Tags
(satire?)
Murdered?
Want to know how bad your murder was on a scale of 1-10?
You need the:
.
Richard Dawkins thinks people who don’t understand his reasoning on rape are not able to think.
But it’s not his reasoning people are having a problem with.
It’s his callousness.
.
Please feel free to comment.
Pride's Purge 
Very good.! 🙂
LikeLike
LOL Dawkins makes a Dork of himself again
LikeLiked by 1 person
I would have thought that being murdered by someone you know would be more comforting in those final few moments than if it were a complete stranger.
LikeLike
Ordinarily, I would side with Richard Dawkins as a fellow humanist but I agree he could have used other examples which are less emotional for some recipients.
Very few men – I believe – have ever been raped but a surprising number of women may have been so it is incumbent upon all men to let women set the parameters as to just how awful a rape crime is.
It is a crime, involving physical and mental assault, both of which are unforgiveable.
Most recently, we have been hearing accounts of children being raped by men in positions of power and influence, as well as internet activism in this sick regard.
While I believe – along with Professor Steven Pinker – that the world generally is becoming a kinder and gentler place over time, there are still the crimes of the past to have to contend with and a need to ensure they do not happen again.
There is – at least – one additional level of murder on the scale above (which, I am sure, has nothing to do with Richard Dawkins in any direct way), which must rank as number 11 or even higher: Gaza Murder, i.e. the indiscrimate murder of innocent children, women, disabled and elderly in the largest possible numbers.
Also known as the Zionist Utilitarianist branch of philosophy.
Zionist lunatics like Netanyahu believe it brings the greatest happiness to the greatest number of “chosen” people. He may be right for all we know.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I have to say, Dawkins made a total ass of himself. Without being too emotive, I have been raped by a partner and it was horrific. I have been raped by a stranger and that was also horrific. It never occurred to me EVER to ‘rate my rape experience’.
Seriously, he gives Science a bad name. So thanks, Tom Pride, for making me smile a bit at the very clever man being a total idiot.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Leaving aside that silly ‘Dawkins Murder Scale’, don’t all good criminal justice systems make a judgement about severity and the impact of the crime on the victim?
Is stealing £1 from a billionaire the same as stealing £1 from somebody who needs it to feed their children tomorrow? Is repeatedly raping a child for their entire childhood the same as once raping your partner when he/she was too drunk to say no? They’re ALL crimes, and they should be prosecuted, but they’re NOT all the same.
LikeLiked by 1 person
P.S. Tom… nicely done!
LikeLike
If I’m in constant pain with a terminal disease and I’m incapable of killing myself then YES IT WOULD be more comforting to be murdered by a member of my family!
LikeLike
No one argues that they are all the same. The opposite in fact: they are unique and complicated and traumatic for all sorts of different reasons. Separating stranger rape and date rape for example is a ridiculous distinction to make because whether the perpetrator is a stranger or not isn’t what makes it horrific or not. That distinction is linked to an idea of rape that makes it about sex, and makes it about honour or ownership of women’s bodies. Which is ironic because that comes largely from religion. Dawkins can ignore that context to his “logic” if he wants but it’s still there whether he likes it or not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“No one argues that they are all the same.”
Actually, from the small amount I’ve read, quite a few of the Dawson critics do argue exactly that, and it also seems to be Tom Pride’s implication (or provocation) in this blogpost. The oft-used phrase seems to be “rape is rape” or “murder is murder”. That’s true as far as simple semantics go, but clearly it’s not everything a court needs to know about the perpetrator and the victim.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rape is rape does not mean all rapes are the same. Rape is rape. All rapes are unique.
All stabbings are different. Stabbing is always stabbing. There is no degree of stabbing based on whether I had dinner with someone then stabbed them, whether I stabbed them when they were drunk, whether I stabbed them while they were asleep after they joked around with a knife pretending to stab themselves the night before, whether they self-harm, whether I stab them slowly or angrily or aggressively, whether I stab them with a friend or stab them by myself, whether I tie them up first before stabbing… It’s all just stabbing. And I’ve never heard anyone go to these great big lengths to argue and generalise about different “types” of stabbing, either.
The generalisation is not “rape is rape.” The generalisation is to say “date rapes are like x and stranger rapes are like y and partner rapes are like n”.
LikeLike
No. I’m simply illustrating how absurd the whole discussion is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, obviously there are different circumstances of stabbing too. I’m not quite sure what you’re trying to get at. You seem to be trying to say that your stabbing rationale is equivalent to rape, when it’s obvious that nobody agrees to being stabbed, whilst many people are very happy to have a penis inserted into them. Drawing that parallel isn’t relevant.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“No. I’m simply illustrating how absurd the whole discussion is.”
Come on… you WERE trying to provoke. You wouldn’t be doing your job if not!
LikeLike
I’m sorry that you don’t understand the point being made.
