Poll: Would you have sympathy for these guys?

[Qizx]

I feel like this is a classic swap - a -roono.

I feel very badly for all of these men, they all had terrible things happen to them.
HOWEVER,
Yes they certainly could have taken precautions to avoid this happening. That being said the onus of preventing these bad things is on the person doing the bad action, not on the person who has the bad thing happen.

All that said number 3 is a fucking moron, NEVER have unprotected sex unless you know the person very well, and are open to the possibility of pregnancy. Seriously. Don't. For those of you out there who are sexually active DON'T BE A FOOL, WRAP YOUR (or partner's) TOOL.

 

[Godhead]

I would probably save the STD from a whirlpool, anybody who would do otherwise is a monster.

 

[Frostbyte666]

I feel sympathy for all of them. Though in degrees the most sympathy for #1 because getting robbed is horrible and one night stands do happen, then #3 though he was constantly pushing it with the unprotected sex but not telling someone about being HIV positive is a horrible thing to do. Now #2 yes there is sympathy there since racism is completely unjustified but I can't help but think the guy was playing russian roulette since he knew all the risks for the area and personally if I was in his position I'd be more looking toward getting away from the place with my life and all extremities in place than chasing tail.

Oh those silly people, not uprooting their lives to go move somewhere else where there's likely to be horrible discrimination or becoming a one man army to end it themselves.

There is a reason I said personally now if you want to stick it out in such an area taking on all the risks of getting lynched by a bunch of racist asses looking for an excuse that's your perogative you just have to be a damn sight more careful than #2 who knew all the risks and damned the consequences anyway; and yes what happened to him was horrific and completely unjustified before you try and accuse me of racism in a passive aggressive fashion as well. Myself yeah I would move even given all the financial troubles etc etc. I'd still take the risk for a better life by uprooting and moving on even with the risk of being hunted down and butchered by a bunch of racists for fleeing (instead of waiting inside a small area for them to find an excuse to lynch). So forgive me for my so called short-sightedness but I am not a person to wait for death to come to me so get off your high horse.

Yeah you touched a nerve.

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

I feel sympathy for all of them. Though in degrees the most sympathy for #1 because getting robbed is horrible and one night stands do happen, then #3 though he was constantly pushing it with the unprotected sex but not telling someone about being HIV positive is a horrible thing to do. Now #2 yes there is sympathy there since racism is completely unjustified but I can't help but think the guy was playing russian roulette since he knew all the risks for the area and personally if I was in his position I'd be more looking toward getting away from the place with my life and all extremities in place than chasing tail.

Oh those silly people, not uprooting their lives to go move somewhere else where there's likely to be horrible discrimination or becoming a one man army to end it themselves.

There is a reason I said personally now if you want to stick it out in such an area taking on all the risks of getting lynched by a bunch of racist asses looking for an excuse that's your perogative you just have to be a damn sight more careful than #2 who knew all the risks and damned the consequences anyway; and yes what happened to him was horrific and completely unjustified before you try and accuse me of racism in a passive aggressive fashion as well. Myself yeah I would move even given all the financial troubles etc etc. I'd still take the risk for a better life by uprooting and moving on even with the risk of being hunted down and butchered by a bunch of racists for fleeing (instead of waiting inside a small area for them to find an excuse to lynch). So forgive me for my so called short-sightedness but I am not a person to wait for death to come to me so get off your high horse.

Yeah you touched a nerve.

Yeah and I don't get those people that get murdered. Me I'd just ignore any difficulty and just kill them instead. Problems are so easy when you ignore all the details.

Like "I don't care about the finances of travel or racism along the way or possibly facing the same racism where they arrive I'd just move to a better place finances be damned." So much easier if you ignore any possible huge difficulty in the plan. Well we sure know you're so much smarter than all those idiots that didn't just move them and their families somewhere safer, right? =/

 

[cdfgku]

Removing the one night stand aspect all of these are still crimes committed against someone.

1.) Someone gets robbed by a person who accesses their house under false pretences.

