this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
552 points (97.6% liked)

News

30971 readers
4278 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. 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Backspacecentury@kbin.social 93 points 2 years ago (3 children)

While I would tend to agree, if I'm reading this correctly, they sent the letters for the sentencing... meaning he was already convicted of rape and they were pleading for leniency for an old rapist buddy, like within the last few months. That is a really bad look no matter how you slice it.

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 112 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (5 children)

He's also an old friend.

I don't believe in guilt by association. Asking for leniency for an old friend to a judge, and he didn't get it, doesn't make them monsters or rapists by proxy.

If our culture demands every felon be shunned by their friends and family members going forward, then end the perverse charade and just kill everyone upon a felony conviction.

Masterson did a very bad thing, some friends wrote letters to inform the judge that that isn't all he is and to consider that, not out of malice, but out of compassion.

Man, the internet has absolutely destroyed the concept of nuance. Then again, we only see our "justice," lol, system as a way to turn the screws on bad people... that our society made, btw. Wanton spectator cruelty without the guilt. Not even a hint of attempts at rehabilitation, and just about everyone roots for a parolee's failure to confirm their biases.

Advocating maximum cruelty be inflicted on a perpetrator shouldn't be confused with compassion for the victim. Americans largely ignore that distinction, because it's convenient, easy, and pleasurable to revel in cruelty and call it kindness.

[–] chemical_cutthroat@lemmy.world 34 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Or... we could accept that Masterson RAPED people, and maybe don't give him any support, regardless of his past actions. We don't need to hold out a hand for the fallen rapist. There are too many people in the world that genuinely need help that wasting even an iota of effort on a rapist is a slap in the face to them, not to mention the people the rapist has harmed. There is no nuance.

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

Thank you for making my point.

Masterson did RAPE people. Now, do we want to punish him and rehabilitate him, or get our vengeance boner on and beat on him because that hilariously makes our society feel virtuous?

So much for society demonstrating being better than than those that violate its laws. Blood! Blood! More blood! Give us bloooood!

[–] lingh0e@lemmy.film 39 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Don't be glib. If it came out that my oldest friend wqs not only a rapist, but also used his fame and religion to silence the victims and avoid prosecution... AND I was involved with an organization with the express purpose of stopping sex abuse... I'd absolutely tell that friend to pound sand.

There were multiple times when I learned that friends of mine were sexually assaulted, some of those times were by people I considered friends. There's zero chance that I'd do anything to "put in a good word" for the rapists I once called friends, because their actions in my company have ZERO baring on how they acted in private.

Tl;Dr: If you're vouching for the upstanding nature of a convicted rapist based on your interactions when he wasn't being a duplicitous rapist... that says more about your ignorance to how terrible that person can be as opposed to the good works you saw from the rapist when they weren't raping. You're also a victim.

[–] meco03211@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Except this isn't about Masterson. This is about Kutcher's support for him. If I have a friend that turns out to be a rapist, that's not a friend. That's someone hiding an important, deal breaking secret. If you've hidden that from me, I'm not going to tell a judge you're an otherwise good person that shouldn't be punished accordingly. If I kept that person as a friend after their rapist nature is revealed, that speaks very poorly on my judgement.

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

If you really don't believe that these are people that did something wrong, that they should be shunned for the rest of their days by every living being, where's the virtue in even keeping a felon alive? Why don't we just have a door to a firepit in every jury courtroom that opens upon a guilty Verdict? Why pretend to weigh punishment with mercy, but still set them up for failure in every possible way?

Honest question, do we want to be a benevolent society that sees a fallen member, and wants to help them reintegrate after their just punishment, or is mercy as a positive thing in our society as stone dead a concept as greed being a negative thing?

[–] insaneinthemembrane@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Not writing a letter asking for leniency is not shunning as well as is not vengeance.

[–] blackbelt352@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

For just about any other crime I'd tend to agree with the sentiment, but for nearly any other crime I can come up with some hypothetical scenario where that crime is justifiable, where I can comprehend the reasoning behind the act.