The severity of a stabbing isn’t based on whether you went on a date with the person who stabbed you or whether they’re a stranger. You’re still just as stabbed. So why would it make a difference with rape?
We are talking about rape. Not circumstances where people who “consent to having a penis inserted inside them”. That would be sex, not rape. What does consensual sex have to do with it?
If somebody is raped, then it’s rape whether they were on a date with the rapist first or whether they’ve been married twenty years or whether they are strangers. Because what makes rape traumatic isn’t effected by whether you’ve been out for dinner first. Just as being stabbed doesn’t hurt less if you know the person.
You seem to be inferring that rape becomes blurred and confused because sometimes people consent to sex. That doesn’t make it less bad. You are confusing the issue of whether it was rape at all, and the issue of how ‘bad’ it is.
LikeLike
Thanks for your nicely observed ridicule of Dork-ins. I’ve never liked him, not because of his views per se, but the way in which he puts those views across. Not just callous; arrogant and pompous too.
Well done for making him look even more of a tosser than he already was 😘
LikeLiked by 2 people
Very, very disappointed with this post. I think you’ll find Richard Dawkins is not callous in the very slightest and I suggest that you know this very well. Why this sudden attack – what’s the hidfen agenda.
You’ll lose a lot of followers with this unjustified attitude.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tom – Sorry, I missed your point for a moment… I disagree completely with you. No, the discussion about different degrees of serious crime is absolutely NOT absurd.
LikeLiked by 1 person
No I won’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Left eye right eye – Two different points. The point I was making was about proof of consent, which is very obvious with stabbing but not with rape, so your parallel about ‘date stabbing’ or ‘stranger stabbing’ is a bit meaningless. Obviously I agree that once lack of consent is proved then rape is proved. Whilst the crime of rape is true in both cases, do you agree that there should be a difference in sentence between a man who raped a child every day for 10 years, and a man who raped his wife once when she was too drunk to consent?
LikeLike
I won’t stop following you Tom, but do go away for a bit and learn how to think.
LikeLiked by 1 person
neurontherapy – I suggest that you demonstrate that you can think before you tell other people to learn how to! Clearly you don’t even have the vaguest opinion about this subject!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Er, what?
LikeLike
Having typed thousands of murder statements over a third of a century, the Dawkins scale is odd.
A cold callous dispassionate person is the stone killer with no remorse and total selfishishness, with not one thought for the victim.
Violence is not pre-mediated to cause a specific injury, but happenchance in the fight or sadistic ongoing violence even when the victim is down.
Passion in a murder with screaming rage (red mist descending) or silent cold calculating is neither here nor there.
One punch can kill.
Control Freaks need to be avoided at all costs by women (or gay men), as at some point a thumper might kill. Once a thumper, always a thumper.
The football hooligans or the pub fight still has broken bottles and knives used. Once an artery is cut, death is fast, as it takes only 2 minutes of lack of oxygen for the brain to die.
The odd belief of men is like they believe cartoons, that men just bounce back from violence. They do not. They die or suffer crippling life-long disability.
Rape victims suffer trauma injury within the brain as do paedophile victims. Rape attacks human pyshcology direct. But rape is also a sadistic crime that can end in death from gross physical injury. Rape is not a sex crime. It is a grevious assault, manslaughter and premediated murder.
But the state murders us every day. From benefit losses that leave us penniless and hungry. From the denial of state pension, when benefits lost to mostly the working poor. From a benefit admin system that is designed to give death from stress. Taxing the poor to death with Bedroom Tax when MPs get from the taxpayer £20,100 per year second home allowance plus extra expenses on top of that.
Now that is premediated.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/state-pension-at-60-now
LikeLiked by 1 person
You are right Tom Pride! You will not be losing me over that academic twat! 🙂
LikeLike
YUP…including it’s media,which does not represent me!….Thank you 38 degrees!
LikeLike
Rubbish!
LikeLike
That woz in reply to neurontherapy!
wot eva that is… hhmmmm keep coming with the labels!
LikeLike
Dawkins…like a lot of intellectuals I have met on my way.
“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.” PLATO
LikeLike
…er. Sorry to be pedantic (well not really sorry, only slightly sorry, sort of 5 out of 10 sorry-ness I guess), but the law already grades crimes of all types (Book him Danno – murder 1!). It’s built into the system and and people created the system.
The system grades crime through types, then at the recommended sentences as laid down in law, then finally when the judge decides and reads it out. @Tom’s Dawkins’ scale at the top is not far removed from actuality, in fact.
@Finkfurst is right when they say “They’re ALL crimes, and they should be prosecuted, but they’re NOT all the same.”
@Tom is right about the whole absurdity of the argument… I read Dawkins’ tweets and the responses and for the life of me I couldn’t find how it all started. It just sort of went…. but maybe I missed the trigger if there was one at all…?