2.) Someone gets accused of a crime they didn't commit and subsequently murdered for it.

3.) Someone gets deliberately infected with a life-threatening, incurable disease.

I don't think whether it is a one night stand should have any bearing on a person's sympathy for the victim of a crime. I also don't think there is anything wrong or immoral about one night stands. If both parties are consenting adults and clear that it is a one night stand then I can't see any problem with it.

 

[WolfThomas]

All three men deserve sympathy. Just because they make a dumb decision I might not agree doesn't give me license to discount their suffering or to despise the perpetrators of their suffering any less.

This veers dangerously close, to "she was asking for it wearing a mini-skirt".

Edit: To clarify when I say perpetrators in 3's case I'm talking about the HIV not the infected person.

 

[Addendum_Forthcoming]

Hey, I'll have you know I am very discriminating when it comes to decimating humanity!

...waitasecond.

Hrm. I didn't think this through....

 

[Something Amyss]

That's exactly what I was thinking. I mean it seems to be what 2 refers to. So many problems with seriously blaming people for not just moving away in thay kind of scenario. Very short sighted and ignores financial situations, family, the state of the rest of the nation, potentially education of the victim, as well as just general available knowledge at the time in such a situation.

Yeah, and it get s worse when you say what you would do in this hypothetical situation in which you have no stake. In life, I've found I'm both weaker and stronger than I though. We just don't know how we'll react in a situation, and so lecturing others on it, or blaming others for it, is rather horrible.

Yeah and I don't get those people that get murdered. Me I'd just ignore any difficulty and just kill them instead. Problems are so easy when you ignore all the details.

I'm actually waiting for someone to tell me that getting stabbed displays a weakness of character. Bleeding my own blood is something that I chose to do, and I could simply choose to rise above it.

Hrm. I didn't think this through....

Look, all I'm saying is I want to feast on the souls of men to appease the elder demonesses. Not even all men. Is that so wrong?

 

[Amaror]

Where are you getting the idea that people just automatically assume that a victim of sexual assault deserves it? Because that's horrible, and I've never seen anyone act like that.

snip

I always hear about that this happens all the time but have never actually seen or read about a particular case were this happened. Even on social media, though maybe i am just looking in the wrong places.
I have seen someone asked the question "What was she wearing" and immediatly get accused of victim blaming but, at least in the cases i have seen so far, it's not to blame the victim in any way, but rather to think themselves protected.
Like they want to think that this happened because of slutty clothes so they can be reassured that it could not happen to them or their loved ones, because they don't wear slutty clothes. When we hear of a horrible thing happening, trying to be sure that it couldn't happen to us is a very natural reaction.
I am not saying this sort of thing doesn't happen though, there are always some horrible people in the world, i am just not sure that it happens as often as it's often said that it happens.

 

[Eclipse Dragon]

Would it be more effective to present the classic provocative clothing leads to rape scenario used in these topics against a similar situation that happens to a man and then see if one sex is favored over the other?

Or a different set of scenarios such as...

Example one:
Girl wants children, guy does not, girl lies and says she's on birth control so they have unprotected sex.

Example two:
Guy wants children, girl does not, they have protected sex, but the guy cuts holes in the condom or otherwise rigs it so it breaks.

 

[Loonyyy]

They all deserve sympathy. They've all been wronged. And, depending on where you live, having unprotected sex with someone, when you have an STD, especially things like HIV, without informing them, is in fact a criminal matter, and rightly so. The spread of HIV poses a very real danger to public health.

