my disillusionment with SF *triggering*

Before I start ranting I just want to say that about the only reason I'm writing this thread is because I feel that if I don't write what I'm about to write, it's going to bother me for a long long time. That being said, I don't want anyone to get upset by this sensitive subject and for those who don't know what i'm talking about that's okay, it's probably better that you don't. It's just a random rant. For those who disagree with me, please, respectfully disagree, as I am respectfully disagreeing with many SF members in this thread. But nobody has to answer or even read this.

But anyway, I hope I don't look like satan for doing this.

It's about the rapist thing again. I just found out that he's being moderated now and that has blew a hole in my world. Of course I'm not trying to disagree or try to change the admins' minds in any way, but I just have to let it out. It seems that he is now being treated as a special case, not accepted in the eyes of SF. I see back in the thread that talked about this guy, that people were slapping themselves on the back for achieving this guy's being monitored.

Happy Clam really made me think alot by talking about how I must also think about the rights of others, and not just this one guy. But I'm wondering... what is this right that is being taken away from everyone else when this guy posts in threads without extra monitoring that nobody else has to endure? If he broke the forum rules in any way except show no remorse for rape, then I would understand. But did he? If he did, then please tell me and I would promptly change my mind.

Anyway, I've found through the other thread that this guy does not show any remorse about rape in his posts at all. But I wonder - is he obligated to? If he doesn't, does this justify shunning him from this community? Is a mandatory shift in his opinion a requirement in making him an equal part of this forum like everyone else? If he doesn't change his mind, will SF then see itself fit to decide what parts of his opinion should or should not be revealed? What parts of his opinion should be screened before judged suitable for the public eye?

I would prefer that if admins find any of his opinions on rape offensive, they simply put a trigger warning on the thread. After all, isn't that why triggers are part of this forum? Isn't that routine? Doesn't this mean that this "rapist threat" will be easily taken care of by current procedures? Then why put an extra layer of monitoring on him?

Yes, he is only being monitored, not kicked out. One of the major motives, at least in the other thread, is that he might be here to find potential victims. Think of how preposterous that reason for monitoring him is.

He needs to be monitored here because he might be here to find victims.
He needs to be monitored EVERYWHERE because he might be going there to find victims. WHEREVER he express his acceptance of rape, he will trigger strong emotional responses. WHEREVER he express his acceptance of rape, people will be offended. Thus, WHEREVER he express his acceptance of rape, threads should be deleted, language should be censored and monitored, because we do not think rape is acceptable. This person will lose his right to free speech because of his views. You don't see people who advocate legalization of marijuana being monitored and censored. His stance is also against the law, and some may argue it is also against morals. But of course it's not as immoral as rape. But what gives us the right to decide what opinions are immoral enough to deny the right to be uttered, or at least uttered without strict supervision?

(Of course I am aware that there is no full free speech on this forum, but still, I don't think an endorsement of rape is against the rules. That's why I asked if he broke the rules, because if he did in any other way besides accepting rape, then I would promptly change my opinion.)

I'm not saying rape is acceptable, I'm just saying that monitoring someone because they utter an unpopular opinion borders on authoritarianism, no matter how horrible you think the opinion is.

Mark Twain - "There is justification for this reluctance to utter unpopular opinions: the cost of utterance is too heavy; it can ruin a man in his business, it can lose him his friends, it can subject him to public insult and abuse, it can ostracize his unoffending family, and make his house a despised and unvisited solitude."

I see Twain's words speak true as SF has acted exactly as Twain predicted the masses would act toward an unpopular utterance. I believed that SF was about the most accepting place on the web. After all, many of us who wish to commit suicide has nobody in real life we feel we can talk to, not even the ones closest to us, and yet here, we can rant away about all of our deepest darkest secrets without fear to total strangers, or so I thought.

If I go up to my professor and say "I have raped, went to jail, and still think rape is acceptable", I would receive no consequence except my professor's request that I be removed from the class, because my free speech did not show intent to rape. Yet my professor has the power to request me be removed only because that's part of the technical regulations of that school. I don't think this guy showed intent to rape in his posts either. And I don't think this forum put in the rules technicalities to allow themselves to take any extra action on him that they don't take on anyone else just because he accepts rape. (needless to say, if he didn't already serve jail time for rape, that's a whole another discussion).