@Dawkins was logically consistent in his remarks, but really, he should’ve shut up and used a less emotional allegory to explain the logic, however it started.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The ‘atheist’ has no reference points to moral values. If we really were evolved pond slime, we would have no need for morals, just the appearance of ‘morals’ in protecting our tribe for our mutual benefit.
I have written several “Dawkins Exposed” pieces. http://www.realstreet.co.uk/?s=%22dawkins+exposed%22
LikeLike
The parallel is not meaningless at all. We are talking about rape. Not consensual sex. And whether all ‘date rape’ can be separated from all ‘non date rape.’ Are you saying date rape is more likely to be consensual? Otherwise what does consensual sex have to do with whether it’s ok to make generalisations?
Once again. No one is saying every rape is the same. Committing multiple rapes is different from committing only one. But being married to your rapist or drunk is NOT something that is relevant to how bad it is. Why would it?
Besides, the reoffending rate for rape is about 90% so this hypothetical example of just one rape is highly unrealistic and begs the question why would you imagine such a scenario? It’s not a reality of how rapes tend to happen.
LikeLike
Anti-intellectual now are we? Any contrived excuse to knock Dawkins. I wonder what the underlying cause for this pathology is.
LikeLike
As he will never wake up from being drugged and not know any of the details of what has happened to him other than burning pain between his legs and blood running down his thigh, I don’t think he has the right to say a damn word about it.
To be conscious and always know every agonising second of the attack in which your bodily autonomy and self worth was stolen from you is horrific. You go over every monstrous detail.
To wake up…….somewhere, knowing nothing of the details of the attack which stole your bodily integrity and ruined your life. That means going over and over every monstrous detail that you don’t know. Knowing Nothing of who or how many people violated you, nothing of what they did to you, or how much danger they exposed your body to, not knowing how they humiliated and degraded you whilst you couldn’t protect yourself. So you are haunted wondering what was done to you, did they do this, did they do that, you’ll never know, you’ll never get any rest from that. Did they use a condom? Have they transmitted a disease to me, do I have aids now, am I pregnant? Do I need an abortion? How can I reconcile aborting a rape baby with my pre-existing ‘pro life’ beliefs. This man or men, I do not know how many has taken everything away from me. Bodily integrity, feeling of place in the world, mental health, physical health, virginity, belief system.
If I don’t know who drugged me, I don’t know who raped me, I have no details to give the police, they’ll never be able to do anything about it, they’ll never catch him, I’ll never know, I’ll never get justice, he’ll never get punished. It could be anyone. It could be the man at the check out, the one holding the door open, the one looking at you in a bar, anyone. The police will say it is my fault. If I tell anyone, I am a pariah.
No one understands, no one talks. Where did my comfort go? My place in my world? Where can I feel safe now?
Is the Stuebenville rape case easier for the victim? No. Both rape, both life destroying.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Please note: it’s = it is
its = possessive pronoun
LikeLike
I think there’s something else he’s missed, and that’s that the amount of suffering caused by a rape depends not just on the act but on the victim. Is there broken trust? Has that person been raped before? Is that person suffering from other significant life stresses at the time when it happens? Does that person just happen to be particularly emotional vulnerable? There are multitudinous factors like this which are impossible or an outsider to assess, so it’s Dawkins who is failing to think when he assumes that simple rules describing the actions of the assailant can tell us anything about the impact on the victim. Furthermore, even if some victims cope comparatively well, there is no way the assailant can anticipate this, so that person must bear the same level of moral responsibility regardless.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Not ‘needing’ morals doesn’t mean one cannot choose to live a considered life and value the welfare of others. It certainly doesn’t absolve one of responsibility for this.
LikeLike
LERY – “Are you saying date rape is more likely to be consensual?” Your question doesn’t make sense, because if it’s consensual then it’s not rape. If the question you’re asking is if there is more likely to be consensual sex on a date than in a street attack, then the answer is obviously yes. The question isn’t about the term ‘rape’ because that’s clear, it’s about the criminal justice systems making a judgement about severity and the impact of the crime on the victim.
You didn’t answer my question – Do you agree that there should be a difference in sentence between a man who raped a child every day for 10 years, and a man who raped his wife once when she was too drunk to consent? Obviously these are the extremes of the range, but it illustrates the point that all rapes are NOT the same or warrant the same sentence.
LikeLike
trbornes
that would depend on the role one believes emotions play in logic….imv emotions are totally logical…i only ask because it is my understanding that many believe logic and emotions are separate and that some people also believe that logic can overrule emotions…o what is your view?
LikeLike
My question obviously makes sense so you understood it perfectly. Why the snide little pedantic bollocks? Sigh.
No it doesn’t make it more likely to be consensual. This is not logical. There is no evidence for this.
Either way we are talking about rape. Not scenarios where it is consensual sex. So why are you conflating the two? (This is why people have such a problem with the rhetoric around ‘date’ rape.)
