100% of rapes in Oslo in the last 5 yrs were committed by non-western immigrants

[Gustaf]

I remember that there was an amusing article in a Swedish paper to explain why it was right not to report on this. It went on to show that the author didn't understand statistics and employed various PC-cliches.

The subsequent racist commentary was as predictable as always, of course.

I think Patrick mostly summed up what this is about. I also think that the general unhealthy attitude towards sex in these cultures (especially towards female sexuality) contributes a lot.

And someone should probably point out that the vast majority of all rapes take place within families and this is thus a small subset of all rapes.

[Gustaf]

And someone should probably point out that the vast majority of all rapes take place within families and this is thus a small subset of all rapes.

Ah, an interesting tidbit. So this is NOT the statistics on all rapes but on a particular randomly chosen subset?
It does tend to make the number a little more believable...

Of course, the cliche assault rapist here is a Russian, not a Muslim. Or a Serb. Anyways, East, not South.

Well, not a random subset, but as I recall this is assault rape, right? I mean, most rapes consist of a man raping his wife/girlfriend in the privacy of their home. This is "strange man jumping woman in the bushes late at night" kind of rape, which is a fairly small percentage of overall rape.

[Gustaf]

They could maybe look a little closer at who they are letting in.

You mean things like "oh, this guy really looks like a rapist, better not admitting him" ? It's not gonna work very fine.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yeah, they could. Pragmatically, that's fine, but in terms of justice it strikes me as quite unfair. Why a foreigner committing a rape should be punished more than a Norwegian for the same crime ?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Do they say rape is all right ? If so, they can certainly be punished for that. Otherwise, can we force them ? Personally, I'd say the best thing would be if there weren't "community leaders" and possibily there weren't communities at all.

Well, certain interpretations of the Quran* seems to say that rape is fine. Didn't Afghanistan just recently legislate that women weren't allowed to refuse sex to their husbands, for example?

And it's odd to view deportation as punishment. It's not as if foreigners have an automatic right to stay in the country anyway. People get sent away all the time for no particular reason, after all.

*Before someone says the same is true of the Bible, I want to point out that it would be irrelevant.

[Gustaf]

Kicking them all out isn't the answer.  You can't blame everybody for the actions of a few. 

Actually you can, and this is an actual integral and apparently evolved part of human nature, because it works, after all, very well.  You may not choose to do this because of some idea of 'fairness' you may entertain, but nevertheless it would probably be one of the more effective ways of dealing with the problem.  It would be 'overkill' if the group being allowed entrance were considered to be a net positive because of other factors which outweighed the raping, but that seems unlikely in this case (people from less rape-prone lands could be imported to clean toilets, etc., or natives could be paid more to clean the toilets).  The final argument is that an 'open society' is worth having more rapes.  Up to you, Swedes.

Before you start spreading your bigotry you should perhaps be aware that Oslo lies in Norway, which is a different country from Sweden.

You countryside American hicks really are very bad when it comes to geography of the  big world out there, aren't you? 

[Gustaf]

Actually you can, and this is an actual integral and apparently evolved part of human nature, because it works, after all, very well.  You may not choose to do this because of some idea of 'fairness' you may entertain, but nevertheless it would probably be one of the more effective ways of dealing with the problem.  It would be 'overkill' if the group being allowed entrance were considered to be a net positive because of other factors which outweighed the raping, but that seems unlikely in this case (people from less rape-prone lands could be imported to clean toilets, etc., or natives could be paid more to clean the toilets).  The final argument is that an 'open society' is worth having more rapes.  Up to you, Swedes.

Before you start spreading your bigotry you should perhaps be aware that Oslo lies in Norway, which is a different country from Sweden.

You countryside American hicks really are very bad when it comes to geography of the  big world out there, aren't you? 

Come on friend, as you well know, I know where just about every capital in the world lies, I just didn't read the boring thread title or article.

And also, why characterize my evenhanded depiction of the public-policy options as 'bigotry'?  I said nothing pejorative about anyone.  Just making the point that prejudices are a workable and beneficial part of our character.

Saying that non-Westerners are only good for rape or toilet-cleaning seems pretty bigoted to me.

But I'm not surprised that you started talking about a topic you knew nothing about.

[Gustaf]

Is there seriously that much of a Foreign Rapist stereotype in Germany and Scandinavia? I imagine the stereotypical rapist over here is a francophone man in a van.

There are so many inappropriately racist jokes to make here, I don't even know where to begin.

But the dark people raping our blonde women thing is as old as knowledge about dark people in this part of the world, I think. It isn't helped by the fact that immigrants, especially from certain areas, are quite overrepresented in crime statistics nowadays. I wouldn't guess at rapes being one such category of crime though.

[Gustaf]

Oh, you're taking the classist view that poor people are violent rapists?

