LET'S (NOT) RESPECT EACH OTHER?S TASTES (OR: "THIS GAME ISN'T FOR YOU, AND THAT'S (NOT) OKAY")

[TheMysteriousGX]

Man, you can't say that making these gals 19 and 21 instead of 15 and 17 would *matter* and is *important* to the folks that want them to be younger for the implications and then hand wave the literal opposite of the coin away as irrelevant.

You can't bring up "but Japan has X" and then just ignore the heinous shit that happens because of it because it's inconvenient to your argument.

I don't see how all that real world stuff is relevant in the world of fiction. If anything, more people playing games with these elements would serve to reduce the amount of real world problems. Japan already is one of the biggest if not the biggest consumer of games and other such media in the world and they have some of the lowest rates of those types of crimes despite still having some such crimes so you definitely can't say that games are promoting them. What they're doing is channeling a demand in a harmless direction.

I'm not the one who brought in the "real world" and the platonic cafes were grown ass adults need to have conversations with children because once they graduate they no longer placate grown ass man's desire. I just pointed out the ways it became a huge problem with compensated dating, assault, prostitution, and sex trafficking. As far as the "lowest rates of those types of crime" goes, I'm reminded of that fairly widespread meme picture where the UK is saying loli porn is bad and the picture is comparing rates of rape between the two countries in 2014. The part they left out was that, in 2014, having sex with literal children wasn't rape in Japan unless violence was involved. Incest wasn't illegal. It wasn't rape if you put a gun to someone's head and forced them to give you a blowjob. Men and boys couldn't be legally raped *at all*. Rohypnols? Sure, drugging somebody's illegal, but after that it's not rape, the should've known better than to drink with you. Blackmail? Coercion? Long as it wasn't threats of violence, it's fair game.

It's easy to have low crime rates if nothing's defined as illegal. It's disturbing the amount of hentai out there that's tagged as "rape" that wouldn't've been rape under the Japanese legal code at the time. I'm like, 90% certain that nothing in Emergence/Metamorphosis counted as rape. Hell, a chunk of the above is *still* true, even after relatively major reforms. The Japanese feminists riot about it every few weeks. The biggest problem the police have with Chikan is either A) giving a shit, or B) getting people to overcome their social programming and actually make a scene. Most incidents of groping don't happen at rush hour. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/04/21/national/media-national/chikan-japanese-term-groping-increasingly-recognized-abroad/#.Xbun3y9MGf0

The truly important thing for me isn't whether the chars really are 15-17 since they all look however they look, some will look 25 and some will look 12 and their personalities can follow in that pattern too. No, the important thing is if some artist decides that the char is 17 we treat that as equivalently worthy of respect as any other age, as either age would equally be the artist's expression were they to pick it. Like I explained with the term arbitrary, when you have such ages and appearances not really matter, what you get is indeed the clearest expression of the artist that you can get.

Yeah, and that clearest expression seems to be hard-capped at 17, with significant flex downwards,
Make no mistake: Marvelous, Compile Heart, Idea Factory et all are very much in the business of making money. It's my very firm belief that if they tone down their overwhelming schoolgirl fetish and make some ultimately minor tweaks to their arbitrary numbers, they could make *heaps* more money. And of that means otaku might have to recognize that people exist after they graduate high school, maybe that's for the better.

 

[Silvanus]

You don't have to actively be in a relationship for there to be signs of chemistry in the story that make it clear someone's into people of the same gender as they are. I don't understand why there has to be this limitation where if you're not obvious about it you're trying to hide or deny something when these sorts of games especially tend to be ambiguous about most such situations anyways. The reason why in a lot of anime and jrpgs you have people shipping various couples in their heads is show of this exact ambiguity but you can still see a current going through despite it.

Nobody is saying a relationship has to be portrayed in a certain way. I'm saying that an ambiguous unconfirmed maybe-flirt is not the same thing as an actual romantic relationship.