I did answer the question. And for the millionth time. No one says every rape should get the same sentence or is identical. The point is that being married to your rapist, or being drunk, is NOT a factor in how serious it was.
LikeLike
Absolutely.
LikeLike
Logic is a sub-discipline of philosophy. Classical logic has no concern AT ALL with emotion. You are using the word “logic” in a totally different sense than I would.
LikeLike
“No it doesn’t make it more likely to be consensual. This is not logical. There is no evidence for this.”
Surely you’re kidding! Do you think consensual sex during a street attack is just as frequent as on a date?
LikeLike
trebornos
thanks for confirming and clarifying what i logically deduced… 🙂
LikeLike
conclusion he is incapable of considering all factors and coming to logical conclusion, coz there simply isn’t one, although he clearly claims there is…being stabbed or raped is bad, of that there is no dispute. but no one can know how bad this truly is, except for the victim….so it comes down to articulation of the crime or crimes to whoever is hearing/judging them, and for what purpose they are….
LikeLike
FFS… It’s logic. That’s all. Stop getting your knickers in a twist..
LikeLike
He isn’t rationalising levels of severity of rape. He’s saying that because one might feel that one type is worse than another, it doesn’t mean that you condone the least worst one. It’s logic. He deals in that a lot. Can you understand?
LikeLiked by 1 person
noodle
the weapon used as a tool to overpower the victim of rape does not grade the severity of the impact of rape on the victim…
LikeLike
I think his refutation and explanation makes sense.
https://richarddawkins.net/2014/07/response-to-a-bizarre-twitter-storm/
Also I strongly believe that tip toeing around sensitive subjects is bullshit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
crip
he is stating the bleeding obvious…some atomic bombs are worse than others, it does not make the least worse not bad or good, or that the least worst one’s should be condoned….
LikeLiked by 1 person
I really don’t mean to be rude but I’m not entirely sure what you’re saying there. I don’t know if you’re being too ambiguous or not being specific enough…
LikeLike
British Humanist Association: Remove Professor Richard Dawkins as BHA Vice President http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/british-humanist-association-remove-professor-richard-dawkins-as-bha-vice-president?recruiter=36839656&utm_campaign=twitter_link_action_box&utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=share_petition … via @UKChange
LikeLike
As a BHA Life Member, I have no intention of signing the petition to the BHA, calling for the removal of Richard Dawkins as a Vice President.
Richard Dawlkins has done a massive amount of good work on behalf of humanism and the global secular movement.
While I agree his choice of comparators left something to be desired, I put this down to the fact that he viewed his examplars in purely intellectual and logical terms.
He has subsequently stated ‘I was only talking logic, with no desire to make light of the seriousness of any kind of rape or any kind of pedophilia.’
I will pass on signing up to a petition calling for his removal as a BHA Vice President.
With hundreds of children being murdered and maimed in Gaza, I really do think it is time to move on beyond this little local disagreement and focus on what really counts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I hope your pathetic little petition gets little or no support. Get a sense of proportion.
LikeLike
Rape and child abuse are not issues of a “little local disagreement” to those who have experienced them. The deaths in Gaza are utterly inhumane – but citing them is a diversion from the statements of Professor Dawkins and the equally real issues of rape and child abuse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I regret you are incorrect when you say very few men have been raped.
LikeLike
And you, apparently, do not consider what is happening to the children of Gaza to be any great form of child abuse. You perfectly encapsulate what Richard Dawkins was saying in that you excuse the greater crime by reference to the lesser crime.
As he said. he had ‘…no desire to make light of the seriousness of any kind of rape or any kind of pedophilia.’ – and neither do I.
But you just banging on endlessly about a minor infraction of expression on his part are just exploting the situation to big yourself up.
By comparison with him and his massive achievements, just who are you?
LikeLike
To support your statement you need to produce actual male rape statistics.
Do you have any?
LikeLike
I am a human being just as are you, just as Professor Dawkins and just like the children of Gaza. I did not conflate rape, child abuse and child deaths in a war zone – you chose to. But the experience of trauma, injury and death are common to all.
LikeLike
Male-on-male rape has historically been shrouded in secrecy due to the stigma associated with males being raped by other males. According to psychologist Dr. Sarah Crome, fewer than 1 in 10 male-male rapes are reported. As a group, male rape victims reported a lack of services and support, and legal systems are often ill-equipped to deal with this type of crime.
Research from the UK suggests that almost 3% of men reported a non-consensual sexual experience as adults and over 5% of men reported sexual abuse as a child. This does not take into account the possibility of under-reporting. Recognition of male on male rape in law has historically been limited; the first successful prosecution for attempted male on male rape in the UK was not until 1995.
Several studies argue that male-male prisoner rape, as well as female-female prisoner rape, are common types of rape which go unreported even more frequently than rape in the general population.