(well, actually your troll act went a little overboard with this post - I doubt anyone could think that anyone could be sufficiently deluded to believe any of that)

[Gustaf]

...toilet-cleaning (an honorable profession I would aver, and one which should be unionized and pay about 35 Euros per hour)  ...If I were cleaning toilets all day I'd want to rape somebody too (probably with the plunger, however, and probably not a female).

Oh, you're taking the classist view that poor people are violent rapists?

Are you incapable of reading and comprehending English? What I was implying was just violence - vengefully buggering the boss - not 'rape'.  And I only said that I would  feel like raping, I did not claim to speak for any poors - apparently they feel like  voting for Michelle Backman after cleaning toilets all day.

Calm down, old man. I just think you should show a little more respect to the poors you are exploiting, that's all. No need to get all aggressive about it. It's not how we rich white people are expected to behave.

[Gustaf]

Are you incapable of reading and comprehending English? What I was implying was just violence - vengefully buggering the boss - not 'rape'.  And I only said that I would  feel like raping, I did not claim to speak for any poors - apparently they feel like  voting for Michelle Backman after cleaning toilets all day.

Calm down, old man. I just think you should show a little more respect to the poors you are exploiting, that's all. No need to get all aggressive about it. It's not how we rich white people are expected to behave.

I show them the utmost tact and respect, Gustaf.  Your comments make little sense given that you know nothing about my behaviours.

Oh, I'm not talking about your behaviour. I'm sure you live up to the old ideals of the English aristocracy in your direct dealings with poor, non-whites. I was referring to this slandering of them behind your backs, when in the comfort of your peers. It strikes me as rather offensive. Sort of like the gents at the country club cracking jokes at the expense of the black bell-boy when he's not around. 

[Gustaf]

Oh, I'm not talking about your behaviour. I'm sure you live up to the old ideals of the English aristocracy in your direct dealings with poor, non-whites. I was referring to this slandering of them behind your backs, when in the comfort of your peers. It strikes me as rather offensive. Sort of like the gents at the country club cracking jokes at the expense of the black bell-boy when he's not around. 

I never slandered them, Gustaf, I critiqued the system which enslaves them.  You really need to work on your reading skills.

Actually, you seemed to be critiquing the system of letting them into our country so they can rape the women that rightfully belong to us. A rather primitive tribal sort of reasoning that I wouldn't expect from such a refined cosmopolitan, but hardly original. You also seemed to imply that we could find someone else to clean toilets for us. You certainly didn't seem to blame their raping on their toilet-cleaning since you suggested bringing in toilet-cleaners from less rape-prone cultures.

Coming from an owner like yourself I thought it was a bit unbecoming to display such condescension to the people who toil so hard to make your lifestyle possible.

[Gustaf]

Actually, you seemed to be critiquing the system of letting them into our country so they can rape the women that rightfully belong to us.

'Rightfully belong to us'? Stop putting your sick ideas into my posts, gus.  I never said anything of the sort.  But it is true I do not support the raping or the system which creates it.

You also seemed to imply that we could find someone else to clean toilets for us. You certainly didn't seem to blame their raping on their toilet-cleaning since you suggested bringing in toilet-cleaners from less rape-prone cultures.

Obviously.  The Islamics are the ones who are the most rape-prone.  This isn't a 'slander' - I never said rape was 'objectively wrong' or that rapists were 'bad'.  I'm sure they like it very much, and it is no doubt an essential part of their culture.  But apparently a significant number of stakeholders in the political entity 'Norway' oppose rape.  This could change of course - as we know rape is sanctioned in many societies.  But for now I'm looking at the issue as a matter of practical public policy and assuming that we want to reduce or eliminate rape.

So...you both do not support raping and you also don't think that rapists are bad?

I'm also confused by how when I just go off exactly what you're saying you accuse me of being literalistic, whereas if I infer general views from the context of all your posting you accuse me of putting words in your mouth. Would you like debate on here to be more factual and less insinuating about othe rposters?

Oh, and your racism against "Islamics" is most offensive. They're oppressed by a global imperialist system, surely even you must see that? I think you would be a rapist as well , rather than lick the boot of Western capitalism. As vain a protest as it might be, I would still have expected you to applaud their fight for freedom from Western ideals about "human rights" for women.

[Gustaf]

So...you both do not support raping and you also don't think that rapists are bad?

Such is the fate of the moral relativist, Gustaf.   

Eh, no. I actually know how moral relativism works, and that's not it.

[Gustaf]

So...you both do not support raping and you also don't think that rapists are bad?

Such is the fate of the moral relativist, Gustaf.   

Eh, no. I actually know how moral relativism works, and that's not it.

OK, lets specify.  I discern a difference between 'objectively bad' and 'I don't prefer it'.

You didn't say "prefer" you said "support"

If one does not acknowledge the existence of objective morality there is no practical difference between not supporting something or thinking it bad. If you say that you don't like rape it seems to follow that you would not like rapists. You might not think them objectively bad, but that nuance would presumably only matter to a moral absolutist.

Unless you're a Mackie, of course.