So uuh, this article made me ashamed to be a guy...

[utopian]

And I just wanted to warn anyone that might wanna look at it, just the title of it disgusted me. Take a second to wonder if you even want to look at this.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-32413502

 

I don't see how people can be like this. This is wrong beyond comprehension. What kind of thought processes wou... honestly, I don't even want to know. I find myself wishing I never had known this even happens.

 

 

 

The thing is, see, I am usually the kind of guy who is totally for championing men's rights, pointing out men's abuse and stuff. And I still do feel like men's rights are fairly trampled. But honestly, after seeing this article, it has opened up a whole perspective for me about what women could be facing. Obviously this article is a very small minority of men, but man, it really does make me disgusted just to know I am in the same gender category as these guys. I am feeling fairly confused, wondering just what it is in "feminism" I have been overlooking. 

[DaVinci]

These issues cycle into each other. A man beats a woman. The woman beats her son. The son grows up hating women. He takes revenge on another woman by raping her. That woman learns to hate men. She promotes "women's rights" that hurt men who had nothing to do with raping her. Those men get mad at all feminists etc. Eventually it cycles down to this level and becomes this incredibly horrible act.

 

Essentially, someone who was not raised in a violent environment wouldn't do something like this. Someone who had rejected violence wouldn't do something like this.

[MysterionMuffles]

Don't think that women aren't capable of pedophilia because of this. They damn well are. That's so messed up though...babies and toddlers? How the hell do you even begin to be attracted to them in--no I can't even conceive of the idea.

[DaVinci]

Don't think that women aren't capable of pedophilia because of this. They damn well are. That's so messed up though...babies and toddlers? How the hell do you even begin to be attracted to them in--no I can't even conceive of the idea.

I don't think it is attraction they feel. I would wager it is more about that at some point in their lives they felt powerless and so are now acting out a power fantasy against the weakest people.

[Better Future]

Baby rapists are very sick people with very dysfunctional brains, they are victims who victimize. Occurrences like this are just a reflection of our dysfunctional society.

 

Don't be ashamed of being a man, don't be proud of being a man either. Your gender most certainly does not connect you in any way to baby rapists.

 

This happened in my country recently. His comments were seen as irrational.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/10232457/David-Cunliffe-I-m-sorry-for-being-a-man

[Libertus]

Does the article also make you glad you're not a Brit? Or over 30? Does it make you feel ashamed to be white?

And what does this have to do with male rights? If a black man kills a child, does that make you question anti-slavery laws?

 

All this has a name: group-think. You're thinking of humans as groups. We are individuals. Consider this, please.

[pretzelogik]

The first thing that occurs to me when I see an article like this is to question its veracity.  Just because it is in a MSM publication does not mean it is true.

 

More elaborate (although not necessarily more repulsive) false stories are generated by the media on a regular basis.

 

This is likely another part of an ongoing effort to curtail freedom of speech, drum up support for a tiered internet or both.  The real takeaway of the article is the last line:

 

"It shows that there is still a long way to go for technology companies and social media networks who work with police to identify and prevent these crimes."

[Agalloch]

This article heavily implies that the babies mothers, their primary care givers and protecters, were complicit in the acts, If it says anything about Gender it says a lot more about them, but I don't think it has anything to do with Gender.

[J. D. Stembal]

More women abuse children than men, and that's a fact. You wouldn't know it by simply reading headlines.

[Tservitive]

Any Individual who would rape a baby is wrong. It's even worse when you work together with others who want to rape babies, film/live-stream it,and share with others who would desire and act upon such a thing. This is the kind of crime that one can never fully redeem due to the irreversible nature of such an act. Feeling the impulse and pursuing it rather than seek help is a moral choice and too many people make the wrong choice.

 

However, any parent, regardless of gender, who would not only comply to such a request, but even premeditatedly place that hardship upon an unborn child.

 

What upsets me the most, even more than parents who would burden a child with a life-long baggage of evil, is that these monsters can still drive a car, enjoy a movie, vote for another sociopath, and of course shack up again and keep this mobius strip going.

[Better Future]

Feeling the impulse and pursuing it rather than seek help is a moral choice and too many people make the wrong choice.

 

Why do people make the choices they do? If a person decides to seek help are we to judge them as "good"? If a person pursues the impulse are we to judge them as "bad"?