The rape of men by men has been documented as a weapon of terror in warfare.
Coxell A, King M, Mezey G, Gordon D (1999). “Lifetime Prevalence, characteristics, and associated problems of non-consensual sex in men”. BMJ 318 (7187): 846–50. doi:10.1136/bmj.318.7187.846. PMC 27803. PMID 10092264.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Percent of U.S. men who experienced an attempted or completed rape – 3%
Source: U.S. Bureau of Justice , CDC, Koss, Gidycz & Wisniewski College Study, United Nations
Research Date: 7.8.2014
LikeLiked by 1 person
9,000 male rapes per year in UK
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jan/11/male-female-rape-statistics-graphic
LikeLike
In addition to my own lived experience.
LikeLike
Left Eye Right Eye
“The point is that being married to your rapist, or being drunk, is NOT a factor in how serious it was.”
So you plainly DO think there are differing degrees of seriousness of rape, and you therefore agree with Dawkins. So WTF are you arguing about?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I wonder do you live in the same world as I do. Do you have the same perceptions. There is NO WAY Prof Dawkins is diminishrd by this attack except IN YOUR DREAMS.
LikeLike
trebornos
come on, i used the atomic bomb analogy effectively, as a collective example, even though it is highly unlikely for one to have actual experience of it, to state the bleeding obvious,.we can all imagine it’s catastrophic impact if one was to be detonated near by,why couldn’t he have done the same?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry but I missed your use of the “atomic bomb analogy” and I don’t think I cited or referred to you at all. I maybe wrong – please clarify.
LikeLike
Left Eye Right Eye – Maybe some confusion arises from you referring to “date rape” as being different from “stranger rape”, because a rape is quite likely be both, in that the victim may have never met his/her date before. Perhaps the more pertinent distinctions are between stranger rape and partner rape (I use “partner” in the sense of there being previous consensual sex) and between adult rape and child rape.
I disagree with your statement “The point is that being married to your rapist, or being drunk, is NOT a factor in how serious it was”. It MAY be…
LikeLike
trebornes
scroll up you “liked” my comment re atomic bombs, i assume you read my post before you did…
LikeLike
Jennie – I also mostly agree with you, but I don’t think Dawkins said or implied that there are simple rules. Maybe that’s a lesson about using Twitter rather than anything deeper. The other problem is that our criminal justice system doesn’t (and can’t) make a judgement only on the level of moral responsibility of the criminal at the time of the crime. Take the example of drink-driving. If there is no accident then the perpetrator will be banned from driving. If they kill a pedestrian then they may well go to jail. Do you think that difference in sentence is wrong? The criminal justice system must try to take into account both the intentions of the criminal and the impact on the victim(s). Rape is no different from other crimes in that sense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sorry overburdened monkey I got genuinely confused and I lost any sense of a free flow of argument back and forth.
I agree with anyone who defends Dawkins (tho’ he needs no defence). The rest are on a bandwagon to discredit him by misrepresentation. One can only assume that their spurious accusations of islamophobia didn’t gain any traction and they are peeved.
LikeLike
Glad to see your petition has really taken off- 5 signatories so far!
How do we know that these 5 are even members of the BHA? I am by the way.
LikeLike
rubeus
i won’t sign the petition, but i do agree with your outrage…
LikeLike
I hear he now tweets that this was not about assigning value to murders, but simply about scales development! If you all don’t see this is about scales development then go away and learn how to think!
LikeLike
Stewart Cowan said: “The ‘atheist’ has no reference points to moral values.”
I would be keen to discuss that with you. Are you willing to do so?
LikeLike
some may like the work of this humanist….http://insidetime.org.uk/articleview.asp?a=814&c=whats_a_psychopath_a_dspd_and_should_peter_sutcliffe_ever_be_released
LikeLike
“GMTV recently asked me about Peter Sutcliffe. I see his horrendous crimes coming from a bucketful of hate within him. He wasn’t born with it – he acquired it by misadventure. If this bucket is now empty – free him”
If that’s the analysis from an eminent psychologist, I would hate to see the analysis from an idiot layman!
LikeLike
GMTV recently asked me about Peter Sutcliffe. I see his horrendous crimes coming from a bucketful of hate within him. He wasn’t born with it – he acquired it by misadventure. If this bucket is now empty – free him (so long as he compensates his victims for life) – if not, don’t.
LikeLike
That doesn’t change the argument about professional psychological analysis, or lack of it! How about even SOME clue about how to tell whether he is still a danger to women? The thing about buckets is just infantile!
LikeLike
anyway what are you doing opening links after you gave me the 3rd degree and forbade me from posting them to you…as you could do your own research and find all out for yourself!….please don’t open this link…. http://www.truthtrustconsent.com/public_html/psychiatry/consciousness
LikeLike
That’s not what I said, but feel free to assume whatever you like.
