to that, if not proof of it. Even the TikTac comment doesn't mean he's ever grabbed and kissed a woman in the manner you want in your grace embracing manner to believe. What is more likely is that he's simply aware that his breath might not be pleasant so a mint might not be a bad idea. With all the crap which comes from your mouth, you might want to invest in some breath mints yourself!!
To those of us not concerned with demonizing those we don't like beyond what their actual behavior demonstrates, Trump portrays himself as a wiseass who gets a kick out of talking shit. To say this is common is a great understatement and I don't buy your posturing as holy. I'll take a sinner like Trump over a sinner like you any and every day of the week and then some. There's far less unnecessary death with a guy like him.
"A gentleman/human who loves and respects women does not speak about them as if they are a hunk of meat to take advantage of/abuse/assault/rape."
Uh...yes they do. You're confusing a gentleman with a feminized lefty. Two very different things. You think gentlemen don't enjoy a good laugh now and then. But the fact is that, as a liar, you purposely overstate these things in order to posture as a better man than a man who is better than you (again, far less unnecessary deaths). Why you feel the need exposes you as a liar every time you whip out your "embrace grace" bludgeon.
"And not only that, it's OBVIOUSLY sick, deviant, misogynistic talk."
Yep. And it's obviously funny between men of character as well as men without. Men speak this way for a laugh, and you want to portray them as "wanna be rapists". There's that embracing grace crap again!! It almost seems like you believe someone can be labeled without engaging in the behavior the label suggests...like "sinner"!!!!
But no, Dan. Lusting after a woman is not the same as wanting to rape her. But that's what a low class person you truly are to pretend that's common. Shame on you for your hatred.
"ASK ANY WOMAN who isn't brainwashed if this is language that is not sexist and misogynistic and not acceptable."
AH!!! So any woman who has a spine is "brainwashed" in your sick world!! If you actually think women do not have their own version of "locker room talk" regarding men, you're more of a moron that I already take as fact.
"In the meantime, ANY PERVERT who defends this as "locker room talk" should be kept away from all children and women, including their daughters and nieces and, well, really any people."
The hypocrisy here is astounding!!!
"just the talk itself causes harm"
You keep saying this bullshit without the slightest evidence that it's in any way true. What harm precisely??
"This language gives a pass to rapists and child abusers"
No it doesn't, because there's no promotion of either by such talk. None.
"This language tells women, "You are deserving of being raped, so long as it pleases a sick rapist-type.""
No it doesn't. You only want it to. You only want others to believe this is true. Women generally hear of such types of conversations between men and say amongst themselves, "Men are such pigs." and then make them dinner.
"You have blinded yourself and castrated your manhood and humanity by your continued choice to ignore this overt perversion and thereby be complicit in the culture of rape."
Wow! That's some world class projection. Such "grace embracing" is only typical of the fake Christian. And I'm certainly not blind to that. I'm not at all blind to your hateful and vile desire to demonize an otherwise ordinary guy to deflect from all the incredibly sinful and satanic things you support, enable, defend and celebrate. And you're likely to delete my comments rather than present a legitimate argument which is persuasive to whatever it is you consider a cause or a superior understanding of "good". Given there's nothing about locker room talk which suggests rape simply by being locker room talk you exploit to posture as more "Christian" (*snicker*), there's no way a sane, honest person would dare suggest such is promoting, enabling, defending or celebrating rape.
"And of course, this is not the only time that Trump engaged in misognystic, woman-hating behavior."
You have no evidence he's ever engaged in whatever it is you mean by "woman-hating behavior" or misogyny. That's just you saying whatever shit you can conjure to demean a guy who, despite his many well-known character flaws, is really quite ordinary but a far better person than you. You know, far less death.
"Get help, and in the meantime, don't talk to women with your sick, perverted, rape-supporting words and insanity."
Get help for your twisted desire to project evil upon those better than you. Get help for your compulsion to do such things when you have no legitimate and substantive argument against those who have done more good than those you support as well as more good than you've ever done.
What kind of disorder provokes someone to claim they are Christian while at the same time acting in the most unChristian manner towards others, conjuring whatever form of evil they can to project upon them, rather than actually having an intelligent position to propose in a persuasive manner. I know you don't have any intelligent arguments, and what you'd propose won't help anyone. But to posture as having such a position and compelling argument to further that position without actually having either is really goofy to say the least.
I'm sure I've said it before on more than one occasion, but like I've posted that video to present the facts against your embellishment of what you need to believe is an absolute horror , I'll say it yet again:
I opposed Bush in the GOP primaries prior to the 2016 election on the basis of his well-known character flaws (which included his support for the Clintons). I didn't need to pretend he was the second coming of Satan in order to do so. He made promises which were only at that time promises, with no prior track record upon which to judge, but his character was a great concern for me. I spoke against him to co-workers who supported him, mostly on the basis of his character and their lack of ability to provide any reason to suspect he'd be a good choice other than the significant fact he wasn't a politician...he was a business man which many felt was necessary at the time. I didn't see it as enough, given his known character.
Then he won the primary and the choice was clear given his opponent being every bit as vile as Trump was made out to be. Hillary was Obama 2.0. Trump at least spoke of beneficial proposals. But as I did with Obama before him, and as no lefty does for anyone they support or oppose, I actually looked into this guy Trump and found him to be far less than liars who oppose him have the honesty to acknowledge. Because along with his character flaws were many examples of good deeds and a good understanding of how things are. After taking office, it wasn't long before he proved himself far, far superior to the empty suit he replaced, and there never was any manifestation of the vile things attributed to him without proofs of any kind.
But you...you've proven yourself far more contemptible throughout all the years we've engaged in on-line discourse. The things you support are vile and in stark conflict with God's clearly revealed Word. As such, your opinion of Trump is worthless to anyone. You chose a proven incompetent and pretended he'd be an improvement with almost 50 years in government without any beneficial effect on anything. You chose someone who's the liar you accuse Trump of being, and that without the fact of the Dem platform and LGBT agenda you praise being loaded with more detrimental lies than anything ever said by Trump.
I can continue to defend all of what I've said, while you do jack to defend your lies and grace embracing hatred of him.
So here's where you delete me so no one can see the truths I present which indict you more than you could even indict Trump. Hell, the Dem party continues to fail in that endeavor, how could you think YOU'D succeed?
Marshal...
You keep saying this bs (locker room talk causes harm) without the slightest evidence that it's in any way true. What harm precisely??
Locker room talk causes harm. This is obvious and self-evident. There are some people (rapists, sociopaths, their allies, etc) for whom this isn't self-evident, but it's clear. But here are some experts pointing out the obvious, not that you'll accept their expertise because you have this commitment to this rape-talk of men.
Was there really anything wrong with men speaking this way about women in private? From a psychological perspective, the answer is unambiguous.
There is a problem with it, and it isn't about being politically correct. It is important to understand the damage this kind of talk does not only to women but also to the men who speak this way, and the men who hear it...
When men speak about women using “locker room talk,” men are priming themselves to think of women as sex objects they can “grab” and to whom they can “do anything.” Even if men don’t consciously think they have less respect for women as a result of engaging in or hearing these kinds of conversations, below the level of awareness, their brains are making associations.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/happiness-and-the-pursuit-leadership/201610/whats-wrong-locker-room-talk
Okay, to begin with, of course locker room talk doesn’t mean that every man who indulges in it is a predator, but it most certainly perpetuates a culture in which predators can hide. The term “locker room talk” is literally designed to insulate men who speak this way, as if they exist in some kind of mythical man-only space. There is no such space. These words are spoken in a world populated by the women and girls who must co-exist with us, along with the words, ideas and predators we grant refuge to.
But here’s something else that men also need to understand. Men need to understand how much damage locker room talk does TO MEN. The Man Box, the bullying and shaming enforcement of narrow and limiting ideas about manhood, (otherwise known as childhood for American boys) is all about defining “feminine” traits like emotional expression and empathy as signs of weakness in men. These powerful human emotional capacities are not inherently feminine, we are all born with them, but defining emotional connection as “girly” and then denigrating women serves to intentionally suppress these powerful relational capacities in boys and men.
https://remakingmanhood.medium.com/dear-dudes-locker-room-talk-will-kill-you-63666fb1435f
That sounds SO MUCH like you and other rapist allies. More to come.
Also, I've gone to blogger to push through your comments that were past the shut off date. I don't care what you think about me turning off the timer and allowing a flood of spam to show up, I'm not getting rid of it. But if you let me know you've added a comment (and it's actually attempting to answer questions as opposed to just being vulgar or abusive), I can allow it to post.
Feminist scholars have long argued against the myth that physical attractiveness is a main motivation for sexual predators. For instance, in the classic text “Against Our Will,” Susan Brownmiller states: “The rapist chooses his victim with a striking disregard for conventional ‘sex appeal.’”
