|
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. 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.
The fact that the term "dressing like a slut" is used already speaks to double standards and a misogynistic mindset on the police officer. Dressing comfortably when the weather is turning warm doesn't mean somebody is dressing like a slut. I actually see guys shirtless pretty often here and nobody calls them sluts.
|
On April 06 2011 00:25 zalz wrote:Show nested quote +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.
Way to completely miss the point. I fully acknowledge that people who commit sexual assault are horrible, awful people and should take all of the blame they can get. How does saying they exist and that we can't always control their actions take anything away from that? Maybe you can control yourself, but the fact that rape exists is literal proof that you're wrong in assuming everyone can and will.
If I go out and start systematically murdering anyone who wears yellow, I am accountable, I'm a horrible murderer, and I should be executed or put away for life or wahtever, but would you fault the cops for asking you not to wear yellow until I'm caught?
|
On April 06 2011 00:28 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 00:15 PrincessLeila wrote: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.
Of course there are laws... lol
You think freedom is not compatible with laws ?
You don't understand what is called freedom.
Freedom don't means you can do anything.
Freedom is more something like "you can do anything you want if that don't put others at risk."
That's why there are LAWS.
What are you guys told in school ?
What do you think freedom means ? Anarchy ?
|
On April 06 2011 00:24 PrincessLeila wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 00:11 SharkSpider wrote: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
Am I in any way a proponent of blaming the victim? No, I'm not. Do I know all the facts about sexual assault? No, neither do you. And guess what? I agree with you when you say that rapists being out of jail is a bad thing, I don't like the fact that people are too afraid to report rapes, and I would never look at an actual rape case and start with 'how was she dressed?', so you can cut the straw man garbage and argue against me if you're going to quote my posts like that, not the ridiculous, cooked up image you seem to have of anyone who dares to suggest that the world isn't black and white and that justice can't always win.
|
When a man is drunk and some hot chick dresses like a slut, well....
No offense, but whilst rape is unjustifiable, when stoned and wasted people's minds are addled, and when they see some hot chick dressed normally, even then they can restrain themselves, but not when a chick is basically wearing nothing. Those chicks that get raped are dressed in a way to seduce men. Its a well known fact.
|
On April 05 2011 16:42 CarlyZerg wrote:
Just gonna chime in with my only experience on the matter. I am a male, heterosexual American. When I went to India with my University class, there were 18 women and 4 men (myself included) with the trip. Several of the women experienced varying degrees of sexual objectification and violence, up to and including rape. My girlfriend, who was on the trip with me, made a point to dress un-provocatively, ie covering skin at all times. She is convinced this contributed to the fact she was not assaulted in any way. My instinct is to agree with her.
I wish we lived in a world where women were free to do and dress as they pleased. I do what I can to contribute to that world. But in the world we currently have, the one where we really live every day, the simple fact of the matter is that the way a woman dresses influences the amount of respect she gets from random males in public settings, which in turn influences the chances she'll be sexually victimized.
I find this unjust and repulsive, but it's the way it is. When my girlfriend goes to shady neighborhoods to tutor, I encourage her to wear a hoodie because I think it makes her less likely to be targeted. To all young people, I encourage you to do your part to change the world so that our children do not have to deal with such a travesty. But in the meantime I prefer to deal with the real world, not the ideal one, when thinking about the people I love.
TLDR; It sucks, but the way a woman dresses does influence her chance of being targeted for sexual violence IMO.
 This actually depresses me quite a bit because in my experience it doesn't matter what I wear to some people. If I go somewhere I don't exactly feel safe, I make it a point to cover up...but every single time I've been catcalled, it was when I was in sweatpants and a hoodie, with messy hair and no makeup - meaning, I looked like shit but these guys STILL wanted to demean me. IMO, it's not so much what a woman wears but more the fact these men just want someone to scare and humiliate, and she is an easy target just by existing. It just feels so hopeless, you know?
Obviously, catcalling is not on the same level as rape, but I think the same concept applies here. I really don't think that there's a way to minimize your risk of being raped based on clothing alone. People who are rapists will do it no matter what the victim is wearing. Saying that a victim increased her risk of being victimized somehow is just giving the rapist person an excuse for his behavior. :/
|
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. 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.
Sorry, I don't see my ignorance. I was kind of angry when I wrote the post so might be badly written.
Rape isn't purely a sexual act, I can't see how you can deny that. It's first and foremost about men(mostly) proving to themself and the women that they are stronger and more powerful than them. There's never been a study that proves that wearing a "slutty" outfit makes you more likely to get raped. So there goes your "common sense" argument out the window.
Then we have the fact that rape is the most under-reported violent crime in america as well as in most othere countries. Because of the shame, and because if you to trial you'll get asked what you were wearing, if you were drunk, if you sleep with many men etc. I think the protests where about more than this certain case.