Hell, I played FFXIII. I'm not straight, so I tend to pick up on whatever little clues I can. And I just thought they were platonic. I'd love it if it were otherwise, but you're clutching at straws.

When there's portals of hell opening all around you and the one gay character's biggest hurdle is his evil mage, slave-owning, human-sacrifice-performing dad not liking that he's gay, while the world is ending, then yeah, that's just a whole lot of potential this char had that's been squandered lol.

Yet we have dozens and dozens of quests about the less important stuff for every other character. This is expected and normal in RPGs. Yet the standard shifts when certain topics come up, and suddenly we shouldn't be addressing something because the world is at stake?

Oh and this reminds me, I think the qun is supposed to be a standin for islam (or at the very least heavily influenced by it) but because they don't actually just put literal islam in dragon age and have to come up with things and stuff that's actually interesting to make it somewhat distinct, you end up with something not at all mundane but which hits the same notes of philosophy and religion that islam also does. Now, see, this is actually the right way to go about this. An artful metaphor works at broaching these same ideas but is also interesting and fun and enriches the world. The only thing it doesn't do is give you virtue points for having a game with Islam in it.

This preoccupation with "virtue points" is not coming from the developers or even the publishers. They just put a quest in a game, among hundreds of other quests and themes. They didn't wax lyrical.

The obsessive discourse about "virtue" is coming squarely from the other side.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

You don't have to actively be in a relationship for there to be signs of chemistry in the story that make it clear someone's into people of the same gender as they are. I don't understand why there has to be this limitation where if you're not obvious about it you're trying to hide or deny something when these sorts of games especially tend to be ambiguous about most such situations anyways. The reason why in a lot of anime and jrpgs you have people shipping various couples in their heads is show of this exact ambiguity but you can still see a current going through despite it.

Nobody is saying a relationship has to be portrayed in a certain way. I'm saying that an ambiguous unconfirmed maybe-flirt is not the same thing as an actual romantic relationship.

Hell, I played FFXIII. I'm not straight, so I tend to pick up on whatever little clues I can. And I just thought they were platonic. I'd love it if it were otherwise, but you're clutching at straws.

When there's portals of hell opening all around you and the one gay character's biggest hurdle is his evil mage, slave-owning, human-sacrifice-performing dad not liking that he's gay, while the world is ending, then yeah, that's just a whole lot of potential this char had that's been squandered lol.

Yet we have dozens and dozens of quests about the less important stuff for every other character. This is expected and normal in RPGs. Yet the standard shifts when certain topics come up, and suddenly we shouldn't be addressing something because the world is at stake?

Oh and this reminds me, I think the qun is supposed to be a standin for islam (or at the very least heavily influenced by it) but because they don't actually just put literal islam in dragon age and have to come up with things and stuff that's actually interesting to make it somewhat distinct, you end up with something not at all mundane but which hits the same notes of philosophy and religion that islam also does. Now, see, this is actually the right way to go about this. An artful metaphor works at broaching these same ideas but is also interesting and fun and enriches the world. The only thing it doesn't do is give you virtue points for having a game with Islam in it.

This preoccupation with "virtue points" is not coming from the developers or even the publishers. They just put a quest in a game, among hundreds of other quests and themes. They didn't wax lyrical.

The obsessive discourse about "virtue" is coming squarely from the other side.

The relationship thing is a distinction without a difference in the context of gay portrayal. And no, nobody else's main quest is all that stuff. You find those quests for the insignificant random npcs and towndwellers and so on who have little relevance to the plot.


Finally, they actively advertised about their pro-gayness trying to earn virtue points about the character and the developer spoke proudly about it as they were making the game. I of course had no idea until after playing the game which was probably why I was excited about the character going in, expecting him to be about epic cool stuff. Maybe others saw it and had tempered their expectations so they weren't as disappointed? Anyways, here:

https://gamerant.com/dragon-age-inquisition-dorian-first-gay-character/


Literally calling him "full gay" which sounds like the name of a fun nightclub lol.

