So I just discovered that I have been working next to the waste of oxygen that raped my best friend several years ago. I work in a manufacturing environment and I know that you can’t fire someone just for being a sex offender unless it directly interferes with work duties (in the US). But despite it being a primarily male workforce he does work with several women who have no idea what he is. He literally followed a woman home, broke into her house, and raped her. Him working here puts every female employee at risk. How is that not an unsafe working environment? How is it at even legal to employ him anywhere where he will have contact with women?
Sorry, too many arguments.
Would it be illegal to put up fliers all over the workplace with his mugshot and information about his crime?
That would probably fall under harassment and get OP fired.
I’d hardly consider making people aware of who they’re interacting with on a daily basis harassment.
Rooting for op to do this so they can get sued as fuck
Illegal? No. Actually creating a hostile work environment and grounds for immediate termination? Yes.
Posting this seperately: OP, you have a right to feel unsafe. Talk with your other coworkers, then go to managment with a safety plan. You probably can’t get this guy fired, but it’s completely reasonable to ask for some sort of safeguards, given he’s a multiple offender. If you need inspiration, look at the sort of practices medical facilities have: multiple people required to be in the room, clear boundaries being set, agreed-upon followup if rules are broken, etc.
They didn’t say that he was a multiple offender, just to clarify.
I doesn’t butbit is what it is . In my opinion rapists should be put to death or given life sentence in prison where they can work till the end of their life.
“I don’t support the prison industrial complex, but when I do I choose Dos Equis.”
Holy shit, how is he not in prison?
OP says in the comments that he served his sentence already.
Because he’s either innocent until proven guilty or he’s served his time. You can discuss it with HR and express your concerns about him, but unless he’s continued to behave predatorily he’s likely just only going to be subjected to increased scrutiny
Because he’s either innocent until proven guilty or he’s served his time.
presumed innocent until proven guilty… Is a procedural doctrine for courts. while the guy presumably has served his time and deserves fair treatment… the OP is also justified in raising this concern with management. Not that management will do anything, because they’ve already determined it’s not a problem. They will, perhaps, accommodate the OP in scheduling them on opposite shifts or placing them away from him.
It doesn’t change the reality of whether or not the individual committed a crime.
But YOU cannot know that “reality” unless (either you are the judge or) you have knowledge of the court’s verdict.
Calling someone a criminal without any such knowledge is a false accusation.
Calling someone a criminal without any such knowledge is a false accusation.
Wut?
So. Carrol wasn’t raped by Trump, until 2023?
And therefore Carrol was falsely accusing Trump of raping her until the court made the decision?
Sorry. That’s bullshit. Also, did you catch the part where he has multiple convictions for rape, apparently?
The point I’m trying to make is that a company’s HR team are not a court of law and don’t- and in fact, can’t- operate on the standards you are asking.
They can k my make a reasonable attempt at being fair, and will usually end up doing what’s “best” for the company. They don’t even have to be right. Nevermind moral.
What those standards are basically impossible, considering what you would find moral, what I would find moral; and what… let’s say law-and-order-died-red-republicans would find moral.
What the company has a legal obligation to do? Protect their employees from a hostile work environment. How that goes… I don’t know. Whose right here and whose not… I don’t know.
I mean you are making a fair argument that there’s a distinction between your own morals and the binding rules in place. You are free to feel a lot of things that are very bad, but when you act on them you will bump into reality.
That said I think the original comment was meant to say that the only reason he is here is because society through the legal process has found him to be safe to work there.
Now to get beyond the feelings against him OP can obviously talk to HR and make sure they get some distance, but if the courts found him not guilty, he deserves to be there. Imagine serving years in prison, working on yourself until the government finally finds you fit enough to enter society again, only for ppl to kick you out of your job again because of something you tried so hard to leave behind. That’s why the prison system usually focuses on rehabilitation instead of punishment in most civil countries.
What I’m saying is, the court’s ruling does not have to change the way you feel, but the court also says you have no right to take his job from him unless he commits crimes again. No feeling can measure heavy enough to weigh up against the right for him to live a normal life.
Yeah, exactly. Rehabilitative justice is hard. His victims should never be expected to be near him again, but society needs to give people chances to demonstrate rehabilitation. Denying someone access to half the population guarantees they never rehabilitate. But it’s also fair to say that in America we don’t really bother rehabilitating people and if someone has been to prison multiple times for rape well, I don’t want to be alone with them either and I’d be uncomfortable with my employer forcing me to be alone with them. And that’s the situation as OP has clarified and yeah it definitely sounds like it may be a hostile workplace.
You’re absolutely right, that this guy deserves a fresh start. but the OP also deserves - and has a right- to work in a place they presumably feel safe. If I were the OP… my response would be to bring this up with HR; document every interaction with this guy while also actively avoiding interaction with him as much as reasonably possible, and most importantly shut the fuck up about it.
HR can assist with avoiding him, if that’s reasonable. (opposite shifts, putting out at opposite ends of the facility, or in places where they’re unlikely to cross paths, etc.). But ultimately, the guy deserves a fresh break and OP deserves a place they can feel safe. but if its a one-or-the-other, OP needs to understand; they already hired both of you, so from a business standpoint, that decision is going to come down to… whose loss would be less detrimental to the company’s profits.