Recent research on perpetrators of sexual assault supports this idea. Perpetrators’ motivations for sexually assaulting women are often about power, control and hostility toward women...
Making light of sexual aggression against women makes it even more difficult for women who experience it to come forward.
Studies suggest that fewer than 25 percent of women who experience sexual harassment actually file formal complaints. Similarly, research finds that only 5 percent to 20 percent of women report rape to law enforcement. Rates of reporting also vary depending on the behaviors women experience. Seemingly “less severe” forms of sexual harassment and assault (like unwanted sexual contact) are rarely reported. Women are often reluctant to report sexual harassment and assault out of fear: fear of being blamed, not being believed, being ostracized or retaliated against.
https://theconversation.com/how-women-are-harmed-by-calling-sexual-assault-locker-room-talk-67422
By researching the origins of how boys are socialized in Western culture, I have seen a correlation between engaging in locker room talk and perpetration of sexual violence. In my extensive analysis, I pieced together how socialization of boys can turn into a hegemonic masculine gender identity which in turn predisposes men to engage in locker room talk that increases their probability of inflicting sexual violence upon women.
https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/honors-theses/329/
Predicting men’s acceptance of sexual violence myths through conformity to masculine norms, sexism, and “locker room talk”
Results indicated that negative attitudes toward women, beliefs about men’s power over women, and adherence to norms about promiscuity had unique relations with endorsement of these myths. Pressure to engage in locker room talk also made men more likely to believe these rape myths.
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-64663-001
https://www.thetribune.ca/opinion/the-consequences-of-locker-room-talk-04022020/
And on and on it goes. Marshal, I have to ask: Do you TRULY not recognize the similarities between this misogynistic "locker room talk" and the way that rapists talk and think? Are you unfamiliar with research into rapists and their attitudes and behaviors?
You all are building up and defending a little rape factory creating more and more vulgarity and harm in and among men. Look at the research.
More data, this time specifically about rapists:
Motives behind rape vary and are difficult to quantify. However, studies show that rapists have some common characteristics:
- a lack of empathy
- narcissism
- feelings of hostility towards women
Hm. WHO does that sound precisely like?
Continuing...
In fact, most social scientists, psychologists and feminist activists are of the opinion that rape nearly exclusively has to do with issues of power and violence. They say that rape is not about lust but motivated by the urge to control and dominate, and that it could also be driven by hatred and hostility towards women.
Again, this sound precisely like Billy Bush, our ex-president and others of their ilk.
Rapists often see women as sex objects who are there to fulfill men's sexual needs. They tend to hold false beliefs, often described as rape myths. For instance, a rapist can believe that if a woman says no, she really means yes, and that she is just playing around or challenging him.
Again, the Billy Bush tapes are a transcript of a rapist's mind.
https://www.dw.com/en/the-psychology-of-a-rapist/a-54814540
Even if you reject expert opinion about obvious misogyny, can you at least SEE how it LOOKS like Trump and the locker room adolescents are speaking rape talk, as it is recognized by regular people and experts?
Do you engage in locker room talk?
Is it your hunch that ALL men talk this way? (Hint: they don't. I don't. My father didn't. My church colleagues don't. My work colleagues don't.)?
It's been my experience that many locker room talk advocates have a belief system that ALL men talk this way or at least THINK this way and, well, it's just false. Just because all the men in your circles talk that way is not evidence that all men think or talk this way.
And to be clear: Neither I nor the experts are saying that all men who engage in perverted locker room talk are going to rape or sexually assault a woman. They're just paving the way for the rapists to feel okay when they do.
More...
In a study assessing California high school athletes from all different sports, researchers found that
“boys who had hypermasculine attitudes were
three times more likely to have recently abused their female dating partners.”
Basketball and football were amongst the sports with the highest rate of hyper-masculine attitudes, defined in the Encyclopedia of Race and Crime as
“an exaggerated form of masculinity, virility, and physicality,
as well as a tendency to ward disrespecting women.”
This form of masculinity praises physical aggression, sexual exploits with women, and stoicism.
https://www.prindleinstitute.org/2016/10/rape-culture-locker-room/
Sadly, I could go on all day. This is not an unknown problem. Locker room talk is part of the problem and none of the solution. It is the province of rapists and their allies. It is an indicator of a problematic attitude towards women and violence. It is one predictor of rapists and sexual assailants and just dirty, vulgar, abusive men.
