Richard Dawkins On Mild Pedophilia And Mild Rape

GLsp20140603B-008_C

A rational mind might suspect that demonstrating logical fallacy with pedophilia and rape examples might cause a twitter frenzy.

Not Richard Dawkins, who’s clarification on both tweets he has entitled:

Response to a bizarre twitter storm

Bizarre? Well with “mild paedophilia” we mentioned the problem with such a term back in September 2013. Yet he used it again. But also went on to tweet later “mild rape”.

Pedophilia

The clarification for that tweet:

I should of course have said RELATIVELY mild. Obviously I don’t think any pedophilia is mild in an absolute sense. But I presume most victims would agree that being touched by an adult hand (though very unpleasant, as I know from my own childhood experience) is RELATIVELY speaking not SO unpleasant as being violently penetrated by an adult penis. But the logical point is, or should be, uncontroversial: no endorsement of the less bad option is implied.

Best not to say “mild pedophilia” ever then. As British Law stands the punishment is automatically more severe for rape compared to assault of a minor:

5. Rape of a child under 13

(1)A person commits an offence if—
(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person with his penis, and
(b)the other person is under 13.
(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

….

7. Sexual assault of a child under 13

(1)A person commits an offence if—

(a)he intentionally touches another person,

(b)the touching is sexual, and

(c)the other person is under 13.

(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable—
(a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or both;
(b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years. [Sexual Offences Act 2003]

If Dawkins had said “the sexual assault of a child is bad, the rape of a child is worse” it would have made more sense.

There is a clear distinction to be made in law, despite Dawkins poor insensitive phrasing in his tweet regarding relative impact on child victims of such sexual offenses. “Obviously I don’t think any pedophilia is mild in an absolute sense” hopefully Richard realises not to use “mild pedophilia” as an expression.

Date Rape versus Stranger Rape

This is where the wheels properly came off for Dawkins, compared to the previous tweet:

20140730-004822-2902351.jpg

You might notice Dawkins does not in his clarification refer to that tweet but this original one:

His clarification suggests he is not ranking rapes, which the “mild rape” twitter conversation above clearly shows he is. It also misses that rape is by nature a violent crime of itself.

In both my hypothetical examples, I made the mistake of forgetting to put quotation marks around the hypothetical quotations. The second one, for instance, should be amended to

“Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse.” If you think anybody who said that would thereby be endorsing date rape, go away and learn how to think.

Actually, it’s rather plausible that some people might find date rape WORSE than being raped by a stranger (let’s leave the “at knifepoint” out of it). Think of the disillusionment, the betrayal of trust in someone you thought was a friend. But my logical point remains unchanged. It applies to any hypothetical X and Y, which could be reversed. Thus:-

“Being raped by a stranger is bad. Being raped by a formerly trusted friend is worse.” If you think that hypothetical quotation is an endorsement of rape by strangers, go away and learn how to think.

I wasn’t even saying it is RIGHT to rank one kind of rape as worse than another (that caused an immense amount of agony and a scarcely creditable level of vitriolic abuse in the Twittosphere). You may be one of those who thinks all forms of rape are EQUALLY bad, and should not, in principle be ranked at all, ever. In that case my logical point won’t be relevant to you and you don’t need to take offence (although you might have trouble being a judge who is expected to give heavier sentences for worse versions of the same crime). All I was saying is that IF you are one of those who is prepared to say that one kind of rape is worse than another (whichever particular kinds those might be), this doesn’t imply that you approve of the less bad one. It is still bad. Just not AS bad.

 

Rape is rape - feminism Photo

If we go by British Law – rape is rape. What the knife does is clearly prove lack of consent. Rape by definition is violent, a forceful act. A huge issue here is suggesting that date rape is not as bad as rape generally. Placing Richard Dawkins in rather bad company when it comes to describing rape.

Dawkins was inviting us to rank different forms of rape. Unless using an imaginary scale for the pain and trauma of a rape victim is an academic exercise. Point is “mild rape” does not exist. It feels in his clarification, Dawkins is ignoring what he did actually say and discuss.

Which is disingenuous because most of the press and a lot of people on twitter were complaining about him saying “mild rape.” He ignores ever having said that. The quotation marks do not help in the tweet.