Have you read that Nutr Health paper in full? What did you think of it?
LikeLike
no!
LikeLike
So you bid me read what is apparently the only published paper Johnson ever wrote, and you didn’t even bother to read it yourself??? I did!
Sorry OBD, but unless you’re willing to read it now and say what you think then I don’t think I can ever take your opinions seriously again.
LikeLike
of course i’ve read it….and you obviously have an opinion on it…. and i very much doubt if that is the only paper he has written in over 50yrs of academia…
“Sorry OBD, but unless you’re willing to read it now and say what you think then I don’t think I can ever take your opinions seriously again.” that’s a worry!
LikeLike
You just said “no!” you didn’t read it! Why did you say that? I may be rude and sarcastic, but I don’t lie or try to mislead.
I’ll ask you again and see if you can answer simply and honestly – Have you read that Nutr Health paper in full? What did you think of it?
LikeLike
OBD – I think the reason you don’t answer is that you don’t have a clue what he’s going on about either! If I’m wrong then I would be most interested to hear you explain it…
LikeLike
OBD – Perhaps we could start with the very first statement in his paper – “The statistical probability that six consecutive double-bonds in any given fatty acid will be all ‘cis’, and none ‘trans’, is less than chance (p<0.02). The chances of all-cis-docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) recurring in quantity over geological time is infinitesimal. The fact that it has, is inexplicable…"
It isn't inexplicable at all, and I can easily give you an explanation. In short – it was evolution. It's no more inexplicable than the far smaller 'chance' of the molecular conformation of DNA, or the countless other complex molecules essential for the function of living organisms.
You DO think living organisms evolved and were not created by a god 6000 years ago, don't you? If not, then the discussion becomes a completely different kettle of ballparks!
LikeLike
I did not refer to date rape as different from stranger rape, lol, my entire point is that these generalised labels are nonsense.
Please don’t explain rape to me.
Please don’t pretend you weren’t outright suggesting that being married to your rapist automatically can be factored into assessing the severity of the crime. Please don’t make out you weren’t making out drunkenness can be factored into it.
Please stop digging.
LikeLike
With reference to Peter Sutcliffe – the Yorkshire Ripper – my impression at the time of the trial was he resented his more accomplished wife but she was beyond reproach so when he murdered the women he was also symbolically murdering his wife.
From memory, she was a little odd – a sort of pixyish figure – and I think she was a devout religionist.
I can only assume he wanted certain sorts of sexual relations but she could not or would not accommodate them so he may well have started consorting with prostitutes which led him perhaps to accidentally kill one of them and then get a “taste” for further incidents of a similar nature.
Was that the same impression others had at the time of the trial?
As for releasing him – why take the risk?
LikeLike
Another aspect of Peter Sutcliffe’s wife was that they lived in her deceased parents home and she had quite a good job – as a teacher? – and had – I think – a degree.
He was not providing the roof over their heads and made only a modest contribution towards the household expenses due to his holding only a semi-skilled job.
It may be his sense of resentment and failure as a man may have grown over time.
From memory, they had no children, which may indicate that their sexual relations were possibly limited and he may have felt a failue in not giving his wife children.
There were many possibilities at the time of the trial which could be attributed to his feelings of possible inferiority and a desire to overcome them in a perverse way.
I still would not let him out. I am sure he remains a very real danger to all women.
LikeLike
john
yeah why indeed….but surely the reasons why he did the dreadful things he did, need to be discovered and understood also, for the sake of humanity….see also work of the late and great dr alice miller and dr dorathy rowe….
LikeLike
I agree.
All criminal trials are solely concerned with establishing if and how a crime was committed and generally take no account of why a crime is committed, except at a fairly shallow level.
It may be that complex motivations are beyond coppers to comprehend and explain.
LikeLike
john
the police always think beyond the actual crime in order to solve it so they’ll have a very good idea of what’s going on…but have to present the case within the current legalistic framework…
bob johnson would very likely get to the bottom of things overtime, but few will believe him or/and others like him or will be encourage to believe them…the reasons will be rooted in his childhood, and what was done to him…certainly bob won’t now be given the chance for many reasons…others will inevitably follow his lead and fill the void..the cure is rediscovering/restoration of humanity within self…recovering lost self esteem….so will continue to be stuck in the cycle that we are culturally now in, until seismic shift occurs…of frozen emotions, violence, projected/miss directed blame, hatred, and warmongering…miller stated that the one’s who emotionally survived the camps, were the one’s who hated and felt their rage towards their captors…ie did not accept the blame, for being treated barbarically…
LikeLike
ps john
sorry, i meant also to add that i agreed with what you said…about the CJS…
LikeLike
Left Eye Right Eye – I agree that those two terms are nonsense. Because you used the terms several times I thought you meant that they ARE different in some way, but are of equal severity. Anyway, apparently we agree, so we can leave that point.
