|
On April 05 2011 02:36 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:
Also, there is a slight nuance to be added to my above definitions, people who dress revealingly in a sexual context or not. There's revealing, and deliberate revealing to be sexually provocative, certainly both are distinct for the purpose of this debate. Do people have a right to dress in a sexually provocative way, assuming that this actually incites rape? Yes. We have to respect each other's individual freedom, this includes dressing up.
Of course it somewhat depresses me if I see a nice woman with a revealing outfit, implying the statement "This is what you will never have, nub!"
If someone "excuses" rape by beeing "provoced", he is trying to make him the actual victim. This is wrong.
On April 05 2011 03:15 travis wrote:
I think it's pretty obvious that a horny guy is more likely to rape someone than a guy that isn't horny.
And I think it's also pretty obvious that dressing like a slut makes most guys horny. I agree with the last one, but not with the first line. Just because I get stimulated and could use ... relief, does not mean I rape her. I assume that raping a girl is more a sign of deficient respect for her.
|
On April 05 2011 15:00 gibbons_ wrote:
One slip of the tongue caused all this... :/
While they were protesting I was trying to get to campus to work on a project so that I can graduate as an engineer to try to make the world a better place for these very same people.
Instead the TTC street cars were shut down and why? For a bunch of goofy-looking people with signs saying 'I LOVE SLUTS' trying to make a point that most of them didn't really understand. Just an excuse to have a Halloween party downtown in April, and to shout provocative sayings at a building... that was empty....
Seriously. The Police HQ was empty. It was Sunday.
This is feminism at its worst. The kind that makes adults shake their heads and wonder where this generation went wrong. Fighting against 'The Man' while carrying iPhones, designer brand clothing and Coach bags.
Great job, girls! You showed that one police officer. Now please never do this again.
I understand your frustrations. Fucking Toronto, eh?
Edit: Fighting against 'The Man' while carrying iPhones, designer brand clothing and Coach bags.
This part may be true, but I've noticed that the people who usually get involved in these things are the lower ranged middle-class student, probably majoring in a media program with too much time on their hands (a friend comes to mind), wearing nothing too chic. Just hipster/neo-hippy garb. The hardcore activists are more like what I've described, at least.
|
On April 05 2011 20:01 PrincessLeila wrote:Requoted for people who don't read the whole thread. Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 06:09 Navane wrote:
Even if dressing slutty had a causal relationship with getting raped, ppl still have the right to dress slutty and should be defended doing it.
We all know free speech has a causal relationship with getting killed. Yet we still have the right to free speech and should be defended doing it.
That's really not worth quoting for the girls' defense. It makes perfect sense in the ideal world, but you can't be so naive.
The reality is, people (strangers) would only "defend" the girl in hindsight, post-rape. Why would I look at a girl dressed like a "slut", on the subway for example, and think, "yeah, you go girl! You show 'em you can dress like a slut!". In the real world, I'd either stare for a few seconds and get a bit turned on, or if she wasn't my type I'd dismiss her.
|
"Just 'cause I'm a slut doesn't mean I want to be raped," said one female protester, according to CNN affiliate CTV.
so what does it mean then?
|
On April 05 2011 22:48 Kalingingsong wrote:Show nested quote +"Just 'cause I'm a slut doesn't mean I want to be raped," said one female protester, according to CNN affiliate CTV. so what does it mean then?
She's loose with her body and doesn't respect herself sexually, but at least she wants the final say on whether she has sex or not. I think it's like the difference between a vegetarian and a vegan. She likes her salad tossed, but doesn't want the cream dressing.
