|
On November 09 2013 12:05 ninazerg wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2013 10:33 Djzapz wrote:On November 09 2013 07:28 ninazerg wrote:On November 09 2013 07:26 schaf wrote:
To get this thread back on track (at least a whole page discussing rape, really??):
I think it's a good idea, helps at least with situational rape, like getting hit in the park. As long as theres no knife involved... The offender can force the woman into opening it one or the other way, but even that buys time. I'm in favor! This thread will never be back on track; Djzapz has entered the discussion. I'm not that bad. I went after the crazy dissidence! Well, you did enter the discussion with this: Show nested quote +On November 09 2013 06:18 Djzapz wrote:
A lot of "guilty until proven innocent" people here. Fantastic. And I don't think anyone wants to throw innocent people into prison. I'm not a man-hater and I acknowledge that there are false reports of rape. I think any rational person would want justice for those who have been sexually assaulted, men and women alike. What I object to is the false assumption that the victim may bare some of the responsibility for being raped. What many people don't understand is that submitting to attacker is not the same as consenting to sex. I shouldn't have to explain what the difference is, because as soon as I do, some idiot will play Devil's Advocate and "Well, what if this happens?". So what if that happens? Is the law perfect? Hell no. By the same legal system that imprisons innocent people for being wrongly-accused, sex-offenders are set free. Both of those things upset me, but I am absolutely for anything that can prevent sexual assault from happening.
You need PROOF without any reasonable doubt before you can lock up someone for decades and destroying someones life. Just an accusation is not PROOF it is an accusation. Based on thievingmagpies infantile logic anyone should be thrown into prison by a simple accusation of another person that doesnt have a monetary gain of the other person being locked up. This is basically saying guilty until proven innocent. I think everyone agrees that the legal system isnt perfect but throwning people into jail without any proof is fucking ridicolous.
|
This thread is fucking awful
|
On November 09 2013 12:42 Bswhunter wrote:
This thread is fucking awful
I think that sums up this entire discussion, surprised this wasn't closed 10pages ago due to how off-topic it is from the original post.
It's evolved into whether or not the victim should bare any blame for getting raped, which is just fucking absurd to even consider (as long as she's not walking around naked, in the middle of the ghetto, at night, and handing out free rubbers)
|
I think it's a cool idea =D
|
On November 09 2013 12:17 Feartheguru wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2013 12:05 ninazerg wrote:On November 09 2013 10:33 Djzapz wrote:On November 09 2013 07:28 ninazerg wrote:On November 09 2013 07:26 schaf wrote:
To get this thread back on track (at least a whole page discussing rape, really??):
I think it's a good idea, helps at least with situational rape, like getting hit in the park. As long as theres no knife involved... The offender can force the woman into opening it one or the other way, but even that buys time. I'm in favor! This thread will never be back on track; Djzapz has entered the discussion. I'm not that bad. I went after the crazy dissidence! Well, you did enter the discussion with this: On November 09 2013 06:18 Djzapz wrote:
A lot of "guilty until proven innocent" people here. Fantastic. And I don't think anyone wants to throw innocent people into prison. I'm not a man-hater and I acknowledge that there are false reports of rape. I think any rational person would want justice for those who have been sexually assaulted, men and women alike. What I object to is the false assumption that the victim may bare some of the responsibility for being raped. What many people don't understand is that submitting to attacker is not the same as consenting to sex. I shouldn't have to explain what the difference is, because as soon as I do, some idiot will play Devil's Advocate and "Well, what if this happens?". So what if that happens? Is the law perfect? Hell no. By the same legal system that imprisons innocent people for being wrongly-accused, sex-offenders are set free. Both of those things upset me, but I am absolutely for anything that can prevent sexual assault from happening. Also, that whole probabilities thing (posted earlier by ComaDose) was absolute bullshit. If "provocative clothing" is a factor to a rapist, why do unattractive women get raped? Why do men get raped? Why do children get raped? Because rapists do not choose their victims based on appearance, but because of the potential victims perceived vulnerability, accessibility, and the attackers' belief that they will not be punished and will get away with the act if they choose to engage in it. No one said anything about the victim baring some of the responsibility. However, certain actions increase your chance of being raped. Whether you choose to live pragmatically or strive for ideological purity is up to you, but there will always be bad people out there and there's nothing wrong with pointing out some actions will increase your chance of something bad happening to you. The fact that unattractive women get raped does not in any way show that "provocative clothing" is a not a factor to a rapist. Everything in that paragraph in a personal belief, and should not said as if it's an obvious fact.