 

I believe that it is the pre-existing brain structure that determines the choices a person makes. Wouldn't we expect to see a more random pattern of rape events if people really were free to choose? Why is it that a very disproportionate number of rapists were neglected and abused as children themselves?

 

Do baby rapists really have the freedom to think to themselves, "Hey, I'm sick, I need to get psychiatric help"? I think parenting quality is the core issue here. It is irrational to hope that baby rapists will make better choices.

[percentient]

this article made me ashamed to be a guy

 

...success?

[Freedom4TheVirtuous]

These issues cycle into each other. A man beats a woman. The woman beats her son. The son grows up hating women. He takes revenge on another woman by raping her. That woman learns to hate men. She promotes "women's rights" that hurt men who had nothing to do with raping her. Those men get mad at all feminists etc. Eventually it cycles down to this level and becomes this incredibly horrible act.

 

Essentially, someone who was not raised in a violent environment wouldn't do something like this. Someone who had rejected violence wouldn't do something like this.

Hi Da Vinci,

 

While I can appreciate what appears to be a sound argument - I just want to say that's not all cases.

 

I'm not acting out the female inflictions on innocent females - I'm bringing the burning fire right back to it's rightful owners.

 

Not trying to divert attention from OP - but I think it's important to assign freewill and not just assume people are like a brownie recipe.

[King David]

I don't know if I'm more shocked at the story as I am that the police did something very valuable.  This is a case where the punishment should fit the crime

[Agalloch]

Why do people make the choices they do? If a person decides to seek help are we to judge them as "good"? If a person pursues the impulse are we to judge them as "bad"?

 

I believe that it is the pre-existing brain structure that determines the choices a person makes. Wouldn't we expect to see a more random pattern of rape events if people really were free to choose? Why is it that a very disproportionate number of rapists were neglected and abused as children themselves?

 

Do baby rapists really have the freedom to think to themselves, "Hey, I'm sick, I need to get psychiatric help"? I think parenting quality is the core issue here. It is irrational to hope that baby rapists will make better choices.

I was really convinced by this argument the first time I read it, but I'm afriad I missed the really common and obvious logical error, you got your implications completely backwards! "Why is it that a very disproportionate number of rapists were neglected and abused as children themselves?" actually says nothing, the non-existant statistic you are looking for is: Why is it that a very disproportionate number of neglected and abused children are rapists? would actually support your argument, but unfortunatley no such study exists that I can find.

 

Of course the vast majority of rapists were neglected and abused as children, that's a prerequisite. It's like asking why the vast majority of people who murder with chainsaws grafted to their stumps were involved in accidents in which they lost an arm. Healthy people don't tend to become rapists. However, have you considered all the people that were abused to the same extent, and then didn't go on to become rapists? Not that they just magically didn't want to, despite the sexual horrors that they had suffered, but those that at least choice not to act out their desires, and those that sought help, as many here have, to attempt to erase the affects of their traumas.

[Merrifield]

Does the article also make you glad you're not a Brit? Or over 30? Does it make you feel ashamed to be white?

 

And what does this have to do with male rights? If a black man kills a child, does that make you question anti-slavery laws?

 

All this has a name: group-think. You're thinking of humans as groups. We are individuals. Consider this, please.

 

Sound advice.

I feel no shame for being a man. I do feel disgusted by what some men do.

 

The first thing that occurs to me when I see an article like this is to question its veracity.  Just because it is in a MSM publication does not mean it is true.

 

More elaborate (although not necessarily more repulsive) false stories are generated by the media on a regular basis.

 

This is likely another part of an ongoing effort to curtail freedom of speech, drum up support for a tiered internet or both.  The real takeaway of the article is the last line:

 

"It shows that there is still a long way to go for technology companies and social media networks who work with police to identify and prevent these crimes."

I think you may be onto something.

The article has the emotional impact of any good propaganda piece. Similar to the hype around the "war on terror" or the "war on drugs".

[utopian]

Thanks everyone... its taken me a little bit to think about this.

 

I think the first thing I had to think of, was that I think this article had something to say about ME. *I* feel ashamed for *THEM*, at what THEY have done. 