If you know what I mean.
|
...I myself believe he still should be employed; He is entitled to his opinion and it is most likely alot more educated then these gals. I am sure he has had his unwanted due share of experience with sexual assaults, and maybe has found th...ere to be some sort of correlation. Should he say nothing, when possibly some of these crimes have been sickly stirred by a sexual predators lust for a provocatively clad woman?. The key word here is sick; The men that commit these heinous crimes are not rational, riteous, upstanding human beings, who are capable of being educated on a "womens right to wear a mini-skirt", they are sick, deranged hunters who may in fact stalk out the most "appetizing" victim?. True, this is not always the case by any means, but from what I recall of my short-skirt, bar-hopping days as a young woman, I 100% agree with this officers notion. I received a far greater deal of unwanted, inappropriate, sexually- based attention than my more subdued, moderately dressed counterparts. It wasn't right or fair back then, and it isn't right or fair today, but unfortunately that is just the sad reality of the world we live in. Maybe these ladies should take up a cause to fight for something to promote the beauty and value of "what's inside a women" rather than placing such high value on the external?,...Just a thought.
|
On April 05 2011 22:48 Kalingingsong wrote:Show nested quote +"Just 'cause I'm a slut doesn't mean I want to be raped," said one female protester, according to CNN affiliate CTV. so what does it mean then?
It means she's trying to be edgy just for the sake of it. "I can be a slut and you just have to deal with it." These are the creatures that come out during the events in Toronto, and it pisses you off if you watch them on TV.
Damn, it reminds me of when I was watching G20. Aside from the main instigators, there were a handful of people who went down and partook in the rioting because, "the government wasted too much money on it". What did they do? Broke store windows, destroyed police cars, vadalized city property. Really smart.
|
The amount of ignorance in this thread is making me noxious. People are actually defending this cop? I can't believe that a country like Canada hasn't come further in women's rights than this. If rape was a crime that mostly happened to men then the debate would never sound like this.
It's basicly the same logic as when people say that a gay couple deserves to get assaulted because they made out in public.
It means she's trying to be edgy just for the sake of it. "I can be a slut and you just have to deal with it." These are the creatures that come out during the events in Toronto, and it pisses you off if you watch them on TV.
WTF? so the women who feel that they can dress any way they want and still not get accused when being raped for "dressing provocative" are CREATUES? what about the guy raping women? what are they if women protesting against rape are creatures? ffs...
|
*Sigh* I am somewhat quiete ashamed of what is happening in my city nowadays.
I have never been deep into US, how are people dressed there?
|
On April 05 2011 22:48 Kalingingsong wrote:Show nested quote +"Just 'cause I'm a slut doesn't mean I want to be raped," said one female protester, according to CNN affiliate CTV. so what does it mean then?
Do you think "sluts" want to be raped ?
Sluts are called sluts because they have sex with too much people for the current moral views.
Or because they dress too sexy for the current moral views.
That NEVER meant they WANT to be raped !
The concept that someone could "want to be raped" is really totally idiotic.
Rape means UNWANTED sexual intercourse !!
This is ridiculous...
|
It doesn't matter how a woman dresses, she could be naked leaning over a park bench(just for the sake of argument), when someone is raped it is always the rapists fault no matter what, are they asking for it? Maybe they are asking for it but that is completely irrelevant, its like some jerk exercising their right of free speech to promote racism, sexism or any kind of prejudice/hate, they are just asking to be assaulted (in my opinion) but if I were to attack them I would be the criminal. (And rightfully so.)
|
On April 05 2011 23:55 fidelity wrote:The amount of ignorance in this thread is making me noxious. People are actually defending this cop? I can't believe that a country like Canada hasn't come further in women's rights than this. If rape was a crime that mostly happened to men then the debate would never sound like this. It's basicly the same logic as when people say that a gay couple deserves to get assaulted because they made out in public. Show nested quote +It means she's trying to be edgy just for the sake of it. "I can be a slut and you just have to deal with it." These are the creatures that come out during the events in Toronto, and it pisses you off if you watch them on TV. WTF? so the women who feel that they can dress any way they want and still not get accused when being raped for "dressing provocative" are CREATUES? what about the guy raping women? what are they if women protesting against rape are creatures? ffs...
Way to call people out for ignorance, and then display a show of it as big as anyone else in this thread.
