You've never known someone who became jaded for life once they completely trusted a person who committed infidelity? There's a reason they call it the ultimate betrayal.
Sorry, I think you're a minority in this view.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Husband travels 160 miles to kill man having an affair with his Wife
- Thread starter Dram
- Start date
- Status
You've never known someone who became jaded for life once they completely trusted a person who committed infidelity? There's a reason they call it the ultimate betrayal.
Sorry, I think you're a minority in this view.
Devolution
Member
She's not actually. Most people don't kill their SO's lover or their SO over it. It's the "ultimate betrayal" for people who haven't been raped, molested, beaten to fuck or completely abandoned by family and SOs.
Most people don't kill their lovers, but to suggest it's anything other than emotionally abusive (at best) is not a common viewpoint.
Are you George Costanza? Why does all the blame get shifted to the woman?
Devolution
Member
If you seriously took that from Fiction's posts you haven't been reading them.
User 100115
Banned
I know someone who's husband went from a loving guy to a drunk, abusive piece of shit who beat the crap out of her for weeks, even raped her, before she finally decided to leave. She stayed because of the man he was before, thought maybe they could work through it, but after he put her in the hospital, she finally had enough.
I can tell you 100% that she would have rather he cheated on her instead. I'd say what he did to her was more of a betrayal than what this woman did to her husband all day long. Cheating is no where near the 'ultimate betrayal' and on the scale of worst things you can do to another person, its at the bottom of the list.
Yeah, I'm not equating rape to cheating. Obviously. There's a sliding scale of horrible things that can happen to you, and while I personally would prefer physical abuse (although this goes hand in hand with mental abuse oftentimes), I'd prefer not to be raped.
User 100115
Banned
Even if he hadn't raped her, he beat this shit out of her. She still would have rather he cheated. That is still more of a betrayal than cheating.
Ok...that's a personal preference. I imagine the *reason* she would have preferred cheating, though, is because of the mindfuckery that goes along with staying with a person who beats you a constant basis. That would takes years of therapy to get over and would result in much bigger trust issues than getting cheated on once.
I hate commenting on these stories, because we don't know enough about the people. For instance, I don't ever condone cheating. I think it's scummy as hell. But let's say the husband was an abusive drunk, or just a real piece of shit. After years of trying, eventually she falls out of love. Yeah, she should just divorce him - but it might not be that easy. She could be afraid of him. She knows he's violent, and is afraid to take that step. She could have family/religious pressure to not divorce. So many factors.
I'm not saying that's how it was. But it's a possible scenario. And in that case, I can't entirely blame her for falling in love with someone else, and wanting to get out from under the husband. It happens. But of course, maybe she was scummy. Maybe it wasn't any of the above, and she was just cheating.
In that case, I could acknowledge both are scummy. But the Husband killing someone is 100% to blame for his own actions.
I'm not saying that's how it was. But it's a possible scenario. And in that case, I can't entirely blame her for falling in love with someone else, and wanting to get out from under the husband. It happens. But of course, maybe she was scummy. Maybe it wasn't any of the above, and she was just cheating.
In that case, I could acknowledge both are scummy. But the Husband killing someone is 100% to blame for his own actions.
Dude's got the guts to kill a guy banging his wife behind his back, I have no problem with it. In fact, coulda tagged the wife aswell, but you got to be able to live with the consequences, both husband, wife and the third guy. You're in the States, that place is filled with lunatics with guns. Don't cheat, nothing happens.
User 100115
Banned
No, the reason is that he physically abused her and broke her jaw. The mindfuckery was secondary.
I'd start packing my shit and grab all the kids and animals and get the fuck out the SECOND my husband laid on a hand on me. I guess in some people's eyes I'd deserve to get it worse because I betrayed him and our vows, even if he just left a bruise on my cheek.
