IMO women have some very very big issues | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

IMO women have some very very big issues

From what we can see at first glance it definitely doesn't look like a fight for her life, but look closer. As she's walking across the street and onto the sidewalk, she walks backwards the majority of the distance, suggesting she either suspect's she's in danger or is at least engaged in a conversation with the abductor. Before I watched the other surveillance video, I seriously thought "WTF, why would you let a stranger walk up to you like that? I would never let a stranger get that close to me, especially while alone. WHY?!" As it turns out, they were shaking hands. In the first video, while she is being forced down the street she has her phone in her right hand, possibly trying to dial 911. In the second video while they shake hands her phone is not in hand. Maybe the guy doesn't look that strong, but she clearly does not have the physical means to overpower him, since he was able to run her down the street quickly and with little effort. I imagine her being in pain or a position that is difficult to move out of when he forces her to the ground. The police report at the beginning of the video also says "Just before the vehicle pulls off the driver and passenger side windows were broken out by the complainant." She certainly doesn't put up the fight you'd expect to see, but she does try.

Maybe most people don't come right out and say "the victims deserved what they got," but we as society always expect the (potential) victims to change and not the predators. Like we just admit defeat, "Oh, there will always be killers, rapists, and muggers out there." Sure, it's true, but why don't we ever try to stop people from becoming these things? Why don't we really look at the source of the problem to find out why people engage in these acts and what we can do to stop them?

What I find amazing in all of this is that they actually got to her while she was alive and even more so, how they were able to track down that scumbag who abducted her.

"Agents moved in quickly after receiving a tip from the ATF Office in Richmond, Virginia, which was investigating Barnes. They believed the man may have been the suspect after seeing surveillance photos in news reports, Philadelphia detectives said.

Authorities began tracking his gray Ford Taurus through a GPS device placed inside the vehicle by the car dealership where it was purchased, detectives said. The GPS was installed because Barnes had poor credit, officials said.

Agents honed in on his location, in a shopping center parking lot, and moved in to strike." (source)

The car dealership was so afraid this black guy with bad credit might screw them over they put a tracking device in the car he purchases!? It's just amazing how well it worked out for everyone but the abductor, and that this isn't the first instance of dealerships using a tracers to keep watch over their customers with bad credit as I found out here.
 
This has been a learning experience for me. Teaching me something I already knew way in the back of my head. Feelings shut down logic, reason, rational thought and bypass foundational truth.
 
 
I just wanted to reiterate what [MENTION=6650]SealHammer[/MENTION] said: that woman is alive and back home.
 
Eventhorizon said:
This has been a learning experience for me. Teaching me something I already knew way in the back of my head. Feelings shut down logic, reason, rational thought and bypass foundational truth.
Click to expand...

Explain.
 
Eventhorizon said:
My point in all of this is that knowing this is something possible, people who find themselves in a similar situation can do things now to make the outcome not defined. This woman for whatever reason laid down and died. Plan now, make changes now and live in the future.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think I may know were you are coming from.

Still I think its the man who has the issues here, the aggressor, I wouldnt identify with them by saying that the victim really ought to have put up more of a fight.

I used to think when I was younger and saw films about the extermination of the Jews by nazis in the gas chambers about why they did not resist to their dying breath, why did they get on the trains, why did they que up naked marshalled by armed guards with dogs and calmly march to their deaths etc. etc.

The reality is that they could have choosen to resist and die that way, they still would have died and like I say for most people violence and killing someone, even in self-defence are terrible prospects, there's nothing abnormal about not being acquainted with them and not rising to them at the first opportunity or impluse, its part of the reason there are standing armies and not everyone is trained or prepared to kill.
 
I feel good about the woman bieng alive. The story more often than not doesnt turn out that way though.
The reason this one effected me enough to comment on it was the video.
 
Lark said:
Yeah, I think I may know were you are coming from.

Still I think its the man who has the issues here, the aggressor, I wouldnt identify with them by saying that the victim really ought to have put up more of a fight.

I used to think when I was younger and saw films about the extermination of the Jews by nazis in the gas chambers about why they did not resist to their dying breath, why did they get on the trains, why did they que up naked marshalled by armed guards with dogs and calmly march to their deaths etc. etc.

The reality is that they could have choosen to resist and die that way, they still would have died and like I say for most people violence and killing someone, even in self-defence are terrible prospects, there's nothing abnormal about not being acquainted with them and not rising to them at the first opportunity or impluse, its part of the reason there are standing armies and not everyone is trained or prepared to kill.
Click to expand...

Clearly the man is the beginning of the problem. If the man were not alive we aould not be talking about this. If predatory animals did nit exist in nature we could go where ever we wanted without protection.

I wanted to drive home the idea that women do not have to be helpless. They can have a plan in place, take some self defense classes. Carry a weapon and know how to use it so it doesnt get used against them, be prepared to kill an abductor etc....and in the process live because of it rather than being shut down by fear if it happens.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Clearly the man is the beginning of the problem. If the man were not alive we aould not be talking about this. If predatory animals did nit exist in nature we could go where ever we wanted without protection.

I wanted to drive home the idea that women do not have to be helpless. They can have a plan in place, take some self defense classes. Carry a weapon and know how to use it so it doesnt get used against them, be prepared to kill an abductor etc....and in the process live because of it rather than being shut down by fear if it happens.
Click to expand...

I would like to second this and also say it is not victim blaming to notice that righteous indignation is a poor defense against knuckles and knives.
 
Last edited:
Eventhorizon said:
Clearly the man is the beginning of the problem. If the man were not alive we aould not be talking about this. If predatory animals did nit exist in nature we could go where ever we wanted without protection.