Terminating the guy simply because she’s uncomfortable and he’s a convicted rapist… is, unfortunately easily defended in court. If he’s also exhibiting patterns of behavior that suggest he’s not reformed… (catcalling. derogatory/misogynistic remarks.) it’s even easier.
But the other side of that is too: Terminating OP because she harassed a guy is… also easily defended in court.
the company will fire whoever impacts their profit margin the least.
Correction, right to a safe work place, not feel safe. Feeling safe and being safe are different things. And this disconnect is actually a real problem.
The last time he raped someone he was in prison for less than 2 years. Considering that wasn’t his first offence I highly doubt that changed him. Also HR is already aware. Apparently they fired the last person who brought it up to them.
Where I work, most positions do not require a background check so we have a mix of people (men, women, trans, nonbinary) with criminal convictions, including sex offenders.
The only thing that matters is their behavior in the workplace. You get fired because of attendance or poor performance.
The biggest problem people at my workplace are the people who try to make someones past an issue.
Also, your statement that you “highly doubt that changed him” is very telling. Basically it shows that you are the one with the problem. Unless you have firsthand knowledge then you are trying to justify your negative feelings.
Maybe this last time changed them. Maybe they got help. Maybe they’re in therapy and are trying to change.
This person and your employer are under no obligation to do what you want when there is no justification other than your own personal judgement.
Oh then yeah I’ve got no fucking clue, firing the last person who brought it up absolutely should be illegal.
Depends on the details of why they were fired. We’re obviously only getting one side of the story here
Repeat offenders are the one I’d be worried about, america isn’t known for functioning reform system.
I hope your friend can heal, sorry for what your dealing with
functioning reform system
Sounds like you want them staying a Club Med and being waited on hand and foot. Gimme a break! Jk it is an absolute catastrophe and the US should know better since it’s such a fucking pro at locking up about 1/200 citizens. (!!?). sorry.
- Be in an industry and location where finding a backup job is not impossible
- Record yourself telling HR you’re afraid for your coworkers and yourself
- Email HR a summary of your meeting
Optional subsequent steps
- Get fired
- Take the audio to a labor attorney who will take your wrongful termination case for free
- Profit
HR hates this one weird trick!
Civil rights attorneys love this one weird trick!
Also make sure you live in a one-party consent state.
What someone did in the past doesn’t mean they’re going to do it again. You may be paranoid about it, but imagine how they feel if they’re a legitimately changed person? That said I’d still be cautious.
I agree with @captainlezbian Was he convicted, or found innocent? Unless he’s doing weird shit that doesn’t justify continued discrimination.
Important to note: in the US people are not found “innocent,” they are found “not guilty.” It may seem pedantic but it’s important to remember that a lack of a conviction is not evidence that they didn’t commit a crime, only that a jury believed there was enough doubt in the evidence to decline to find them guilty.
This is especially relevant to rape cases, where evidence is difficult for outsiders to interpret and a trial result of “not guilty” doesn’t necessarily mean a rape didn’t happen or that the defendant didn’t commit it.
Similarly, “not guilty” does not necessarily mean “guilty, but we couldn’t prove 100%”. So, a lack of conviction is not evidence that they did commit a crime, as you’re implying. This is especially relevant to rape cases.
Not sure how you got that out of my comment which was in reply to someone talking about people being found innocent rather than not guilty.
You’re stating that “not guilty” doesn’t mean “innocent.” I’m adding that “not guilty” doesn’t always mean “guilty but got away with it.” Which part confused you?
So, a lack of conviction is not evidence that they did commit a crime, as you’re implying. This is especially relevant to rape cases.
Guess I’m confused where I said anything remotely like that.
If they didn’t do it they get the same ‘not guilty’ verdict, so what is the recourse for someone who was falsely charged?
I am specifically thinking of the US where there are a lot of black men falsely convicted of violent crimes they did not commit because of racist eye witness testimony or even victims who blame a random black person to avoid social stigma and prosecutors who want higher conviction rates.
A false accusation or conviction isn’t even necessarily because of ill intent from anyone involved (although let’s be real, cops almost always have ill intent); people can just be wrong about who raped them. Eye witness testimony is bad in a neutral setting and horrible in an emotionally charged setting, and if for some reason DNA evidence is unavailable then unfortunately victims are left with nothing but their (human, fallible) eyewitness testimony of what happened.
Intentional false accusation is a whole other ball game, and is already a crime.
He was found guilty both times he raped someone. Considering he served less than 2 years in prison for his last offence I highly doubt that changed him.
Also considering that he’s a rapist I don’t give a damn how he feels. Rape isn’t like other crimes. You don’t rape someone because you don’t know any better. You don’t rape someone out of necessity. You don’t rape someone on accident. You rape someone because you’re a rabid animal who has no place in society. You don’t fix someone like that. You can only mitigate the risk to others.
In your the last sentences of your last paragraph you could exchange the word rape for murder and it would still be true. Similarly for most crimes there is no necessity. So I really don’t understand why you think “rape isn’t like other crimes”.
It seems like you have your own irrational opinion that you don’t want to change so I really don’t see the point in this discussion.
