|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: War On Drugs | |||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Heroine, morphine, and cocaine abuse were all common in the Victorian period, these not yet being restricted drugs. As has been mentioned, Sherlock Holmes is a heroine addict, and this was not astoundingly remarkable, nor was it obligatory to paint him as a stumbling buffoon - quite the opposite, he is lauded for his intellect. It is actually more accurate to say that poor, malnourished crime-committing heroine users are merely more visible than the productive, functional users who are not getting into trouble with the law, than to to say the functional users have a unique experience. --- On the issue of criminalisation, I cannot see the logic in decriminalising use, but not sale. If using or owning a thing is not contrary to the law, why whould providing or making that thing be contrary to the law? The providers are fulfilling a market demand with appropriate supply - thats exactly how its supposed to work. If you don't want the product retailed, then you have to assert its usage and posession are criminal in and of themselves. You cannot blame an entrepreneur for meeting effective demand for a product it is legal to have. This message has been edited by contracycle, 03-17-2005 07:12 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: I don't think thats necessarily a good assumption. Such drugs are expensive - not least becuase of the costs associated with conducting an illegal enterprise. For the poor, that degree of expense is probably not sustainable on low-end wages, and thus their income may be supplemented by criminality. It is not necessarily the case that their drug use makes them unemployable at all - it is that the relatively huge expense to them leads them to criminality, which makes life unstable, which makes it hard to hold down a job. If they were sufficiently wealthy that they can easily sustain the expense of the habit, and can be confident of a stable supply, then the devolution to the chaotic and criminal lifestyle may not occur at all. Thats excatly the conclusion that appears to arise from studies on middle class habitual users. Short article: Is heroin safe for some people to use?Is heroin safe for some people to use? | Science | The Guardian quote: Arguably, it already is for many poor families. But, why cannot we de-stigmatise this problem, so that people are more willing to seek treatment, and treatment can be provided without having to wade through accusations of "endorsing" drug taking?
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Yes, but the point was that did not oblige the author(s) to paint him according to the modern druggies stereotype. Functional upper class users were normal and known - many od these drugs were available from the local chemist. The point was to illustrate that the stereotype of drug-users we have is not universal by a long shot, and shoulf not be assumed to be accurate merely because it is common.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: That is repugnant misogynist nonsense and classic demonstration of the "blame-the-victim" defence.
quote: Utter nonsense.
quote: All you're saying is that you played the "I'm so violated" card better than they did. One wonder who is the one with this issue running around in their heads? I think at this point your delusions to any comprehension or sympathy for feminism or sexual equality can be wholly discarded.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Or, is that the spin you need to put on their accounts so you don't have to deal with the problems they raise?
quote: Your opinion on the matter is worthless. Date rape is an identifiable and extant phenomenon, whether drug-assisted or otherwise. People used to make the same kinds of objections to intramarital rape, and that is specific term to denote a category; the only consistent elements in this sorts of nonsense apologetics are that a) women are unstable, irrational, and make up stories, and b) the poor men are the real victims.
quote: Yes, they are where you least expect them - in your own home, in the company of a male friend, and so forth. This issue is directly relevant becuase it demonstrates that we are still conditioning men to demand sex as if by right - even from women with wehom they have otherwise healthy relationships. And further, it acords with the frequency with which women dioe at the hands men known to them.
quote: I can; the argument is very similar to the issues aroun intramarital rape. That is, some people judge that a woman who goes out alone with a man is "asking for it", or that men have some reaonsable expectation of sex on dates. The result is forcible rape, but one often publicly condoned in the way intramarital rape used to be. It is a term that describes a real thing, not some spurious victim-status of your paranoid imaginings.