Here's how it goes. People think that dressing like a slut might make it more likely that a potential rapist will target you over someone else. To justify this position, rape is a sexual act and sex is best done when turned on, and slutty clothes are designed to turn people on. People are free to dress as they will, but the fact is that no amount of law enforcement can stop bad people from doing bad things, it can only deal with the consequences.
Suggesting that people take defensive measures, well, that's arguable, but it's no reason to protest. Likewise, you can't just protest against rape. That's like protesting against murder. It's not like it's going to stop it from happening. Find me a case where a known rapist got off easy because someone was dressed provocatively, and protest that. These people give the act of protest a bad name.
Still, it's good to see that people here are still naive enough to refuse to acknowledge a difference between statistics and culpability. If white people are 2x as likely to be assaulted on a certain street, nobody's going to win a court case because they assaulted a white person on that street, but would you really fault a cop for suggesting that white people don't walk around that neighborhood?
Maybe it's a bit much, but I do trust that if police officers could actually prevent rape cases, they would. But the fact is that you can't be everywhere, and that sometimes there are means of prevention that law enforcement can't control.
|
On April 05 2011 21:07 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 20:01 PrincessLeila wrote:Requoted for people who don't read the whole thread. On April 05 2011 06:09 Navane wrote:
Even if dressing slutty had a causal relationship with getting raped, ppl still have the right to dress slutty and should be defended doing it.
We all know free speech has a causal relationship with getting killed. Yet we still have the right to free speech and should be defended doing it. I read it, and a lot of people by the way also say that you can expect to get killed if you say a lot of controversial shit. Not that you are at fault, but you could, not should, choose to manage your risk.
So should we advice people to stay quiet in order to avoid risks ?
It's called Fascism.
In this context the "choose to manage your risk" argument is simply cowardice.
B. Franklin once said :
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
Restricting freedom to gain security is wrong.
The right answer is not to restrict freedom, it is to fight and report crime.
Let's fight the bad guys, rather than tell the others to "avoid risks".
|
On April 05 2011 22:58 garlicface wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 22:48 Kalingingsong wrote:"Just 'cause I'm a slut doesn't mean I want to be raped," said one female protester, according to CNN affiliate CTV. so what does it mean then? It means she's trying to be edgy just for the sake of it. "I can be a slut and you just have to deal with it." These are the creatures that come out during the events in Toronto, and it pisses you off if you watch them on TV.
slut = someone that have sex with too much people for the current moral views.
Is there any law against "sluts" ?
some people are saying "I can be a slut and you just have to deal with it." ?
Yes, you have to deal with it !
Some people don't follow the moral, and there are no laws against it !
It's called freedom.
Deal with it.
Or go live in a country where moral and "common sense" > laws. There are plenty.
|
On April 06 2011 00:11 SharkSpider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 23:55 fidelity wrote:The amount of ignorance in this thread is making me noxious. People are actually defending this cop? I can't believe that a country like Canada hasn't come further in women's rights than this. If rape was a crime that mostly happened to men then the debate would never sound like this. It's basicly the same logic as when people say that a gay couple deserves to get assaulted because they made out in public. It means she's trying to be edgy just for the sake of it. "I can be a slut and you just have to deal with it." These are the creatures that come out during the events in Toronto, and it pisses you off if you watch them on TV. WTF? so the women who feel that they can dress any way they want and still not get accused when being raped for "dressing provocative" are CREATUES? what about the guy raping women? what are they if women protesting against rape are creatures? ffs... Way to call people out for ignorance, and then display a show of it as big as anyone else in this thread. Here's how it goes. People think that dressing like a slut might make it more likely that a potential rapist will target you over someone else. To justify this position, rape is a sexual act and sex is best done when turned on, and slutty clothes are designed to turn people on.
Yeah, commom sense is back...
Truthiness at its best.
You don't want to know.
You have a "logical" explanation that fits your views, why bother reading anything about the facts ?
And yes we can and we must protest, as long as people like you are more focused on the clothes of the victim rather than the fact that 15 out of 16 rapists never go in jail.