I know that you can’t fire someone just for being a sex offender unless it directly interferes with work duties (in the US)
You can definitely fire someone for being a sex offender in the US. Outside of a few exceptions that probably don’t apply in your case, you can also fire someone for being merely an accused sex offender.
In the US you can be fired for any reason except for protected reasons (gender, sexuality, race, religion). Being a convicted sex offender is not a protected class.
Many US based companies also do pre-employment background checks. So either OP works for a company that doesn’t or they work for a “second chance” company that is OK with violent backgrounds. Either way the company is fine with his background and is very unlikely to fire him for something they likely knew about at hire.
people don’t think it be like it is but it do.
anti-discrimination laws just mean employers can’t give the real reason so they’ve gotten really good at making up legally acceptable reasons.
And in “right to work” states, not even that much.
You mean “at-will” states and that functionally means any state but Montana.
You’re thinking of at-will employment states. Right to work is about joining unions and making that difficult.
Ah right. Thank you for pointing that out.
“Right to work” means employees can work in a union shop and receive the benefits of such without having to join the union or pay dues. It’s a set of laws that have successfully destroyed unions.
You’re thinking of “at will” employment laws, which means an employer can fire an employee for any reason or for no reason, but not for an illegal reason (which varies depending on state but includes the right to organize and rights against discrimination and retaliation).
Oh, of course. Thank you for pointing that out.
Sorry - I should have realized others would point that out as well. I didn’t mean to pile on.
No worries, I assumed it was done in good faith and appreciated the heads up. Thanks!
*in a right to work stste
In an at-will state, which I think is most or all of them.
Right-to-work is different; it means you can’t be required to join a union in order to take a job.
In a right to work ststeSome cities and counties have additional protections, but at the state level, the only one that’s not at-will is Montana and the entire population of that state would fit in a single decently sized city. So, I think that’s a distinction that wasn’t really necessary, but you do you.
The short and unsatisfactory answer to your question is that this isn’t a hostile work environment. A hostile work environment is narrowly defined. You telling everyone about his rape of your friend is closer to the definition than him being a rapist.
An unsafe work environment applies only to physical hazard, so the same goes there. You’d have to demonstrate and prove that he is causing you current harm. Basically, unless he sexually harasses you or attempts to rape you, and you can prove it, there is no leg for you to stand on.
I think it might be easier for OP to reason through this question by themselves if the person in question hadn’t “raped [their] best friend”. I support restorative justice… unfortunately in the USA we often get neither restorative justice nor justice, just punishment.
What do you think can restorative justice look like for crimes like torture (that is what rape is)?
An argument from ignorance that ends in a false equivalence.
If you want to penalty for a crime to be death or life in prison lobby for that.
To try to freeze someone out of functional society but not in the corrections systems invites them to commit more violence since society has rejected them. Integration and community are key to rehabilitation.
He needs to work somewhere and as long as he doesnt continue to harass or worse anyone I dont see the issue
Yes, but also keep your guard up and trust your instincts. It sucks, but life is messy.
The average user of Lemmy has more empathy with a two times convicted rapist than with Amber Heard or that one woman from this atrocious Tiger King series.
Was he tried and has he served his sentence? If so, it’s incumbent on society to put aside the personal feelings and help the criminal (yes that’s what I said) re-integrate into society. It’s either that, or fight for a different system.
Life in prison
So we shouldn’t try to reform people - just piss away a human life at a cost of $14K-$70K per year to the taxpayers in what’s already the most incercerated population in the world, where it’s well established that the threat of prison does nothing to reduce crime, and there would be no puntitve difference between a single rape and a spree?
Got any more of those great takes you’d like to share?
It’s even more dire, because where in the developed world can you incarcerate someone for 14k? I would estimate that depending on the kind of treatment these people get, you’re looking at costs of at least 50% GDP/capita, if not more.
US GDP/capita is around 70k USD, average costs per inmate per year are around 40k USD.
Germany GDP/capita is 46k EUR, average cost per inmate are at around 43k EUR.
So essentially we either kill them or house them inhumanely like livestock forever, OR we reintegrate them and use incarceration as a last resort, there is no other way. People who advocate for life in prison for anything but murder have no clue what they’re talking about.
If that’s what you want to happen to you, I’m sure we can help
How are you expecting him to feed himself if he can’t work anywhere? There’s no such thing as a men’s only work place.
I agree that rape should be charged with the same severity as taking a life. But we also need to let ex felons leave that in the past if they can. There’s a lot of abuse and oppression that results from permanent shunning. We made the choices in our justice system that we made because of history. Let’s not repeat the mistakes of history.
Fuck you.
Any reason or just being a blatant idiot?
You’re being the jackass supporting the tyrrany ensaling everyone.
Okay. Let’s just keep all the prisoners locked up forever. Well wait, that’s kind of expensive. Let’s force them to work. You know they’re going to have kids, and both parents are no good evil people so the kids must be too. Let’s never let the kids out either.
Congratulations, you’ve re-invented chattel slavery. With the exact same argument of banishing felons from society that was used in the 1600’s and eventually evolved into chattel slavery.
Can we do the civil war now too or do we have to wait?
You got shit backwards. War is now. Deny or don’t still happening.