I wasn’t “suggesting” that marriage or drunkenness may be a factor in the severity of the crime, I thought I said it quite plainly!
Perhaps we can start with marriage. If one or both of the couple have been conditioned to believe, perhaps for religious reasons, that consent can never be withheld within marriage, then do you think it may be a factor in assessing the severity of the crime?
LikeLike
OBD – I assume not replying means that you don’t know or you’re afraid to say. That must be disappointing for you. On a more philosophical point, I think that many of the problems in this world are caused by people following the lead of somebody they regard as some kind of guru, without ever really understanding what they’re being told, but believing it anyway.
LikeLike
you said….”Lucy – He is NOT a qualified GP and he does not claim to be. So you’re talking complete crap (www.truthtrustconsent.com/public_html/about-me)”…but his about me page does not agree with your misrepresentation…it clearly states that he is a member of the royal college of GP’s…in nick davies mad world of parkhurst prison it also state he discovered his solution whilst in his GP’s practice in oldham….so i have not interest in discussing anything with someone who so readily distorts what has been said or is written in a link…. “Did Dr Johnson treat you for psychosis, so you have first-hand experience?” you also asked this extremely rude intrusive question of me….and many times i have told of my disabilities and that i had trouble typing, because of pains and you told me to STFU and stop whinging….the work of bob johnson is sound and if others open the above link they will also see that he is support on that paper by professer michael crawford…
LikeLike
p s all also add since your have such a poor grasp of logic that what he is actually saying is that the origins of that fatty acid does not matter and that one does not need to be carl benz nor ferdiand porsche to fix or repair an ICE…i should know i’m a fully skilled time served hgv/van/car mechanic….
LikeLike
OBD – I think you confuse lack of understanding with lack of agreement. It’s not that I don’t understand Johnson’s ‘logic’ it’s that I disagree with it. He’s simply wrong in most of what he says. I only disproved his first statement because it was the first. I could go though the whole paper doing exactly the same thing.
Of course you don’t need to be Karl Benz to fix an engine, that’s a statement of the bleeding obvious, because countless people can fix an engine by fitting a new part. However you DO need to know how engines in general and that engine in particular were developed in order to MAKE the parts. You may be a brilliant motor mechanic (I’m only average, but I’ve been fixing my own cars and motorcycles for 40 years) but you can’t make a new crankshaft or reprogram the ECU, can you? Similarly, an understanding of how biological processes evolved has given scientists insight into how they work, and hence how they might be fixed when they go wrong.
I wasn’t trying to insult you. My point was – How do you know Johnson’s claimed 100% cure for all psychoses works if you don’t have personal experience of it? Incidentally, having a mental health problem is NEVER something one should feel is an insult.
As for the GP thing – Nick Davies is journalist and only writes what he’s told, which may be lies. Also, the dates, qualifications and employments on Johnson’s web site don’t make sense. Just look at them critically. Conclusively – Whatever he might claim, he is NOT listed as a GP by the General Medical Council. Look him up in the database yourself – the GMC number is 0400150.
Also check out http://www.jamesnaylerfoundation.org/ (it’s actually just Johnson himself) which falsely claims to be a registered charity, and it’s asking for donations as if it were. This is illegal.
Finally, you didn’t answer my very fundamental question – Do you think living organisms evolved or were created?
LikeLike
dr bob johnson…GMC speciality register for psychiatry reg. num. 0400150 from his about me page on his web site it states on the gmc registration page;….Registered with a licence to practise; this doctor is on the Specialist Register…..
More Details
Primary Medical Qualification
MRCS 1961 Royal College of Surgeons of England
LRCP 1961 Royal College of Physicians of London
BChir 1962 University of Cambridge
MB 1963 University of Cambridge
MRCGP
therefore you have been proven utterly wrong….
LikeLike
OBD – How strange. I told YOU his GMC registration number. Now you’ve looked it up in the register and posted an edited version of the result. You deleted where it says “This doctor is not on the GP Register” and added “MRCGP”. Why would you make such a pointless attempt at deception? I know exactly what it says, and nobody else is interested. The point is about being honest and open, not about whether did or didn’t put in the extra years to become a GP.
What the register actually says is:
——————————-
Primary Medical Qualification
MRCS 1961 Royal College of Surgeons of England
LRCP 1961 Royal College of Physicians of London
BChir 1962 University of Cambridge
MB 1963 University of Cambridge
Provisional Registration Date – 27 Oct 1961
Full Registration Date – 27 Dec 1962
Specialist Register entry date – General psychiatry From 26 Nov 1998
GP Register entry date – This doctor is not on the GP Register
——————————-
LikeLike
posted for the record….
i posted the section below on 29 JULY 2014 @ 3.49 pm from his web site about me page….further more it was i not you who originally posted his “about me” page, it was provably ME, so i provable informed you of his gmc number…you had no idea who bob johnson is, until i told you, some months ago….
from gmc today…”For many doctors the date of entry will be in 1996 as this is when the Specialist Register was established”.
http://www.truthtrustconsent.com/public_html/about-me
“Dr Bob Johnson Friday, 19 June 2009
Consultant Psychiatrist, P O Box 49, Ventnor, Isle of Wight, PO38 9AA UK
GMC speciality register for psychiatry reg. num. 0400150
formerly Head of Therapy, Ashworth Maximum Security Hospital, Liverpool
formerly Consultant Psychiatrist, Special Unit, C-Wing, Parkhurst Prison, Isle of Wight.