 

Now I had to think about that for a second. Why do I feel this way? It was not me that did it. And yet I still feel embarrassed, as if it was. Is this because, perhaps, this is the way I was raised? To feel the shame of someone else's criminal actions as if it was my own? Thinking back, I do have a crazy mother who did her best to guilt trip everyone and anyone in order to gain entitlements. Not unlike Steph's mom. I think I am starting to see this chain of abuse that makes me feel this way. 

 

Even though I see some kind of abuse mechanic, however, I still feel bad. I need some way of undoing this I suppose, some kind of therapy. I am an abused child myself. It feels it some strange way that I could have been messed up to the point where I turned out like one of the guys in the article, but I did not. 

 

And in the larger scheme of things, it seems like this is perhaps a common thing, women shaming men to get them to do things for them for free. For entitlements. Does it start young, as I believe it started young for me with my own mother? Is this what more militant feminism aims to take advantage of? In no way do I think people like in the article should be excused. But I didn't do it, and I should not have to pay for it. Or feel like I did. I wish I could just say I did not.

[MMX2010]

Thanks everyone... its taken me a little bit to think about this.

 

I think the first thing I had to think of, was that I think this article had something to say about ME. *I* feel ashamed for *THEM*, at what THEY have done.

 

Now I had to think about that for a second. Why do I feel this way? It was not me that did it. And yet I still feel embarrassed, as if it was. Is this because, perhaps, this is the way I was raised? To feel the shame of someone else's criminal actions as if it was my own? Thinking back, I do have a crazy mother who did her best to guilt trip everyone and anyone in order to gain entitlements. Not unlike Steph's mom. I think I am starting to see this chain of abuse that makes me feel this way. 

 

Even though I see some kind of abuse mechanic, however, I still feel bad. I need some way of undoing this I suppose, some kind of therapy. I am an abused child myself. It feels it some strange way that I could have been messed up to the point where I turned out like one of the guys in the article, but I did not. 

 

And in the larger scheme of things, it seems like this is perhaps a common thing, women shaming men to get them to do things for them for free. For entitlements. Does it start young, as I believe it started young for me with my own mother? Is this what more militant feminism aims to take advantage of? In no way do I think people like in the article should be excused. But I didn't do it, and I should not have to pay for it. Or feel like I did. I wish I could just say I did not.

 

 

What you typed (and what I highlighted in blue font) is narcissism.  In the first sentence, you admit that the first thing you thought when you read that article is, "I wonder how what they did reflects on me."  That's narcissism. 

 

Your second sentence, "*I* feel ashamed for them, at what *THEY* have done.", is false-as-stated, because it's impossible to feel anything for someone else.  I can't feel angry for the woman who loves me; she either feels angry (or doesn't) of her own free will. 

 

A more accurate (and therefore truthful) translation of your second sentence was, "I felt angry at them for provoking my sense of shame-for-myself and concern-for-myself by committing their crime.  Because my first thought when reading this article was, 'I wonder how what they did reflects on me.'"  BUT even this second sentence isn't perfectly accurate, because they didn't provoke your sense of shame/concern for yourself; you voluntarily felt it as a result of reading the article.  You have agency over your feelings, because even the feelings that seemingly arise involuntarily can be controlled / altered by self-knowledge and the acquisition of new moral perspectives. 

 

----------------------

 

What you said in green font is the typical reasoning of narcissistic individuals.  They feel that the narcissism is cured by going inward, through long series of therapeutic interactions, to find the childhood-centered root cause of the narcissism and undoing it.  

 

The problem is that the assumptions that (1) the cure for narcissism is internal, and (2) only you are in the prime position to discover the cure through introspection are BOTH narcissistic!. 

 

Blog author TheLastPsychiatrist has already discovered the cure for narcissism.  He warns that the majority of narcissists will not follow through on his cure, because they don't understand how (and why) it works. 

 

The cure for narcissism has two steps.  Step one: Fake not being a narcissist.  Step Two: There is no Step Two; there is only Step One. 

 

The retort by those who doubt the cure is always as follows, "But you don't get it TLP.  You're supposed to recommend a specific form of therapy that is most effective in getting me to understand the root cause of my narcissism!  You're a goddamn psychiatrist!  What's the matter with you?  How dare you not recommend either medication or therapy!?!?" 