JFC
Because in this case, the Woman is the one in the committed relationship. I would assume this applies to a husband that is also cheating with a single woman (that the man that is committed to the marriage is more responsible than the single woman). If it's not, then the poster is a hypocrite and only singling out women for the blame.
EDIT: Not saying I agree with above. I actually do think the single person shares the blame, if they actually know the person is in a relationship. Just explaining how I read the posters response. Then again, maybe your reply was based on a larger context (his history of posts). So in that case, maybe I should butt out.
Exr
Member
She isn't saying that it's not emotionally abusive at all, she's saying you can't murder a human being over it.
Ok, again that's personal preference though. Lots of guys (and girls to a lesser extent) have dealt with physical abuse by their same-gender peers. I've been there. It sucks, but if you hate the person it's a hell of a lot easier to get over than if it was someone you loved and trusted.
Who would say this? Physical abuse is unacceptable in *any* part of a modern society. In relationships, on the streets, by parents to their children...they all deserve to be locked up until a team of psychologists can deem them safe for release IMO.
User 100115
Banned
But apparently if I got into a relationship before the divorce was finalized, and he killed my lover, it's be understandable.
I'm not justifying murder. I don't think that bullied kids have a right to kill their oppressors either.
In your hypothetical example, I wouldn't even consider the act of "cheating" immoral as (chances are) the relationship is viewed as void by both parties. Yeah, someone might get jealous or hurt, but no bond of trust is broken.
i should have never clicked on this thread. What the hell is going on in here? People comparing it to rape?
Two wrongs don't make a right, the guy clearly needs anger management but now he won't get it cause he's going to be on death row. The chick needs a soul. And the victim needs to ask "are you married" and if "yes" say no thanks.
Two wrongs don't make a right, the guy clearly needs anger management but now he won't get it cause he's going to be on death row. The chick needs a soul. And the victim needs to ask "are you married" and if "yes" say no thanks.
Some people let their emotions take over when the person they love cheats on them.
It's not understandable in the sense that killing others is ok, but in the sense that with the amount of people living together, some will overreact when they find out their partner is cheating.
Vigilant Walrus
Member
Every moment we're alive, we're keeping from having sex with other people. We're not biologically programmed to have sex with just one person. For better or worse we have these monogomous traditions now. An after effect of post-hunter-gatherer.
I believe that the reason why cheating is such a big deal(besides the lying, the deceit) is that it's very difficult for people to find new people to fuck. particularly men are struggling. males are programmed to fuck almost everything on two legs (if you look at our ape-man ancestors) but we live in a society were a lot of factors hinder this biological wiring.
So when people lose their wife, after they have let themselves go, they think so little of themselves that there is no going back. there is no way, a comparable attractive woman of similar quality will ever fuck them. and that's where all hell breaks loose, because then you might as well be dead, if life is miserable from here on out. and in the anger they lash out at those responsible because they let their emotions run amok.
our feelings of being entitled over other humans is a strange thing. "she can only love me". Think about how crazy that sounds. Most people don't even know who they really are. How the hell can you expect another human being to keep feeling the same way about you for many years, when you don't even feel the same about yourself every day?
Some people don't know how to get back from cheating. For some people it's worse than death. They don't think they can get back on the horse. When people get into serious relationships with their SO, they give up something of themselves, and often they are broken on the other side. it's a real trick, to keep your options open, to keep your sexual value high and desired while still being faithful in a relationship. Most of us, let ourselves go.
/rambling
I believe that the reason why cheating is such a big deal(besides the lying, the deceit) is that it's very difficult for people to find new people to fuck. particularly men are struggling. males are programmed to fuck almost everything on two legs (if you look at our ape-man ancestors) but we live in a society were a lot of factors hinder this biological wiring.
So when people lose their wife, after they have let themselves go, they think so little of themselves that there is no going back. there is no way, a comparable attractive woman of similar quality will ever fuck them. and that's where all hell breaks loose, because then you might as well be dead, if life is miserable from here on out. and in the anger they lash out at those responsible because they let their emotions run amok.
our feelings of being entitled over other humans is a strange thing. "she can only love me". Think about how crazy that sounds. Most people don't even know who they really are. How the hell can you expect another human being to keep feeling the same way about you for many years, when you don't even feel the same about yourself every day?
