True, but not terribly useful. As the possessors of hands, all people (and many mammals) are potential stranglers. This is also true, but not useful. People's potential actions aren't grounds for action against them, IMHO.
Well, this was the radical feminist position as I understood it, one which necessitated seeing Irma Grese or Rose West as a victim of patriarchy...
If someone was 99% likely to kill or rape how would you respond?
On the general point, does this make it okay to commit all kinds of atrocity in the head / as thought crime, so long as this is not actualised? [It is okay to have paeophile necrophile fantasies, say, so long as these are not actualised? I can live with that.]
Someone who is 99% likely to kill/rape should be carefully watched - but this is an unlikely situation, and usually leads stems from psychiatric problems - at which point you can section them.
And I'm fine with fantasies. Many, many people have unpleasant fantasies (including me) who would never hurt a person in real life.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2010-07-10 12:00 pm
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
All men, as possessors of a penis, are potential rapists?
no subject
no subject
If someone was 99% likely to kill or rape how would you respond?
On the general point, does this make it okay to commit all kinds of atrocity in the head / as thought crime, so long as this is not actualised? [It is okay to have paeophile necrophile fantasies, say, so long as these are not actualised? I can live with that.]
no subject
And I'm fine with fantasies. Many, many people have unpleasant fantasies (including me) who would never hurt a person in real life.