There's a big difference between telling a person that they shouldn't be at a certain place at a certain time because you are at a higher risk of being vulnerable to a crime and implying to someone that they deserved it because of the way they were dressed.
I trust police officers in general too, I don't think that this one is a horrible person or anything like that. But to say that the women in this clip didn't have a reason to protest or that they are "creatures" is just fucked up. But the fact is that police officers(who are mostly men) have a bad rep in rape cases, just not in america or canada, but all over the world. I'm going to say this again, if rape whas something that mostly happened to men, they would NEVER have to answer to the questions women are asked in court today.
|
Saying that a victim increased her risk of being victimized somehow is just giving the rapist person an excuse for his behavior. :/
qft
|
On April 06 2011 01:11 meeyoop wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 16:42 CarlyZerg wrote:
Just gonna chime in with my only experience on the matter. I am a male, heterosexual American. When I went to India with my University class, there were 18 women and 4 men (myself included) with the trip. Several of the women experienced varying degrees of sexual objectification and violence, up to and including rape. My girlfriend, who was on the trip with me, made a point to dress un-provocatively, ie covering skin at all times. She is convinced this contributed to the fact she was not assaulted in any way. My instinct is to agree with her.
I wish we lived in a world where women were free to do and dress as they pleased. I do what I can to contribute to that world. But in the world we currently have, the one where we really live every day, the simple fact of the matter is that the way a woman dresses influences the amount of respect she gets from random males in public settings, which in turn influences the chances she'll be sexually victimized.
I find this unjust and repulsive, but it's the way it is. When my girlfriend goes to shady neighborhoods to tutor, I encourage her to wear a hoodie because I think it makes her less likely to be targeted. To all young people, I encourage you to do your part to change the world so that our children do not have to deal with such a travesty. But in the meantime I prefer to deal with the real world, not the ideal one, when thinking about the people I love.
TLDR; It sucks, but the way a woman dresses does influence her chance of being targeted for sexual violence IMO. This actually depresses me quite a bit because in my experience it doesn't matter what I wear to some people. If I go somewhere I don't exactly feel safe, I make it a point to cover up...but every single time I've been catcalled, it was when I was in sweatpants and a hoodie, with messy hair and no makeup - meaning, I looked like shit but these guys STILL wanted to demean me. IMO, it's not so much what a woman wears but more the fact these men just want someone to scare and humiliate, and she is an easy target just by existing. It just feels so hopeless, you know? Obviously, catcalling is not on the same level as rape, but I think the same concept applies here. I really don't think that there's a way to minimize your risk of being raped based on clothing alone. People who are rapists will do it no matter what the victim is wearing. Saying that a victim increased her risk of being victimized somehow is just giving the rapist person an excuse for his behavior. :/
You're right. But those guys do it when they're with their friends. I know, lol. But they don't do shit when there's a group of people. Go out with friends; walk home with friends, and in general you should be safe.
|
On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
The fact that the term "dressing like a slut" is used already speaks to double standards and a misogynistic mindset on the police officer.
There's double standards everywhere, nothing strange or terrible about it. Also, it's not a double standard since guys don't wear clothing that barely cover their bodies, thus guy wear =/= girl wear.
On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
Dressing comfortably when the weather is turning warm doesn't mean somebody is dressing like a slut.
Guys can dress comfortably in hot weather without short shorts or miniskirts.
On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
I actually see guys shirtless pretty often here and nobody calls them sluts.
I believe the common term for them is either disgusting or douchebag, depending on their build.
|
On April 06 2011 01:25 Dismantlethethroat wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:11 meeyoop wrote:On April 05 2011 16:42 CarlyZerg wrote:
Just gonna chime in with my only experience on the matter. I am a male, heterosexual American. When I went to India with my University class, there were 18 women and 4 men (myself included) with the trip. Several of the women experienced varying degrees of sexual objectification and violence, up to and including rape. My girlfriend, who was on the trip with me, made a point to dress un-provocatively, ie covering skin at all times. She is convinced this contributed to the fact she was not assaulted in any way. My instinct is to agree with her.
I wish we lived in a world where women were free to do and dress as they pleased. I do what I can to contribute to that world. But in the world we currently have, the one where we really live every day, the simple fact of the matter is that the way a woman dresses influences the amount of respect she gets from random males in public settings, which in turn influences the chances she'll be sexually victimized.
I find this unjust and repulsive, but it's the way it is. When my girlfriend goes to shady neighborhoods to tutor, I encourage her to wear a hoodie because I think it makes her less likely to be targeted. To all young people, I encourage you to do your part to change the world so that our children do not have to deal with such a travesty. But in the meantime I prefer to deal with the real world, not the ideal one, when thinking about the people I love.