The concern is when it comes to sensitivity on two of the worst crimes against adults and children imaginable, Dawkins does not live in the real world. Assault and rape are different sexual offenses. Try not to trivialize  the real pain and suffering people go through, as being mild.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Leave a comment

Filed under British Society, Richard Dawkins

The Rapprochement That Never Quite Comes

20140720-220809-79689444.jpg

How do you forgive a mother who blames your childhood self for the religious fundamentalism she had taught to you as a kid? Reminiscing on my childhood, reading the leaked Peter Clarke report on Birmingham “Trojan Horse”Schools”

Recently my mother asked why I am interested in, and write, about religion. I pointed out that us studying with Christian fundamentalists like the Jehovah’s Witnesses for six years helped. False religion needed to be understood. It was also grounded into me the separation of church and state – and for us to be no part of this world.

Her response floored me. It was apparently all my fault. I had asked, at the age of eight, why it rained in the UK but not in Africa. A question she posed to Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their answer led to us studying with them.

By the time I was thirteen, she said she was having doubts. I told her demons were trying to take her away from the Truth.

How my adult self wanted to reply. It was not me that invited my personal weekly study with them for two hours each week from age of eight to fourteen at the family home. Or the other three meetings we went to each week. Where I was taught how demons can tempt you, and influence other people. That almost everyone, save us, were going to die.

End of the World

20140720-221117-79877937.jpg

A constant refrain: the end of this system of things would be soon. In late 1980s the people that had seen 1914 were nearly dead. Armageddon had to come in their lifetime. As the Governing Body proclaimed to the faithful. With a disabled brother, a paradise earth seemed the best chance for him. He was there automatically. I had to make sure I was with him. By following Jehovah to the letter, as dictated by the Watchtower and Bible Tract Society.

My mother pulled me out of school so I could study more. We watched the first Iraq War as a sign of the impending Second Coming. Elders saw prophecies of Daniel, and Revelation, in these unfolding news events. In the end, the aerial was pulled off the roof to protect us from satanic propaganda and evil broadcasts. We hankered down, calling on the name of Jehovah.

Indoctrinated

I know my mother regrets having studied with them. She romanticises the period. But I am blamed for believing everything I read and was told by the adults that had access to me. A product of my environment, I was the ultimate fundamentalist. The promise of a new world made me hide away from the outside world. My private study reinforced what I was being taught. Faith was absolute, dawn to night, by thought and deed.

Instead of being prepared for the real world, I was ready for the spiritual war that was sure to come. Absorbed in a monoculture doomsday cult, which I gave myself completely too. No one stopped me taking what these adults said seriously. Religious freedom seemed to allow my interactions to be almost solely confined to the Kingdom Hall congregation. As “bad associations spoil useful habits.”

I had the mind of a sponge, soaking up the theology of the Jehovah’s Witnesses as proclaimed in their books and magazines. I broke myself free only by realising science and not the bible would have to prove a creator was necessary or not. Which led to reading old publications that showed the Jehovah’s Witnesses had regularly made up things which never happened. Or changed belief, while still quoting scripture to justify a position, now at odds with previous teaching.

Mercifully my mother was already of a mind to leave when I realised at 14 how duped we had been. So we left as a family. But I have to draw the line at a child being blamed for their own indoctrination. One that very nearly destroyed my life chances in a world that through it’s misery, conflict and strife, keeps turning.

Whatever our beliefs or none, we need to work together to make the world a better place to wake up to then it was when we went to bed. One aspect is the separation of church and state. I would add also, separation of church from classroom.

20140720-220536-79536608.jpg

Trojan Horse Plot

Reading Peter Clarke’s report into attempts to impose religious orthodoxy in state schools in Birmingham, I hear parallels with my upbringing. How women are seen as temptresses. Students becoming religious prefects of their own accord, a limited education on other faiths and promotion of their own.

[Peter Clarke] also found evidence of a “co-ordinated, deliberate and sustained action to introduce an intolerant and aggressive Islamist ethos into some schools in the city”.

