Post a response:
|
I'm not sure I put it very well in previous post on this (replying to Kit), but it comes down in so many of these cases to "how bad is it objectively," given "how unjust is the reaction to it," which in turn raises the question of "how bad is the reaction to it, objectively..." The infinite regress is logical, more than historical. The Master K case is not really quite like the "nothing to lose" scenario. It's more like a case of self-presumed innocence, the sense that BLs have that the propaganda striking their ears is patently inapplicable to them, and the power of their loves, affections, and lusts, so manifestly true. So natural is it that the terror of the world surround and judging it seems unreal -- until it catches them. "Yes, he did wrong. Now leave him alone." I find this tricky though: It is because of the situation that us heretics find ourselves in that I find it difficult emotionally to "condemn" anything short of actual rape or sexual assault, where I suppose for some reason my sympathy for the victim exceeds my sympathy for the man - perhaps because I cannot conceive of myself as committing a rape. "For some reason?" I should hope your sympathy for the victim would be for a good reason, one higher than your own "incapacity" to conceive of committing rape. If someone did conceive himself as capable of committing rape (there are many such people), his lack of sympathy for the victim would still be contemptible, and yet he still might eschew it for moral reasons. I would think that you cannot conceive of yourself as (capable of) committing rape at least partly because you recognize it as a moral transgression. That's a capacity, not an incapacity. |