I can't come up with any hypothetical where rape or sexual assault is justifiable.

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It's never justifiable, agreed, but I disagree that it cannot be understood or that the victimizer deserves special worse punishment or consideration. Before we tested for people on the spectrum, people that legitimately lacked the capacity of impulse control were executed like anyone else. Now courts bicker about how low functioning you have to be for such things.

Some people are born very low functioning and never get diagnosed, or throttle that line, and weren't raised well, etc. Americans in general often refuse to see such nuance in such cases. They prefer to imagine a fair black and white world where every rapist is some evil mastermind when often they aren't in control of themselves any of the time. It's not like our mental healthcare system is robust enough to identify and mitigate those issues for poor kids who need it.

I'm sure there are regular and high functioning rapists, like Weinstein and statutory rapists, but I rarely see a differentiation between those calculated actors and some barely sapient person with sporatic impulse control who really doesn't have the capacity to empathize with their victim or consider the consequences, but squeaked by on the mental competence review. Those are worlds apart imho and should be treated as such.

[–] mypuzzleaddiction@geddit.social 3 points 2 years ago

Im just boggled at the mind at how concerned you are for the mechanics of rapists and how there’s something that makes them rape people and don’t seem to be at all concerned with the effects they have on those they raped.

I see this whole devils advocate thing and like whatever this is internet share your peace, but I just can’t understand how lacking empathy for the people you hurt in any way should lessen the consequences of the impact you cause. Context does not excuse consequences. I’m sure Masterson is sick in the head, you’d have to be to rape someone as maliciously, viciously, and violently as he did. I just hope you’re also out here advocating for more support to the victims who are now also sick from the trauma that was directly caused by this man’s actions.

Sure, let someone who according to you can’t control themselves back on the street and give him a lighter sentence. I’m sure he won’t go out and rape again since his lack of control apparently stops once he’s caught and convicted. We should just wait to see if he does it again and say “ooops, his bad let’s try another 5 years” to his next victim and send her off with hopefully a good ass therapist for the rest of her life since that’s how long the rape is going to affect her.

You talk about society lacking nuance but your nuance seems to extend only to the rapist and his buddies. They were not advocating for him to be rehabilitated. They were asking for him to get less time since “his daughter not having a father” would be an injustice. Sure, he’s been convicted of rape, but the injustice of the law here would be his daughter visiting him in jail where he’s not raping people. Now if Kutcher was like “he’s clearly sick, I hope you find an alternative to prison that helps rehabilitate him so he won’t harm others” I could see your point. That’s not what he said. That’s not what he was asking for. People are angry because it’s enraging to see celebrities and rich people get special treatment. Use each other’s fame to hurt others and escape consequences. Your worry about a lack of nunca is funnily enough so black and white in its arguments, you could say it in and of itself lacks nuance to how complicated the subject and ramifications of rape on a person actually are.

[–] tsz@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago
[–] HughJanus@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They said he was a role model

[–] Laticauda@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Nobody is saying it makes them monsters or rapists by proxy, it just makes them friends of a rapist who stayed his friend even after it was proven that he raped at least two people, and then asked for him to be treated leniently even though he certainly didn't grant any leniency to the people he raped. And they're free to do that. But disapproving of that isn't guilt by association, that's just them making choices regarding their relationship with a rapist that other people are free to judge and criticize them for.

[–] reverendsteveii@sopuli.xyz 10 points 2 years ago

It doesn't make the rapists by proxy, but it does make them someone who believes the rapist they like should be the exception.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 4 points 2 years ago

It's not like he just stole a car or something. Rapists deserve the worst punishments we have to offer.

[–] zaph@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

meaning he was already convicted of rape

The letters are typically asked for before conviction as a just-in-case. He's still asking for leniency for his rapist buddy I just thought I'd clarify that little bit.

[–] mrpants@midwest.social 6 points 2 years ago

Several of the letters make mention of his conviction. Someone posted them above.