Some people don't know how to get back from cheating. For some people it's worse than death. They don't think they can get back on the horse. When people get into serious relationships with their SO, they give up something of themselves, and often they are broken on the other side. it's a real trick, to keep your options open, to keep your sexual value high and desired while still being faithful in a relationship. Most of us, let ourselves go.
/rambling
I'd be interested to read more on this if you have any sources.
Interesting if it's not just wild conjecture. Any sources?
"Letting yourself go" is an excuse that people that are lazy use to make it seem like they've achieved what they wanted to by being fit. If they've become insecure in their marriages, I think they're not working enough on themselves. Why does any of this make life miserable? These are far too reflected outcomes of someone cheating to be an emotional response. This is not why people act out when they're cheated on.
It's not feeling the same. It's still feeling attracted to. The way that comes about hopefully changes as much as you do. No matter how you'd like to mark humans in regard to monogamy, it is not what it is about in most cases. Keeping new trends like open relationships out of the equation (because, how could a new trend underline a point you're making about evolutionary psychology?), a lot of people are happy about pledging their love to one person. 50% of marriages end in divorce, and there's nothing wrong happening there. The problem is when one person says "I'll love you forever", and then forgets to say "I don't do, anymore" before breaking the deepest bond of trust with their significant other. "She can only love me" is a ridiculous statement, but only people with narcissistic personality disorder (well, nearly) think like that about girls. I'm a person very, very fond of monogamy, and I'd expect someone to not betray that relationship if I was with them, but I would never be upset if they decided to end it.
This is firstly irrelevant, secondly inconsequential, thirdly a justification and fourthly a bit incoherent.
Yes, the residing issues after having a deep bond of trust broken is one that can be extremely hard to mend. I'm sure there's ample people out there that aren't capable of mending it, and haven't the open mind to seek out people that can help them with it.
This is an unfitting hyperbole only suited for those affected by such a heinous act, while still affected. It is extremely hard to break up with someone that's very close to you, but I don't think it's suited to say it's worse than death. It may feel worse than death, to them, but it's because it hurts a lot. It isn't worse than death, and it feels wrong to label is as such. I'm being pedantic over the qualifier "feels", but it's essential, because life goes on.
That likely means they were missing something going into it. A proper relationship should have no one giving up an essential part of themselves. I know about this, because I just came out of my longest relationship ever, and I'm on the other side, missing her - but I have never given up on anything that was mine. The brokenness on the other side is a natural part of it all, but it is also what has us get back up, and get back to our roots. They are not broken, they feel like they're missing a huge part of themselves - rightfully so - but they're perfectly fixable, it just requires work. And most of the time, they end up in a better place.
You're portraying it in such a definitive matter that it's unfair.
Which leads us into what I feel is an epitome of bitterness. I don't know what it is. Maybe you've been in a bad break up, maybe you've had your trust broken. There's nothing inherently wrong with monogamy, and I don't think you have any sources to back it up. I think it's unfair to portray it as such, as you did first in your post. Either you have some issues with a past relationship that I hope you work on, or you've missed the point of the relationship altogether.
You should be with someone that inspires you. Someone that's so beautiful you wish to keep in shape, because you feel she deserves it. It should also stem from a place within you to lead a happy life, and to be healthy. If you think it's in any way OK to "let yourself go", and that that's nothing more than succumbing to lazy desires, you're abusing that laziness to blame monogamy. Be healthy, be happy, have children, play with them. If you're so insecure that you need to keep in shape to feel desired by others, then do that. Don't try and blame monogamy for that, too. Even if you are desired, why does that make it hard to be faithful? It's just not coherent to me.
