Sunday, July 1, 2018

The Mathematical Impossibility Of Modesty Teachings

To think that a victim of rape or any other offense is responsible for the actions of the perpetrator is to indulge in a moral and intellectual abomination.  Yet this illogical belief is a primary tenet of modesty teachings; no no one who truly believes in modesty teachings actually escapes this tenet, though a person might deny it and even deceive himself or herself on the matter.  Even more illogical is when people claim that the perpetrator of a sin like rape clearly is “100%” responsible and yet also claim that the victim is somehow still responsible for some aspect of the offense.

Several moments of rational contemplation expose how inherently stupid this belief is, for such a thing is mathematically impossible, the moral injustice of it aside.  There cannot be more than 100% of the responsibility.  If one party has full responsibility for his or her actions, then the other party cannot have any at all.  Basic mathematics and deductive reasoning reveal this.  It is impossible for a rape victim to be responsible in any way for being assaulted, and, likewise, it is impossible for a person who is the victim of lust or objectification--they are not the same thing, despite widespread confusion among some Christians--to be responsible for how others mentally sin against him or her.  If two people have free will, then one cannot be morally or causally responsible for the actions, both physical or mental, of the other.  That this needs to be emphasized among Christians testifies to the unintelligence and Biblical ignorance of evangelical culture.

Not only is this fact about the nature of moral responsibility true by logical necessary independent of whether the Bible is correct, but the Bible also demands that people be treated as their deeds deserve, not the deeds of others (Deuteronomy 24:16).  To hold one person accountable for the sin of another person--whether that sin is murder, rape, lust/coveting, abduction, larceny, robbery, or illicit anger--is inherently irrational and unjust.  This becomes an even worse offense when victims are told to avoid nonsinful things to “prevent” offenses against them.

When people say things like “Of course a rapist is 100% responsible for his/her actions, but . . .,” they are leaping into a defense of an idea that cannot be true.  There is no other responsibility to parcel out if 100% of it belongs to one person.  There cannot be more than a maximum amount of a thing!  If anyone argues against this, they argue against logic itself; he or she therefore cannot be right because logic cannot be false.

The stupidity of most people, and of professing Christians in particular, is thorough, consistent, and devastating.  I am deeply sorry that the men and women I know who were affected in miscellaneous negative ways by modesty teachings, including the accompanying stereotypes, false metaphysical claims about sexuality, contra-Biblical legalistic mindset, and false guilt inspired by victim blaming, were taught such outright fallacies and logical and Biblical errors.

Modesty teachings are not only illogical in that they are arbitrary (all alleged standards are subjective and there is nothing sexual about the human body), unbiblical in that they are legalistic (the Bible never prescribes modesty standards and says not to add to its commands), and often thoroughly sexist in that they are generally imposed only on women (with asinine, unbiblical, untrue stereotypes appealed to as the basis for this), but they also rely extensively on victim-blaming.  Victim blaming, too, contradicts reason and Scripture!  It is intrinsically unjust and irrational.  Is it truly that difficult to grasp these facts?

Logic, people.  It is very fucking helpful and true whether or not you acknowledge it.  Reality does not change just because you deny it or do not know it.

No comments:

Post a Comment