The Small Rants Thread IX: Leaping into the Well of Darkness

[Amechra]

I don't. I've seen what 15 years as a criminal law judge has done to my mom.

But is that because the law is a terrible monster that devours hope and enthusiasm, or because she's a judge.

[bhu]

I don't. I've seen what 15 years as a criminal law judge has done to my mom.

But is that because the law is a terrible monster that devours hope and enthusiasm, or because she's a judge.

I had a friend who became a judge once.  He said it's soul crushing because you only see the worst in people if you let it get to you, and you see so many innocent people do time while so many scum go free.  He ended up quitting before he put a bullet in his head.

Which prolly explains why so many judges are sociopaths here.  If you have any empathy you can't take the demands of the job.

[trappedslider]

I don't. I've seen what 15 years as a criminal law judge has done to my mom.

But is that because the law is a terrible monster that devours hope and enthusiasm, or because she's a judge.

I had a friend who became a judge once.  He said it's soul crushing because you only see the worst in people if you let it get to you, and you see so many innocent people do time while so many scum go free.  He ended up quitting before he put a bullet in his head.

Which prolly explains why so many judges are sociopaths here.  If you have any empathy you can't take the demands of the job.

I would think it would depend on what type of court your a judge in...from my limited understanding aren't a few different types of courts?

[SorO_Lost]

The last level of Broforce (october update). 

Almost the entire map can be blown up, so how to we make a hard stage? Create a boss that is a missile launcher with x4 life and frigging stock pile the stage with standard launchers. And then make them climb upwards so EVERYTHING firing at them blows up the god damn stage preventing you from climbing the frigging thing.

Finally beat it using Blade whose jump height was enough to zerg rush in and ride the boss to the top.

[Kuroimaken]

I don't. I've seen what 15 years as a criminal law judge has done to my mom.

But is that because the law is a terrible monster that devours hope and enthusiasm, or because she's a judge.

I had a friend who became a judge once.  He said it's soul crushing because you only see the worst in people if you let it get to you, and you see so many innocent people do time while so many scum go free.  He ended up quitting before he put a bullet in his head.

Which prolly explains why so many judges are sociopaths here.  If you have any empathy you can't take the demands of the job.

I would think it would depend on what type of court your a judge in...from my limited understanding aren't a few different types of courts?

It's no coincidence that lots of judges have drug and alcohol issues, too.

Depending on the type of judge, you wind up with different kinds of soul crushing.

Criminal judges see enough atrocities to desensitize them for life. I actually saw some pictures of this one girl who was run over by a car in one of her suits... They found her arms and legs at different quarters of a mile. And this was an ACCIDENT, mom actually dealt with rapes and executions and other shit. She doesn't miss the threats, either.

Civil court judges deal primarily with money disputes, and anyone going to court about money is understandably at their worst every time. The pettiness and greed also get to you.

Prosecuting mayors and other political scumbags hardly gets much better. You often see them getting away with the most atrocious stuff - or being convicted, then reelected, or, even worse, they wind up free once it reaches the Supreme Court.

Then there's insurance fraud, public service suits, etc.. And our country is undergoing one of the worst justice system deconstructions in AGES.

(Yes, this is all technically secondhand from my mom, but she has 30 years as a career judge, so I'm willing to take her info at face value.)

[FireInTheSky]

Stupid day not being long enough... Why can't you be 28 or 30 hours long instead?

[brujon]

https://archive.today/jV3gs

This is making me rage.

Retroactively withdraw consent...

Goddamnit.

EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo4568PIRnk

This seems appropriate.

[Amechra]

https://archive.today/jV3gs

This is making me rage.

Retroactively withdraw consent...

Goddamnit.

EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo4568PIRnk

This seems appropriate.

I do not think they understand consent.

You can't take it back - that's implicit in the whole concept. Our whole system is based off of consent being "no take-backs."

What you can do is never give consent to that person again.

