At what point do you cross this line? v. keeping slaves in the modern US

I agree with the statements that take into account the cultural aspect. Up until the 20th century, it was quite normal in your supercivilized US to have slaves. Does that mean those slave owners were sociopaths with a dysfunctional conscience? Not really. Consider that only because the West has developed such a conscience recently, it does not mean the rest of the world followed suit.

Then consider that people just love having power over other human beings, which is likely the root for the entire slave thing. It gives them satisfaction and a higher self-worth.

I don't think that's what Lindy did, as in provide an excuse for the crime of rape.

I do agree with her. It's recklessness when you know/realize a specific action (any action) has a good chance of helping a negative/dangerous action to take place. When a reckless act goes bad, the person who committed the reckless act does bear responsibility for what happened to some extent. If a woman is stupid enough to walk skimpily-clad into a ward for sex offenders and then gets raped, are that woman's hands completely clean as you like to portray it?

 

Seriously? Yes, I meant exactly what I said - There is no functional purpose to blaming the victim other than providing an excuse for the perpetrator and to do that is unconscionable. I mean, where does it stop? There is no limit to this manner excusing of anything; by walking out your door in the morning you've brought it on. Just expect it if you even bother to get out of bed.

maybe if you weren't in that spot at that time that drunk drive wouldn't have hit you. partially your fault
maybe if you hadn't decided to walk to the store that mugger wouldn't have found you. partially your fault.
maybe if you hadn't decided to live in that neighborhood those stray bullets wouldn't have hit your kid through the window. partially your fault
maybe if you hadn't been wearing that dress you wouldn't have been raped. partially your fault.

Absolutely fucking absurd.

 

See, I didn't argue for any blaming of the victim and I sure as hell wouldn't seek to provide an iota of defense to a rapist. However, we do have to recognize the element of recklessness, and how a specific action may be part of the whole "causation" aspect (something that is inherently complex and often difficult to pinpoint, which KirStang would probably tell you).

The first three of the analogies you made cannot be compared with the last one. The difference between them is that the first three state "random victimization". The drunk driver probably didn't set out to run over somebody, the mugger randomly attacked people at the store he randomly selected for his mugging, and the stray bullet sure as hell wasn't fired to hit the kid (hence, "stray").

Further, it's hardly ever an A->B scenario. You'd usually find there's numerous factors to take into account. If I walked (A) around with a gold-plated Rolex watch (B) in a poor (C) and crime-ridden (D) neighborhood, I would expect to get mugged (Result E). The mugger can't defend his actions by pointing to me having worn that Rolex watch, but what I did was still stupid, only helped the situation along, and what happened was somewhat predictable. As such, it was reckless.

Now, sexual attraction is not the major reason why rapists rape (though it does play a part in it), so much as it is power. However, even if we look at the power aspect only... from a rapist's viewpoint, what would provide more satisfaction? Raping that modestly-clothed woman (gotta admit here that there's a "purity" aspect to this which perverted minds would like to "stain"); or the confident-looking and assertive woman in a miniskirt and tight shirt with a deep cleavage?

Probably the latter, as they give off a sense of "strength" and confidence which, from a power-addicted rapist's point of view, would be so much more rewarding to subdue and violate. Now, it's perfectly unreasonable to stop "being yourself" for the sake of some rapist, but the same does not extend to clothing. Knowing that rapists, whether they're motivated by sexual attraction or power, would target sexy-clothed women should be enough to constitute recklessness on the part of the woman to some degree when going to wear "light" clothing in public.

Lastly, the recklessness argument extends just as much to women who go to bars/clubs and get shitfaced drunk, pass out and wake up the next morning with a used condom on the floor.

Of course, being the hilariously individualistic culture that you are, why think for the benefit of society when individual rights to act as stupidly as possible without accepting any of the possible consequences are so much more important?

I'm not saying the US is squeamish for abolishing the legality of slavery. Regarding that woman, I don't know enough of her background to make any conclusion on her possible sociopathy.

Antisocial behavior is relative. In many ways, US culture's etiquette is perceived as cold and antisocial in regions such as Latin America and the Middle East.

Obviously she hasn't treated the employee in accordance with the social norms of the US, as otherwise the issue of criminality would not come up. However, it does make a difference what her cultural background is. Elite-level families and clans in India are known for their lavish lifestyles and for keeping a number of "employees" (read: de facto slaves). Owing to an upbringing in such an environment, would she have developed a conscience or recognition for the equal value of each human being? No, very likely not. She would certainly not consider herself as doing anything wrong by her own social standards for having a slave, nor would the society back at home see anything in it.

Also, even if she has lived in the US since birth, cultural traditions and the entire enculturation process within her family would maintain the slave-master mindset.

We should compare these different realities, because it matters greatly in the classification of her as a sociopath. Does this discussion in any way affect the vile nature of what she did? No.

We are, if she grew up in an environment where slavery is deemed acceptable. Unless we know her past in extensive detail, this is an area we can't come to a definitive conclusion in.

1. Maybe.
2. No.
3. Yes.
4. Yes.
5. Probably not, as her call to the employee's relative indicates.
6. Probably does.
7. No, it's not okay.

For the record, I have a deep dislike for any social norm where absolute equality for each human being is not provided. Maybe it's because I'm German. I definitely do not like the vast majority of cultures in the world.