Yes, statistically most people in our part of the world let themselves go, regardless of being in a relationship or not. The fact that sugar has become such a drug for everyone that it leads to health problems has nothing to do with monogamy. People were monogamous a hundred years ago, and they were much leaner, and there was no "letting yourself go". It's inconsequential that people get fat once they have a wife. Even if it is, it makes them weak people. If they then make a conscious choice to not pursuit a happy life once they've found a mate, they've missed out on the whole point.
Also, once you think about evolution, and try to say that "we were made to be promiscuous", you'd see two things if you apply that to the world of today: People are having a lot of one-night stands. STDs are more prevalent than ever. There are people that go through life and are promiscuous the whole way through. But another thing that's absolutely certain from evolution is that the human female is extremely vulnerable during her very long pregnancy, and it could be argued she'd need protection during that time. Our children take an extremely long time to develop, compared to all other animals in the animal kingdom. They need proper protection and a healthy environment to be raised in. This has made us monogamous as well as clan based. There are many fleshed out theories about the promiscuity of women, and how it is connected to being inseminated with the best genes, then having a proper caring figure there to support that offspring. But this even underlines our monogamous nature.
Kano on the Phone
Member
"I didn't read the thread, I just wanted to nip in and make sure that everyone knew that cheating bitches are the worst. Thanks."
Dude, your viewpoint is insane. It absolutely sucks to get cheated on, but you have a serious lack of perspective if you think it is comparable to having the shit beaten out of you by your partner. Think about it. Aside from it being far more damaging, it's also a far more massive violation of trust. So your significant other sleeps with someone else and violates your marriage agreement? That isn't even remotely justification to kill someone, no matter if you're pissed off. Killing someone is not a reasonable response. The guy is totally responsible. Not 80% responsible but 100% responsible. The appropriate thing to do is to leave the relationship.
I've read a good chunk of this thread, and I find it genuinely scary how some of this community thinks. The woman-hating with a violent satisfaction in this outcome is creepy. Rape culture is evident here. She cheats? Call her a terrible person, break up with her and cut contact. Don't murder someone and call it an unavoidable outcome, like being a man is like being a force of nature and women better tread lightly or they'll be responsible for the consequences.
People wonder why there aren't more women in places like this; one is this outright hostile attitude.
I don't care if she is the hottest woman ever, my morals don't play second to lust. You don't have those hang ups because your morals are different from mine. The dude that got shot may have been entirely innocent if the woman never told him she was married, but we'll never know because he's dead.
The wife and husband are both at fault for what happened, regardless if murder out ways infidelity. Also if the guy knew the women had a husband he is also at fault. No one is condoning what the husband did but this isn't the first time someone has killed over a spouse cheating. Betrayal hurts, I have felt it myself when my girlfriend told her friends something about me that I trusted her with. I felt so betrayed I wanted to hurt myself. So I can understand the effect it can have on someone's mind and there ability to think rationally.
It takes a lot to kill someone. You literally want to remove them from this earth so that they never take another breath in this existence again. Their history, their family ,the people dependent on them in their own small world? The effect a murder will have on them doesn't matter, as long as this guy dies. There is no logic left, just primal revenge.
This isn't like war, where murder is strategic (for an extremely quick generalization). This situation is a position where a person's value for life is invalidated. The shooter obviously does not care about his life anymore; he was willing to drive 3+ hours knowing full well he would go to jail.
And as I'm reading the responses in this thread, I wonder how many experiences people have in actual relationships. The woman cheated, but she is being judged as if she is the killer herself. Monogamy and the reason why people cheat has so many facets and can get so complicated. There is a reason for everything. I don't condone cheating in anyway, but all the cases of it I have experienced never involved bimbos or manwhores cheating just because they can or their needs are fickle and flighty. Needs are not being met, period. The lack of this support is so much so that the person cannot even go to their partner to address this need, rather they turn to someone else.