Man, you can't say that making these gals 19 and 21 instead of 15 and 17 would *matter* and is *important* to the folks that want them to be younger for the implications and then hand wave the literal opposite of the coin away as irrelevant.

You can't bring up "but Japan has X" and then just ignore the heinous shit that happens because of it because it's inconvenient to your argument.

I don't see how all that real world stuff is relevant in the world of fiction. If anything, more people playing games with these elements would serve to reduce the amount of real world problems. Japan already is one of the biggest if not the biggest consumer of games and other such media in the world and they have some of the lowest rates of those types of crimes despite still having some such crimes so you definitely can't say that games are promoting them. What they're doing is channeling a demand in a harmless direction.

I'm not the one who brought in the "real world" and the platonic cafes were grown ass adults need to have conversations with children because once they graduate they no longer placate grown ass man's desire. I just pointed out the ways it became a huge problem with compensated dating, assault, prostitution, and sex trafficking. As far as the "lowest rates of those types of crime" goes, I'm reminded of that fairly widespread meme picture where the UK is saying loli porn is bad and the picture is comparing rates of rape between the two countries in 2014. The part they left out was that, in 2014, having sex with literal children wasn't rape in Japan unless violence was involved. Incest wasn't illegal. It wasn't rape if you put a gun to someone's head and forced them to give you a blowjob. Men and boys couldn't be legally raped *at all*. Rohypnols? Sure, drugging somebody's illegal, but after that it's not rape, the should've known better than to drink with you. Blackmail? Coercion? Long as it wasn't threats of violence, it's fair game.

It's easy to have low crime rates if nothing's defined as illegal. It's disturbing the amount of hentai out there that's tagged as "rape" that wouldn't've been rape under the Japanese legal code at the time. I'm like, 90% certain that nothing in Emergence/Metamorphosis counted as rape. Hell, a chunk of the above is *still* true, even after relatively major reforms. The Japanese feminists riot about it every few weeks. The biggest problem the police have with Chikan is either A) giving a shit, or B) getting people to overcome their social programming and actually make a scene. Most incidents of groping don't happen at rush hour. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/04/21/national/media-national/chikan-japanese-term-groping-increasingly-recognized-abroad/#.Xbun3y9MGf0

The truly important thing for me isn't whether the chars really are 15-17 since they all look however they look, some will look 25 and some will look 12 and their personalities can follow in that pattern too. No, the important thing is if some artist decides that the char is 17 we treat that as equivalently worthy of respect as any other age, as either age would equally be the artist's expression were they to pick it. Like I explained with the term arbitrary, when you have such ages and appearances not really matter, what you get is indeed the clearest expression of the artist that you can get.

Yeah, and that clearest expression seems to be hard-capped at 17, with significant flex downwards,
Make no mistake: Marvelous, Compile Heart, Idea Factory et all are very much in the business of making money. It's my very firm belief that if they tone down their overwhelming schoolgirl fetish and make some ultimately minor tweaks to their arbitrary numbers, they could make *heaps* more money. And of that means otaku might have to recognize that people exist after they graduate high school, maybe that's for the better.

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical. Btw, I do remember that crazy British reporter lady trying to tell the creator of Girls und Panzer that he was supporting pedophilia under the guise of an unbiased interview, somehow. That was one hilarious interview indeed. Not a good example if you wanna show Japan as being unreasonable here lol.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

Btw, I do remember that crazy British reporter lady trying to tell the creator of Girls und Panzer that he was supporting pedophilia under the guise of an unbiased interview, somehow. That was one hilarious interview indeed. Not a good example if you wanna show Japan as being unreasonable here lol.

And considering literally nobody was making any assertions even remotely like that in this thread, I wonder why you bring it up.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

Btw, I do remember that crazy British reporter lady trying to tell the creator of Girls und Panzer that he was supporting pedophilia under the guise of an unbiased interview, somehow. That was one hilarious interview indeed. Not a good example if you wanna show Japan as being unreasonable here lol.