-_-
http://www.rainn.org/statistics
http://rwu.edu/campus-life/health-counseling/counseling-center/sexual-assault/rape-myths-and-fac
@ "there's nothing wrong with pointing out some actions will increase your chance of something bad happening to you", Plansix already touched on this:
On November 08 2013 08:57 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On November 08 2013 08:20 Thieving Magpie wrote:On November 08 2013 08:09 HellRoxYa wrote:On November 08 2013 05:48 ComaDose wrote:On November 08 2013 05:47 farvacola wrote:On November 08 2013 05:39 Zealos wrote:
There's a cool concept call enthusiastic consent. Instead of working out if she's saying no or not, only have sex with her if she is totally into it and wants to get down and dirty. The problem is that large swaths of otherwise nice American girls consider enthusiastic sexual consent as a sign of sluttiness. i don't think we can blame that on the girls tho Are girls only victims now? Who do you think call girls sluts? It is at least equal between men and women, and I would wager that women are more vicious with the verbal abuse when it comes to calling other women sluts. To pretend that women have no place in changing society and that men are the only ones to blame - that men are the sole cause and only perpetuators of sexist behaviour and attitude - will get you nowhere. This thread has been a very interesting read overall. I feel that I want to chime in on the discussion about what women should and shouldn't wear. In an ideal world women should be able to wear anything and nothing and not get raped, but we don't live in an ideal world. Cautioning women that they should not wear provocatice clothing in precarious situations is not the same as blaming them for dressing that way if and when they do get raped. I think there's a disconnect in feminist discourse here where they cannot recognize that the woman might have made stupid choices and inadvertedly gotten punished for it. The argument that it shouldn't have mattered doesn't hold water when it does matter. It's the same thing as me cautioning my friend from walking through a rough neighbourhood at night. It seems like a bad idea because both of us know people get beat up or mugged there a lot, yet my friend still decides to go there. Is my friend stupid? Most certainly. Does that mean my friend is to blame for being the victim of a crime? Of course not, he should have been able to walk through that neighbourhood unharmed and not have to worry. It's all about making smart decisions. Closing your eyes and saying you shouldn't have to make smart decisions because you want the world to be different doesn't make the world different. A good argument against this would be that provocative clothing doesn't lead to a hightened risk of rape. I don't have any statistics on the issue so I can't know what way reality spins. It seems likely to me that more provocative clothing does entice a potential rapist to commit rape and thus leads to an increased risk for the woman, in which case cautioning against it, especially in settings where the risk is percieved as high, makes sense. The "don't wear provocative clothing" cautioning isn't an excuse to stop the long term work with changing society for the better. And indeed many people do blame the victim by saying she shouldn't have been wearing this or that, or been at that place or gotten that drunk. The fact of the matter is, though, that cautioning against it before hand is not victim blaming but a pragmatic approach to the reality we live in. A reality we can change, but not a reality we can ignore because we want to. I want to end by reminding everyone that changing the society we live in involves not only men but women as well. If we don't work together and look at things as a whole we will get nowhere. What a person wears should never be up for debate. I will not punish someone who has been robbed for having things much like I would never punish someone who has been raped for having clothes. What I don't get is why people always go to the clothing argument when it comes to sexual assault. Why do people analyze rape and sexual assault like they would weather or their eating habits in relation to getting cancer? If you wear this top, you are 10% more likely to be sexually assaulted, so you should avoid that. Also, cut down on salt, it increases your risk of heart problems. Does anyone truly believe that a reduction is trashy clothing will lead to a reduction in rape cases or is this just a thing we use to shift the discussion to the victim? Because assholes are still assholes.
@ "No one said anything about the victim baring some of the responsibility.":
On November 07 2013 08:23 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2013 06:48 ComaDose wrote:On November 07 2013 06:46 Mothra wrote:On November 07 2013 06:41 ComaDose wrote:
"Wearing provocative clothing ... just as valid to label contributing causes of rape"
seeee there is rape culture everywhere you just need to know how to spot it. Are you going to share the reason it is not valid, or is your reason just rape culture full stop? If you can explain in plain English I'll be happy to listen. Because wearing provocative clothing is not at all a contributing factor to rape and to suggest so shifts the blame from the rapist to the victim. almost as obvious of a case i can think of. i.e. telling women they can't dress a certain way or they risk getting raped is not okay. Wearing provocative clothing makes you look prettier. Looking prettier makes you more likely to get raped. Basic logic. The point of contention isn't whether or not provocative clothing makes you more likely to be raped, that isn't even slightly contestable, the point of contention here is how much should we blame women for getting raped for doing things that increase their likelihood of getting raped and how much should we let that affect our sympathy for the victim. Just to let my opinion be known on this one, I don't believe clothes choice should affect how we allocate blame. It doesn't make any particular sense to do that, it's mainly just vindictiveness, envy and this other emotion that is equally inane but I don't know the word for.