This is a sad story to hear. No one deserves death like this, but the guy who got kill was the one who deserved it the least.
This isn't like war, where murder is strategic (for an extremely quick generalization). This situation is a position where a person's value for life is invalidated. The shooter obviously does not care about his life anymore; he was willing to drive 3+ hours knowing full well he would go to jail.
And as I'm reading the responses in this thread, I wonder how many experiences people have in actual relationships. The woman cheated, but she is being judged as if she is the killer herself. Monogamy and the reason why people cheat has so many facets and can get so complicated. There is a reason for everything. I don't condone cheating in anyway, but all the cases of it I have experienced never involved bimbos or manwhores cheating just because they can or their needs are fickle and flighty. Needs are not being met, period. The lack of this support is so much so that the person cannot even go to their partner to address this need, rather they turn to someone else.
This is a sad story to hear. No one deserves death like this, but the guy who got kill was the one who deserved it the least.
I decided to have a look at past threads and here's the pattern I found:
When a man attacks a woman who may have cheated, GAF posters start questioning the wife's behavior, stating or implying it was partially her fault, she set the violence in motion, she deserved it for cheating, should feel guilt, rationalizing the guy's behavior, etc.
When a woman attacks a man for possible cheating, there is a pattern of not questioning the man's behavior, no shifting of blame to him. Blaming the cheating man responses are practically nonexistent. You just get jokes, puns, the usual "good, she deserves to die/burn/rot in prison," especially if she attacked his genitals for his misbehavior.
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=661617
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=712837
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=665733
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=505040
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=556400
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=450780
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=416547
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=493122
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=534999
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=564757
http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=453196
She is entirely guiltless. No one cheats thinking "people might die because of this," since murder is not a rational followup response. She had nothing to do with her husband's premeditated, deranged behavior. He is unstable and entirely to blame. You guys and your thinly veiled victim blaming is disgusting.
Yea no one goes in thinking that someone could potentially die, but you're a fool if you think no one goes in thinking that someone could get HURT. People take betrayal differently depending on how emotionally stable they are. Some just end the relationship, some drink, some hurt themselves, and some hurt others. Am not blaming her. I don't want her going threw life feeling guilty for this guys death, but hopefully this is a warming to those who think that cheating is a joke and shouldn't be taking seriously.
Some of you guys amaze me .... on both sides.
How can some of you think anyone deserved to die? And at the same time some of you guys think the women is 100% guiltless / blameless.
Life has grey areas ...
In my opinion, the husband went fucking nuts and obviously went way way wayyyyy too far. He should of beat the guys ass, but not killed. And that's even up for debate.
The chick being blameless? Pull your heads out your ass, she cheated, shit like this DOES happen. Guys are fucking crazy, hell people in general are fucking crazy. I've been cheated on, and no I never once thought of homicide. But some people will go that far, this chick is not blameless. She is not a victim, she cheated on her dude and got another guy killed. The murderer himself is obviously the only guilty party if you want to just take into account the physical murder. But none of this shit would of happened without the other 2 peoples role, you can't just assign blame in this to 1 person. Well you can, but you will be doing yourself a disservice. If you willingly refuse to look at the entire picture, that is your choice. Everyone is guilty here, and guilty to varying levels of severity. The murderer is ultimately the one in the wrong, but the wife and other guy played their parts. This isn't fucking victim blaming, it's seeing life as it is. In all it's grey areas. This isn't just black and white like some of you want to make it out to be.
If the mods and certain people want to make this some sexist victim blaming rant, then go ahead. That is not what I typed, and that is not what I am trying to convey. But this chick is not blameless, the deceased is not blameless, and the murderer most certainly is not blameless. Everyone played a role in this shit storm, some more then others.
How can some of you think anyone deserved to die? And at the same time some of you guys think the women is 100% guiltless / blameless.
Life has grey areas ...
In my opinion, the husband went fucking nuts and obviously went way way wayyyyy too far. He should of beat the guys ass, but not killed. And that's even up for debate.
