this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2026
252 points (98.1% liked)
Not The Onion
22788 readers
1644 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sure, I guess. I suppose it is also illegal for me to beat the shit out of someone who tried to mug me. It's against the rules for a kid bullied in school to fight back. Certain actions invite harsh consequences. Doesn't mean it's not an entirely appropriate consequence to suffer for having cheated on someone.
People don't learn their lessons without consequences. And anyone who would violate someone's trust like that certainly has a lesson that needs learning. I don't get why you're defending a cheater here, it is a very immature position to take in this situation and such an obvious and reasonable consequence for this person.
Because people are justifying abuse when it's very rarely, if ever, justified.
One person's actions don't justify your abusive actions regardless of how hurt you are.
Cheaters make terrible decisions that hurt their partners. I'm not defending that. But that's independent of these revenge fantasies you all are coming up with for her.
She was punished by the courts as was he for their separate actions.
So if someone raped my daughter, you would defend that rapist from me trying to break every bone in their body?
If yes, something is deeply wrong with you.
If not, then we agree that sometimes consequences beyond what the law prescribes are appropriate. We just disagree where the line is, and it makes your reasoning pretty hollow.
That's a false equivalence.
How is it a false equivalence? One person broke a rule and might receive legal consequences, and the act certainly merits something more severe than that. Do you not think the legal consequences are not enough in that case? Because following your logic here, you would defend that rapist.
Again the only difference is where you draw the line, and that defeats the moral purity of your terrible argument. Abusers deserve the abuse they receive. End of fucking story.
The rapist in the scenario should be serving their time in jail.
Sure sounds to me like you are defending that rapists "rights" rather than subject them to a punishment they richly deserve. I think there would be a lot fewer rapists in the world if we made sure we actually made sure their actions had appropriate consequences.
This story isn't about a rapist though. You presented a false equivalence and I'm not going to continue to play this game with you.
You're the one with the faulty argument and you're not answering the question because you know it exposes your argument as such either way.
I did answer your question.
The wife was in the wrong for cheating. The husband is in the wrong for recording her having sex without consent.