MRCPsych (Member of Royal College of Psychiatrists),
MRCGP (Member of Royal College of General Practitioners).
Diploma in Psychotherapy Neurology & Psychiatry (Psychiatric Inst New York),
MA (Psychol), PhD(med computing), MBCS, DPM, MRCS.
Author Emotional Health ISBN 0-9551985-0-X,
Author Unsafe at any dose ISBN 0-9551985-1-8
curing mental pain….”
as you can see above his gmc number was/is specifically for specialty register, and not for GP as you have implied/stated….so there would be no GP registration details, unless he chose dual registration, which he plainly has not…at this time he does not practice as a GP…i never ever said he was on the GP register, btw it’s a gmc register not a qualification….i legitimately added MRCGP because as anyone can see from above (re aboutme page) it is true…that he is NOT on the GP register is irrelevant, as he no longer practices as a GP but is on the specialist register which covers what he does practice, which is psychiatry…so whether i chose to show this or not is irrelevant in any case……he got his med degree in 1961, the same yr that he also 1st got his provisional (12mth) licence to practice as a doctor..he has had the same reg no since he 1st qualified as a doctor in 1961…
i posted ref to his site on this very thread, 28 JULY @ 12.19 pm “then you might like the work of quaker dr bob johnson @truthtrustconsent.com, as i do”…btw quakers never knowing lie…their mission is seeking truth…
you posted this after i had 1st posted his about me page….
JULY 29 @ 11.17 pm…Lucy – He is NOT a qualified GP and he does not claim to be. So you’re talking complete crap (www.truthtrustconsent.com/public_html/about-me)
you posted this JULY 29 @ 1.12 pm….Lucy – Perhaps you should tell Bob Johnson that he qualified as a GP, because neither he nor the GMC know about it!
you posted this 29 JULY @ 4.14pm …at the very least I can read English and see that the GMC and Johnson’s own web site say he never qualified as a GP!
i am absolutely an evolutionist….i believe that the only god is that of nature…heaven is here now on earth…
you are therefore proven once again to be plain wrong…i will no longer discuss these matter with you…skara brea…amen…
LikeLike
Actually you talked in glowing terms about Johnson much longer ago than that, and I remember seeing his web site back then, though I can’t remember if you posted the link or I found it.
I think soliciting donations to a charity which doesn’t exist is unethical as well as illegal, and I would say that’s much worse than a little embellishment of your CV, which some people don’t really think is lying anyway.
I’m glad we agree that life evolved, though I think referring to ‘nature’ as a god is a bit confusing, because that’s not what most people think the word means.
LikeLike
Can you guys please stop this pednatic nonsense right now?
Right now, war crimes are being committed in Gaza and all you two seem to want to spend your time on is scoring cheap and silly little points against one another.
Give it – and the rest of us – a break – please !!!!
LikeLike
john
no one is forcing you to read what we post, in fact i had stopped posting on this thread some hrs ago…and i am not the one scoring points here…but i know you are more concerned with things outwith the uk personally all humanity concerns me…as i have read your specific post about this above, and i disagree with your stance…my mission is to do what i can to end warmongering, so it is not a case of looking elsewhere but to one’s self….i have mentioned the work of alice miller to you…and i also responded to your post re sutcliffe my exchanges with fink are not the cause of the gaza butchery….but i was just reading an article that describes a father in gaza picking up pieces of his 2 yr old son and placing them in a carrier bag….
how do i help? what do i do about it? tell me ffs coz it tears me apart…here’s the link
..http://wingsoverscotland.com/what-does-it-mean-to-be-scottish/ or do you think that you are the only one who cares…in fact it is the very reason that i am so passionate about the work of dr bob johnson, alice miller et al….
you’ll also know that many friends, seek mission in war zones and will be active right now…so don’t give me your self righteous crap, as if, you are the only one who cares, get involved, and get it stopped…
LikeLike
John – I agree with overburdenddonkey. Don’t read if you’re not interested, and you must have been astonishingly bored to have done so. Also, thinking about something trivial doesn’t stop one thinking about something more serious, and maybe conning vulnerable people out of their money isn’t so trivial anyway.
LikeLike
Pingback: 89% of public say Foot-in-Mouth syndrome scientists should be aborted at birth | Pride's Purge