The chick being blameless? Pull your heads out your ass, she cheated, shit like this DOES happen. Guys are fucking crazy, hell people in general are fucking crazy. I've been cheated on, and no I never once thought of homicide. But some people will go that far, this chick is not blameless. She is not a victim, she cheated on her dude and got another guy killed. The murderer himself is obviously the only guilty party if you want to just take into account the physical murder. But none of this shit would of happened without the other 2 peoples role, you can't just assign blame in this to 1 person. Well you can, but you will be doing yourself a disservice. If you willingly refuse to look at the entire picture, that is your choice. Everyone is guilty here, and guilty to varying levels of severity. The murderer is ultimately the one in the wrong, but the wife and other guy played their parts. This isn't fucking victim blaming, it's seeing life as it is. In all it's grey areas. This isn't just black and white like some of you want to make it out to be.
If the mods and certain people want to make this some sexist victim blaming rant, then go ahead. That is not what I typed, and that is not what I am trying to convey. But this chick is not blameless, the deceased is not blameless, and the murderer most certainly is not blameless. Everyone played a role in this shit storm, some more then others.
While cheating is one of the worst betrayals of trusts there is, and I know, any person is entirely innocent in a cheating matter where the SO decides to hurt the third party. It is not even a tiny bit on the one cheating. Cheating is horrible, but it is completely separated from the fucked up reactions some emotionally unstable people have.
Kano on the Phone
Member
What sort of mental gymnastics are involved with convincing yourself that someone who is tied up and assaulted isn't a victim? I'm honestly curious.
The guy should absolutely not have beat anyone for this. From an ethics point of view, there's a reason why cheating isn't illegal, but beating someone is.
You're entirely right. This isn't black and white. She is a part of the situation. But to say that she is in any way responsible for this guy's death is a reckless thing to say. It is essentially saying that the Jews were responsible for Hitler prosecuting them. After all, they upset Hitler.
You're confusing the fact that she was a part of the situation with her having any blame for it. You cannot take blame for people reacting badly. It is essentially saying that women that dress provocatively are responsible for being raped. It doesn't work that way.
(Also, it sounds like you thought about beating up whoever was the one involved with your girl. You've got fucked up priorities. She cheated on you. He is not to blame, even if he knew. It might be morally debatable or wrong, but you cannot hurt anyone for striding with your morals)
Geeze man, you even read anything else?
Being tied up and bound against your will obviously makes you a victim to that situation, but you seem to be forgetting that key piece of information. That this entire thing started from infedility. Read my post again, I am not blaming her. But she sure as heck is not blameless, she is a victim for being held against her will (while her husband traveled to commit a homicide) ... but she is not a victim in the sense of the entire situation. Her initial actions drove this series of events into fruition. If you cannot understand this, I don't know what else to say. I understand where you are coming from though, unfortunately you don't seem to understand my point of view it seems. To each their own I guess ...
It has nothing to do with understanding a point of view. I can also understand that you're saying there's causality involved, which you're right about. Assigning blame on top of that has nothing to do with it, though, and as such, your argument of her not being blameless is completely unfounded.
If anything, you should understand that your argument is being rebuked because it does not hold water, rather than being "wrong".
You just used to false equivalencies in 1 post on me. The holocaust and rape thing, which had nothing to do with the subject. Back to the subject, she isn't blameless or guiltless. She isn't responsible for causing the mans death, but she played a part in these events. Feel free to deny that, I can respect your opinion.
While this should be the case, I think most people deep down know it's not. Like that picture that makes the rounds on GAF with the Caucasian dude in bed with a Japanese guy's wife, as the husband is walking through the door past a bunch of swords.
Relationships are emotionally charged and a breech of trust out of nowhere is earth-shattering. Not everyone wants to "to keep [their] options open" as another poster put it. That completely defeats the point in having a serious relationship to begin with.