quote: As I understand, GHB does wipe out some temporal memory that goes back further than the drug itself. Nevertheless, it is precisely this secondary evidence which you think should be discounted becuase for some reason you don't think it was rape. Lastly, campaigns to raise awareness of drink-tampering have been going on over here for some time. Abnd yes, it would be sound advice for no womeam to ever let a man touch or handle her drink - but that again shifts all respnsibility onto women to protect themselves, creates a poisonous atmosphere, and eliminates the responsibility of the man who actually, you know, committed the rape. Its amazing we still see such backward, recidivist nonsense in the 21st century. It's about time you abandioned the idea that all women are conspiring against men, holmes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: No, it was exactly right. I'll say it again just so we are clear: that is repugnant misogynist nonsense and a classic demonstration of the "blame-the-victim" defence. This is exactly THE classic demonstration of bigotry. Even if I took the most charitable possible view of your claim, your generalisation of it beyond your immediate acquaintances, and claims as to "why it was invented", are noxious, spurious and misogynist.
quote: I do not at all feel obliged to construct a serious argument to confront this claptrap. Your paranoia is not sufficiently challenging to the facts to require serious rebuttal, and merely demosntrate your own ignorance.
quote: Oh, it wasn't rape becuase it was date rape, huh? Just like its not if she doesn't try to claw his eyes out, or had a weapon and didn't kill? Baloney. The issue of male rape is rather tangential to this IMO. Either way, it is wholly invalid for you to go from one conversation with a few individuals to a generalsiation applied to all women who have ever made such a claim. That is indeed resorting to sterotyping and collective responsibility, and I consider it utterly vile. But at this point your assumptions that women conduct this sort of manipulation routinely has now been aired on several threads, and I frankly don't consider your report of what they had to say reliable. It seems to me more likely that you heard what you wanted to hear.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Wrong, it most certainly did. It explains that it is merely a decrsiptive term of something that actually happens, and not a conspiracy by an evil sisterhood.
quote: You are confusing your feelings with those of others. It is because many men DO think they are entitled to sex in marriage, or after paying for a date.
quote: You don;t agree with what I said precisely becuase what you said was that it was WOMENS responsibility. Therefore men can continue to believe that they are entiteld to sex, and thats no a problem for men to deal with, its a problem for women to deal with. Again, that haqs been a constant feature of your arguments in regards womens rights: "don't involve me, sort it out for yourself".
quote: Your argument is that rape should not be stopped, that women should just deal with it. After all, if she was careless with her drink, thinking she was in the company of friends, then that would be her fault, right? Like wearing a mini-skirt is also her fault. Classic blame-the-victim, again and again.
quote: And what eveidence is there for that, other than you find it more comforting than dealing with the facts? What people, where, name names.
quote: Except that it is NOT a dilution and your interpretation of what they had to say, given this assumption of yours, is highly suspect. So suspect I think it is outright misogyny.
quote: So what. Again, this demonstrates a remarkable naivite about rape and how it happens - it seems to assume that only the violent home-invader or mugger conducts rape. Thats is entirely not so, and one of the things that this very term is intended to denote. But instead of hearing what is actually said, you choose to filter this through some paranoid conspiracy about dishonest women and the "victim culture" of which you appear so enamoured. It seems to me that YOU are revelling in your "victim" status here, the poor white male so aggreived in this "politically correct" world. This message has been edited by contracycle, 03-22-2005 09:06 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: BBC NEWS | UK | Girls reveal abuse by boyfriends Whats also clear of course is that boys are willing and able to exercise this violence. Our society still accepts violence by men against women; still seeks to demonise women as culpable for their victimhood. And it has to be massivley endemic if it is being taken up by kids in what is likely their first relationship. In this context, the idea that men "might" be aggressive, or "might" use a date-rape drug, is not hysterical, or demonising men, or an unfair generalisation, or any kind of "victim culture": it is simply acknowledging the actuality. This message has been edited by contracycle, 03-22-2005 10:52 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Based on other stuff I have read, I would expect this to include physical intimidation, harrasment, bunny-boiling, stalking and so forth. Lets also bear in mind there are quite a number of cases of jilted men murdering their ex's, and sometimes their children, becuase "If I can't have you nobody can". Angry and emotional, I think of as normal. Aggressive, no.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024