 

While generally true, there *IS* trafficking in First World women as sex slaves in other parts of the world. Not usually those with better educations or economic backgrounds, or just those with strong families, but the ones who slip into drugs, or run away from abusive home situations, or who disappear after having outgrown their usefulness to child pornography rings. It is not just Eastern European white females who end up in slavery in Third World brothels. A police friend of mine who works on child pornography cases that cross MANY jurisdictional lines (the same child showing up all over the place) opened up one day about the life of some of these kids after they become teens... literally sold as sex slaves when they become "too" old to be interesting to paedophiles anymore.
--- merged: Mar 3, 2012 at 6:38 AM ---

Many of your points have been very well refuted here already, and your arguments are not convincing, but I do have to respond to this point. You are right that rape is about power, not sex. But by your reasoning, women dressed in burkhas/hijabs would rarely be raped, while in fact it is not rare enough (most probably go unreported due to cultural differences). When it comes to rape, it is ALL about power, and the clothing isn't going to deter or encourage many, if any rapists.

 

So... not seriously. My bad.

 

No, my reasoning wasn't as you recounted. What I was trying to convey, is that if a rapist were given the choice between a sexually-liberated, confident and assertive woman in sexy clothing and a modestly-clothed woman who is too shy to look somebody in the eye, and ceteris paribus; I'd wager that he would pick the former as his victim, because the violation of the confident woman's worldview would be a stronger display of his power over her and thus more satisfying for him.

It doesn't mean that a burqa-clad woman wouldn't get raped. It also depends on the situations. Maybe it's easier to rape the burqa/hijab-wearing women because the rapists figures she wouldn't put up much of a fight, and his identity as a rapist would probably be safe with her as she wouldn't dare to speak about the rape out of personal shame and the shame it would bring upon her family. While I can't say I know this, it seems evident that such a convenience-based reasoning would be persuasive to many a rapist.

 

Remixer, I think you have a profound misunderstanding of the psychology of rapists. It's rarely about the clothes she's wearing, which was the point that I was trying to make with my initial comment. The dress, whether it be a burqa or a miniskirt, is irrelevant. Excluding date rape (where the victim knows the attacker beforehand), it's more about opportunity, power and dominance.

Send two women, one in a miniskirt and one in a burqa, down a dark street with a potential rapist hiding in the shadows, and the outcome is going to be the same. Pretending otherwise is ignorance, willful or otherwise.

It's about the criminal, brah, not the victim - to put it in Plan9-speak.

 

the_jazz, I understand the point you're making. However, my point wasn't particularly about the dress itself either, but the characteristics of the woman's personality the dress would indicate to a rapist.

Not that I have conclusive research on this on hand, but I can't imagine why a sexily-dressed woman wouldn't be more appealing to a rapist when speaking from a power-display and opportunity perspective.

 

While this isn't good, and I don't know all of the details, I think her job at this house would beat what some hotel maids have to do.

And then this woman will have to figure out what she will do now. Can she stay in the US? Will the INS deport her? What will her life be like then?

It is a big problem with many jobs, and I'm not sure what the fix is.

 

Exactly how big is this closet?

 

You continue to miss my point - the rapist isn't interested in the woman's personality at all. If he were, he wouldn't be a rapist.

You're espousing a traditional Muslim belief - that men can't control themselves around women. Frankly, that's something that I reject completely and I'm a little surprised that you've gone as far down that road as you have.

 

Rape isn't about sex. A woman in a sexy dress isn't tempting a rapist, because the rapist isn't horny. His interest is in power and humiliation, not in getting off

 

Just to be a dick - was this woman raped? How did we get into a discussion of whether a delectable little strumpet is more tantalizing to a would-be toothy rapey kind of guy, when we started off with human trafficking and at the very least indentured servitude, if not modern slavery in the United States. My understanding is that human trafficking, for sex or other labor, is right behind illegal drugs in terms of volume trafficked and $$$ involved.

I could track back the thread to see how this got jacked, but the point is that this woman wasn't "asking for it," and neither are rape victims. It's shit-house scary when I agree wholeheartedly with the jazz

edit: I a word.

 

I think we should agree to disagree here, as I do believe the personality aspect to have some relevance to a rapist's identification of women he wants to victimize. I concede that I may be completely wrong here, but that's simply my belief on the matter, based on my own subjective understanding of human patterns of thought.

I do, however, sometimes feel that letting people know on here that I'm a Muslim to have been counterproductive for discussions. I've repeatedly pointed out that I'm not exactly steeped in Middle Eastern traditions and values, and that in and of itself I am very German, yet it seems to come up again and again when people address my points. I've held very similar positions during the years I spent as an Atheist. Then again, I have to wonder whether people on here would defer my opinions to my ethnic origin instead, if I had proclaimed myself to be Atheist. I know several white German Atheists that hold the same opinion as mine, and as such I believe this connection people draw between my opinions and my religion to be inherently misguided, if not an insult to my intellect.

Also, I do not claim that men in general can't control themselves around women. There are good reasons why I'm not exactly a proponent of hijab, nor have I ever had any discussions with my fiancée about her conforming to Islamic rules on dress. At the same time, we can't ignore that there are men (and to a lesser extent, women) out there who cannot control themselves, and that the risk is there. Completely ignoring the self-control deficiencies these people have in our assessments on how to live and behave is not reasonable, in my opinion.

 

I think it's important to take into consideration the power dynamics that are most likely responsible for keeping this relationship sustained for six years. A wealthy family as opposed to an immigrant in an unfamiliar place w. limited options and resources? Probably within a year the situation had become one that felt natural and, because no one got caught, normal.

Still, fact is, the couple knew that what they were doing was illegal and the woman was grossly underpaid. They are criminals no different than a mugger on the street. Hope she goes to jail for a long time.