The data is there and truly, indisputable. Now, the question is will you respond with, "Dang! I had no idea how much a part of the rape culture such talk was. Now that I see the data, I'm going to have to change my ways and apologize for defending rape-y talk from clear perverts like Trump and his allies (including me, until now)." OR will you continue the documented rape-culture language and ideas?
Just stopped by to check on this thread and all I have time to say right now is WOW! I have so much to say about your comments and quotes. It'll require time and research, so stay tuned.
As to your blogger settings, there's no way you get so much spam that you need to have that set as you do. Is it limited by blogger or can you set it for a longer period.
As to "vulgar", look in the mirror. You want to believe you're on the up and up and you insult constantly. Hypocrite!
As to "vulgar", look in the mirror. You want to believe you're on the up and up and you insult constantly. Hypocrite!
It's not vulgar to look at men who say things like "Man, I'd hit THAT! I'd bang her all night long! I wouldn't even wait to ask. They let you, you know? They WANT it and I'll give it to them!" and say that this is vulgar in the extreme. It is sexist. It is misognystic. It's harmful and oppressive, as the data shows and simple reason would recognize. These aren't "insults." It's recognizing that which is vulgar, sick and oppressive for what they are. Calling a spade a spade is not insulting. The "locker room talk," and those who defend it... THAT's vulgar and insulting.
As to spam, I get a ton of it when I turn the timer's off. I received four just yesterday, I suspect because I let in your older comments, because I hadn't received them in a while. But back before I started using the time-out option for comments, I'd have hundreds of spam comments show up that I had to go in individually and delete and I'm just not going to do that, nor am I going to let the spam stay. Sometimes it's been the vulgar "locker room talk" type spam advertising items for adolescent men.
This system works for me. As I've demonstrated, I'll allow on topic, reasonable respectful questions and comments. If you're truly wanting to comment on something from two months ago or two decades ago, you can always post it on the recent post and reference the old post.
You'll just have to get over it.
"You also have yet to provide any evidence that men speaking crudely among themselves for their own enjoyment have any actual negative impact on anyone."
Anyone can see that I cited multiple expert testimonials. No, it is YOU that has provided nothing more than your personal uninformed-by-research opinion that your vulgar words of perversion cause no harm.
This, from a man who admits having these rape-y conversations with other men - what you and Trump call "locker room talk." So, it's like you're the rapist assuring the judge, but no harm was done! The assurance of the guilty is not worth much.
Unless you have data that undercuts the research I've cited (and what common sense recognizes), just move on, Marshal. You've lost by your own testimony.
Dan
Marshal continued with his vulgar, abusive language in defense of rape-y, misogynist "locker room" talk, all the while insisting that he knows better than the experts... all the while not even TRYING to provide any expert opinion in defense of the sexually abusive talk of rapists and their allies.
Amongst the many things Marshal said was...
The research you've presented is shit. You haven't even read any of it. If you had, you wouldn't have copy/pasted snippets of the abstracts, but would have posted actual evidence to support your position. You once again prove my contention that you simply provide links which conclude what you want to believe
As if Marshal's ignorant (ie, literally, has no research on the topic and is clearly unfamiliar with the data) claims is more important than expert research and opinion.
Noting again that this sort of narcissism is a trait of sexual predators.
As to the last part of his comment, no, I didn't post all the data, just the results. But the data is out there and I have read some of it. That he chooses to ignore the conclusions of experts is not evidence, of course, that they're wrong. Marshal provides NONE in his defense.
And as I've made clear to Marshal, unsupported, vulgar, abusive language will not remain.
Marshal...
only those who might be in any way similar to a guy like Trump engaging in locker room talk. Again, no one would know that among them might be one who would actually rape a woman, and they would get their asses kicked by everyone else in the group if there was even a hint they might. But I run with a better quality of man than you do.
This abusive, mock-machismo chest-puffing is also part of the traits of the abuser and predator that the research speaks about. Marshal engages and freely admits engaging in (at least in the past) this sort of sexually-predatory language in his misogyny WHILE insisting... "BUT, IF any of these guys who boast and talk in rape-y ways ACTUALLY harmed a woman, the rest of us would kick his ass..."
It's really pathetic. Pretending to be macho while and one who defends women WHILE at the same time, engaging in that which is vulgar, demeaning, objectifying and ACTUALLY harming to women. Little vulgar, abusive boys, imagining themselves to be decent men. Pathetic.
You want to help women, then listen to the research and stop defending rape-talk.