This isn’t a civil war. I’ve seen a civil war. And this is nowhere close.
That’s not what I said.
Me - … Civil War…
You - … war is now…
Me - … Civil War…
You - Not what I was talking about!
Are you just being purposely obtuse then?
I didn’t say civil. Can you just not read the fucking obvious?
Also, stop lying with your shitty not quote quotes.
So if we protect our communities, we’ll enable slavery. So if we don’t want slavery, we have to expose ourselves to rapists.
Yeah, no, you can take your inflammatory, enabling garbage and shove it.
Imprison rapists for life. Stop letting them out in society. Don’t let situations like OP’s happen in the first place.
It’s not an either/or situation. But congratulations. You are the second or third person to respond with a ridiculous logical fallacy.
It is to you because that is how you framed it. Re-read what you wrote. You and your cult have offered nothing but logical fallacies, especially Motte and Baileys, strawmen, transparent threats, and talking points for an anti-justice, anti-victim, anti-woman political agenda. And you do it because you don’t care about rape victims or their lives, and you don’t care about OP, you’re here on your hustle looking to push an agenda.
And I am telling you NO. Get the fuck on. Get off our lawn.
Uh huh. Sure and which of those have you observed in my posting?
Because draconian punishments are typically associated with conservative political positions. Hardly the bastion of women’s rights. And above is the real history of how slavery in the American Colonies was started. It was successive pushes for harsher and harsher punishments until they just decided to take the mask off.
Forgive me if I don’t want that to happen again.
Look all around the thread. You goons have been at it the entire day. But we both know you don’t actually give a shit. You’ll step all over whoever you have to to get what you want, including rape victims, assuming you don’t brainwash them into your disgusting little cult first.
Because draconian punishments are typically associated with conservative political positions. Hardly the bastion of women’s rights. And above is the real history of how slavery in the American Colonies was started. It was successive pushes for harsher and harsher punishments until they just decided to take the mask off.
Draconian punishments have nothing to do with the thread.
Neither do conservatives or petty red vs. blue politics.
This shit is exactly what I’m talking about. You took a real and serious issue: workers being exposed to the presence of a known sexual predator in the workplace in a situation they can’t easily escape, jeopardizing the safety of everyone in that place, and you made it all about YOU. All about your overdramatized and blatant strawmen, all about your own warped assumptions and biases – I’m not even right wing – and you created this monstrosity of a straw… caricature of an opponent for you to bash the hell out of.
All so you can endanger innocent workers by exposing them to a rapist.
Because what you’re demanding is wrong and you KNOW it. 🤦
You’re fucking monstrous. Your spirit is hideous.
I respectfully disagree. Murder is not at the same level as rape. Rape is awful and despicable, but at least you’re alive to recover from it.
That’s the thing, many people never recover from rape.
I think more people don’t recover from death compared to rape
I’m not arguing that lol. But many people would literally rather be killed than raped and it’s frequently cited as one of the things, “worse than death”.
It should absolutely be punished similarly.
That sounds like a great way to make all rapists murderers.
No. There’s a psychological barrier to killing, even in the mind of a criminal. That’s why most murders are actually proper who knew each other and had enough emotion to overcome that barrier or people who were scared/abused enough that the barrier was no longer there. (It goes away as a defense mechanism)
That sounds like a blatant threat and attempt at emotional blackmail
-
Many is not anywhere near all.
-
That is an option for the victim in a rape still, there is no option for the victim in a murder.
-
But it is possible to recover, and many do. There is no recovery from being murdered. Personally, I’m glad I’m still alive even if I’m still dealing with my own SA-induced trauma 20 years later.
Murder also has further externalities. When you kill someone, you take them away from their friends and families, who now have to live forever without that person in their lives.
But this whole conversation feels a lot like we’re asking “who was worse, Hitler or Genghis Khan?”, and it’s weird to put either side on the defensive even if there is an objectively true answer to be found.
Yes, but statistically speaking the amount of people who recover from murder (being around 0 to 1, depending on if the Resurrection of Christ is a factual event or mere myth) is a tad lower than people who recover from rape induced trauma…
There is no reason why rape is judged much less severely than torture though.
What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
You are advocating a known sexual predator be allowed in the workplace, knowing other employees are threatened by his presence.
The company isn’t responsible for ensuring the rapist – who is not supposed to be in society in the first place – is able to put food on the table. It is the company’s responsibility to protect its workers in th workplace, and that means not letting a known rapist work around women.
Honestly, those women could probably go complain to the EEOC. They certainly could win a civil suit.
What you’re asking for is horrific and a blatant violation of the rights of other people. We don’t live under the barbaric practices of the 20th century where anything like this can just be done to you and you have to put up with. We live in the 21st century where we recognize the rights of victims and communities are more important.
Don’t like it? Do what you’re telling rape victims to do: get over it and move on.
Women aren’t the only victims of rape. Clearly he shouldn’t be allowed to work around anyone right? Actually he shouldn’t be allowed to live near anyone who could be at risk either. Actually he shouldn’t be allowed to go near anyone who could be raped. I think the Soviets already tried a prisoner only island and it didn’t work too well.
-
It’s not the company’s responsibility to employ him.
-
There are plenty of jobs he can get where he doesn’t interact with anyone.