I wonder if anyone was ever bullied as a child, and that someone wants to die because of it, and a bully comes into the forum and talks about being a bully, would SF monitor him as well?

Well, that's my little pathetic objection to the monitoring received by this guy that's not on anyone else. Hope this didn't offend anyone, especially my benevolent overlords the SF admins and mods :biggrin: Cya

 

well i know he has had a few posts removed due to content, and a thread was also locked because of the triggering nature of some posts. And whilst in some respects i do agree with his moderation in others i dont.

I agree with it because it seems every single thread he posts in, turns into a flame war especially in the rape/abuse threads because of the "attitude" that he puts across in his posts. It's just that when people post in there it is to try and feel safer, better and they dont need someone who in their post puts ** im an ex rapeist** because straight away some of them will lose trust in the site for that matter

 

Hey

First off I'd like to thank you for respectfully disagreeing and not speaking negatively about the victims. I appreciate that. But if you don't mind I'd like to share my view.

Ok, as a rape victim myself I felt he was taunting us on one of the threads where we were discussing how and IF we can "get over it" and move on with our lives after rape or sexual abuse. I think it was wrong how he was answering those questions stating his opinion of how victims should deal with rape. It was becuase of preditors like him that the thread was even started in the first place. I think we do need to censor/moderate what he's saying when it comes to him posting in the rape/sexual abuse threads. What is an ex rapist doing in a rape/sexual abuse forum anyway? That right there makes me feel unsafe.

From personal experince I was bullied AND sexually assulted. If someone was bullying me on SF I could handle that myself and wouldn't feel their posts should be deleted or moderated. In that case I agree with you on the free speech matter. But rape is such a horriffic and violent act. He admitted that he was a serial rapist. Reading something like that is VERY triggering to a survivor and can easily throw us into flashbacks and feeling suicidal. I would hope that if there was a serial killer on SF bragging about everyone he's killed that he would be put under moderation too. I feel that moderating sex offenders on this site is an act of protection, not just physically but emotionally for us victims. Like I stated in the previous thread, myself and others here are suicidal becuase of the trauma, we dont need a sex offender going into our forums intimidating us and making us feel worse.

I don't know if you or anyone close to you was raped, but please put yourself in our shoes. After getting violated in the most henious degrating way imaginable is it "fair" to respect his right to free speech when he blantly admitted to it and went into detail about his victims? Shouldn't we pull together to protect the weaker ones here? Rape or not, if there was a traumatic issue you were suicidal over and someone started to harass you regarding it, I would ask for that person to be put under moderation too. I think we should look out for those of us that are hurting most in SF. I would hate to think someone committed suicide on SF because we let an ex rapist say whatever the hell he pleased. I believe in free speech but suicide isn't a game and having a sex offender saying some of the things he did isn't worth the risk of pushing someone over the edge just so he can say what he feels.

I'm not offended by your views but I am a little hurt because I feel that his freedom of speech rights are held in higher regard than our pain and trauma. :sad:

 

Intentionally triggering people is good grounds for moderation.

I'm under moderation for methods, which I think is much less severe than intentionally triggering people, but both seem fair to me. [Note: I don't know if it was his intention to trigger, but it was AT BEST severe, severe, negligence on his part]

I think it's better for him to be partially muzzled than to ruin YET ANOTHER life.

I've not ruined any lives yet, and since I've been muzzled I probably won't.

 

I have seen some issues that the mods should have taken a tougher stance with, its rather a mixed bag..I think they need a stronger code of conduct and to abide by it. Also the mods should take stronger steps to prevent preening around here. Shopping for a boyfriend or girlfriend on here is not a good idea.

I had strong issues in chat last time I was there with some of the attitudes people where displaying...if people want sex chat go to a sex chat room on the web..plenty of them around and you should be considerate that some members on here might find any sexual talk or 'come on's' triggering.

 

I think if respectfully done, SF is a wonderful place to begin a relationship. Most of us are thoroughly lonely, and it's really nice to find someone who understands the way you feel.