Kano on the Phone
Member
Ah, so you somehow separate the assault from the rest of the situation. Makes sense now. It isn't right, but I see what you're doing.
You're saying that since she did something
Moving away from the metaphysical discussion and back to the equivalences I brought up, I'm saying that what you're saying is the perfect equivalence of a woman wearing provocative clothes, and via causality, causes a man to be aroused. His arousal makes him do something stupid, and he rapes her. So she was the one instigating the events which unfolded to her being raped. And as such, she isn't blameless, according to you.
I chastise any such argument, because it is, to me, a morally indefensable way of looking at things.
I like how you disregard everything I wrote, completely. I see what your doing ...
I came here for discussion if you wanna troll go for it though. Honestly I made my points pretty clear. I don't really care man, take what you want out of my posts but you know I had more to say then what you are boiling it down to be .... good job though, keep it up. Also I like how I even agreed with you, and you still got snark left.
Sep you are projecting ....
I didn't say I find infedility morally objectionable, you simply typed that for me. People are not rational creatues, if your lover cheats ... some people flip the fuck out and do bad things. Most people don't, but some do. We are creatures of passion and fury sometimes, and that's just the truth. My point was any logical human being has to prepare themselves for what their SO might do if they were to cheat, it's not rocket science. If I cheat on my wife, I am prepared to have my shit FUCKED UP. Do I expect it? Depends who I am with, but it surely would be in the back of my mind. To sit here and act like this lady is some angel, who did nothing wrong, and had nothing to do with any of this, is disingenuous at best. I am not blaming her as the only person in the wrong, I am simply saying she played a part. A line of thought that clearly enrages some people for some reason, I don't know how viewing this story from all points of view can possibly be a bad thing. In the end the husband is the one who did the murder, he will pay, not her.
OK, so you don't think it's morally objectionable to cheat, but omit that, and the entire argument still stands.
She had something to do with it, but she has no blame. She did something wrong, but she is blameless for the murder. Your point is that women that wear provocative clothes, that as an effect arouse men that then rape the woman, that woman then played a part. Your main argument the whole time is that the woman that cheated on someone wasn't blameless, so I can only assume the same would apply in this situation, since it is exactly the same. I am making this point to show you that your logic isn't consistent, since I am assuming you would agree that this isn't a correct thing to say, and to show that it doesn't follow.
The woman is guilty of infidelity. She is entirely blameless as far as the murder goes, though. Just like a woman can be guilty of wearing provocative clothes. However, she is entirely blameless if she is targeted because of her clothes.
Kano on the Phone
Member
I'm not trolling, and I read your posts, I'm just saying you're wrong. She's a victim and isn't responsible for the husband choosing to murder and you're wrong for suggesting anything else. You're welcome to enjoy all the weird nuance you want as it comes to a victim's role in a crime they didn't commit, I was just curious how you came to it, which is why I asked.
Dude you can't just make up shit like that, I never said anything about women wearing sexy outfits deserve rape. You are literally putting words in my mouth ... you don't know me well enough to say that.
Anyway I am out of here, time for some Zen Pinball. Seriously stop putting words in peoples mouth man, it's not a good way for discussion to happen. I said she is not blameless of the entire situation, the mans murder is not on her hands. But she played a part in this entire thing, that's all I was saying. That's all I said. Everything else about women asking for rape, holocaust being the jews fault, etc ... is entirely you typing what you want to hear. I am sorry bro, but I am trying to be polite and not get mad. Usually that kind of stuff piss's me off , anyway at least you tried to be polite with me unlike the other guy. For that I appreciate your time, anyway I gotta kill my boys highscore in pinball because at the end of the day .... that's all that matters.
Kano thank you just saw the reply. Sorry for calling you a troll. I simply meant she is not blameless in the over all situation. She had nothing to do with the murder, that's all on the husband obviously. But she is not blameless in the over all sense of things, she made a mistake. She shouldn't have to pay for it with her life, or jail time, but she will over time most likely wish none of this happened. Her actions included. That's all I was trying to say. Anyway Pinball time.