What people mistake is the difference between potentially causing the situation, and being responsible for it. These three cases involve victims who's actions have a causal link to their victimisation. But that doesn't make them morally culpable. Being drunk and taking someone home isn't immoral, robbing someone is. There is no question of "asking for it". Here's how you ask for something: "Can I have your something?". Having sex with someone of a different race isn't immoral. Falsely accusing them of rape and beating him to death (Which yeah, does sound like a poor retelling of To Kill A Mockingbird). Having unprotected sex isn't immoral, it's just stupid, although if he's not getting regular tests, so that he knows he's clean, it's immoral as hell. Having sex with someone, when you have an STD, and not telling them, is highly immoral. It doesn't matter that she didn't lie. For the record, he'd be in the wrong if his love for unprotected random sex caused him to pass it on again. He has no moral responsibility for this, but it is a very poor way to go about sex. Always get consent, always ask about diseases, always use protection. Not that I'd have to tell Bob that.

I have sympathy for all of them. The first has been robbed, the second has been murdered, and the third has a terrible disease which will dramatically impact his life. They aren't morally responsible for their fates. They could have prevented them, but if I stabbed you, you could probably have prevented that too in any number of ways, and if that would make you lie down and accept it, then you'd be a fool. In each case, the victim could only be victimised because someone wronged them, and that person is morally responsible for their actions.

Hrm. I didn't think this through....

Look, all I'm saying is I want to feast on the souls of men to appease the elder demonesses. Not even all men. Is that so wrong?

"Not [...] all men". The "Elder Demoness". "Souls of men".

Gasp. It is her. Of the profile picture and the popcorn eating. The Sarkeesididdle! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[blackrave]

Nope, not in a slightest
These scenarios would have some impact on me if people involved would be somewhat involved in my life
If they aren't I couldn't care less

I much rather read and learn about recent developments in fusion tech or spacecraft propulsion systems, rather than bothering with some poor schmuck on the other side of globe. I will never meet him/her, his/her fate will not impact me in a slightest.

To be honest this attitude is new in me.
Some may call me "cruel" or "sociopath", but I prefer considering that I simply don't waste energy on things I can't change or that doesn't impact me.
In short, I learned how to give zero fucks.
It brings immense peace of mind and I honestly wish it on other people.

Fun Fact: Worldwide ~40 people die each minute. Do you feel sorry for all of them?

But let's play this game and assume that people involved on both sides are my relatives/friends/neighbors.
1.Girl is an asshole, guy is a sucker. But either way that's a crime. Plain and simple. My sympathy won't change the past. I would strongly advise guy to take precautions next time.
2.Guy is an idiot, girl is a murderer, useful idiots who lynched a guy are murderers as well. Again this is a crime. My sympathy (or lack of it) can't resurrect people.
3.Guy is naive, girl is scum. I would explain to guy how big of an idiot he is for having unprotected sex with stranger. Later I would support him during recovery from said disease, if healing is possible. If not, I would be around him until his death (while taking precautions not to get infected from him). This is only case where my sympathy could do something.

 

[Something Amyss]

They all deserve sympathy. They've all been wronged. And, depending on where you live, having unprotected sex with someone, when you have an STD, especially things like HIV, without informing them, is in fact a criminal matter, and rightly so. The spread of HIV poses a very real danger to public health.

This is probably the most interesting example, largely because it's a case where we do routinely see victim blaming regardless of who did what to who.[/quote]

Look, all I'm saying is I want to feast on the souls of men to appease the elder demonesses. Not even all men. Is that so wrong?

"Not [...] all men". The "Elder Demoness". "Souls of men".

Gasp. It is her. Of the profile picture and the popcorn eating. The Sarkeesididdle! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO[/quote]

Sarkeesididdle? What are you, a Flanders?

 

[Frostbyte666]

Yeah and I don't get those people that get murdered. Me I'd just ignore any difficulty and just kill them instead. Problems are so easy when you ignore all the details.

Like "I don't care about the finances of travel or racism along the way or possibly facing the same racism where they arrive I'd just move to a better place finances be damned." So much easier if you ignore any possible huge difficulty in the plan. Well we sure know you're so much smarter than all those idiots that didn't just move them and their families somewhere safer, right? =/

And once again you miss the word PERSONALLY and you seem to think that everyone in the same situation would react the same way. Yes a lot of people are going to stay around and not take a risk, feel safer where they are then to move on etc. etc. etc.