I wanted to drive home the idea that women do not have to be helpless. They can have a plan in place, take some self defense classes. Carry a weapon and know how to use it so it doesnt get used against them, be prepared to kill an abductor etc....and in the process live because of it rather than being shut down by fear if it happens.
Click to expand...

In and of itself that is a positive message.

However, you can take all those measures and still be a victim and it wont mean the end of predators just because people may be prepared for them, in the mean time does taking all those measures mean you're no longer the person you used to be and resemble the predator more than your former self in your views about the world, the people in it and your expectations of others?

This is in another way the question that states and people have to answer in dealing with the threat of terrorism, terrorism and crime have a lot in common as I understand them, there's nothing wrong with preparedness and what you were essentially saying but think on the other points too wont you?
 
SealHammer said:
I would like to second this and also say it is not victim blaming to notice that righteous indignation is a poor defense against knuckles and knives.
Click to expand...

I dont understand what you're saying, what righteous indignation?

I wouldnt ever say its a defence against knuckles and knives, who said that? Or are you attributing that to a poster? Suggesting it was implicit in what people had to say?

Suggesting that there would be no crime if people were all crime fighters does imply that it is in some way the victim's fault that they were victimised, maybe its not what's meant or perhaps its not even understood as such but that's what it is. Its also a rationalisation used by criminals to excuse their behaviour, its a "public service" weeding out the "weak" or "unwary", or minimise it.
 
Lark said:
I dont understand what you're saying, what righteous indignation?
Click to expand...

"Women should not be required to defend themselves from predators"

I wouldnt ever say its a defence against knuckles and knives, who said that?
Click to expand...
Nobody.

Or are you attributing that to a poster?
Click to expand...
No.

Suggesting it was implicit in what people had to say?
Click to expand...
More or less.

Suggesting that there would be no crime if people were all crime fighters does imply that it is in some way the victim's fault that they were victimised, maybe its not what's meant or perhaps its not even understood as such but that's what it is. Its also a rationalisation used by criminals to excuse their behaviour, its a "public service" weeding out the "weak" or "unwary", or minimise it.
Click to expand...
I'm saying that, while it's the admirable and ultimately most important pursuit to eliminate all forms of violence, that thought alone is not a bulwark against violence upon your being in the present moment. As it stands, to ensure one's safety, one must accept the possibility of being a target of aggression and make plans, however spare, to escape from it.
 
Lark said:
I dont understand what you're saying, what righteous indignation?

I wouldnt ever say its a defence against knuckles and knives, who said that? Or are you attributing that to a poster? Suggesting it was implicit in what people had to say?

Suggesting that there would be no crime if people were all crime fighters does imply that it is in some way the victim's fault that they were victimised, maybe its not what's meant or perhaps its not even understood as such but that's what it is. Its also a rationalisation used by criminals to excuse their behaviour, its a "public service" weeding out the "weak" or "unwary", or minimise it.
Click to expand...

Thats an interesting interpretation, but just because you declare it as so, does not mean you are correct.
 
the said:
Thats an interesting interpretation, but just because you declare it as so, does not mean you are correct.
Click to expand...

You are right, what do you suggest?
 
Eventhorizon said:
Clearly the man is the beginning of the problem.
Click to expand...

That's not necessarily true

It would be true if the man is born with some innate psychopathy but if he wasn't born bad but turned bad for example became a sociopath through his environment then the story doesn't begin with the man it begins with the environment

In fact you could expand that even further and ask if the man did have hereditary psychopathy then why are psychopaths managing to pass on their genes?

For example why are some people in our society admiring psychopathic traits?

What kind of sick society admires the kind of traits exhibited by a psychopath?

...and that takes us back to environment again
 
muir said:
That's not necessarily true

It would be true if the man is born with some innate psychopathy but if he wasn't born bad but turned bad for example became a sociopath through his environment then the story doesn't begin with the man it begins with the environment

In fact you could expand that even further and ask if the man did have hereditary psychopathy then why are psychopaths managing to pass on their genes?

For example why are some people in our society admiring psychopathic traits?

What kind of sick society admires the kind of traits exhibited by a psychopath?

...and that takes us back to environment again
Click to expand...

People are responsible for their own actions. Stop blaming everything else. This man made the personal decision to do this. Society isn't promoting for people to abduct strangers and if it were a biological drive than there would be many more abductions than there are.
 
muir said:
That's not necessarily true

It would be true if the man is born with some innate psychopathy but if he wasn't born bad but turned bad for example became a sociopath through his environment then the story doesn't begin with the man it begins with the environment

In fact you could expand that even further and ask if the man did have hereditary psychopathy then why are psychopaths managing to pass on their genes?

For example why are some people in our society admiring psychopathic traits?

What kind of sick society admires the kind of traits exhibited by a psychopath?

...and that takes us back to environment again
Click to expand...

You dont believe in free will what so ever?

This sounds like a lot of excuses to me. Diminished responsibility is still responsibility.
 
La Sagna said:
People are responsible for their own actions. Stop blaming everything else. This man made the personal decision to do this. Society isn't promoting for people to abduct strangers and if it were a biological drive than there would be many more abductions than there are.
Click to expand...

The reality is that even if its a biological drive there's nothing what so ever to suggest its alright to act on it, people regulate their biological drives all the time and conform to social perogatives or the dictates of conscience.

I've seen some strange things posted by Muir before now but making excuses for abduction? That's a new low right there.

Edit: In addition if the environment is such a powerful deterministic force the question to ask would not be how a minority act out as psychopaths or sociopaths but why the majority refrain from doing so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back