And considering literally nobody was making any assertions even remotely like that in this thread, I wonder why you bring it up.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.


What I am actually seeing here is that Japan is less incorrect about its approach than the UK (though as stated, still incorrect), because I am of the view that it is better to not overpunish people than to underpunish them. Basically, if someone who performs minor nuisance offenses gets off without punishment, that's a smaller injustice than them getting prosecuted as a rapist. Neither is ideal or correct but the UK system is more unjust.


I brought up that interview because if was comical enough to have merit on humor alone but also because it shows you that the person arguing for the UK (when they were supposed to interviewing a dude) had some, like I was saying, extreme on the other side of the spectrum ideas that they were trying to sell to the reader in the guise of an unbiased interview, which is useful information to know when analyzing the credibility of her other claims.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

 

[Erttheking]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.


And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

 

[Asita]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

It doesn't matter whether the UK or Japan is in the right. What matters is that the statistics are not directly comparable due to their different methodologies. They only become comparable once the figures are adjusted so that they track the same phenomena. Either the UK zeroes out from its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it only tracks the same things that Japan's figure does, or Japan adds to its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it tracks the everything that the UK's figure accounts for. Which figure is adjusted is largely irrelevant. All that matters is that the acts tracked in the adjusted data become consistent between the data sets.

It's like adding fractions. You can't do it until you convert the fractions into a form where they share a denominator. In order to add 3/5 and 2/3, you have to first turn them into 9/15 and 10/15, respectively, giving you a result of 1 4/15. If a pair of similarly named statistics are defined differently, they lack that common denominator and have to be adjusted before they can be directly compared.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

It doesn't matter whether the UK or Japan is in the right. What matters is that the statistics are not directly comparable due to their different methodologies. They only become comparable once the figures are adjusted so that they track the same phenomena. Either the UK zeroes out from its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it only tracks the same things that Japan's figure does, or Japan adds to its figure all instances attributable to incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc until it tracks the everything that the UK's figure accounts for. Which figure is adjusted is largely irrelevant. All that matters is that the acts tracked in the adjusted data become consistent between the data sets.

It's like adding fractions. You can't do it until you convert the fractions into a form where they share a denominator. In order to add 3/5 and 2/3, you have to first turn them into 9/15 and 10/15, respectively, giving you a result of 1 4/15. If a pair of similarly named statistics are defined differently, they lack that common denominator and have to be adjusted before they can be directly compared.

Yes I understand the mathematics, I just don't see them philosophically applying when the subject at hand is something that wasn't generated by nature and we just calculate it and express that through math but rather it is something we arbitrarily define. In that situation, who is in the right would make the other one using bad information in their statistics, poisoning the result one way or another. It's like trying to calculate the length of the earth on the assumption it's flat. The math may be correct for a hypothetical flat earth but it is not indicative of reality which is what I'm talking about here. You can still calculate the length of the earth, you just have to do so differently than you would if it was flat, and you'd be actually correct despite the other equation using the right math, because it's based on a faulty hypothesis.

Rape stats aren't supposed to be a disembodied thing, they actually supposed to reflect some aspect of reality, not just math.

 

[Erttheking]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.


And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.


And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

Now you're being obviously disingenuous lol. I only likened blackmail to beheadings, incest and whatnot being treated as crimes are fine which is why I didn't give you a counter argument.


And blackmail for theft would be like, blackmailing someone to make them steal something, not blackmailing someone for their own property that they can legally give to anyone without commiting theft. You're really stretching what I'm actually talking about here. Simply put, blackmail and extortion are already crimes. Having sex isn't a crime, giving things isn't a crime, etc. etc. so when someone blackmails you to do these legal acts that you just don't want to do, they are, yes, ONLY committing blackmail during that event, not rape or theft or anything else.



Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

 

[Erttheking]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.


And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

Now you're being obviously disingenuous lol. I only likened blackmail to beheadings, incest and whatnot being treated as crimes are fine which is why I didn't give you a counter argument.