Because few rapes are reported.
Because when they are reported, people like you say "how was she dressed ?" to begin with.
And it seems the police does too.
Please read this : http://socialistworker.org/2011/03/24/blaming-an-11-year-old-victim
|
Here's how it goes. People think that dressing like a slut might make it more likely that a potential rapist will target you over someone else. To justify this position, rape is a sexual act and sex is best done when turned on, and slutty clothes are designed to turn people on. People are free to dress as they will, but the fact is that no amount of law enforcement can stop bad people from doing bad things, it can only deal with the consequences.
Can we stop pretending like men are somehow not accountable for their actions and not in control of themselves? If i see Miss Universe walk by naked i am pretty sure i could keep myself from raping her given the fact that i ain't a fucking monster.
If a person has their back to me and i have a knife i don't instantly decide to kill them cause it's easy.
If i a see someone drop his wallet i don't wait till he is around the corner to steal it.
If someone rapes someone then there is nothing about the situation that makes him less accountable. The rapist isn't driven to insanity by the sight of naked skin.
Someone said it before, if men were most likely to be raped this thread would not even exist.
|
On April 06 2011 00:15 PrincessLeila wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 21:07 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:On April 05 2011 20:01 PrincessLeila wrote:Requoted for people who don't read the whole thread. On April 05 2011 06:09 Navane wrote:
Even if dressing slutty had a causal relationship with getting raped, ppl still have the right to dress slutty and should be defended doing it.
We all know free speech has a causal relationship with getting killed. Yet we still have the right to free speech and should be defended doing it. I read it, and a lot of people by the way also say that you can expect to get killed if you say a lot of controversial shit. Not that you are at fault, but you could, not should, choose to manage your risk. So should we advice people to stay quiet in order to avoid risks ? It's called Fascism. In this context the "choose to manage your risk" argument is simply cowardice. B. Franklin once said : "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Restricting freedom to gain security is wrong. The right answer is not to restrict freedom, it is to fight and report crime. Let's fight the bad guys, rather than tell the others to "avoid risks".
Too idealistic. We aren't allowed to carry guns and knives in public. We aren't allowed to bring liquids onto airplanes. We aren't allowed to beat the shit out of people we don't like. We aren't allowed to give alcohol or tobacco to minors. We can't run red lights or speed. We gave up a ton of freedom for a ton of security, yet no one complains or believes the tradeoff wasn't worth it.
|
On April 06 2011 00:15 PrincessLeila wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 21:07 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:On April 05 2011 20:01 PrincessLeila wrote:Requoted for people who don't read the whole thread. On April 05 2011 06:09 Navane wrote:
Even if dressing slutty had a causal relationship with getting raped, ppl still have the right to dress slutty and should be defended doing it.
We all know free speech has a causal relationship with getting killed. Yet we still have the right to free speech and should be defended doing it. I read it, and a lot of people by the way also say that you can expect to get killed if you say a lot of controversial shit. Not that you are at fault, but you could, not should, choose to manage your risk. So should we advice people to stay quiet in order to avoid risks ? It's called Fascism. In this context the "choose to manage your risk" argument is simply cowardice. B. Franklin once said : "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Restricting freedom to gain security is wrong. The right answer is not to restrict freedom, it is to fight and report crime. Let's fight the bad guys, rather than tell the others to "avoid risks".
I don't think any less energy is being expended by telling people to avoid risks. They are still trying to get the bad guy. Still trying to stop the crime. You don't have to avoid the risks if you choose not to but it is the responsibility of those responsible for keeping us safe to let us know exactly what the risks are. Or we could just all go live in a bubble where our actions had no effect whatsoever on the people around us. Sadly, that isn't the case. If I were to disrespect you and lets say you were a violent person, I would be increasing the risk of being physically attacked by you. I should be able to tell you what I think and in a strictly legal since I wouldn't be wrong at all. However, that action carries some risk. I equate this police officer with saying something along the lines of "One of the ways to reduce the risk of being assaulted is to avoid insulting or provoking violent people." They don't identify the attackers. They aren't saying that the attackers are innocent and you deserved it for insulting them. They will still do their level best to make sure that they are held responsible for their crimes. They won't get a lighter sentence. All they are saying is that this behavior might possibly increase the risks. If it doesn't, good for you. If it does, we will still do our job in holding them responsible.