The agenda would have confined “schoolchildren within an intolerant, inward-looking monoculture that would severely inhibit their participation in the life of modern Britain,” the leaked report says. [BBC]

No indoctrination should be happening to children. Nor can they be blamed as they reinforce what they are taught. They are a product of their upbringing. They are innocent. Needing an education, which includes academic religious studies to understand diversity, prepared to live as a well adjusted adult. Not religious instruction to reinforce a narrow understanding of the world to limit their interactions with society.

I have forgiven my mother – but I have not forgotten.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

1 Comment

Filed under British Politics, British Society, Jehovah's Witnesses, Religion, Science, secular

Gaza, Israel and Palestine

20140713-112203-40923392.jpg

Empathising with all sides in a conflict usually is seen as an abhorrence for war. Dismay at the horrific scenes of bloodshed and mayhem. Anger, at the dehumanising used to justify atrocities.

My humanism denounces mentalities that see people as less than human. Both sides in Gaza and Israel have failed on this score. The failure is death and destruction. The murder of kidnapped children rather than bringing communities together, showing solidarity with one another, has led instead to each side bombing one another.

Hamas are evil theological thugs that deny freedom to Palestinians in daily life, let alone any chance for a two state solution. Launching rockets that send Israelis running for cover achieve one thing. The invitation for Israel to respond militarily. Hamas human shields are in place to increase the civilian death toll in an already compact, densely populated area.

Somehow the destruction of disabled centres, and the killing of a Hamas police chief with 17 members of his families included in the attack, are made viable by some. This is what demands for security do. Israel has the right to defend itself from attacks, rather than just rely on the Iron Dome missile defence system. Yet the retaliation goes beyond the concept of legitimate military targets.

Airstrikes oblige Hamas with the pictures that reverberate around the world. The horror is visual. Charred flesh, bloodied infants. The deflection is that Israel should not live in fear and Palestinians must stop Hamas. Or else this will be the response. Get a backbone I am told, and accept collateral damage is inevitable and a price worth paying. Never mind this appears as collective punishment on the innocent. Because it is.

There is an iron dome to criticism of Israel playing into terrorist hands, and the delay of a peaceful solution. A proportionate response is replaced with shock and awe. So forget the illegal settlements, because people in Tel Aviv are running for their lives as sirens ring out. Netanyahu will get a poll bounce as a hawk defending the State of Israel, against backdrop of countries that wish to annihilate it. If they could.

The dove of peace is cowed once again. The peacemakers are in hiding as people run for cover. Those cheering on the bombardment from either side will denounce this piece as naive and giving succour to one side.

Those kidnapped murdered children have been failed twice, once in life and now in death. The world watches. But we should not be silent. A ceasefire must be called by all sides, a way to peace must be found. That gives dignity to Palestinians and security to Israel.

How to achieve? Only by goodwill and abhorrence of violence on all sides talking to each other. At present that is a pipe dream buried under the smouldering rubble in Gaza.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

20 Comments

Filed under politics, Religion, World

Video: Karima Bennoune’s “When people of Muslim heritage challenge fundamentalism”

20140712-115142-42702055.jpg

Standing in a corridor with a parrying knife, waiting for the door to be smashed in by fundamentalists wanting to kill your father for teaching evolution. Thankfully, they did not get in, but the experience set Karima Bennoune on a journey to promote not just human rights, but to show the struggle of Muslims against fundamentalism. By telling their story of living in the face of violence and intimidation.

I had heard of the title of her book “Your Fatwa Does Not Apply Here” but having watched the TED video it has jumped to the front of the next one to buy. Too often, I am asked where are the Muslims challenging fundamentalists? That I am on the left apologising for violence blaming anything other than islamism. That I am on the right using examples of Muslim fundamentalists to suggest at it’s heart this is the real isalm.

20140712-115036-42636762.jpg

Karima Bennoune’s talk “When people of Muslim heritage challenge fundamentalism” is the thing to listen to about going beyond this left/right response. By telling stories of the sheer horror of what fundamentalists do, and of the people standing up against them. We hear about the murder and the madness. Much less about the people who are in the firing line taking them on.

Worth twenty minutes of your time.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture, Religion, secular, World

What Joanne Harris Actually Said About J K Rowling

Often I think there is a book inside of me, but at the moment the Doctor suspects it may be kidney stones. If there really is something of literally value inside you the prospect of fame, and fortune via the written word may be illusory for most of those hoping to make a living off it. Perhaps some at least know not to enter X Factor with their vocal talents. But maybe, with a few Retweets by authors of your blog posts you might think yes – I have what it takes. Maybe you do – but even so:

According to a survey of almost 2,500 working writers – the first comprehensive study of author earnings in the UK since 2005 – the median income of the professional author in 2013 was just £11,000, a drop of 29% since 2005 when the figure was £12,330 (£15,450 if adjusted for inflation), and well below the £16,850 figure the Joseph Rowntree Foundation says is needed to achieve a minimum standard of living. The typical median income of all writers was even less: £4,000 in 2013, compared to £5,012 in real terms in 2005, and £8,810 in 2000. [The Guardian]

Still, perhaps it is only a matter of handing that manuscript to the right person at the right time. Like JKR …

Joanne Harris, best selling author of Chocolat, made this observation:

The general public has been led to believe by success stories like JK Rowling’s that authors are fabulously well-paid for doing a job that’s easy and fun. But stories are always more than they seem to be. Those people who assume that it’s just a little story about wizards are completely missing the point.

It is a fair point. Writing a book that can hold someone’s attention for two, three hundred pages is not as easy as it sounds. The amount most writers have to live off is pitiful compared to most jobs. Living off your royalties in luxury is most unlikely. You will be exceedingly lucky if the advance pays you the minimum wage for your efforts.

What Joanne Harris said has been lost in translation by media headlines, and it leaves a bitter taste in the mouth. The Independent:

“JK Rowling’s ‘little story about wizards’ distorts truth about authors’ pay, says Joanne Harris”

20140710-213518-77718248.jpg

Which is not what she said at all. The Daily Telegraph had:

“Author attacks JK Rowling’s Huge Wealth for ‘a little story about wizards’ “

The Daily Telegraph has since changed the headline – but the previous title still appears on a google search.

20140710-213612-77772101.jpg

It has led to such comments as these by Kate Hopkins:

20140710-213651-77811513.jpg

It is important to set the record straight for what Joanne Harris said. Not just for accuracy, but the message. Making an income to live off writing is becoming increasingly hard despite being in a technological age where it has never been easier to get your written work out there. In a drowning sea of digital e books, blogs, and established print media making professional material available for free.

Books are more than a collection of printed words. They are portals to other worlds. To another time whether past or present. A gateway to a place beyond imagination. You always remember a page turner. It is like a pet on the book shelf, where just seeing the spine sends tingles up your own as you reminisce about the story that wrapped you up in another universe.

In this media age people think they can be celebrities with no noticeable talent, and live off being a sensation from their 15 minutes of fame. We are also in an age where people expect to get content for nothing.

Joanne Harris needs to be heard on this. If we cannot give a lifeline to writers, rewarding their talent, then our literally culture will be in poor health.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

Leave a comment

Filed under British Society, Culture, economy, technology

Unity and Pluralism by Muslim Council of Britain – Unless Ahmadi

20140709-222705-80825084.jpg

The billing is “British Muslims Sign Historic Intra-Faith Unity Statement: Intra-Faith Unity Statement Aims to Provide Common Ground Between Muslims of All Traditions.” Tonight at an event, special guests of the Muslim Council of Britain were invited to sign the statement that calls for among other things:

“no group or individual shall use, propagate or tolerate the rhetoric of takfir (charge of unbelief) for anyone.”

“We shall respect each other and our differences”

“We shall avoid hate and condescending speech”

“attacks on these places of worship are attacks on us all,”

“We call on our Ulama from all traditions to form a positive space for reconciliation and cooperation.”

“to campaign in an inclusive, non-sectarian manner.”

“Above all, we shall emphasise areas of commonality, the virtue of compassion and empathy”

The question though that came to my mind: were the Ahmadi invited to take part? Because when I think of love for all hatred for none, pluralism and stressing non sectarianism, I think of them as the face of Islam the world needs to see more of on our TV screens. Whilst many Muslims think of them as heretics. In some states like Pakistan they are legally discriminated against, and generally terrorised by assassination or mass killing in a mosque. Not that they are allowed to call it a mosque.