-
OP and the other workers have a serious, legitimate, valid fear of this asshole and their rights are fundamentally more important than his, because it’s their safety and security on the line, not his or by extension yours. He is not you
-
You’re being overly emotional and melodramatic, and it’s obvious you’re doing it on purpose because you know what you’re asking for is horrific.
No one owes that clown a living and if you don’t like it, it’s too fucking bad. He should have thought about that before being a dirty rapist, just as you should have thought before you opened your stupid fucking mouth.
The people at that job do NOT have to suffer his presence to appease you. They do NOT have to endanger themselves by being around a fucking rapist!
Don’t you care about their rights at all? Their rights are being violated by virtue of him being there, doesn’t that matter to you at all? Would you want your cousin or your sister or your mother or your wife to work in a situation like that? Or are you gonna insult my intelligence by lying to my face saying they or you do already, so surely rape apologia is good for us peasants too?
It’s not the company’s responsibility to employ him.
I never said they did.
There are plenty of jobs he can get where he doesn’t interact with anyone.
Like?
OP and the other workers have a serious, legitimate, valid fear of this asshole and their rights are fundamentally more important than his, because it’s their safety and security on the line, not his
A lot of fears are valid, but that doesn’t necessarily justify acting on them.
their rights are fundamentally more important than his
That was true during his prison sentence. Now as much as he disgusts us, he has served his punishment and has his rights again.
or by extension yours. He is not you The people at that job do NOT have to suffer his presence to appease you.
What does this have to do with me?
They do NOT have to endanger themselves by being around a fucking rapist!
They can quit, they can force the employer to fire him, or they can tolerate it. Fundamentally, there is nothing he can change now to make himself more tolerable to his coworkers, and its not his employers job to punish him again.
Their rights are being violated by virtue of him being there
How?
Would you want your cousin or your sister or your mother or your wife to work in a situation like that?
Why is this the argument? Why can’t I have the option empathize with someone myself- why does it have to be a surrogate? But my mom was hospitalized 2 years ago after assault by a student who she still works with. Of course its terrifying know that could happen, but that’s why safety measures are put into place at her work place.
rape apologia is good for us peasants too?
Where did I apologize for rape? All I implied was that under the law he had served his time. He is now allowed to exist in society. If you believe in mandatory minimum of a life sentence for rape, that is a debate that can be had. But just like murderers, kidnappers, torturers, terrorists, and other horrific criminals, rapists are sometimes given a chance at freedom again. But you should separate wanting to protect people, and wanting revenge. Wanting revenge is a motive for criminal justice, but don’t try to hide it with an argument about protection and rights.
I never said they did.
Yes you did, and your fellow cultists have been doing that the entire day. It’s the logical inference from your stances, which you have been desperately trying to bait and switch us to accept with lame Motte and Baileys, strawmen, and complete exaggerations and distortions of your enemies – we’re you’re enemies to you, and trust me, the feeling is mutual – and you’re not getting one over on us. You’re not going to weasel your way out of arguing that employers are somehow obligated to put food on the tables of rapists.
Honestly you should know better than to presume employers are obligated of anything toward anyone. They don’t even really have any obligation to fire him, and if you genuinely were trying to be logically consistent and not some gross-ass rape apologist, you would have used that reasoning from the get-go. But you didn’t, because protecting rapists is important to you. Because you’re vile.
Like?
Like not my problem. Oh, I’m sorry, I guess that was just a dismissal instead of you doing a simple Indeed.com search for remote work. Silly me. I forgot we’re morally obligated to cater to the needs of rapists simply because you’re angry that evil people face lifelong consequences for their actions and that is somehow unfair to you (because you fear that happening to you or your friends. Implying you’re going to do something nasty to somebody)
A lot of fears are valid, but that doesn’t necessarily justify acting on them.
Well, we’re not talking about a lot of fears, we’re talking about the serious and credible threat of the presence of a rapist. And OP is justified in talking to his coworkers and bosses about this whether you like it or not. Get over it, like you tell rape victims to do when you’re not brainwashing them.
What does this have to do with me?
You tell us, you’ve made the whole thread and OP’s serious problems he came for advice on all about you. All Damn Day.
They can quit, they can force the employer to fire him, or they can tolerate it. Fundamentally, there is nothing he can change now to make himself more tolerable to his coworkers, and its not his employers job to punish him again.
Yep, burden’s all on everyone else and so everything must happen in favor of the rapist. The world revolves around him, and the rights of the community are secondary to his. We know that’s your stance.
Also an employer firing someone like that is an act to protect their employees and, probably more importantly for them, to protect the business from liability. It’s not even a punishment but you’re throwing a temper tantrum trying to make it out as if it is.
Actions. Have. Consequences. Get over that fact. Get over the fact that that rapist brought it upon himself, and there’s nothing you can or should do about it. What you want is not right. What you want is unconscionable and wrong.
How?
By being a rapist, an implied rapist of women when there are women in the workplace from OP’s post. And like it or not, being a rapist makes you a threat to the community, permanently. Rape is an act you can NEVER walk away from, NEVER move on from, and given the horrific nature of the act, that’s how things must be for life to be right and just. Just because you don’t feel that way doesn’t make it not true.