I am not one of those people.

You do know there was this thing called the underground rail-road right? It actively helped people get away, I'm not saying everyone could get into contact with them and they couldn't help everyone, relatively few actually, but not everyone just stayed where they were even with all the risks of uprooting everything.

Another thing I never said I was smarter or that I would even be successful in all likelihood I'd be torn to pieces by hunting dogs but I would still make the attempt because I am a person with my own thoughts, feelings and opinions and consider the risk worth the attempt a lot of people would disagree while others would agree.

Hell look at the more recent news of the refugees pouring into Europe they have left behind virtually everything to try and get a better life and a lot of them won't, they still make the attempt though, admittedly they have it easier without having to run a gauntlet of murderous racists. No they just have murderous armies, crushing poverty, various racial abuse....hang on.

 

[Loonyyy]

They all deserve sympathy. They've all been wronged. And, depending on where you live, having unprotected sex with someone, when you have an STD, especially things like HIV, without informing them, is in fact a criminal matter, and rightly so. The spread of HIV poses a very real danger to public health.

This is probably the most interesting example, largely because it's a case where we do routinely see victim blaming regardless of who did what to who.

There's a bit of it in this thread, and I walk a fine line there as well, because, well, he should have been engaging in safe sex, and by not doing so he is in every encounter, potentially doing what was done to him, except he's unaware. This is why Herpes is a thing, in particular, the odds of male to female transmission during intercourse are extremely high. That's a minor infection, but it's reached around 1/6th of the adult population. HIV killed a massive number of queer folk during its outbreak, in part because of some promiscuous activities with little protection (Which is exacerbated by the fact that proper protection for those activities is at best a rarity).

It's really hard to talk about it without making anyone who's been exposed feel bad, and I know that, my last partner carried herpes, she had exactly the situation from the example, he knew he had it, he didn't want to tell her in case it made her not want to sleep with him, and he didn't even want to use protection. It wasn't a random hookup, he wanted a genuine relationship with her, he was in love with her and everything. Turns out that deliberately infecting people with STDs is a dealbreaker. Now I've got to find out whether I've got it too, which is mega fun times.

At the same time, it's not the fault of the person who gets infected, you can never believe that. You've always got to feel sympathy for them. The only way to stay completely free of STDs is to never have sex with anyone ever, and that's just unreasonable. Nearly all of us live in this glass house, we can't throw stones.

"Not [...] all men". The "Elder Demoness". "Souls of men".

Gasp. It is her. Of the profile picture and the popcorn eating. The Sarkeesididdle! NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Sarkeesididdle? What are you, a Flanders?

Saying the name summons her. And I'm all out of popcorn.

Plus I needed a faux ancient mysterious name for her to give the demoness vibe, but I had a mental blank. Sarkessidoodlemackey. Sarkeesiod? Sarkhulu? She who speaks nasally? The Pop And the Corn? The Lady of the Hoops?

 

[Secondhand Revenant]

Yeah and I don't get those people that get murdered. Me I'd just ignore any difficulty and just kill them instead. Problems are so easy when you ignore all the details.

Like "I don't care about the finances of travel or racism along the way or possibly facing the same racism where they arrive I'd just move to a better place finances be damned." So much easier if you ignore any possible huge difficulty in the plan. Well we sure know you're so much smarter than all those idiots that didn't just move them and their families somewhere safer, right? =/

And once again you miss the word PERSONALLY and you seem to think that everyone in the same situation would react the same way. Yes a lot of people are going to stay around and not take a risk, feel safer where they are then to move on etc. etc. etc.

I am not one of those people.

You do know there was this thing called the underground rail-road right? It actively helped people get away, I'm not saying everyone could get into contact with them and they couldn't help everyone, relatively few actually, but not everyone just stayed where they were even with all the risks of uprooting everything.

Another thing I never said I was smarter or that I would even be successful in all likelihood I'd be torn to pieces by hunting dogs but I would still make the attempt because I am a person with my own thoughts, feelings and opinions and consider the risk worth the attempt a lot of people would disagree while others would agree.

