It was Assange's legal team that brought it up. You're right that in this case it can be proved or disproved, but most of the time you just have to take "well you would say that, you're female/ethnic/Muslim/whatever" and keep your mouth shut because if you complain then you're being a humourless cunt.

Quote:

So you're admitting that the judicial review process is utterly corrupt and inefficient? In the "right" way, that is...

Looks like it, yeah. Not in every case admittedly, but the stats do show that if you're black then you're more likely to get sent down and for longer.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by Zichao

It was Assange's legal team that brought it up.

i.e. it's a low blow and you shouldn't get depressed - they're just trying to discredit the opposition. If that fails, they'll say she is in the pay of the CIA. That, at least, is harder to disprove...

Quote:

You're right that in this case it can be proved or disproved, but most of the time you just have to take "well you would say that, you're female/ethnic/Muslim/whatever" and keep your mouth shut because if you complain then you're being a humourless cunt.

As I said, the point here would be that the legal team is (deliberately) trying to confuse the Swedish law on rape being wishy-washy bullshit (or so it seems from this case, assuming the article we had prior is an accurate description of the events) and that prosecutor being a biased feminist. Basically, I would say that, without knowing all the facts, it looks like the Swedish law itself is some radical feminist bullshit by other nations' standards... In which case, we should refuse to extradite Assange for the same reason we'd refuse to extradite a feminist lesbian to Somalia...

Quote:

Looks like it, yeah.

Thus, it is entirely possible that Sweden just proceed with as much corruption/incompetence but just tilted differently... i.e. against men...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Quote:

i.e. it's a low blow and you shouldn't get depressed - they're just trying to discredit the opposition. If that fails, they'll say she is in the pay of the CIA. That, at least, is harder to disprove...

The first time I heard it I'd have said that too. After about the 1000th I think depression is a reasonable reaction.

Quote:

As I said, the point here would be that the legal team is (deliberately) trying to confuse the Swedish law on rape being wishy-washy bullshit (or so it seems from this case, assuming the article we had prior is an accurate description of the events) and that prosecutor being a biased feminist. Basically, I would say that, without knowing all the facts, it looks like the Swedish law itself is some radical feminist bullshit by other nations' standards... In which case, we should refuse to extradite Assange for the same reason we'd refuse to extradite a feminist lesbian to Somalia...

I wouldn't blame the vagueness of Swedish law on feminism.

Quote:

Thus, it is entirely possible that Sweden just proceed with as much corruption/incompetence but just tilted differently... i.e. against men...

As I've been saying along, prove it.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by Zichao

I wouldn't blame the vagueness of Swedish law on feminism.

Why not? They're all crazy about gender equality and stuff... Was it not you who posted something about the Swedish advert being banned for portraying men as 'mere sex objects'...

When people are in this frame of mind, who knows what's possible? And this frame of mind, is it not due to some misguided understanding of feminism, inasmuch as feminism is something specific?

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

You don't need to be a feminist to write bad laws - we've got whole statute books full of them. Equally, it's perfectly possible to write good feminist laws.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Okay. What other mvt would be likely to lead to write bad rape laws in the sense that the man is guilty of rape (or at least can be accused of) if he dates two women at once or isn't an attentionated lover?

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Over here it tends to be députés for whom the high point of their career is getting their name attached to a piece of legislation - it could be about rape or it could be about how often landlords have to fill in fire safety plans. Being a feminist doesn't make you a crap legislator.

But on the other hand, I know nothing about the Swedish judicial system. There could be sufficient jurisprudence as to make it clear what is and isn't considered to be consent (I guess it could be like the reasons for annulling a marriage in France - basically lying about any criterion that the other party considered fundamental). In that case I still think it's a pretty bad idea as it seems far too intrusive (you're raping your wife if you don't tell her you're having an affair?), but it's not bad legislation per se.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by Zichao

Being a feminist doesn't make you a crap legislator.

That's definitely not what I suggested. If anything, feminism in its simplest form is basically just another name for fairness/equality in the french revolution sense of the word, which ought to, actually, make for pretty good legislation.

OTOH, people rarely stay that tuned to that part of the concept - and, presto, you get censors saying that sexy ads portray women being raped and guys being reduced to sex objects...

Quote:

But on the other hand, I know nothing about the Swedish judicial system. There could be sufficient jurisprudence as to make it clear what is and isn't considered to be consent (I guess it could be like the reasons for annulling a marriage in France - basically lying about any criterion that the other party considered fundamental). In that case I still think it's a pretty bad idea as it seems far too intrusive (you're raping your wife if you don't tell her you're having an affair?), but it's not bad legislation per se.

"You're raping your wife if you don't tell her you're having an affair?" is NOT bad legislation per se?! What the hell more would you need? I understand you made it a hypothetical and, obviously, I got even less idea of what the Swedish judicial system is like but I would see such degradation of what 'rape' actually is that it is ridiculous. And I do firmly suspect that such mental confusion comes from misguided feminism...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.