• Welcome to PurpleFlock! Be sure to sign up here so that you can chat with your fellow Ravens fans.

The Random Thought Thread

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
that's just one statistic of course - it's just indicative of how large the scale is and how utile women see the legal systems as being with regards to dealing with sexual violence

other recent studies (again UK but hard to imagine the percentages will be much different elsewhere - this one is from 2017) have 20% of women having survived sexual assault since they were 16 (so doesn't even include any statistics relating to children) and 3.1% of women aged between 16-59 report having survived sexual assault in the previous year

lots of lots of statistics abound but globally it seems like the accepted figures are somewhere between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 women experience sexual violence (without including "harassment")
And I agree that's feasible. Though I also look at the "degrees" of certain things.

Like rape is obviously the worst of the magnitudes, and should obviously be dealt with harshly (and I think most people would say the legal system does fairly well with this).

But understand also that a woman who is kissed by somewhat at a bar, without sort of "initiating it", is considered sexual assault. So is being smacked on the ass or groped.

Do I think that should be taken seriously? Yes. But I also don't think it requires a lifetime of therapy or being labeled a "survivor" of sexual assault to recover from having your ass slapped by somebody in an unwanted situation. I think that's just wanting to be a part of the "me too" movement and draw attention to yourself. I've had my ass grabbed, against my will, many times. I've been kissed by women I had no interest in kissing. All are simple sexual assault.

I think the public stigma surrounding sexual "assault", which has also been pushed by the media for some time now, is that every time some reports, accuses, or mentions sexual assault, it means a man forced sexual acts (blowjobs, intercourse, etc.) on a woman against their will. Largely speaking, that's not sexual assault. That's rape. They're not the same.

Sexual assault is a very broadly defined, very wide ranging category of misconduct. And the wider that gets, the more people will be exposed to it.
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
And I agree that's feasible. Though I also look at the "degrees" of certain things.

Like rape is obviously the worst of the magnitudes, and should obviously be dealt with harshly (and I think most people would say the legal system does fairly well with this).

But understand also that a woman who is kissed by somewhat at a bar, without sort of "initiating it", is considered sexual assault. So is being smacked on the ass or groped.

Do I think that should be taken seriously? Yes. But I also don't think it requires a lifetime of therapy or being labeled a "survivor" of sexual assault to recover from having your ass slapped by somebody in an unwanted situation. I think that's just wanting to be a part of the "me too" movement and draw attention to yourself. I've had my ass grabbed, against my will, many times. I've been kissed by women I had no interest in kissing. All are simple sexual assault.

I think the public stigma surrounding sexual "assault", which has also been pushed by the media for some time now, is that every time some reports, accuses, or mentions sexual assault, it means a man forced sexual acts (blowjobs, intercourse, etc.) on a woman against their will. Largely speaking, that's not sexual assault. That's rape. They're not the same.

Sexual assault is a very broadly defined, very wide ranging category of misconduct. And the wider that gets, the more people will be exposed to it.

to be specific the same 2017 study did narrow down on the "per year" statistic i quoted above - of the 3.1% who'd been sexually assaulted that year, it was just over 16% that had "experience[d] rape, attempted rape or sexual assault by penetration"

unfortunately i dont have any numbers to hand for those statistics over the whole lifetime though only the last year figures...

and also worth pointing out that narrowing down statistic completely ignores non-penetrative but similarly traumatising sexual assaults
 

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
to be specific the same 2017 study did narrow down on the "per year" statistic i quoted above - of the 3.1% who'd been sexually assaulted that year, it was just over 16% that had "experience[d] rape, attempted rape or sexual assault by penetration"

unfortunately i dont have any numbers to hand for those statistics over the whole lifetime though only the last year figures...

and also worth pointing out that narrowing down statistic completely ignores non-penetrative but similarly traumatising sexual assaults
And that's fine. I'm merely pointing out the fact that the vast majority of those who statistically say they've been "harassed or assaulted" likely wouldn't qualify as somebody who needs a lifetime of therapy, or substantial civil lawsuit payouts/compensation, to "overcome" what they've experienced.
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
And that's fine. I'm merely pointing out the fact that the vast majority of those who statistically say they've been "harassed or assaulted" likely wouldn't qualify as somebody who needs a lifetime of therapy, or substantial civil lawsuit payouts/compensation, to "overcome" what they've experienced.

agree with the 2nd, don't necessarily agree with the 1st - the amount of mental capacity that "trying not to be raped" takes up even if you haven't been assaulted or harassed to an obviously traumatic degree is definitely likely to send people to therapy - especially when those indiscretions are shrugged off by general society as "less serious" - those sorts of micro-aggressions and "little" assaults are naturally going to create environments that are unhealthy and probably lead to a need for serious therapy...
 

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
agree with the 2nd, don't necessarily agree with the 1st - the amount of mental capacity that "trying not to be raped" takes up even if you haven't been assaulted or harassed to an obviously traumatic degree is definitely likely to send people to therapy - especially when those indiscretions are shrugged off by general society as "less serious" - those sorts of micro-aggressions and "little" assaults are naturally going to create environments that are unhealthy and probably lead to a need for serious therapy...
And I think that people who seek years of therapy out of "fear of not being raped" based on an "assault" encounter that involves being smacked on the ass or being kissed by somebody unwarranted have much more underlying issues that require therapy than just those encounters.
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
And I think that people who seek years of therapy out of "fear of not being raped" based on an "assault" encounter that involves being smacked on the ass or being kissed by somebody unwarranted have much more underlying issues that require therapy than just those encounters.