Hell look at the more recent news of the refugees pouring into Europe they have left behind virtually everything to try and get a better life and a lot of them won't, they still make the attempt though, admittedly they have it easier without having to run a gauntlet of murderous racists. No they just have murderous armies, crushing poverty, various racial abuse....hang on.

I'm not sure I can possibly continue this conversation... The underground railroad was for slavery. It stopped existing back in the 1800s. Scenario 2 was more of a reference to To Kill A Mockingbird I believe...

And not take a risk? Lol. See you can't even imagine it not being feasible.

You seem to miss that refugees can move to a place they are not liable to be killed in.

 

[Something Amyss]

You do know there was this thing called the underground rail-road right? It actively helped people get away, I'm not saying everyone could get into contact with them and they couldn't help everyone, relatively few actually, but not everyone just stayed where they were even with all the risks of uprooting everything.

Do you understand what the Underground Railroad was? Seriously, do you? Because you're talking about the wrong century, and it didn't help people get away from racism. It moved Southern slaves into Northern free states, and then later into Canada because the Yankees were sending the slaves back. And they faced racism even in Canada. Literally nothing you said here is correct as pertains to this case.

There's a bit of it in this thread, and I walk a fine line there as well, because, well, he should have been engaging in safe sex, and by not doing so he is in every encounter, potentially doing what was done to him, except he's unaware. This is why Herpes is a thing, in particular, the odds of male to female transmission during intercourse are extremely high. That's a minor infection, but it's reached around 1/6th of the adult population. HIV killed a massive number of queer folk during its outbreak, in part because of some promiscuous activities with little protection (Which is exacerbated by the fact that proper protection for those activities is at best a rarity).

Saying you should wrap it up is a far cry from saying someone is at fault when they are infected by someone knowingly. People are mitigating sympathy because the guy didn't wear a condom (and I'm wondering how many of them do).

It's really hard to talk about it without making anyone who's been exposed feel bad, and I know that, my last partner carried herpes, she had exactly the situation from the example, he knew he had it, he didn't want to tell her in case it made her not want to sleep with him, and he didn't even want to use protection. It wasn't a random hookup, he wanted a genuine relationship with her, he was in love with her and everything. Turns out that deliberately infecting people with STDs is a dealbreaker. Now I've got to find out whether I've got it too, which is mega fun times.

Unfortunately, I've also been there and done that. Fortunately, I am in the clear. Unfortunately, my then-GF was cheating on me, in multiple instances, picked up at least two STIs, and may have tried to accuse me of knocking her up when I most likely didn't (Given I was using protection and the guys she was banging apparently were not). And yeah, she knew she had herpes and tried to get me into risky situations. Why? Don't know or care.

She didn't infect me, but even if she had it'd be her doing. And that applies even if it's a one-night stand.

Saying the name summons her. And I'm all out of popcorn.

Do you have any baby mice?

P

lus I needed a faux ancient mysterious name for her to give the demoness vibe, but I had a mental blank. Sarkessidoodlemackey. Sarkeesiod? Sarkhulu? She who speaks nasally? The Pop And the Corn? The Lady of the Hoops?

IA SARKEEITHULHU!

 

[K12]

I don't think that any thread which has the phrase "was the black guy asking to be lynched?" in the OP is going to end well.

I'm outta here!

 

[Buckets]

The first case, taking advantage of someone who is in an inebriated state is dodgy at best, no matter what gender, robbing them is fucked up either way.

The second is fucked up and I'd be questioning the morality of anyone who does not feel sympathy if I'm honest.

The third is a bit more complicated, unprotected sex carries with it a lot of risks - STD's, unwanted pregnancies etc, and being shitfaced isn't a very good contraceptive. If he had worn a condom there wouldn't be an issue, so he is partly responsible for the result and whilst he has a pretty fucked up disease to live with, he should shoulder some of the blame.