this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2024
336 points (97.5% liked)

News

23301 readers
3788 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Michael Meyden is accused of making the smoothies with benzodiazepine, a drug typically prescribed for anxiety, according to a probable cause affidavit.

An Oregon man accused of spiking smoothies with sedatives and giving them to his daughter’s pre-teen friends has been charged with multiple felonies, according to court documents.

Michael Meyden, 57, of Lake Oswego, allegedly drugged three of his daughter’s friends while they slept over on the night of Aug. 25, 2023, according to court documents and a probable cause affidavit filed this week in Clackamas County.

The girls, all 12 years old, were hospitalized and tested positive for benzodiazepine, described in the affidavit as a drug typically prescribed for anxiety, with common prescriptions under the names Valium, Xanax and Klonopin. Benzodiazepines are a depressant that produces sedation, sleepiness and a relaxed mood, the affidavit said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee -4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Just as you use your statistic to justify sexism.

I have said several times already that it's sexism. That doesn't make it wrong to be cautious, nor is it justifying the fact.

Sexism in its barest definition exists in benign circumstances all around us. Why do men and women have different bathrooms? Different sports leagues? Different car insurance rates?

Arguing that sexism shouldn't exist for the sake of it in this specific case is selectively pushing equality in the face of women's safety.

100% of women will experience a car crash in their lifetime. (3-4 accidents per lifetime).

Let's extend your logic on this: is it wrong to wear a seat belt given, statistically, that you will experience a car crash at some point? Because in effect, that's what this line of logic is.

Or are you just being obtuse? Because in order for this point to make sense, you'd have to argue against practicing safety in the face of statistical likelihood. Which is literally what this is about

Because to you, the cause isn't your problem

Oh, please do educate me on what causes men to sexually assault women. Yes, the fact that women are being attacked is the problem. The cause should not preclude women from taking measures to ensure their safety.

As long as I have spent clarifying this point, besides the misguided notion that we should push equality in a situation that is fundamentally unequal, I seriously don't understand how people don't get it.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Oh, please do educate me on what causes men to sexually assault women.

The patriarchy and culture of toxic masculinity. Added to that many religions teach that men are more important than women.

you’d have to argue against practicing safety in the face of statistical likelihood.

Again if you live your life by those statistics, you would also be wary of black people. Saying "yeah it's sexism but it's justified because statistics show men commit more sexual assaults" is no different than saying you are wary of blacks based on the same statistics.

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee -3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The patriarchy and culture of toxic masculinity. Added to that many religions teach that men are more important than women.

And because of this, it's not important for women to protect themselves? We should denounce the fact that women protect themselves because society has conditioned men to be violent?

Look, I'm all about addressing the root cause, but just pointing at one injustice in society doesn't make another just disappear.

Again if you live your life by those statistics, you would also be wary of black people

You really need to stop saying "well if you're taking precautions based on statistics you must also be racist"

Because that's a really transparent fallacy that essentially just boils down to you asserting "women shouldn't protect themselves because what about black people?"

These are separate points, and putting the words in my mouth that I must be racist is nothing more than deflection to avoid addressing the actual point.

Again if you live your life by those statistics

Additionally, I know very many people who wear seat belts because of the statistical chance of being in a wreck. According to your fallacy, all of those people must also be racist.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

women shouldn’t protect themselves because what about black people?”

The fallacy I'm trying to elaborate is mismatched risk. Cars are far more dangerous but you ignore that risk. You could choose to not be sexist just like you currently choose to ignore the statistics to not be racist.

[–] Seasoned_Greetings@lemm.ee -2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

1 in 3 women experience unwanted sexual contact at least once in their lifetime. That's roughly 65 million women in the states.

That's not an insignificant risk. You may choose to ignore it, but you clearly don't have to live with it.

Saying "women should ignore potential danger" on the premise that it's not fair to a man, who is 9 times out of 10 not even effected by the precautions that women tend to take, is basically like saying you shouldn't wear a seat belt so that you don't accidentally offend the other drivers on the road.

You aren't discriminating against those other drivers by being conscious of your own safety.

Whether or not you agree with that doesn't really change the fact that women are taught to go to the bathroom in groups or go to the bar with friends (or really not go anywhere alone that they might not be able to easily call for help) or carry mace or cross the street to avoid a man that's looking at them creepily or any number of avoidant situations.

These are things women do to protect themselves that literally only affect the men who wanted to and would otherwise miss an opportunity to assault them, and things women are taught to do by other women because sexual assault is a thing that happens.

The only context things like this are even brought up as "sexist" at all is when men realize that women have to do it and then get offended on the behalf of all men because it's "not fair". Like in this conversation we're having now.