 

And TLP's retort is always as follows, "The cure for narcissism is the cure for narcissism, because it is NOT FOR YOU.  Instead, it's for everyone else you'll ever come into contact with."

 

------------------

 

Something else to consider.  If you ask HannahBanana what she felt when she read this article, I'm guessing she felt sadness for the babies who suffered.  This isn't narcissistic, because she doesn't care about "how she feels", nor "how the existence of this crime reflects on her".  She simply and spontaneously feels sadness for the babies who suffered. 

 

And if you ask me what I felt when reading this article, the truth is I didn't feel anything.  I saw the title, knew what the article was about, and refused to read it.  I've no power to alter whatever crimes these men committed, and I know that reading about these things sours my mood.  And I don't want my mood to be soured over a problem I cannot solve, especially since my job requires face-to-face contact with people who need my help.  My feelings are partially cold, partially narcissistic, partially unselfish, and most pragmatic. 

 

Lastly, you'll notice that your second reply focuses entirely on what you feel and what you want to know about yourself.  Which, naturally, means that it contains no curiosity as to what others felt and what they learned about themselves.  So all of your curiosity is directed inwards, none of it is directed outwards, and guess what? 

 

You're an isolated individual who has trouble making long-term friends, right? 

[Better Future]

have you considered all the people that were abused to the same extent, and then didn't go on to become rapists?

 

I wasn't making the point that abused children will automatically go on to abuse others. I was making the point that the choices a person makes are determined by the pre-existing brain structure.

 

Child abuse has a huge effect on the develping brain but it is not the only factor. The brain develops according to genes and every single experience over a lifetime.

 

Tservitive stated that "too many people make the wrong choice" when it comes to acting on their impulse to rape babies. My point was just that the brain behaves exactly as we should expect it to, there is no such thing as a "wrong choice".

 

When a person "chooses" to seek help it does not make them "good". It is because every experience they have had has lead them to that point.

[Agalloch]

 

I wasn't making the point that abused children will automatically go on to abuse others. I was making the point that the choices a person makes are determined by the pre-existing brain structure.

 

Child abuse has a huge effect on the develping brain but it is not the only factor. The brain develops according to genes and every single experience over a lifetime.

 

Tservitive stated that "too many people make the wrong choice" when it comes to acting on their impulse to rape babies. My point was just that the brain behaves exactly as we should expect it to, there is no such thing as a "wrong choice".

 

When a person "chooses" to seek help it does not make them "good". It is because every experience they have had has lead them to that point.

 

I know the point you were making, which is why I pointed out your fallacy. If pre-existing brain structure is determined by abuse suffered, and not all those who suffer these specific abuses went on to commit those actions, then "brain structure" alone doesn't determine action and freedom of choice is still relevant.

 

You're a dick, bananas are blue, rabbit soup, blamertyblurgh. Don't forget to not criticise these comments, every experience i've ever had lead me to this point cock sucker.

[Better Future]

If pre-existing brain structure is determined by abuse suffered, and not all those who suffer these specific abuses went on to commit those actions

 

You fail to understand that child abuse is not the only factor to influence brain structure. Firstly, each brain differs slightly due to genetics, resulting in different personality traits and differing responses to the same inputs. Secondly, there are countless other inputs that influence brain structure. From parents, to peer group, to teachers and the wider culture. 

 

Not all victims of child abuse go on to abuse. Brain structure differs and so do the resulting responses to abuse. Brains are very similar though and so we can see broad patterns. Abused children are much more likely to be dysfunctional adults.

 

Maybe your brain structure is such that you respond by trying to offend me so that you can then ask me why I was offended, because your brain was just doing exactly as I should have expected. I don't get offended, I don't get angry, I don't complain. I understand.

 

It is interesting that when I tell people that their brains are only acting in accordance with their pre-existing brain structure they will often attempt a random output of some kind, in order to reinforce the illusion of freedom. It appears that you have done the same.

 

You're a dick, bananas are blue, rabbit soup, blamertyblurgh. 

 

Do you notice how this is not a random output? These "random" words are in perfect alignment with your pre-existing brain structure. You call me a "dick", where did you pick this word up from? You experience bananas, rabbits and soup in everyday life. Your attempt to make up a word is also in line with your understanding of the English language.