And blackmail for theft would be like, blackmailing someone to make them steal something, not blackmailing someone for their own property that they can legally give to anyone without commiting theft. You're really stretching what I'm actually talking about here. Simply put, blackmail and extortion are already crimes. Having sex isn't a crime, giving things isn't a crime, etc. etc. so when someone blackmails you to do these legal acts that you just don't want to do, they are, yes, ONLY committing blackmail during that event, not rape or theft or anything else.



Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

You compared classifying someone who blackmailed a person into having sex against their will as rapists to beheading jaywalkers. A hyperbolic statement. No offense Dreiko, you?re starting to sound like those people who say it?s not rape if it wasn?t violent. And you agree with criminalizing underage incest? So do you agree that Japan?s definition of rape is too narrow? Because they don?t do that.

I know. That?s theft. If you blackmail someone into commit a crime, you are responsible for that crime. Kind of like how blackmailing someone into having sex is rape considering someone is being forced to have sex against their will. The signs of being drunk are very obvious. It?s very simple Dreiko. If they?re drunk and you?re not, keep it in your pants. Otherwise you are taking advantage of someone who is under the influence.

If someone can?t give consent and you have sex with them, you have raped them. ?I didn?t mean to? is not a valid defense.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

Uh, when one definition is more narrow than the other? Yes. These statistics don't exist in a vacuum and jag was pointing it out. Acting like it doesn't matter is just missing the point. You can't pretend a lower rate of crime is anything to be proud of when it directly results from a more narrow definition of said crime.

Honestly, you're just blatantly debating in bad faith here. "The UK calls something rape, it is rape" is a presumption, hm? You wanna be coy? Ok. I'll play ball. Incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc.

Which of those do you object to being classified as rape?

That really makes sense only if you have some sort of third world country where people don't have human rights. Japan is a prosperous first world country so they are just as entitled to define rape in their own legal standard as any other nation. The standard isn't necessarily stricter just because it defines more thing as rape, it can also just be mistakenly overbroad. You're not "strict" when you behead jaywalkers and you are not taking a "bigger stand" against jaywalking when you do that, you're just being tyrannical. Do you think Saudi Arabia takes a stand against theft by cutting people's arms off? Aren't they just being insane?

Blackmail and extortion are...blackmail and extortion. What you blackmail and extort someone for, be it money or sex or to quit their job or to refuse a promotion, isn't (and shouldn't be) relevant. Or what, should we call extortion for a monetary sum theft now? See, that makes no sense.


And sure drugging someone in order to take advantage of them is rape but just having drunkenness organically lead to sex without anybody's intention to have that happen definitely shouldn't be.

So, while I agree that these things ought to be illegal, they still aren't actually rape either. You have two extremes here. You have Sweden and the like treating everything under the sun as rape, such as to in fact remove the gravity of rape by equating brutal assault that lives actual physical scars to people drunkenly bumping uglies and then waking up perfectly healthy and regretting it (the one who reports it first being a victim of rape) and then you have Japan where it's seen as a no big deal to grab someone's ass since "heru mon ja nai" or "you won't lose anything by it" XD.


So yeah, I agree that these things should be treated as crimes, but I don't agree that they should go towards the nation's actual rape statistics. They're more akin to public nuisance crimes or maybe assault at best if someone's being overly physical.

Okay, 1) whether or not you think they *should* count as rape, sexual assault, or other crimes is largely irrelevant to the fact that Japan wasn't counting them and the UK was, which explains a lot about the discrepancy about the two numbers which was the point, and
2) WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK.

The implication, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Japan should adopt the UK standard or that UK is accurate and Japan inaccurate. Otherwise, why bring this up as a counterpoint to Japan's low statistics to imply that they're not really low or that they ought to be higher. You wouldn't do so if you didn't think that UK's approach was more correct, hence my addressing that notion.