[brujon]

https://archive.today/jV3gs

This is making me rage.

Retroactively withdraw consent...

Goddamnit.

EDIT:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo4568PIRnk

This seems appropriate.

I do not think they understand consent.

You can't take it back - that's implicit in the whole concept. Our whole system is based off of consent being "no take-backs."

What you can do is never give consent to that person again.

They don't obey the laws of logic and reason, your attempt is futile.

[Kajhera]

It ... seems to be less about anything involving a legal framework and more about pointing out someone can say 'yes' and still not actually be comfortable with what's going on.  Which seems valid. Particularly in the abused/coerced section, I might agree to, say, have sex with someone I was afraid would injure me somehow otherwise. (extreme example) I don't know if the criminal implications necessarily make sense, but in terms of thinking about how to communicate with a sexual partner and my personal desire not to hurt someone I love despite my sometimes terrible blindness to feedback, it seems like a ... useful mode of thought?

I.e. that approach should not be used to hurt someone, but to avoid hurting someone.

[dman11235]

Well, actually, I think the point that these idiots are trying to make is that there IS no legal argument for consent at all.  ALL consent is revoke-able.  The example you gave about the coercion, legally (and morally and ethically and logically), is NOT consent.

I mean, with this sort of person, imagine someone going up to you, who you find extremely attractive, and they ask if you want to have sex, then you say yes, you have sex, and then they say "I regret this!".  To the people Brujon's linking, YOU RAPED THAT PERSON.  They came on to YOU, and YOU did the rape.

What you are saying about consent is right.  It's possible to say "yes" and have it not be consent.  Anyone who is impaired enough is not capable of giving consent, even if, at the time, they feel like giving consent.  This is otherwise known as date rape and statutory rape.  And whatever it's called with the mentally handicapped/coerced.

EDIT: btw, my recommendation Brujon, is to just ignore them.  These types of "feminists" (note the quotes) are not common.  Thankfully.  They are very vocal, but not numerous.  And much like the sexism from the other side of the spectrum, eventually they will be removed from the pool.  Society will eventually even itself out.  The BEST thing you can do is prove them wrong about men by acting like a human being.  Don't go out of your way to act all holy and saintly, just act like a normal person.  Same thing with the other side.  Of course, go to the police if things get out of control (like, threats and whatnot).  But don't debate them.  That only makes them stronger.

[bhu]

Well.

You'll all recall my situation with the Neurologist.  After several weeks of trying to contact her so she could do a peer to peer with medicaid I gave up and scheduled a doctors appointment.

The hospital wakes me up this morning saying they tried to reopen my case but the neurologists notes weren't enough, could I please have some other physicians who've treated me for the problem send their notes.  I mention that all she has to do is the peer to peer and am told "Oh she doesn't do those, she refuses to."

So I keep my doctors appointment to tell him I need a referral to a new neurologist, and find out she called him and told him to do the peer to peer.  He refused, telling her "You ordered the test, you're the attending physician, it's your responsibility.  Why would they talk to me about a test you ordered when I'm not the specialist?"

So now I have to wait for them to find me a neurologist and schedule me an appointment.  Then go, and go through this whole process again.

I suddenly understand why mass shootings have become so common...

[trappedslider]

[awaken_D_M_golem]

If the Tea-baggers really believed their own B.S. , they'd swap their Gummint Medicare for the sweet tasty Insurance company run arounds, that have been going on.  But they don't and won't, and make everybody else deal with that !@#$.


Are those 2+ docs in different networks?

[Kajhera]

I mean, with this sort of person, imagine someone going up to you, who you find extremely attractive, and they ask if you want to have sex, then you say yes, you have sex, and then they say "I regret this!".  To the people Brujon's linking, YOU RAPED THAT PERSON.  They came on to YOU, and YOU did the rape.