On November 07 2013 10:35 Mothra wrote:Show nested quote +On November 07 2013 08:23 AnachronisticAnarchy wrote:On November 07 2013 06:48 ComaDose wrote:On November 07 2013 06:46 Mothra wrote:On November 07 2013 06:41 ComaDose wrote:
"Wearing provocative clothing ... just as valid to label contributing causes of rape"
seeee there is rape culture everywhere you just need to know how to spot it. Are you going to share the reason it is not valid, or is your reason just rape culture full stop? If you can explain in plain English I'll be happy to listen. Because wearing provocative clothing is not at all a contributing factor to rape and to suggest so shifts the blame from the rapist to the victim. almost as obvious of a case i can think of. i.e. telling women they can't dress a certain way or they risk getting raped is not okay. Wearing provocative clothing makes you look prettier. Looking prettier makes you more likely to get raped. Basic logic. The point of contention isn't whether or not provocative clothing makes you more likely to be raped, that isn't even slightly contestable, the point of contention here is how much should we blame women for getting raped for doing things that increase their likelihood of getting raped and how much should we let that affect our sympathy for the victim. Just to let my opinion be known on this one, I don't believe clothes choice should affect how we allocate blame. It doesn't make any particular sense to do that, it's mainly just vindictiveness, envy and this other emotion that is equally inane but I don't know the word for. What I had in mind was more that the prevalence of people objectifying themselves as sexual objects leads to increased animosity, frustration and lust, and decreased respect for others and self. Those lead to more rapes. Not so much that looking pretty on a particular night increases chances of being raped. I think we have to all have to take responsibility for it as a society instead of just blaming either victim or rapist and then washing our hands of it. Rape culture is a vague and meaningless phrase to me, whereas the violence and hypersexualization of society I can understand and believe perpetuates rape. I do believe that dressing in a sexually provocative manner is a part of the problem, but it doesn't mean I blame people for being raped or feel anyone deserves to be.
So, yeah, it's been said. I feel like you just walked into this thread and went "Oh boy, an argument!" and went to the last page of the thread, looked at the last post and decided to disagree with it.
|
On November 09 2013 12:25 Sokrates wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2013 12:05 ninazerg wrote:On November 09 2013 10:33 Djzapz wrote:On November 09 2013 07:28 ninazerg wrote:On November 09 2013 07:26 schaf wrote:
To get this thread back on track (at least a whole page discussing rape, really??):
I think it's a good idea, helps at least with situational rape, like getting hit in the park. As long as theres no knife involved... The offender can force the woman into opening it one or the other way, but even that buys time. I'm in favor! This thread will never be back on track; Djzapz has entered the discussion. I'm not that bad. I went after the crazy dissidence! Well, you did enter the discussion with this: On November 09 2013 06:18 Djzapz wrote:
A lot of "guilty until proven innocent" people here. Fantastic. And I don't think anyone wants to throw innocent people into prison. I'm not a man-hater and I acknowledge that there are false reports of rape. I think any rational person would want justice for those who have been sexually assaulted, men and women alike. What I object to is the false assumption that the victim may bare some of the responsibility for being raped. What many people don't understand is that submitting to attacker is not the same as consenting to sex. I shouldn't have to explain what the difference is, because as soon as I do, some idiot will play Devil's Advocate and "Well, what if this happens?". So what if that happens? Is the law perfect? Hell no. By the same legal system that imprisons innocent people for being wrongly-accused, sex-offenders are set free. Both of those things upset me, but I am absolutely for anything that can prevent sexual assault from happening. You need PROOF without any reasonable doubt before you can lock up someone for decades and destroying someones life. Just an accusation is not PROOF it is an accusation. Based on thievingmagpies infantile logic anyone should be thrown into prison by a simple accusation of another person that doesnt have a monetary gain of the other person being locked up. This is basically saying guilty until proven innocent. I think everyone agrees that the legal system isnt perfect but throwning people into jail without any proof is fucking ridicolous.
Ask ThievingMagpie if he wants innocent people to be thrown in prison. I bet you, like, 100 dollars he will say no, unless he reads this and makes a pact with you to say "yes", so you can split the money with him.
|
Rape is the worst crime and rapists deserve to be executed.
|
Not really sure what to say, but this is pretty extreme.
|
On November 09 2013 12:42 Bswhunter wrote:
This thread is fucking awful
you said it
|
On November 09 2013 15:16 NeuroticPsychosis wrote:
Not really sure what to say, but this is pretty extreme.
If this is freaking NeuroticPsychosis out, it must be pretty bad.
|
On November 09 2013 15:08 Doodsmack wrote:
Rape is the worst crime and rapists deserve to be executed.
Dude ... really?
|
Germany25658 Posts
I think this thread has run its course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