YOU WERE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT UP JAPAN'S "LOWER RATES OF THAT TYPE OF CRIME". You can't just say that then ignore that lots of shit that the UK counts as "rape" (incestuous pedophilia, drugged drinks leading to rape, blackmail and extortion, etc) didn't (and to a disturbing degree still doesn't) count in Japan.

Why not though? Is there some reason that the UK definition should matter above Japan's when discussing Japan's statistics? Is there something that proves it to be more close to reality?


You keep working under the presumption that just because the UK calls something rape, it is rape.

When it comes to statistics, it absolutely matters. You have to compare like-to-like.
You can't say Freedonia has half the murder rate of Examplestan so it's safer when Freedonia only counts killings that happen on the weekend as murder.

It is like to like, each society gets to define whatever type of conduct as rape, and the societies that are more advanced and prosperous achieve this prosperity through in some part the accuracy of this definition (among a myriad of other things) so Japan being a very prosperous nation indicates some measure of accuracy to their criteria. Nobody forced the UK to choose a definition which will brand more of its citizens as rapists.

Also, rape is just one of the crimes and generally crimes all have a pattern to them. Japan has similarly low stats for all those other crimes too, not just rape, so a scenario where you get like 30 shootings total a year in the whole nation but there's this plague of rape is not really realistic. Rape happens the most in places where all the other types of crime also happen often, and Japan has the least of those other types of crimes.

So even with the UK standard you'd still end up with way fewer of them because the society is just safer and more law abiding overall.

A first world country that is fucking awful at handling sexual assault. Don?t whitewash the shit that goes on over there just because it makes games you like. You think defining blackmail, underage incest, and drugged sex is comparable to beheading jaywalkers and cutting the hands off of pickpockets. Can you kindly not insult my intelligence with baseless hyperbole?

Define blackmail for theft as theft? I mean, yeah. We do that. This might blow your mind Dreiko but people can commit more than one crime at a time. You can commit blackmail and use that blackmail to commit another crime. Don?t be so simplistic in how you view the world.

Drunk people are not capable of giving consent, there is no ?organic? way for drunkness to lead to sex unless both people are black out drunk. Don?t act like drunk women aren?t taken advantage of, I?ve seen enough victim blaming to know that they are.

Now you're being obviously disingenuous lol. I only likened blackmail to beheadings, incest and whatnot being treated as crimes are fine which is why I didn't give you a counter argument.


And blackmail for theft would be like, blackmailing someone to make them steal something, not blackmailing someone for their own property that they can legally give to anyone without commiting theft. You're really stretching what I'm actually talking about here. Simply put, blackmail and extortion are already crimes. Having sex isn't a crime, giving things isn't a crime, etc. etc. so when someone blackmails you to do these legal acts that you just don't want to do, they are, yes, ONLY committing blackmail during that event, not rape or theft or anything else.



Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

You compared classifying someone who blackmailed a person into having sex against their will as rapists to beheading jaywalkers. A hyperbolic statement. No offense Dreiko, you?re starting to sound like those people who say it?s not rape if it wasn?t violent. And you agree with criminalizing underage incest? So do you agree that Japan?s definition of rape is too narrow? Because they don?t do that.

I know. That?s theft. If you blackmail someone into commit a crime, you are responsible for that crime. Kind of like how blackmailing someone into having sex is rape considering someone is being forced to have sex against their will. The signs of being drunk are very obvious. It?s very simple Dreiko. If they?re drunk and you?re not, keep it in your pants. Otherwise you are taking advantage of someone who is under the influence.

If someone can?t give consent and you have sex with them, you have raped them. ?I didn?t mean to? is not a valid defense.

Yes, didn't I say that there's two extremes here and that I think there's an actual middle ground? Incest should be criminalized, but not as rape, but as it's own type of crime. Not sure what you'd call it, endangering a minor or corrupting a minor? Something like that, not rape.