|
On April 06 2011 00:15 PrincessLeila wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 21:07 Silmakuoppaanikinko wrote:On April 05 2011 20:01 PrincessLeila wrote:Requoted for people who don't read the whole thread. On April 05 2011 06:09 Navane wrote:
Even if dressing slutty had a causal relationship with getting raped, ppl still have the right to dress slutty and should be defended doing it.
We all know free speech has a causal relationship with getting killed. Yet we still have the right to free speech and should be defended doing it. I read it, and a lot of people by the way also say that you can expect to get killed if you say a lot of controversial shit. Not that you are at fault, but you could, not should, choose to manage your risk. So should we advice people to stay quiet in order to avoid risks ? It's called Fascism. In this context the "choose to manage your risk" argument is simply cowardice. B. Franklin once said : "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." Restricting freedom to gain security is wrong. The right answer is not to restrict freedom, it is to fight and report crime. Let's fight the bad guys, rather than tell the others to "avoid risks".
Thinking that "fighting bad guys" can completely remove sexual assault from society is incredibly naive. People will never be able to have as much sex as they want to, as long as there is still freedom of consent, and there will always be people who are screwed up enough to take what they want regardless of law, consequences, etc. If politics, law, etc. can be changed to reduce this, then obviously that's fantastic, but complete removal is probably not possible. Until the day that crime simply ceases to exist, however, people have the right to know the dangers in society and that taking advantage of some freedoms can expose you to more risk than otherwise.
We let people smoke, but we do not do so without telling them that it's a bad idea. It's legal to send your kids to the playground alone, but no responsible parent would do so. We let people carry cash and credit cards, even though it would be possible to mandate that password-protected cards are used instead. None of these freedoms are restricted from anyone, but some times common sense forces us to consider the extent to which we use all of the freedoms we're afforded.
Sure, go by your gut reaction, call it fascism, use outdated quotes instead of trying to make a reasonable case, or make appeals to emotion, but in the real world, that doesn't change things. The sad truth about any society that isn't fascist is that when you get the right to interact with others without having a soldier staring down the barrel of a gun at you, you lose the right to expect to be protected in these situations, and people gain the right to murder, rape and assault anyone they can, provided they're willing to accept whatever consequences come of it.
|
Anyone and everyone can do what they want, when they want, how they want as long as it's within their point of view and understanding of what is right and wrong, they will do what they want. Give or take a few set backs like laws / society. This however only lasts so long.
It's been mentioned here that rapists rape for demeaning women, this is not always the case but it is a strong reason for a lot of them. Rapists who have bad experience over a gender dominating them or demeaning them repetativly will often times turn out to be abusers or rapists themselves toward that specific gender, can be in males and females.
In some cases the rapists don't need to have a style of clothing just attidude, place of work or even their hair style, color, bone structure. However that's nothing new or secret.
Some rapists are considered hunters, they stalk and hunt women for sport and to release themselves. It's considered nature for them like man against animal.
To really know why this person was taken and to consider the officers statement of dress less revealing and be less victimized is to know how many people follow that. Maybe do a toll on all the rapists and how they targetted them, and or why.
If rapists stalk for prey they will start low (genually) and then aim higher. The slutty / prostitutes / stand out people will be targetted first. Like serial murderers most start out with a lack of remorse and start at a young age with practice. Dogs, cats, even babies.
If a rapist goes for a quick release they will target easier targets or the ones that are most provoked.
However if they target something specific, it doesn't matter. It is more common though for teenagers and adults to rape co workers, school workers, friends and a lot of cases that don't get reported. I would say those people are the hard to get but wear revealing type clothing.
Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