You make a truth claim and "support" it with "This is obvious and self-evident." If it is, then provide evidence. Your sole purpose is not to do away with locker room talk, but to demonize Trump as having committed an unforgivable sin.
But it IS self-evident. IF a man hits his wife, then he IS an abuser. It's observable. It's fact.
If that same man says he can "take her" any time HE wants, he is being threatening and abusive and dangerous. It's observable. It's fact.
IF that same man says, "It's just a joke," it doesn't matter (and probably isn't true). It's vulgar, abusive, terrifying.
And if that same man laughs about sexually molesting women and a friend of his laughs along and eggs him on, THEN they both are laughing about sexual assault. Observably, factually. It really doesn't get more clear than that.
More on the topic...
Words matter. Choosing to speak is an action. You made the decision to speak those words. Billy Bush made the decision to laugh along. When you treat pussy-grabbing as a masculinity merit badge, you’re telling men that sexual assault is fine with you. That hurting women is something to brag about.
You’re also telling judges and juries, cops and prosecutors that they shouldn’t bother taking sexual violations seriously. Rape is vastly under-reported and under-prosecuted. Your words just helped it stay that way. Your words have rolled out the red carpet for rape.
Just because men have historically done something doesn’t mean it’s not hurting us. And it doesn’t mean you can’t stop. You could have chosen not to say those words, Donald. You are not helpless. Men are not helpless.
By very conservative estimates, over 25 million women in this country have lived through a sexual violation. The rest know it could be their turn at any time. You say you’ll make America safer, Donald, but once again Sunday night, you made it more dangerous for half of us. You are making America dehumanizing for us.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/locker-room-talk-not-harmless-rape-culture-trump
Roughly 25% of women in the US have been raped or had sexual violence done to them.
https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics
Probably more, since rape and assault go under-reported. Think about that. Let's say it's actually 1-in-3 rather than 1-in-4. It's probably much worse than that.
("a study by UN Women found that as few as 10% of rapes are actually reported to authorities worldwide"
https://wisevoter.com/country-rankings/rape-statistics-by-country/)
That means, if there is a family with three daughters in it (or a mother and two daughters, or a mother a daughter and a grandmother) that the odds are ONE of those will experience sexual violence.
Further, fully 80% of women experience will experience sexual assault or harassment in their lifetime. The odds are great that a woman you love has experienced this.
WHY is such vulgarity and evil common?
Also, back to the "most rapes don't get reported," here's another data byte:
"Forty percent of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to police in 2017, but only about 25% were reported to police in 2018." (from the first link above)
Why do so many go un-reported?
Read/listen to rape victims and they will tell you. They fear they won't be believed (with just cause). They fear they'll have to re-live this evil, awful experience (they will) and there's a good chance the criminal will go free (it's likely). They hear "locker room talk" and men - including leaders and role models like the sexual deviant pervert you defend - laughing and joking about such abuse as if it's a joke and that increases their fear. It decreases the likelihood of them being taken seriously.
"Locker room talk" is vulgar, despicable, un-manly and violent. It trivializes and makes "common" the notion of rape/sexual assault. We can no longer abide such violent talk and you will NOT defend it here.
Marshal, in a now-deleted comment (because of the vulgar, rape talk, misogynistic and anti-science ignorance)...
In my entire life (68 years), I'm aware of only two women who reported being assaulted sexually.
Well, there it is. There is almost NO rape because Marshal is only aware of two women ever having it happen to them.
Stats from feminists about rape aren't necessarily reliable,
Marshal dismisses data from experts because he doesn't consider feminists/women to be reliable - never mind that we don't know that all the experts self-identify as "feminists." It's another attack against both women and experts.
Marshal, I see that you're 68, but you sound more like you're a vulgar old 68 year old man from 1960, not from 2023. This hateful, despicable, anti-woman, anti-science view sounds more like something from the bad old days when men were freely thuggish Neandertals openly glad to keep women down. You're acting in a manner that is simply not acceptable in a decent society. Like Trump, your hero. It's sad, it's pathetic and, at least in the free world, not going to be put up with.
Get help. You're very, very sick, delusional and dangerously anti-women. If you love the women in your life at all, stay away from them until you get help.
Also Marshal, you should know that the fact that only two women in your life (according to) have shared their sexual harassment/assault stories is potentially a sign of two things...
1. Women don't like to talk about the trauma in their life
2. Women especially don't like to talk about the trauma in their lives to creepy old men who talk in hateful, misogynistic ways.
Dan
Post a Comment