Your outlook and perspective is skewed, but again, that’s because you perceive yourself as a potential rapist so that’s not a surprise.
Why is this the argument?
Because you clearly don’t empathize or care about anyone other than yourself. Especially not OP or anyone in OP’s position, or his friend, or his coworkers. Or his employer, for that matter.
Where did I apologize for rape?
The entire thread. All day. Your stance is by its nature rape apologia, and you know this but you just don’t care because you don’t care about anyone other than yourself and your own feelings.
Hell, if your loved ones were in a situation like that, you would say the exact same thing you are now, and that’s what makes you a rape apologist. It doesn’t matter to you. You don’t even respect me enough to be honest about it.
You can front about it all day, but you are a rape apologist. And until you change your stance and throw away your shitty opinions on the matter, you’ll continue to be one. And one day, when something like this happens to someone you love, you really WILL tell them what you’re telling us here, and you will destroy that person. If they are a victim, you’ll either successfully brainwash them, and they will go on to destroy others, or you’ll cause them PTSD and drive them to drug addiction and suicide, statistically.
Take heart in that no employer will ever fire you for that, for what it’s worth.
-
See that’s where I disagree. They’re both awful, traumatic events. At least with murder you’re dead and don’t have to spend the rest of your life haunted by the experience.
I can’t send a corpse to therapy for any amount of time that’s long enough for them to recover from being dead, I can say differently about being traumatized…
And honestly as someone who’s used therapy to recover from trauma, I find the idea that “It would unquestionably be better if you were murdered instead” to be so absurdly offensive and dismissive, as if anything of value to me and my continued existence is suddenly moot because I’ve become “Damaged Goods”
Seeing Murder as preferable to Rape is a highly misogynistic way of thinking that draws too much from patriarchal standards about a woman’s worth.
I think this attitude where some traumatic event ruins people for life is toxic. Trauma is part of life. People can move on and have fulfilling lives.
“Trauma is part of life”? Murder and dieing is also part of life. Sorry, but that just doesn’t make sense. Trauma in a clinical sense is certainly not “part of life”.
Life is traumatic. Everyone will go through difficult periods. Your parents will die. Friends will kill themselves. You will be in serious car accidents. You will be assaulted and robbed. You’ll leave your kids in the backseat on a hot day and you’ll fall and hit your head on the concrete in a weird way that causes paralysis.
This is unavoidable. Life is full of these types of events and while you certainly won’t get to experience all of them you are bound to experience some.
Lacan says when your subjective perspective on life is shattered, you’ve felt “the Real” up close. This is traumatic- your psyche breaks and you need time to heal these cracks. They’ll never be quite the same.
Let’s say I’m a young professional woman. I take a self defense class and have a good job and a nice boyfriend. I have a set of beliefs about the world. For example, most people are good. I have bodily autonomy. I am strong and can defend myself.
Then one night a male stranger pulls me into a dark alley, beats the shit out of me and raped me. All of a sudden, it turns out not everyone is good. I cannot defend myself effectively against a male and he can totally take away my bodily autonomy.
All these beliefs shattered- I have experienced trauma. As Ben Finegold would say- the truth hurts.
It doesn’t have to be so dramatic. Any event can shatter these beliefs. I could get a D on the essay I spent so hard working on. I thought I was a straight A intelligent student… but then when I put my heart into something, I fail.
Belief shattered - maybe I’m not so smart. Trauma. Different scales, same phenomenon.
Tldr: yes, trauma is inherent to life. It’s part of our psyche.
And that means we all should tolerate rape. Or violence, or even attempted murder. After all, the arbitrary line of not being dead is the only one that matters and who gives a fuck about our quality of life while we’re still alive? And it’s all the victim’s responsibility because rape is a normal, immutable part of life and we have to accept it. How convenient that you, the rape apologists, benefit while we suffer.
You can justify doing anything to anyone under that logic.
Also it falls apart because many rape victims commit suicide anyway, so this is a particularly disgusting rape apologist talking point. 🤦🤦🤦
Jesus Christ, Lemmy. What the actual fuck is wrong with you as a platform?
Nobody is advocating for tolerating rape. If you have nothing to respond with, don’t make up some wild claims. Makes you seem like a crazy person, when I think it’s really just you realize you’re spewing nonsense and have no reasonable argument against what anyone is saying.
They’re rape apologists. Everything they’ve been doing is part of a framework of Motte and Baileys they have constructed to justify and defend rape, and rapists.
Notice they’re talking about the nature of trauma in life when this is actually a thread about OP dealing with a known sexual predator at work? How they have been talking about redemption, punishment, and the death penalty when NONE of those things are eve tangentially related to OP? That is purposeful and intentional.
They derail threads like this, where there are clear-cut cases to hold someone off, because they oppose accountability on a moral level.
They do it because they’re rape apologists.
And so therefore a rape victim should just put up with rape and move on. They’re still alive so it doesn’t matter, and their rapist should be able to live with no consequences.
By your twisted logic, you can justify doing anything to anyone as long as you don’t kill them. Rape does affect everyone for life, especially the ones who have claimed they moved on from it.
What makes you think someone won’t turn around and use your own reasoning to justify doing something to you?