 

We don't let serial rapists sit in on group counseling sessions for rape victims. It's about the audience involved. Allowing a convicted sex offender, an an unapologetic one at that, to post "advice" to rape victims is like letting a mass murder give advice to the families of his victims about how to cope with death. Nothing good can come of it, and more likely than not it may cause harm to some people. This is a clear case, in my mind, where the safety of the whole supercedes the rights of the one.

 

Hi,

I haven't read his posts. Rape is an unsafe topic for me. I'm only going from this thread.

From what I gather, the SF team is monitoring a man who says he is
-serial rapist
-taunting rape victims
-saying he wants to rape again

And you are objecting to this man's right to free speech being violated.

Safety. How many people on SF are here because of chronic abuse whether it be emotional, sexual and physical and are suicidal because of this but do not express it explicitly because of fear?
Look at mourningseraph's and amazon's post.

Of course he's not obligated to feel anything but SF isn't a therapists couch for men who have rape fantasies to come and let their minds unravel.

This "community" is full of volatile people some of which are women (and men) who've been violated and humiliated through rape and physical abuse and feel unable to speak out, do not have "free speech" because of being so terrified to "speak out". Their right to scream and shout has been taken away and the only way of communication is through self harm, suicide and slow death through drugs/eating disorders or things to numb and escape. If I were to explicitly (and I do this now,) explicitly talk about what I've endured by my physical/psychological boundaries being violated, I'd be "shunned" by a lot of men and women because I was so "explicit" but this wouldn't be through moderation. It'd be through how they reacted to me. I'd be called a slut for being so explicit and I'd be left alone. Not only that, but I'm pretty clear in saying, that you haven't ruined my personal enjoyment of my sexuality and my body and you never will and I won't be friends with anyone who treat me like an object anymore. Try being in that position and see how many friends you're left with at the end of the day :tongue:

I understand your concerns.

There, are, however, social circles where his expression and thought out intent to rape, maim and injure, would be accepted. There are men who think this is socially acceptable, not only to rape but the general, socially acceptable derogatory treatment of women in general. It might shock you, but it's true. :smile:

Back to your general post: there isn't a mental health system out there/society that adequately helps or to listens to everyone who are going to maim and injure someone else, or a mental health system/society that helps or listens to everyone who is going to maim or kill themselves.

How is smoking weed equivalent to having another's body, psyche and emotions completely violated and for them to suffer the consequences of this for the rest of their life? How is smoking cannabis, or advocates of it's legalisation, equivalent to someone saying explicitly saying they are going to go out and not only control but to violate, someone's sexuality and body; something personal, and a source of expression and enjoyment?

Give me a quote, saying how hard it was to express coming out as a woman who's been through shit over and over in her life without being tainted as dirty, a whore, weak, "deserving it", "tainted" "mentally ill" and not lose her friends by being so fucking outrageously angry (and often homicidal rather than acceptably and romantically suicidal) at people and their attitudes to socially acceptable violation (and yeah, there are different types of violation, rape being only one of them), without being called a "crazed, unhinged feminist."

The SF moderators are individuals, going through their own personal hell rather than an angry mob, but I can see how mob mentality can take place when people see someone to pick on who "utters immoral thoughts", if this was the general crux of your post, then I completely hear ya...I hate blind mob mentality and congratulatory backslapping too.


Thanks for the thoughts though.

 

I was abused as a kid and I asked the moderators to close one of those threads. The majority of people who join this site do so because they struggle with a very real impulse to end their lives. There are many reasons for the suicidal compulsions, one of which is sexual and emotional abuse.

The rape/abuse section should be intended for people struggling with what happened to them. It's not a free speech forum where people can mock victims. He's allowed to have his opinions so long as he doesn't act on them, but he's a bit like that Californian pedophile who announced the best places to look at little kids--freedom of speech yes, but society is allowed to negatively reinforce the behavior with shunning, legal restraint orders, and police investigations.

It's like me going to the substance abuse thread and talking about what cocktails are the best to drink. That guy's inhuman and a major F*ck up. It's a classic example of an abuser--hurting other people to make one feel superior. And above all, he's just gross.


