Does 'rape culture' accurately describe (many) societies?

Ziggurat said:
Are you trying to reach the stupidest conclusions possible?
Click to expand...
I think you have demonstrated that you have the monopoly on those with the whole poverty isn't a causal factor nonsense you appear to believe.
Ziggurat said:
That might happen sometimes. But when a woman has five kids with three different baby daddies, none of whom have ever lived with her, that's not an accident. That's not an abusive partner. That's not someone pushed into a situation by financial necessity. That's a choice.
Click to expand...
How would you help her make better choices? What effect would this have on the life chances of the children?
 
It's definitely true that children do better if they have good role models of both sexes, but nothing I have seen says it has to be their biological parents who provide that. And the more the merrier; children with many close and caring adults are more likely to thrive, whether those adults are related to them, or not.
 
Poem said:
There are so many elements here that I fear it would take forever to unravel. For one thing - it isn't proven that radioactive decay is acausal.
Click to expand...
To the best of our knowledge radioactive decay is acausal. But we don't even need to go that far. Simply because we cannot measure everything precisely means that predictions about complex systems will be inaccurate over the long term, sometimes wildly so if the system is chaotic.
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
Why would you want to given that you believe poverty is not a significant factor?
Click to expand...
Significant factor in what?

See, this is just another example of your sloppy thinking. Poverty itself has little to do with misogynistic violence. A lack of a father does, and that's correlated with poverty, but it isn't poverty itself.

But that DOES NOT mean that poverty doesn't create other problems. It absolutely does. Among other things, it can lead pretty directly to misery. I have never, ever suggested otherwise. I have never, ever argued that there's no reason to do anything about poverty, that there's no reason to reduce poverty. There is, and if you thought I ever said otherwise, then you aren't actually paying attention and thinking. I would indeed like to reduce poverty. That's a worthwhile goal.

But not because it will reduce misogynistic violence. Because that's primarily due to other factors.
 
Ziggurat said:
Significant factor in what?

See, this is just another example of your sloppy thinking. Poverty itself has little to do with misogynistic violence. A lack of a father does, and that's correlated with poverty, but it isn't poverty itself.

But that DOES NOT mean that poverty doesn't create other problems. It absolutely does. Among other things, it can lead pretty directly to misery. I have never, ever suggested otherwise. I have never, ever argued that there's no reason to do anything about poverty, that there's no reason to reduce poverty. There is, and if you thought I ever said otherwise, then you aren't actually paying attention and thinking. I would indeed like to reduce poverty. That's a worthwhile goal.

But not because it will reduce misogynistic violence. Because that's primarily due to other factors.
Click to expand...
Poverty leads to family breakdown. Family breakdown leads to domestic violence. Do I really need to point out the obvious to you?
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
Poverty leads to family breakdown.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. Family breakdown helps keep families poor, but it's not caused by poverty. Which is why poor families in the past stayed together. It's only pretty recently that broken homes became the norm for the poor.
 
Helen said:
The lack of a father drastically lowers the risk of domestic violence.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. You know how fairy tales are full of stories of evil stepmothers? It's a cliche, but it's based on reality, although nowdays generally the other way around. When a mother brings new males into the picture, they're FAR more likely to abuse the children than their biological father. This is a very well established phenomenon.

 
Ziggurat said:
No, it doesn't. Family breakdown helps keep families poor, but it's not caused by poverty. Which is why poor families in the past stayed together. It's only pretty recently that broken homes became the norm for the poor.
Click to expand...
In the past the consequences of women with children leaving men were so dire, both financially and socially, that they would stay with violent men.

My aunt was strongarmed into having an abortion by my uncle's mother because it would "ruin his teaching career" to have a child out of wedlock. That was in the 1960's and it somewhat ◊◊◊◊◊◊ her up.

Poor people staying together in the past was not because poverty did not impact their relationships, but because the other options were worse than the occasional beating from a drunk husband. Ah, the good old days!
 
Ivor the Engineer said:
In the past the consequences of women with children leaving men were so dire, both financially and socially, that they would stay with violent men.
Click to expand...
Women leaving violent men is not the primary driver of the high fatherlessness rate among the poor. This is an excuse, because it happens sometimes, but it's not what's mostly going on.
 
Ziggurat said:
No, it doesn't. You know how fairy tales are full of stories of evil stepmothers? It's a cliche, but it's based on reality, although nowdays generally the other way around. When a mother brings new males into the picture, they're FAR more likely to abuse the children than their biological father. This is a very well established phenomenon.

Click to expand...
But far from every single mother brings in a stepfather, and far from every stepfather abuses the children - it's not an inherent trait in stepfathers. And many mothers, and children, are abused by the biological father.

Mothers sometimes abuse their children as well. It's rarer, but it happens, and it's very closely correlated with poverty.
 
Ziggurat said:
Women leaving violent men is not the primary driver of the high fatherlessness rate among the poor. This is an excuse, because it happens sometimes, but it's not what's mostly going on.
Click to expand...
Where do you imagine these men and women with poor impulse control and other problems come from? They were once children. A combination of genes and environmental factors made them who they are. Growing up in a deprived environment is strongly correlated with many psychological and behavioural issues in adulthood.
 
Ziggurat said:
Women should be encouraged to be selective in who they hook up with, and only have children with men who will stay with them to raise the child.

Do you think that's bad advice?
Click to expand...
I think it's hilarious! As does my wife who I met online after she had got divorced from her husband. She had a five year old son, who's now nearly 18.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom