Poll: rape worse than murder?

[happyninja42]

snip

snip

snip

https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/mentalimpact.shtml

It seems to affect about 30% of the victims more extremely than the others and about 10% are impacted severely. So like 31% develop PTSD and 11% do not lose the diagnosis. Interestingly enough, women are more likely to develop PTSD if they are battered and children are more likely to develop it if they are abused than either category.

I mean, the numbers are pretty terrible, since it is a traumatic event. But this is nothing like a universal claim that they should have a bullet to the head or even that they would have preferred that.

As you pointed out it is highly relative and the more pertinent question would be if causing severe PTSD is worse than murder. I would still say no for all the reasons I gave above. Murder is the absolute end and no control is in the hands of the victim ever again.

Yeah, I mean I've heard the statements in this thread, from people paraphrasing victims who couldn't get over the trauma, and they sound exactly like the phrases I hear from the veterans I work with, who suffer from PTSD and depression. It's just a different traumatic event, the impact, and fallout from it is pretty similar across the spectrum though. And yes, this whole thread is simply an opinion piece, let's not forget that people. The OP asked us which one we thought was worse, that's not the same thing as definitively stating one is worse than the other. My personal opinion is that murder is worse, because everything ends for the victim there. There is no more chance for happiness, or fun, or anything, it's all over. But, for millions of people world wide, life is sometimes too painful for them, and they want it to end, just to feel an end to the pain. Whether it's from rape, war, abuse, their own actions they feel guilt over, whatever. Those people would have a different opinion from me. I don't share it, and I wish they didn't have it, because personally I feel that life is preferable to death, but I'm not them. I can only try and maybe help them change their minds, but in the end, it's their call.

 

[Lightknight]

Yeah, I mean I've heard the statements in this thread, from people paraphrasing victims who couldn't get over the trauma, and they sound exactly like the phrases I hear from the veterans I work with, who suffer from PTSD and depression. It's just a different traumatic event, the impact, and fallout from it is pretty similar across the spectrum though. And yes, this whole thread is simply an opinion piece, let's not forget that people. The OP asked us which one we thought was worse, that's not the same thing as definitively stating one is worse than the other. My personal opinion is that murder is worse, because everything ends for the victim there. There is no more chance for happiness, or fun, or anything, it's all over. But, for millions of people world wide, life is sometimes too painful for them, and they want it to end, just to feel an end to the pain. Whether it's from rape, war, abuse, their own actions they feel guilt over, whatever. Those people would have a different opinion from me. I don't share it, and I wish they didn't have it, because personally I feel that life is preferable to death, but I'm not them. I can only try and maybe help them change their minds, but in the end, it's their call.

Sure, but the question posed here was a blanket "Is it worse than death" and on that broad question the answer is certainly no.

For some people that may personally impact them in a way they believe they'd rather have died. But the act itself a universal they'd be better off dead? Hell no and that would be damn offensive to say. Which I think you agree with.

 

[rasta111]

It's a weighted question that clearly presumes rape is in fact worse than murder... I tend to agree. No one knows how they are going to die but rape destroys the innocence of all involved. It ruins people. There are fates worse than death.

Of course recovery is an option. No one recovers from murder. You could argue this in circles all day long and just make things seem worse than they are though.

I would suggest observation and prevention is the way forward in either case.

captcha: too many cooks... An interesting observation indeed captcha... Very interesting.

 

[Lightknight]

It's a weighted question that clearly presumes rape is in fact worse than murder... I tend to agree. No one knows how they are going to die but rape destroys the innocence of all involved. It ruins people. There are fates worse than death.

Of course recovery is an option. No one recovers from murder. You could argue this in circles all day long and just make things seem worse than they are though.

captcha: too many cooks... An interesting observation indeed captcha... Very interesting.

So your message to rape victims is that they are ruined and ergo it would have been more merciful had they been murdered them.

Where is this coming from? Am I honestly the only person still in this thread seeing this?

Look, recovery isn't just an option, it's the norm. In fact, only 30% suffer from PTSD at all and only 10% of that have PTSD long term.

 

[rasta111]

It's a weighted question that clearly presumes rape is in fact worse than murder... I tend to agree. No one knows how they are going to die but rape destroys the innocence of all involved. It ruins people. There are fates worse than death.

Of course recovery is an option. No one recovers from murder. You could argue this in circles all day long and just make things seem worse than they are though.

captcha: too many cooks... An interesting observation indeed captcha... Very interesting.

So your message is that rape victims are ruined and ergo it would have been more merciful to murder them.

Where is this coming from?

What did I say? Whatever I'm considering all parties here all violence begets more violence. Even rapists and murderers are people too. Obviously most would consider the victims first but one must also consider the cause of the problem here.

Introspection is a powerful thing.

Speak less use more. Problems are not all they appear from the outside.

 

[Lightknight]

What did I say? Whatever I'm considering all parties here all violence begets more violence. Even rapists and murderers are people too. Obviously most would consider the victims first but one must also consider the [b[cause[/b] of the problem here.

What? The destruction of innocence in the murderer/rapist is irrelevant. They're not murderers or rapists because they're wide eyed and bushy tailed innocent little softies. That's already happened.

Death is far more damage than rape. Telling rape victims that they're just ruined and better off dead is terrifyingly bad taste and not true in the least.

As I said above, though you posted while I was editing, only 30% of victims of rape develop PTSD. Of those, only 10% are long term PTSD sufferers. Most victims move on with their lives. You would rather they were robbed of that just so they wouldn't be "ruined" in your eyes?

 

[rasta111]

What did I say? Whatever I'm considering all parties here all violence begets more violence. Even rapists and murderers are people too. Obviously most would consider the victims first but one must also consider the [b[cause[/b] of the problem here.

What? The destruction of innocence in the murderer/rapist is irrelevant. They're not murderers or rapists because they're wide eyed and bushy tailed innocent little softies. That's already happened.

Death is far more damage than rape. Telling rape victims that they're just ruined and better off dead is terrifyingly bad taste and not true in the least.

As I said above, though you posted while I was editing, only 30% of victims of rape develop PTSD. Of those, only 10% are long term PTSD sufferers. Most victims move on with their lives. You would rather they were robbed of that just so they wouldn't be "ruined" in your eyes?

All of these things you speak of are just statistics maybe they're reassuring, maybe not, I'm talking from the point of view of both the victim and the assailant. Soldiers murder people all the time and no one bats an eye as long as it doesn't ruin their day. The psychological trauma in both cases is substantial enough from both sides of the picture to throw all that out the window.

Seriously if you were any of the above how much of your time would you want to spend thinking or reading about any of the above?

I'm guessing it wouldn't be a long time...

 

[Lightknight]

What did I say? Whatever I'm considering all parties here all violence begets more violence. Even rapists and murderers are people too. Obviously most would consider the victims first but one must also consider the [b[cause[/b] of the problem here.

What? The destruction of innocence in the murderer/rapist is irrelevant. They're not murderers or rapists because they're wide eyed and bushy tailed innocent little softies. That's already happened.

Death is far more damage than rape. Telling rape victims that they're just ruined and better off dead is terrifyingly bad taste and not true in the least.

As I said above, though you posted while I was editing, only 30% of victims of rape develop PTSD. Of those, only 10% are long term PTSD sufferers. Most victims move on with their lives. You would rather they were robbed of that just so they wouldn't be "ruined" in your eyes?

All of these things you speak of are just statistics maybe they're reassuring, maybe not, I'm talking from the point of view of both the victim and the assailant. Soldiers murder people all the time and no one bats an eye as long as it doesn't ruin their day. The psychological trauma in both cases is substantial enough from both sides of the picture to throw all that out the window.

Seriously if you were any of the above how much of your time would you want to spend thinking or reading about any of the above?

I'm guessing it wouldn't be a long time...

I guess I'm not sure what your point is here. The perpetrator experiences their own set of psychological ramifications for either action.

The victim is either dead or harmed depending on the action.

So the perpetuator's ramifications are irrelevant. Only the victim's.

Which is worse for the victim? Dead or having a chance at long term ramifications of the event?

 

[Ieyke]

You disappoint me, humans.
The correct answer is "It depends".
As in most issues of morality, there is no absolute black and white, only dark shades of grey.
It's situational and relative.
Depends entirely on the circumstances.

How can you not know that by now?

 

[rasta111]

What did I say? Whatever I'm considering all parties here all violence begets more violence. Even rapists and murderers are people too. Obviously most would consider the victims first but one must also consider the [b[cause[/b] of the problem here.