He's allowed to have his opinions. But we're allowed to have our own reactions to them. Emotional and physical abuse are very real problems, and the posts he's written expand the hurt in people's lives as well as make the suicide forum an unsafe area to share your experiences.

I condone banning him.

James.

 

I couldn't agree with you more James!

 

Same here. I don't want to get anyone's backs up here - but I think that having somebody who openly admits to not only raping more than once, but showing no remorse for it. I respect his rights to be on this forum, but not to so openly voice his flippant attitude to rape and abuse.

I think his attitude would be better suited to a different forum altogether.

 

I come to SF and post about my suicidal feelings and idealizations. I show no remorse for my past suicidal attempts. I talk about my past attempts but believe me if I were to post about my past attempts in great detail or tried to convince other members that suicide is acceptable you can bet your bottom dollar I would be censored and moderated. Just as this other member should rightfully be. It is not done to hurt any one member but rather to protect the SF community as a whole. The administrative staff are in a position to protect the best interests of all members. Does this member feel suicidal over his past decisions? I'd be inclined to think not if he has no remorse or regrets for doing so. Although there is a thread to discuss rape, it is intended for those that are having difficulty dealing with the experience, and struggling with suicidal thoughts and feelings. Just as are so many other threads here at SF. If this member can not benefit from the overall purpose of SF (Suicide Forum) then maybe they should be utilizing a better suited forum, one for those who are dealing from rape from the point of being a rapist and not one where it is being dealt with from the point of a victim. I tend to believe that most members that use the Rape/Abuse Thread are there because suicidal issues are foremost for them being a result of the rape or abuse.

I would compare it to the experience at my young son's daycare. If he is ill, he can not attend the site. Not as a punishment to him for being ill, but to protect the enitre school community from further harm. Same applies here. If this member was posting ways that other members could protect themselves from rapists or help them overcome their problems from the experience fine. But he can not and should not be allowed to cause anymore hurt or further damage to other members. That is undesputeable.

 

The only equivalent to that that a rapist could come up with would be to actively tell people where or how to rape...? If he does that then it's more of a legal issue than a judgment issue...

 

But thats exactly what I'm saying. The SF rules EXPLICITLY says

"We do not allow members to provide knowledge or the means for anyone to harm themselves or others in any way"

I believe your example would go under that.

But there is no such rule regarding discussion on rape. If he was sharing methods of rape, that would clearly break the rules and that'll be the end of that. But nobody here yet has told me that that was the case.

 

Wow. To everyone who was talking about the inappropriateness of his actions or what you guys believe to be the inappropriateness of his actions,

I AM REALLY STUPID!!! And here's the reason....

SF rules -
"Being suicidal yourself does not give you the right to act how you want, please bear this in mind before you post on the forum or enter chat."
"If a Staff member asks you to stop a certain conversation or behaviour then abide by their decision."

With all my talk about his abiding by the rules, I guess these 2 rules give the admins any power they want in deleting any and all posts that they feel are inappropriate (did I spell that right?). Of course that doesn't mean on an opinion basis I agree with the implementation of these rules in this specific instance. But hey, I for sure won't debate the rules. People will just be more annoyed.

 

I'm so sorry if u personally hurt by my post, I was really trying to avoid anything like that with
"I don't want anyone to get upset by this sensitive subject " and
"Hope this didn't offend anyone, especially my benevolent overlords the SF admins and mods:biggrin:"

But I guess the reason I would give that impression is because in this specific instance, I feel that free speech is such a clear standard to go by, I can see in front of my eyes what is being done to it with this guy's moderation. The reaction of others on the other hand is such a hazy thing and I found myself wondering if speech should be censored if others reaction are unfavorable. Because there are ALOT of unfavorable language in this world. I guess I don't know your pain and trauma well enough, I would want this guy moderated too. But despite that, I can't bring myself to believe that in order to make a well informed opinion on this subject... that I have to know that trauma and pain. But I guess that's just me.

 

Rape is illegal in the UK & in the USA.
Following Staff discussions, this member is now banned and this thread is being closed.