Trivialisation, Projection and Denial: Is this how these disturbed minds justify the crime of rape?

Question

Happy Bullet (in his current incarnation “BabaYaga” just posted the following insulting “question” (as usual) trivializing rape:

“Why can't men understand something so simple as NO MEANS NO?...If I say no - THAT MEANS NO...If I say no, then yes - THAT MEANT THE FIRST THING I SAID (NO) IS WHAT COUNTED…”

IS THE FOLLOWING RESPONSE A WINDOW INTO THE MIND OF A SERIAL RAPIST?
“That's very simple. Women change their minds oftentimes, they don't have a definite decision all at once. My girl-friends would agree to that. This is one of the unique traits that separate women from men. So basically, you can't blame the men if they keep on insisting the women on what they want to happen or do or think...Perhaps in this way they could change your minds, as what your nature basically defines.

Persistence breaks resistance.”

CREEEPY" I FOUND THIS ARTICLE ON PSYCHOPATHOLOGY EARLIER - I THINK THIS IS HOW THE PERPETRATORS JUSTIFY THEIR CRIMES TO THEMSELVES AND TO THE WORLD; WHAT DO YOU THINK?

“When called to account for the way they have chosen to behave, the [sociopath] instinctively... feigns victimhood … and the bully wins by default. Variations include feigning indignation, martyrdom ("If it wasn't for me...") and a poor-me drama ("You don't know how hard it is for me ... blah blah blah ..." and "I'm the one who always has to..." and "You think you're having a hard time ...").
Also:
a) denies everything. Includes: Trivialization
b) quickly follows the denial with an aggressive counter-attack of counter-criticism or counter-allegation, often based on distortion or fabrication.

Lying, deception, duplicity, hypocrisy and blame are the hallmarks of this stage. The purpose is to avoid answering the question and thus avoid accepting responsibility for their behaviour. Often the target is tempted - or coerced - into giving another long explanation to prove the bully's allegation false; by the time the explanation is complete, everybody has forgotten the original q

HAPPY BULLET, YOU HAD MY RESPONSE TO YOUR 'QUESTION' ABOUT RAPE STATISCS FOR WOMEN OVER 30 DELETED; IT'S BACK AGAIN, YOU CAN'T SILENCE OR CENSOR ME. YOU ARE OBVIOUSLY THREATENED BY ME, BUT I WILL NOT CENSOR YOUR STUPID-*** POSTING HERE BECAUSE IT UNDERSCORES FOR EVERYONE THE NATURE OF YOUR STUPID *** AND THAT YOU HAVE PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS SO GET SOME HELP FOR THAT, EH?

HEY HAPPY BULLET: "... aggressive counter-attack of counter-criticism or counter-allegation, often based on distortion or fabrication..." LOOK HOW YOUR CREEPYY BEHAVIOUR PERFECTLY FITS THE PARADIGM AS SEEN ON THIS VERY PAGE: THE SHOE FITS PERFECTLY!

Answer 1

Rapists shouldn't even be counted as humans, if we assume at humans are rationale beings.

Rapists only want power and to dominate, do you think he will care if the woman says "no" even at the beginning?

I believe that poster is NOT referring to rape. But he is talking about the fallacy most men who do not have enough experiences with women believe in.

Answer 2

WOW. I agree with you. And if rapists were speaking the truth, meaning if Yes means yes and No means Yes, then rape wouldn't exist in the world, at all. However, I am not afraid of people like Happy Bullet or the answerer you have cited, they are everywhere. I am afraid of legal institutions that are very often subject to Trivialisation, Projection and Denial, as you said, so they make it much harder for the victims of raping.

NO means NO, but rapists don't pay attention to verbal communication. He beats her almost to death and make her completely unable to defend or escape it and then rape her. Then, he turns the situation into the "fact" that she wanted it. Just because she COULDN'T defend, it means for him that she DIDN'T defend. Imagine that it was the strongest argument one war rape witness used in the Hague, after the war in Bosnia, to protect the person accused. The members of jury were out of their mind trying to understand this idiot.

Answer 3

I think that for the men to think that raping a woman is ok because they cannot make up their mind is soooo ignorant. It's like duh, if a person cannot make up their mind about something then leave them alone. Go buy some! Goodness if they want it that bad, taking a women's innocence, is not the answer. I think they should think about how they would feel if someone were to do that to their wife, sister or daughter then they would straighten their mind up about things.

Answer 4

Now you have returned to your old comic stand-by: RAPE
IS FUNNY. You must spend hours a day just dreaming up
this ridiculous s-h-i-t. Have you absolutely nothing
useful to do?

I think you are - a COMPLETE CRANK:

Crank (person)
"Crank" is a pejorative term for a person who

1. holds some belief which the vast majority of his
contemporaries would consider false,

2. clings to this belief in the face of all
counterarguments or evidence presented to him.

The term implies that

1. a "cranky" belief is so wildly at variance with
some commonly accepted truth as to be ludicrous,

2. arguing with the crank is useless, because he will
invariably dismiss all evidence or arguments which
contradict his cranky belief.

Common synonyms for "crank" include kook and crackpot.
The word quack is usually reserved for someone who
promotes a medical remedy or practice which he knows
to be ineffective.

The psychology of cranks

A widely quoted study by two Cornell University
psychologists, Justin Kruger and David Dunning, is
often thought to bear directly upon a striking and
virtually universal characteristic of cranks: they
simultaneously overestimate their own knowledge and
ability and underestimate that of other persons,
including that of acknowledged experts in the field.

Kruger and Dunning hypothesized that with regard to a
typical skill which humans may possess in greater or
lesser degree,

1. incompetent individuals tend to overestimate their
own level of skill,

2. incompetent individuals fail to recognize genuine
skill in others,

3. incompetent individuals fail to recognize the
extremity of their inadequacy,

4. if they can be trained to improve their own skill
level, these individuals can recognize and acknowledge
their own previous lack of skill.

They confirmed these hypotheses in a series of tests.

These results are taken to explain why cranks so often
seem to represent, not individuals with an exceptional
degree of knowledge, but rather individuals with an
exceptional degree of ignorance concerning the subject
of their cranky belief.

As noted above, in addition to a general lack of
ability to accurately assess their own skills and
knowledge, many cranks also exhibit deficiencies in
reading comprehension, logical reasoning, and other
cognitive abnormalities, which may contribute both to
how they arrive at some bizarre counterfactual belief
in the first place, and to how they are able to cling
to such a belief in the face of all objections.

It is also striking that many cranks seem to exhibit
certain symptoms of grandiosity or megalomania. This
may perhaps also be understood, in terms of the
phenomenon studied by Kruger and Dunning, as resulting
from a simultaneous overinflation of their own social
value and underestimation of the social value of
others.