By REBECCA SPARROW
“Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that’s an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think.”
That’s it.
That’s the tweet that Professor Richard Dawkins (author of the best-selling book The God Delusion) sent out on Tuesday night. That’s the tweet that made the Internet lose its mind and rain merry hell on the renowned British atheist, academic and professional pot-stirrer.
Now what precisely prompted Dawkins to tweet this opinion is so far unknown but he didn’t stop at the topic of rape. Dawkins, 73, went on to tweet:
“Mild pedophilia [sic] is bad. Violent pedophilia is worse. If you think that’s an endorsement of mild pedophilia, go away and learn how to think.”
Followed by: “’Mild date rape is bad. Violent date rape is worse.’ Is it really so hard to understand that that doesn’t constitute endorsement of either?”
According to the Huffington Post, Dawkins comments were met with “incredulity by a charity, which delivers services to end violence against women and children.”
“Jody Woodward, a spokesman for East London Rape Crisis, a service within thecharity NIA, told Huffington Post UK: “Rape itself is a violent act regardless of whether any physical force is used. For survivors there is no hierarchy as to what constitutes ‘better’ or ‘worse’ rape. Rape is rape; there is no such thing as mild rape.
“Around 90% or rapes are committed by men known to the victim/survivor, these worrying myths around ‘real’ rape being committed by strangers at knifepoint can impact on women feeling they can come forward to report the abuse and feeling they will be believed.
Top Comments
I'm really glad someone below (thank you Andy) posted a link to Dawkins' article. I, like many here, was ready to fire off a written assault on Dawkins' tweets until I took a look at why he was tweeting those statements.
I agree 100% with the principle behind his article. I idea that you can't logically debate some ideas because they are too sensitive has always been an issue in my eyes. Debate has always been the way ideas are improved. Without debate, there is no progress because ideas will never be refined. This is why whenever someone suggests that the "debate is over and we should act now ...", I bristle up and ask why are those people so scared of debate. Debate and scepticism are the defining principals of science because truth and facts will always stand against all debate ... if it doesn't then it isn't true or it needs to be refined.
This is also one of the issues I have with Dawkins himself. His stubbornness over religion frustrates me. While I think he can easily poke holes in most (if not all) organised religions, this doesn't in any way prove or disprove the existence of God or Spiritualism. All religious texts were written to explain the world to people with limited knowledge. It's kind of like using a child's story to explain physics. On the other hand, more complicated "religious" texts like Taoist actually talk about stuff that can be related to science.
Anyway, that's a rant for another day.
Stopping people from talking about something just because someone might be offended is ridiculous. Life hurts and it's full of offence. People judge us on what we say and what we don't say. You can't make everyone happy and utopia is a great idea but it's an impossible one. So my advice to everyone is ... if something offends you, then get over it ... if an idea offends you then debate it using facts not feelings.
Really heartened to see so many of the responses here actually getting the point. Don't read the tweets and stop there - read his post related to the suspension of emotional fear and the idea that as humans we can have moral discourse about what society considers "taboo". He is not saying that rape is ever justifiable. The point is that we can have an opinion - emotion is imperative to our being - but being able to talk about issues that are uncomfortable is what aids our understanding and growth as a species. And persecuting those who wish to have these discussions takes us right back to the dark ages when the Church was able to incarcerate, torture and kill logical, fee, scientific thinkers. And that is not progress.
Thanks KC for saying just what I was going to say (though probably better phrased). I read the whole article on Huff Post earlier today and suggest to others here: Please do the same if you wish to get his comments into some actual CONTEXT.