In the UK on this blog I mentioned an occasion when Muslims made a local paper side with their theocratic judgment that the Ahmadi were not actually Muslims. The paper even apologised to those offended for running an advert celebrating the Ahmadi Muslims. Despite David Cameron publicly thanking them for their contribution to Britain during the celebrations.

Here was a chance for the Muslim Council of Britain to include the Ahmadi and show they really did mean this:

“British Muslims from a diverse range of faith traditions came together today to affirm their commitment to Muslim unity and pluralism.”

The press secretary of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association UK informed me on his personal twitter account:

20140709-222506-80706519.jpg

This led to a follow up question – and I hope like me you find his shocking.

20140709-223141-81101852.jpg

So Muslim Council of Britain. You want to end sectarianism, bloodshed, murder and hatred among Muslims. You want to promote pluralism, in a spirit of unity that no one should judge other Muslims?

Then invite the Ahmadiyya to sign, and show solidarity with them when their places of worship are burnt down, their members murdered and work with them to end the persecution they suffer in the world.

Till you do, this document is a worthless piece of paper and a public relations exercise. Your actions will lack credibility and no one deserves to take you seriously as an organisation for the umma. Let alone dedicated to pluralism, which is more than just a word to use in a press release to sound tolerant.

Article written by John Sargeant on Homo economicus’ Weblog

Follow @JPSargeant78

My Huffington Post Blog

1 Comment

Filed under British Society, Religion, secular

Jehovah’s Witnesses At Train Stations

20140708-184624-67584941.jpg

Knocking on a door, your senses try to pick up any vibration that someone is coming. Especially elderly; might take their time. Not just indicating to wait long enough, but to tailor your message. That article on crime in the magazine – yes that might start a conversation.

Ministry work – going door to door – is part of being a Jehovah’s Witness. Spreading the good news that virtually everyone is going to die in an apocalypse, you too unless heed the message. Though the end of the world was meant to happen in the lifetime of those that saw 1914. Those people I spoke to who had witnessed the Great War have departed before that promise of interpretation by the Watch Tower and Bible Tract Society was shown to be a lie. One I shared with others.

Just as teachings change to circumstances that catch you out – or God revealing what we need to know at that moment if you prefer – so do methods. Door knocking and hoping someone is in has given way to trying to be where people are.

Volunteers are targeting train stations, as well as shopping centres and other busy places, in 14 cities across Britain and Ireland – Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Dublin, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham, Sheffield.

In London alone, the movement says it has 1,000 people giving away literature – and they get through about 6,000 brochures, 20,000 books, and 100,000 magazines every month. [BBC News]

Rather like a spider on a web, they stand there with a collection of books and magazines. Waiting for the fly to come to them. At least you can be sure they do not want your blood. Refusing blood transfusions is one thing most people are aware they do even for kids in critical condition. Just your complete obedience to what the Watchtower believes. They will do their best to assimilate you on that journey, gradually, starting with the offer of a bible study.

Sincerity is not something they lack. They really do believe God would be angry if you had a slice of birthday cake (it’s moon worship). That a child should not be playing with a transformer doll as it suggests life exists independent of the only creator, Jehovah (and magic powers a big no). Books to read on theology are by the Society; the devil’s work is false religion so beware of them. Those ancient philosophers will lead you to paganism, even to doubt. Probably best to leave well alone.

The relationship with Jehovah is that of a loving father who does not think twice at killing people that displease him. When the Israelites demand some variety to their diet in the wilderness, fish meat rain from the sky. It’s a test. Those that ate them die (Numbers chapter 11).

20140708-185313-67993718.jpg

You do get to read the bible at least with them. I still remember the audio tape dramatisation and the noise of those choking on the fish meat, dying in agony. And those stories – which are real to you as a kid – rather put you off birthday cake if Jehovah is like that. He is a jealous God – even his chosen people did not escape his wrath. And judgment day was waiting like a thief in the night.

At least at a train station you can escape them much easier than a knock at your door. Or a child finally reasoning this cannot be true.

I have written more on the past teachings of the Jehovah’s Witnesses here.

My childhood experience can be read here.

2 Comments

Filed under Jehovah's Witnesses, Personal, Religion