Murder, for the victim, by definition, is not a traumatic event.
Death is always an option, revival generally isn’t.
Or we can accept the past actually does matter, protect our communities and offenders can be the ones to accept the short end of the stick.
You know, like a sane society
Sounds more like a backwards medieval society than a ‘sane society’.
Most modern and sane societies have a concept of rehabilitation and have found that we are all better off when a justice system is centered on rehabilitation and addressing the roots of crime at a deeper level, beyond just punishment, punishment is not very effective on its own.
That’s because your idea of a sane society is a rape culture patriarchy where men can do what they want and women have to put up with it. We have a word for what you’re asking for. It’s called a slave racket.
And we’re not your slaves.
Rehabilitation and punishment have nothing to do with what OP is talking about and in modern and sane societies, rapists aren’t allowed to work alongside their victims. But sadly, there are very few modern and sane societies, if any, because the truth is you all want to rape, benefit from rape, and benefit from seeing others raped. You’re just evil. There’s no way around that.
You’re just looking for excuses to protect a rapist. You’re sick.
How can you say all that when you don’t even know what the victim was wearing?
Please tell me you’re joking. Please. For my sanity
I am not serious, lol. Can I ask how you think we as a society should handle these individuals? I know you said that they “should get the short end of the stick”. Does that mean execution? Life-imprisonment?
Are you being serious about that question?
If you don’t allow people to have second chances, then recidivism rates skyrocket. Being tough on crime creates more crime (and more prisoners).
Look at the Scandinavian prison model. Reform is what ought to be the focus.
But in the US, recidivism is kind of the goal. After all, we need to keep the for profit prisons full.
If you dress up enabling rapists, who do not belong in the community, through flowery rhetoric, you deny that second chance to everyone else.
Society doesn’t owe rapists anything. It owes everyone else their safety. If the rapist doesn’t like it, they should not have raped anyone. If you don’t like the fact that your rapist friend is ostracized from the community, you should stop being friends with rapists.
This is why we need to throw rapists in jail for life, and quite frankly, to start jailing their enablers, so communities can rebuild and the trauma from those acts can heal.
When did the person you responded to say they were friend with rapists. When you resort to ad hominem attacks on peoples character, you’re signalling to everyone you have already lost the argument and have nothing of value left to say, just take the L.
Well, when did anyone say they were ostracizing a rapist? You want to talk about logical fallacies, you best look at yourself and your compatriots here.
Firing them from a job like that, where they have to work closely with women and have the opportunity to reoffend, isn’t ostracization the way you’re flagrantly exaggerating it to be. It’s called common sense.
The other employees have every right to fear being raped because there is a known sexual predator in the workplace. It’s a specific and credible fear that not only is grossly immoral if the company doesn’t act, it also will put them in a position of extreme liability. That scumfuck should never have gotten past the background check in the first place.
And you don’t care about that because all you care about is yourself. Because like the other apologists here, you’re thinking from a perspective of “But what if I get caught?” and that means you believe you or someone you know will rape someone someday – and you’ll keep them in your life anyway, because you don’t care about justice or morality, you only care about shielding your friends from consequences.
Seriously, that was my only comment and now I’m also a rapist according to you. This is something else, I can’t say I’ve ever encountered someone this toxic on Lemmy since I’ve been here. You extrapolated all sorts of things I never said from 2 sentences.
Not that you are remotely deserving of a respectful response at this point, but I’ll still give you my thoughts:
I’ve been sexually assaulted and have had people close to me be sexually assaulted and raped. The insinuation that I am a rapist would be personally harmful to me and retraumatizing if I wasn’t aware that you are doing this because you are unable to articulate your opinions on the matter effectively, so you resort to insults. I totally understand the visceral need and desire for vengeance and justice when you or someone close to you is the victim of vile acts. There is someone I grew up acquainted with that if I saw them again in person I would have an intense desire to cause physical pain because of what they did to people close to me. I totally understand the desire for vengeance, and I suspect everyone else on this thread does too.
With that said, when societies make rules you have to decide what the goal is. Is the goal vengeance and punishment, is the goal a better future for society in general, or is it a little of both. We have the sum total of human experience to look back on, we can see what societies systems of punishment result in better outcomes for society at large. We know what systems of punishment result in recidivism more often, what systems result in rehabilitation more often, and we know what systems perpetuate a cycle of violence that never ends. We don’t rehabilitate criminals and sex offenders for their sake, we rehabilitate them for societies sake. Because we can conclusively show that if systems of punishment make it their goal to rehabilitate instead of get vengeance, it usually breaks the cycle of violence whether it be physical or sexual. You’re basically saying you would prefer vengeance, even if it is at the expense of sexual and physical violence being perpetuated through society generation after generation.
I strongly suggest you read this article: https://www.firststepalliance.org/post/norway-prison-system-lessons#:~:text=Prisoners in Norway lose their,crime rates in the world.
Norway has the lowest recidivism rate in the world exactly because the treat their criminals like human beings. Guess who wins, all of the non-criminals that enjoy one of the lowest crime rates in the world.
Seriously, that was my only comment and now I’m also a rapist according to you.