What? The destruction of innocence in the murderer/rapist is irrelevant. They're not murderers or rapists because they're wide eyed and bushy tailed innocent little softies. That's already happened.

Death is far more damage than rape. Telling rape victims that they're just ruined and better off dead is terrifyingly bad taste and not true in the least.

As I said above, though you posted while I was editing, only 30% of victims of rape develop PTSD. Of those, only 10% are long term PTSD sufferers. Most victims move on with their lives. You would rather they were robbed of that just so they wouldn't be "ruined" in your eyes?

All of these things you speak of are just statistics maybe they're reassuring, maybe not, I'm talking from the point of view of both the victim and the assailant. Soldiers murder people all the time and no one bats an eye as long as it doesn't ruin their day. The psychological trauma in both cases is substantial enough from both sides of the picture to throw all that out the window.

Seriously if you were any of the above how much of your time would you want to spend thinking or reading about any of the above?

I'm guessing it wouldn't be a long time...

I guess I'm not sure what your point is here. The perpetrator experiences their own set of psychological ramifications for either action.

The victim is either dead or harmed depending on the action.

So the perpetuator's ramifications are irrelevant. Only the victim's.

Which is worse for the victim? Dead or having a chance at long term ramifications of the event?

Wasn't that implied? Unquestionably dead in my opinion. Mileage may vary, obviously a rape victim has a better chance at recovery than a rapist, same as a murderer has a significantly better chance... Do not question the pyschological ramifications in all cases.

 

[Lightknight]

Wasn't that implied? Unquestionably dead in my opinion. Mileage may vary, obviously a rape victim has a better chance at recovery than a rapist, same as a murderer has a significantly better chance... Do not question the pyschological ramifications in all cases.

Wait... you agree that murder is the worst?

I may have entirely missed your posts intention then. I'm just going to back away slowly like nothing happened...

You disappoint me, humans.
The correct answer is "It depends".
As in most issues of morality, there is no absolute black and white, only dark shades of grey.
It's situational and relative.
Depends entirely on the circumstances.

How can you not know that by now?

That's not the way the law works. You get X amount of punishment in units of time for committing Y act. Said acts are evaluated respectively amongst each other and so X amount adjusts itself according to the relative harm.

With that in mind, rape is bad but is not equivalent to murder as far as scale and punishment deserved.

There are additional acts that could pile up to amount to the same or similar punishment. But by itself it's hard to match up to the "DEAD" card. You know?

 

[rasta111]

Wasn't that implied? Unquestionably dead in my opinion. Mileage may vary, obviously a rape victim has a better chance at recovery than a rapist, same as a murderer has a significantly better chance... Do not question the pyschological ramifications in all cases.

Wait... you agree that murder is the worst?

I may have entirely missed your posts intention then. I'm just going to back away slowly like nothing happened...

It's an interesting subject actually, what is murder in the long run anyway? Can one person really take the life of another? I consider that to be one of the greatest illusions of all.

What I actually said was being stone cold dead seems better to me than being a victim of a far more heinous crime in the long run. Precisely what constitutes murder as an act is another topic entirely. One might say a totally spiritual issue as opposed to a literal one. No one calls soldiers criminals but assassins and terrorists on the other hand... Yeah points for another topic...

Personally I don't feel the need to discuss it as I consider it only one question which I myself already know the answer to. Do you fear death?

 

[totheendofsin]

I think they are incomparable and to attempt to compare the two is insulting to victims of both.

 

[Lightknight]

I think they are incomparable and to attempt to compare the two is insulting to victims of both.

I think you can discuss the merits of them as both being horrifically negative acts. However, I think that in this scenario to not place murder as the higher would actually be equivalent of telling rape victims that they were better off dead. It should be more offensive for that reason than anything else. To claim that they are ruined and now all value they offer or that life offers is gone.

Regardless, "insulting" a group is not a reason to drop discussion of a topic.

It's an interesting subject actually, what is murder in the long run anyway? Can one person really take the life of another? I consider that to be one of the greatest illusions of all.

Yes, a person can take the life of another. No illusions. It can and does happen. Even if you believe in something like reincarnation the person's life was still taken, the vase was still shattered.

Personally I don't feel the need to discuss it as I consider it only one question which I myself already know the answer to. Do you fear death?

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

 

[rasta111]

I think they are incomparable and to attempt to compare the two is insulting to victims of both.