I certainly hope it's possible to regret sex and not feel violated; make it difficult to try new things otherwise. There's exactly one person I can think of for whom that would make sense, though, and that does involve foreknowledge of mental state regarding sex and taking advantage of it despite knowing her general attempts towards the contrary. And honestly ... I'd trust her judgement if she thought I should be locked up for it; she's been both villain and victim (both when young), knows what the criminal side entails rather than inflicting punishment blindly, and is a generous and loving person who would not intentionally hurt someone without reason.

If it were a complete stranger ... it might be helpful (if painful) to me and to them to realize they felt violated, but it would indeed not make much sense as a legal accusation, had we no way to know the other's mindstate; which is definitely a risk when at least one person with haywire empathy sense is involved with a stranger. (part of why I'm inclined to avoid that state) ... Again, there should be a distinction between acknowledging something as criminal rape and acknowledging something as sexually violating. Why do I keep coming back to that? ><

[Raineh Daze]

The problem with the link is that it condones operating on the idea that you can, after the fact, declare that it was rape based on no actual reason... but only on one side. This sort of view is just... insane, and actually accepting it is terrible to legitimate cases because it trivialises everything.

[Amechra]

The problem with the link is that it condones operating on the idea that you can, after the fact, declare that it was rape based on no actual reason... but only on one side. This sort of view is just... insane, and actually accepting it is terrible to legitimate cases because it trivialises everything.

I refused to read the link (I'm already depressed; I don't need more help to feed the rage and misanthropy), but let me guess: they only talk about women when they say you can withdraw consent retroactively?

Therefore ignoring the fact that rape happens to both genders, you opinionated piece of shit.

[Raineh Daze]

The problem with the link is that it condones operating on the idea that you can, after the fact, declare that it was rape based on no actual reason... but only on one side. This sort of view is just... insane, and actually accepting it is terrible to legitimate cases because it trivialises everything.

I refused to read the link (I'm already depressed; I don't need more help to feed the rage and misanthropy), but let me guess: they only talk about women when they say you can withdraw consent retroactively?

Therefore ignoring the fact that rape happens to both genders, you opinionated piece of shit.

Oh, wait, confused it with something else Brujon posted. I wish he'd stop reading this stuff, because I get confused about the sources. >_>

I still think it's dumb to base anything on how you felt after that. You can't criticise or punish people for not being able to see the future. Worse, I can't comprehend declaring it to be morally wrong to be incapable of discerning feelings or emotions that the other person is already unaware of. It's basically saying 'it's wrong to not know someone better than they know themselves!'

[brujon]

The problem with the link is that it condones operating on the idea that you can, after the fact, declare that it was rape based on no actual reason... but only on one side. This sort of view is just... insane, and actually accepting it is terrible to legitimate cases because it trivialises everything.

RD gets it.

The real problem here is that people are trying to complicate something that should not ever be this complicated. Two adults willingly go into the bedroom and decide to have sex. How is this not consent?

People are trying to make the case that if a girl is a little tipsy than her ability to consent is impaired. I absolutely get the cases where a girl is so hammered that she doesn't ever properly remembers that she had sex, and that it might lead to her not using protection and ending up pregnant or getting an STD. And i see this might be rape, in some cases. But being a little tipsy does not, and should not, mean you are unable to consent. Because if it is, then all countries should outlaw alcohol, and you shouldn't ever pick a girl up at a bar.

[Kajhera]

The problem with the link is that it condones operating on the idea that you can, after the fact, declare that it was rape based on no actual reason... but only on one side. This sort of view is just... insane, and actually accepting it is terrible to legitimate cases because it trivialises everything.

I refused to read the link (I'm already depressed; I don't need more help to feed the rage and misanthropy), but let me guess: they only talk about women when they say you can withdraw consent retroactively?

Therefore ignoring the fact that rape happens to both genders, you opinionated piece of shit.

Actually, thankfully, gender was barely mentioned, women were never specifically mentioned, and the names in the example case they used implied a gay male couple.