Blackmailing someone into having sex isn't the same as raping them. Basically, it's either rape and not blackmail or it's blackmail. Blackmail is making someone will themselves to do something over a threat. It's different from actually forcing them to do something irrespective of their will because the person has the option of suffering the consequences and refusing, whereas in a rape situation you take that option from them through force and they literally can't do anything to avoid the sex. It's basically severely worse to actively rob someone of the ability to make the choice than to simply present it.

And yes I said if BOTH people are drunk neither is being malicious, I don't know where you saw me say that if only one person is drunk it's the same as it is with both people. Yet in a lot of these tyrannical systems whoever reports the drunk sex first is a victim of rape.

 

[Erttheking]

Yes, didn't I say that there's two extremes here and that I think there's an actual middle ground? Incest should be criminalized, but not as rape, but as it's own type of crime. Not sure what you'd call it, endangering a minor or corrupting a minor? Something like that, not rape.

Blackmailing someone into having sex isn't the same as raping them. Basically, it's either rape and not blackmail or it's blackmail. Blackmail is making someone will themselves to do something over a threat. It's different from actually forcing them to do something irrespective of their will because the person has the option of suffering the consequences and refusing, whereas in a rape situation you take that option from them through force and they literally can't do anything to avoid the sex. It's basically severely worse to actively rob someone of the ability to make the choice than to simply present it.

And yes I said if BOTH people are drunk neither is being malicious, I don't know where you saw me say that if only one person is drunk it's the same as it is with both people. Yet in a lot of these tyrannical systems whoever reports the drunk sex first is a victim of rape.

You do know that jag mentioned incestious pedophilia right? As in sex with someone who is underage? As in statitory rape? You are you going to tell me that sex with someone who is too young to get consent shouldn't be considered rape either?

Say that to someone who was blackmailed into having sex, see what happens. Also, what the fuck are you even talking about? It's not rape because they have the choice to accept the damages? That's like saying it's not rape if you hold a gun to someone's head because they can accept the damages. And even ignoring that, it's not a choice, it's an ultimatum. When you are threatened to do something you are not being threatened with a choice, your choices are being taken away.

Well I clarified I wasn't talking about two people being drunk at the same time, so I don't know why you brought it up. Also, even then, you kinda do say the two are the same. Look.

Having sex with someone who is unable to give consent without realizing they can't because you're drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Neither party is more to blame when neither party purposefully got the other party drunk to take advantage. Just because some people do indeed do that doesn't mean every such case is one where malice was involved.

Both people having sex because they're too drunk is just as organic as allowing sex to happen because you're too drunk to refuse. Emphasis mine.

Dreiko? You fucking scare me man. You seem to be readily opposed to all but the most narrow definition of rape. If it's pedohilia, it isn't rape. If someone was blackmailed into having sex, it wasn't rape. If you're too drunk to refuse sex it's "organic."

Remember when people used to talk about rape culture Dreiko? This is it. Making excuses for everything but the most narrow definition of rape.

 

[gyrobot_v1legacy]

More importantly this whole topic has degraded to a circular argument as you and altnamejag debate about the context of the sexual material vs the original topic of me arguing that not everybody's tastes deserves respect and trying to seek approval for it.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I means, it kinda fits the idea.

This spiraled out of "niche ecchi games with passable controls and writing probably aren't going to score very well, doubly so when most of them feature kids"

But we've gotta justify, at any length, how they're Good, Actually.

Or at least, if somebody was calling Dragalia Lost gambling/gacha trash in a shiny-but-depressing wrapper, I wouldn't end up trying to argue that pachinko machines aren't gambling for culture reasons.

 

[gyrobot_v1legacy]

I means, it kinda fits the idea.

This spiraled out of "niche ecchi games with passable controls and writing probably aren't going to score very well, doubly so when most of them feature kids"

But we've gotta justify, at any length, how they're Good, Actually.

Or at least, if somebody was calling Dragalia Lost gambling/gacha trash in a shiny-but-depressing wrapper, I wouldn't end up trying to argue that pachinko machines aren't gambling for culture reasons.

Still we could have did more damage breaking down Pete's article vs debating circularly with Dreiko