I think you can discuss the merits of them as both being horrifically negative acts. However, I think that in this scenario to not place murder as the higher would actually be equivalent of telling rape victims that they were better off dead. It should be more offensive for that reason than anything else. To claim that they are ruined and now all value they offer or that life offers is gone.

Regardless, "insulting" a group is not a reason to drop discussion of a topic.

It's an interesting subject actually, what is murder in the long run anyway? Can one person really take the life of another? I consider that to be one of the greatest illusions of all.

Yes, a person can take the life of another. No illusions. It can and does happen. Even if you believe in something like reincarnation the person's life was still taken, the vase was still shattered.

Personally I don't feel the need to discuss it as I consider it only one question which I myself already know the answer to. Do you fear death?

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore... Consider the butterfly effect.

 

[the December King]

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore...

How can you say that murder is not horrific? The taking of another life... are you objecting to the term 'merit'?

I seem to recall you being quite upset when others were dismissing your Creationist points of view out of hand, instead of engaging in dialogue. It's a shame that you seem to dismiss the ideas of others just as quickly, just because they don't share your point of view.

 

[rasta111]

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore...

How can you say that murder is not horrific? The taking of another life... are you objecting to the term 'merit'?

I seem to recall you being quite upset when others were dismissing your Creationist points of view out of hand, instead of engaging in dialogue. It's a shame that you seem to dismiss the ideas of others just as quickly, just because they don't share your point of view.

... Who are you and why are you stating the obvious obliviously?... I'm not the one who wants to discuss 'the merits' of 'being horrific'... I'd appreciate it if you all stop labeling me as things you clearly don't understand also.

 

[the December King]

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore...

How can you say that murder is not horrific? The taking of another life... are you objecting to the term 'merit'?

I seem to recall you being quite upset when others were dismissing your Creationist points of view out of hand, instead of engaging in dialogue. It's a shame that you seem to dismiss the ideas of others just as quickly, just because they don't share your point of view.

... Who are you and why are you stating the obvious obliviously?... I'm not the one who wants to discuss 'the merits' of 'being horrific'... I'd appreciate it if you all stop labeling me as things you clearly don't understand also.

What does it matter who I am? Asking for clarification shouldn't be met with such disdain...

However, and I mean this: I'm sorry you think someone has labeled you.

 

[rasta111]

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore...

How can you say that murder is not horrific? The taking of another life... are you objecting to the term 'merit'?

I seem to recall you being quite upset when others were dismissing your Creationist points of view out of hand, instead of engaging in dialogue. It's a shame that you seem to dismiss the ideas of others just as quickly, just because they don't share your point of view.

... Who are you and why are you stating the obvious obliviously?... I'm not the one who wants to discuss 'the merits' of 'being horrific'... I'd appreciate it if you all stop labeling me as things you clearly don't understand also.

What does it matter who I am? Asking for clarification shouldn't be met with such disdain...

However, and I mean this: I'm sorry you think someone has labeled you.

I don't think you understand the things you're saying... I asked you who you think you are because you're disdainfully butting in and labeling me at the same time... I'm now being disdainful as you're acting like you said nothing at all... I say again... Oblivious.

 

[Lightknight]

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore... Consider the butterfly effect.

I'm not sure what you're objecting to here? The word merit has more than one definition, including:

"the intrinsic rights and wrongs of a case, outside of any other considerations."

That is the legal definition of the term and the one I was using. The "merits" of a case being tried are the individual components being evaluated. This term is regularly used in the context of evaluating whether something is good or bad. This is not to be confused with the definition of merit that means something is deserving of reward.

So forgive me, but I'm uncertain why you object here. Is there a bit of a language barrier here? I am in NO way saying that there is any good in either of those actions.

I'm saying it's possible to discuss the elements of each act and evaluate them individually to discuss a relative level of harm being done.

I don't fear it. It's going to happen someday. But were it impending I would move to avoid it.

Did you just says 'merits of them both as being horrific...' Yeah, I'm definitely not listening to you anymore...

How can you say that murder is not horrific? The taking of another life... are you objecting to the term 'merit'?

Thanks, I too am confused with what part is being objected to here. I think they're thinking I'm talking about "merits" as in good things rather than the legal definition that is commonly used in the context of discussions and debates that pertains to evaluating the goodness or badness of the components of the case.