No, I said you’re a rape apologist. And you are. And a particularly gross one too, being that you’re sitting here claiming you’ve been sexually assaulted like that’s supposed to make actual rape apologia coming from you somehow valid or palatable. That claim actually makes your stance worse. If you’re telling the truth, you’re hurting other rape victims by arguing that they need to suffer the presence of a rapist, and live with their safety constantly being in jeopardy, simply because you allowed yourself to become brainwashed by a rape culture so you could gain access to comfort. And like all rape victims who have been brainwashed – if you’re not just some lying neckbeard, then you’re not the first brainwashed sap I’ve run into in my life and you sadly wouldn’t be the last – you of course latch onto every dumb ass talking point the rape culture tells you to because you can’t handle the reality of what you have done to yourself. You sold your soul for a place in society, and you drag down other victims, denying them their own safety, just so you don’t have to face what you’ve done.
Do you know the story of the two wolves named Comfort and Dignity? If not, go look it up. Or I’ll tell it. You need to learn it.
But it’s obvious you’re just here with a shitty political agenda regardless, because you came in here with a wall of text talking about vengeance when no one even fucking brought it up. No one brought up vengeance anywhere except for you and your ilk. We over here on Team Justice are talking about convincing HR to fire his dumb ass which is not only well within their rights to do, it is their moral responsibility as a member of the community. You are arguing specifically that they do not, to appease you, at the cost of dignity, safety, and the human rights of everyone else in that workplace. No one brought up Norway or Nordic countries except you and your ilk, because it’s a common talking point in the sales pitch you inundate Lemmy and Reddit threads with to push an anti-victim, anti-justice political agenda.
So you obviously don’t care about rape victims. So don’t sit here and claim to be a rape victim and act like that’s gonna inspire sympathy. It won’t work on me, honey.
I was sexually assaulted too and I never sold out like you did. I didn’t give up on justice. You bear the burden of that. OP’s friend should never have to.
You’re disgusting and vile.
For profit prisons are creepy and ought to be illegal, but they’re also a small percentage of US prisons. They’re not to blame for the high prison population. They’re another symptom.
What kind of society are we going to have if we do that though? Societies with forever punishments are worse places to live specifically because it ends up being used as a weapon. It gets easier and easier to get that forever punishment because this exact argument gets deployed for lower and lower offenses. Your three options are slavery, banishment, or death. And it’s usually for an ulterior motive like votes or money. Humans have tried all three in the past and they’ve all led to more heartbreak and violence than they’ve stopped.
A sane society wants and works towards peace. You get peace with rehabilitation and treatment.
A better one.
See, in the real world where adults pay bills, your actions have consequences. Those actions tend to be for everyone else and are extremely damaging if you rape them, so what sane societies do is prioritize the interests of the victims and the community at large over the rapist. They imprison or preferably execute the rapist, to guarantee they cannot hurt members of the community anymore without forcing the community to bear the burden of the rapist’s presence, for their mere presence is now a problem.
Communities do not owe anything to rapists and are under no responsibility to integrate people like that into it. The act of doing that endangers a community because now they have to live alongside a rapist.
Communities have a large moral obligation to establish a Moral Event Horizon and accept that individuals who do horrific things like rape don’t belong in it anymore regardless of circumstance. The community has to be willing to discriminate who can participate or not based on actions. That’s what a community does to maintain itself.
A community unwilling to do this is an unprincipled one that usually just thinks rape is morally acceptable or at least necessary to reproduce. A community unwilling to permanently remove a rapist for any reason is just, quite frankly, an evil one.
Rapists don’t have a permanent right to participate in the community. The idea that they do has destroyed our society. You have to earn the privilege to participate through following the laws and good action, and if you refuse, you can no longer participate in the community.
Communities have an obligation to establish rules abd enforce then through threat of losing the ability to participate.
It’s not hard when you don’t enable rapists.
Let’s say we agree on your governance model. There are non-trivial cases of men falsely been accused of rape by women. Some have even been convicted and their innocence proved many years later. How does your governance model that proposes execution of the convicted account for this?
It literally doesn’t matter because this isn’t a discussion of the death penalty. This is an individual asking about a serious situation at work you deliberately ran off the rails to push a political agenda. Take your anti-justice garbage and shut it.
Oh, and by the way, OP’s friend being expected to work alongside their rapist functionally is worth than death.
They imprison or preferably execute the rapist, to guarantee they cannot hurt members of the community anymore
It does matter because you brought it up, this is what you said, word for word. Do you hope your proposed legal framework to be implemented at any point in time and therefore willing to give it some serious thought or are you just venting?
It doesn’t matter because the only reason I even replied was because I didn’t realize you were purposefully derailing the thread to push an agenda, and using OP and his serious, personal situation to do it.
You and your goons have said, all over the thread, the most vile, disgusting, anti-woman shit, because the truth is you condone rape and don’t want to see other males suffer for it. It didn’t occur to you that you could suffer such a thing and have no recourse. You clearly dismiss the extreme moral crime of expecting a victim’s friend and potential victims to suffer under circumstances like that – of course, everyone else in that place can just go find another job, right? Rapists have the right to work wherever they want but not good, normal people. The world revolves around you and your ilk, after all.
You’re quite simply a rape apologist. There’s no way around it. And so are the mods of this sub apparently.
