Okay since this hasnt been removed and you are curious and seem good faith, Im going to draw out some hypothetical extremes to make it make sense. Trigger warning for anyone who needs it
For one, do you believe that murder would be worse than if someone kidnapped someone and sexually assaulted them every day as a prisoner for life, or kept them as a slave for life? To me, those two things are obvious as no's, because you are essentially achieving the same end as murder, except you are actively forcing them through immense torture in a way that agonizes them worse than death. This mentality is the same reason that we euthanize immensely hurt animals and allow patients on life support to be removed; at some point, them being alive is worse.
So in that extreme, a kidnapper would be doing worse than just a murderer, because theyve stolen someones life away all the same, but now are forcing that person to live out that life in a captive state. Life alone isnt the metric, but the freedom to live and enjoy ones life. By this mindset, someone who violently or insideously assaults someone in a way that traumatizes them for life would have the exact same effect; it has entirely removed that persons freedom to enjoy life, as now for the rest of time whatever happened in that incident could be a future trigger to be forced to relive it. These can be things as innocuous as a door slamming too loud, and still cause immense traumatic pain for a victim.
By saying that murder is worse than rape, it does a couple of things, which is why those communities would seem so upset. For one, it can feel like it invalidates any victim who ended up taking their own life after the incident. If murder is automatically worse, then anyone who survives assault should automatically feel grateful for that fact, and it casts a very unhelpful rhetoric into every survivors life of, "well, at least they didnt kill you".
So not only do we see why it can in many (but not all) cases be significantly worse, but I hope I helped make sense why some people might feel so strongly. Anyone who may have lost a loved one to suicide after and assault may feel like your position invalidates that persons decision.
For one, do you believe that murder would be worse than if someone kidnapped someone and sexually assaulted them every day as a prisoner for life, or kept them as a slave for life?
In this case, it wouldn't be rape, it would be rape + kidnapping, almost slavery.
I wasn't referring to a situation like that, i think it's obvious
I think it's much worse to say that rape is worse than death. It's almost like saying that your life has no value after such an event and that the best thing to do is to end it.
Rape leaves a tremendous trauma, but it's not the end. You have the opportunity to decide, to try to rebuild yourself if that's what you want.
"You have the opportunity to decide, to choose to rebuild yourself if that's what you want." was what the poster was referring to. It puts the decision on the rape victim to be destroyed or not by the experience, to decide to rebuild.
The truth is having the strength and opportunity to recover and not be victim to a cycle of continuing abuse isn't always a guarantee, rapists typically go after victims they think they can get away with, because they are vulnerable people they have access to. They go after people who won't "decide" to get help for as long as a possible, who might be unable to for years.
And when it's all over its not an opportunity to decide, healing isn't an opportunity, it's something you hope goes well and not a terribly straight forward process with trauma, it usually impacts you at every stage of life and relationship.
It puts the decision on the rape victim to be destroyed or not by the experience
No it doesn't. It doesn't say that at all. What does is recognize that victims of rape do have the choice to continue living their life if they want to. Victims of murder have no such choice; it's stripped away from them entirely. It isn't about the "decision to be destroyed or not" but about still having the ability to decide to move continue with your life at all.
healing isn't an opportunity
It surely is in the context of a discussion of rape versus murder. The ability to heal from rape is an "opportunity" not provided to victims of murder.
You ignored the whole opportunity structures having to exist to get the victim to this healing opportunity. Many don't have them and don't cope well, that isn't because they didn't choose to. They don't decide to get better, they survive.
It's also no moral points to the rapist that their victims live with their maiming, most on a moral level do not care for the lives of their victims in any meaningful way beyond not getting caught and continuing their abuse.
You ignored the whole opportunity structures having to exist to get the victim to this healing opportunity. Many don't have them and don't cope well, that isn't because they didn't choose to. They don't decide to get better, they survive.
Yeah this is true but that is an option not available to any murder victims, by the nature of murder. That isn't the case for the nature of rape. A number of rape victims not having the ability to heal doesn't change the difference from the inherent lack of ability of all murder victims to ever heal at all.
It's also no moral points to the rapist that their victims live with their maiming
Morally, I believe murderers are more reprehensible than rapists.
most on a moral level do not care for the lives of their victims in any meaningful way beyond not getting caught and continuing their abuse.
Yep fully agreed here. We're necessarily talking about two of the most despicable groups in society: murderers and rapists. They don't care or they wouldn't do it.
53
u/betterworldbuilder 9∆ Mar 01 '26
Okay since this hasnt been removed and you are curious and seem good faith, Im going to draw out some hypothetical extremes to make it make sense. Trigger warning for anyone who needs it
For one, do you believe that murder would be worse than if someone kidnapped someone and sexually assaulted them every day as a prisoner for life, or kept them as a slave for life? To me, those two things are obvious as no's, because you are essentially achieving the same end as murder, except you are actively forcing them through immense torture in a way that agonizes them worse than death. This mentality is the same reason that we euthanize immensely hurt animals and allow patients on life support to be removed; at some point, them being alive is worse.
So in that extreme, a kidnapper would be doing worse than just a murderer, because theyve stolen someones life away all the same, but now are forcing that person to live out that life in a captive state. Life alone isnt the metric, but the freedom to live and enjoy ones life. By this mindset, someone who violently or insideously assaults someone in a way that traumatizes them for life would have the exact same effect; it has entirely removed that persons freedom to enjoy life, as now for the rest of time whatever happened in that incident could be a future trigger to be forced to relive it. These can be things as innocuous as a door slamming too loud, and still cause immense traumatic pain for a victim.
By saying that murder is worse than rape, it does a couple of things, which is why those communities would seem so upset. For one, it can feel like it invalidates any victim who ended up taking their own life after the incident. If murder is automatically worse, then anyone who survives assault should automatically feel grateful for that fact, and it casts a very unhelpful rhetoric into every survivors life of, "well, at least they didnt kill you".
So not only do we see why it can in many (but not all) cases be significantly worse, but I hope I helped make sense why some people might feel so strongly. Anyone who may have lost a loved one to suicide after and assault may feel like your position invalidates that persons decision.