It's the murderer's mother's fault. Without her giving birth to him, none of this would have happened.
I am saying that what you're saying equates to saying that a woman wearing a provocative outfit is 'playing a part' in getting raped. Here's how:
In this situation, the woman did something. It could be anything. It wasn't illegal, so ethics aren't relevant. Morals can be discussed, of course, but since it's subjective, we cannot mix it into the discussion. She did something, and a man was killed for it. She is not to blame for it.
In the other situation, a woman does something else. She wears provocative clothes. She was raped for it. She is not to blame for it. You're saying that the first woman "played a part" in it, and if your logic is consistent, the other equivalent situation should receive the same treatment. But it's obvious that it's not relevant to state that about the second situation, yet you continue to say it is relevant for the first situation.
I even pointed out that I was applying your logic to an equivalent situation to prove that your logic was either inconsistent or that your logic is of moral objectionable quality. You showed that it was inconsistent when you said I was putting words in your mouth you wouldn't say - or you're saying "I would say that, but you don't know me well enough to know it".
I am pointing out that at best it is of no consequence to point out that "she was a part of it". It is rather obvious that she was a part of it. At worst it sounds like she's to blame (and you did stress how she wasn't blameless, so it seems that you wish to assign some blame on her for this). It is an unfair thing to do, and as such, I chose to rebuke your argument on the foundation that it is unnecessarily inflaming a situation, by making it clear that the woman is innocent and completely blameless regarding the murder.
About the Jews and the woman in a provocative outfit, it is a tool I chose to use to show what you're saying in a different light. I am trying to argue that "if you mean what you say with this, you should also mean this" - since I am assuming you wish to say things that are consistent, as in things you can stand for that will always apply, and that isn't an emotional response you have that is true "just because" - because that's what I wish to show, that when you enter the thread and say "How can you guys really try to say she's blameless?!" is hopefully something you don't think in other situations, because it would mean the things I've pointed out earlier. If you don't apply the same logic to other situations, it means you've probably judged this situation with your feelings and not your mind. With those feelings, maybe you projected some reaction you had to state that "this woman is responsible for what happened, in some way" - which seemed to be connected to your desire to beat up a guy that had had sex with your girlfriend. I wish to state that it is not your girlfriend's fault that you beat him up, and she wouldn't be responsible.
With that, I hope it sheds light that will have you reflect upon such a situation in the way of saying "maybe it's completely wrong to hold it against the third party, and I should rather speak with the girl that did this to me?" - or something.
I just saw this. smh.
User 100115
Banned
I assumed as much, thanks for giving the proof.
People have been killing over infidelity since time immemorial. Yes it's crazy, yes it's illogical, and yes there is an animalistic bent to it. I don't know if it's territorial, or if it's something even more basic. But people react to it like you've threatened their lives, and in some ways you have. Ultimately, it's all about perspective, and when it comes to human emotions, I think we all could use a little more of it.
This thread is fucking sick. The leap between cheating and the resulting action of murdering someone is so massive, that there is simply no way that the cheater should be blamed. As shown in the links I posted, some of you are hypocrites because you don't see guys on message boards defending a woman who kills or maims a man for cheating.
My exact thoughts to the poster who said this is why women have such low numbers here. This is why someone made a thread about it, why Evilore once asked guys to stop the creep threads, why female celebs bail the fuck out, and why a thread asking about Aisha on GAF had to be locked before shit got out of hand. Some of you are really embarrassing when it comes to women.
My exact thoughts to the poster who said this is why women have such low numbers here. This is why someone made a thread about it, why Evilore once asked guys to stop the creep threads, why female celebs bail the fuck out, and why a thread asking about Aisha on GAF had to be locked before shit got out of hand. Some of you are really embarrassing when it comes to women.
- Status