except the difference is it's not paranoia - the odds are incredibly high that they'll experience harassment (most likely repeatedly) and it creates an embedded societal fear about being around men (generally)

the idea being that despite most men not being rapists or assaulters or harassers, most women are harassed and a large proportion are assaulted or raped - which means that while most men probably aren't dangerous, any man COULD be dangerous

and that fear permeates many women's lives - it means that many women constantly end up preparing themselves for a potential attacker especially when walking alone or running alone etc. - things like holding keys as a potential weapon, having headphones in but not listening to music, calling friends/texting friends along your route - constant vigilance is exhausting

so it's not just the incidents themselves but the warranted fear of potential incidents, or the incidents that never quite escalated to "violence" because of their vigilance

im going to make a probably crass equivalency (and i'll preface this by saying there are obviously differences) but it's not dissimilar to the idea that a black person who faces racial micro-aggressions and being held to different standards by society and employers and who faces the threat of violence (especially from the authorities) is likely going to be affected by those experiences even if that individual never actually faces direct violent attacks - there's still trauma there

navigating a society where those sorts of micro-aggressions are endemic to your experience is going to be difficult - so it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a harassment or a "minor" assault could send someone into a spiral or send them to therapy of some sort

also sidenote: therapy's not just for traumatic experiences - a large proportion of society should probably be in regular therapy for most of their lives anyway even without underlying mental health conditions or relationship issues
 

JAAM

Hall of Famer

rmcjacket23

Ravens Ring of Honor
except the difference is it's not paranoia - the odds are incredibly high that they'll experience harassment (most likely repeatedly) and it creates an embedded societal fear about being around men (generally)

the idea being that despite most men not being rapists or assaulters or harassers, most women are harassed and a large proportion are assaulted or raped - which means that while most men probably aren't dangerous, any man COULD be dangerous

and that fear permeates many women's lives - it means that many women constantly end up preparing themselves for a potential attacker especially when walking alone or running alone etc. - things like holding keys as a potential weapon, having headphones in but not listening to music, calling friends/texting friends along your route - constant vigilance is exhausting

so it's not just the incidents themselves but the warranted fear of potential incidents, or the incidents that never quite escalated to "violence" because of their vigilance

im going to make a probably crass equivalency (and i'll preface this by saying there are obviously differences) but it's not dissimilar to the idea that a black person who faces racial micro-aggressions and being held to different standards by society and employers and who faces the threat of violence (especially from the authorities) is likely going to be affected by those experiences even if that individual never actually faces direct violent attacks - there's still trauma there

navigating a society where those sorts of micro-aggressions are endemic to your experience is going to be difficult - so it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a harassment or a "minor" assault could send someone into a spiral or send them to therapy of some sort

also sidenote: therapy's not just for traumatic experiences - a large proportion of society should probably be in regular therapy for most of their lives anyway even without underlying mental health conditions or relationship issues
Well I'm probably the last person who wants to discuss the pros and cons of "therapy". I think 90% of "therapists" on this planet are much, much, much closer to con artists than they are any respectable "doctor" of psychology or neuroscience. As somebody who mistakenly pissed away hundreds of dollars on therapy several years back, I generally have very little respect for the profession to begin with.

For some people it may be valuable. For most, it's just a way of paying large sums of money to a stranger to have them validate your own feelings.
 

Corvus Purpura

Practice Squad
Tickets on sale already?

The schedule needs to be released prior to tickets going on sale. That's a venue I really want to get to, along with the new stadium in LA. But yes, those tickets will be insanely expensive. I was shocked how cheap and plentiful MNF tickets were for the Rams game in 2019, but that was obviously not a new stadium that's trying to cover their costs. Even the Chargers, while likely very easy to come by, will still be expensive.
 

SepticeyePoe

Hall of Famer
tenor.gif
 

UPennChem

Hall of Famer
Something that never makes any sense to me is why our wide receivers are not made better by our secondary. There's always so much iron sharpens iron talk, but like there's nothing to show thats true. Shouldn't it be a real luxury to have our receivers have to work hard against quality players in practice? The majority of secondaries are worse than ours. Idk it just makes me wonder what practice is like. Does the defense just destroy our offense? If not, why doesn't it translate to games?
 

rossihunter2

Staff Member
Moderator
Something that never makes any sense to me is why our wide receivers are not made better by our secondary. There's always so much iron sharpens iron talk, but like there's nothing to show thats true. Shouldn't it be a real luxury to have our receivers have to work hard against quality players in practice? The majority of secondaries are worse than ours. Idk it just makes me wonder what practice is like. Does the defense just destroy our offense? If not, why doesn't it translate to games?

i think the defence probably does destroy our offence - but also worth noting that defence is normally ahead of offence throughout most of the offseason

also worth noting that hollywood's definitely better against press in 2020 than he was in 2019 - partly that's because he spent the whole offseason working on it but probably also because he practices against marlon and jimmy all the time who are physical, long and athletic and high-level press corners

i think the other thing is though that their physicality is probably checked somewhat by the fact that a lot of offseason work is non-contact or low-contact which means that guys like miles boykin don't have to defeat physical challenges (where he struggles most) as much as you'd expect because of those offseason training rules
 

UPennChem

Hall of Famer
i think the defence probably does destroy our offence - but also worth noting that defence is normally ahead of offence throughout most of the offseason

also worth noting that hollywood's definitely better against press in 2020 than he was in 2019 - partly that's because he spent the whole offseason working on it but probably also because he practices against marlon and jimmy all the time who are physical, long and athletic and high-level press corners

i think the other thing is though that their physicality is probably checked somewhat by the fact that a lot of offseason work is non-contact or low-contact which means that guys like miles boykin don't have to defeat physical challenges (where he struggles most) as much as you'd expect because of those offseason training rules

That makes sense. Do you know how physical they are during practice once the season starts?
 
Top