TLDR; It sucks, but the way a woman dresses does influence her chance of being targeted for sexual violence IMO. This actually depresses me quite a bit because in my experience it doesn't matter what I wear to some people. If I go somewhere I don't exactly feel safe, I make it a point to cover up...but every single time I've been catcalled, it was when I was in sweatpants and a hoodie, with messy hair and no makeup - meaning, I looked like shit but these guys STILL wanted to demean me. IMO, it's not so much what a woman wears but more the fact these men just want someone to scare and humiliate, and she is an easy target just by existing. It just feels so hopeless, you know? Obviously, catcalling is not on the same level as rape, but I think the same concept applies here. I really don't think that there's a way to minimize your risk of being raped based on clothing alone. People who are rapists will do it no matter what the victim is wearing. Saying that a victim increased her risk of being victimized somehow is just giving the rapist person an excuse for his behavior. :/ You're right. But those guys do it when they're with their friends. I know, lol. But they don't do shit when there's a group of people. Go out with friends; walk home with friends, and in general you should be safe.
But I was with with friends when this happened! You do have a point, though. If I was by myself I would really start to worry about getting physically hurt, but I knew since I had someone else with me it probably wouldn't get to that point. Still scary, though. > <
|
On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
Sorry, I don't see my ignorance. I was kind of angry when I wrote the post so might be badly written.
Rape isn't purely a sexual act, I can't see how you can deny that. It's first and foremost about men(mostly) proving to themself and the women that they are stronger and more powerful than them. There's never been a study that proves that wearing a "slutty" outfit makes you more likely to get raped. So there goes your "common sense" argument out the window.
Umm, there are different types of rapes. Rapes also happen when people are drunk, and the guy gets too horny/drunk to control himself.
On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
There's a big difference between telling a person that they shouldn't be at a certain place at a certain time because you are at a higher risk of being vulnerable to a crime and implying to someone that they deserved it because of the way they were dressed.
Also, the police officer didn't imply anything, he simply said to avoid dressing too provocatively as a precaution.
On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
I'm going to say this again, if rape whas something that mostly happened to men, they would NEVER have to answer to the questions women are asked in court today.
There is a very similar thing: domestic violence against men. It's hugely unreported and occurs frequently. It's also not very well publicized or discussed because apparently androgyny doesn't exist.
|
On April 06 2011 01:33 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
I'm going to say this again, if rape whas something that mostly happened to men, they would NEVER have to answer to the questions women are asked in court today.
There is a very similar thing: domestic violence against men. It's hugely unreported and occurs frequently.
Absolutely.
Much like rape, domestic violence against men is a serious issue whose treatment by greater society and the justice system is tainted by an unconscious gender bias.
|
On April 06 2011 01:27 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
The fact that the term "dressing like a slut" is used already speaks to double standards and a misogynistic mindset on the police officer.
There's double standards everywhere, nothing strange or terrible about it. Also, it's not a double standard since guys don't wear clothing that barely cover their bodies, thus guy wear =/= girl wear. Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
Dressing comfortably when the weather is turning warm doesn't mean somebody is dressing like a slut.
Guys can dress comfortably in hot weather without short shorts or miniskirts. Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
I actually see guys shirtless pretty often here and nobody calls them sluts.
I believe the common term for them is either disgusting or douchebag, depending on their build.
What the hell? Do guys where you live wear coat and tie everywhere? I'm in LA. Wearing light clothing is normal here, even in places far from the beach.
If a woman wears fetish gear or all those slut accessories, it's one thing. But short shorts or miniskirts are pretty normal.
|
On April 06 2011 01:33 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
Sorry, I don't see my ignorance. I was kind of angry when I wrote the post so might be badly written.
Rape isn't purely a sexual act, I can't see how you can deny that. It's first and foremost about men(mostly) proving to themself and the women that they are stronger and more powerful than them. There's never been a study that proves that wearing a "slutty" outfit makes you more likely to get raped. So there goes your "common sense" argument out the window.
Umm, there are different types of rapes. Rapes also happen when people are drunk, and the guy gets too horny/drunk to control himself. Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
There's a big difference between telling a person that they shouldn't be at a certain place at a certain time because you are at a higher risk of being vulnerable to a crime and implying to someone that they deserved it because of the way they were dressed.
Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:25 fidelity wrote:
I'm going to say this again, if rape whas something that mostly happened to men, they would NEVER have to answer to the questions women are asked in court today.
There is a very similar thing: domestic violence against men. It's hugely unreported and occurs frequently. It's also not very well publicized or discussed because apparently androgyny doesn't exist.
Wait what? "the guy gets too horny/drunk to control himself" do you really believe that? Do you think that if truely believe that both sexes are equal and that women are worth as much as men you would rape someone because you're drunk?
I agree, domestic violence against men is a very under-reported crime and that horrible. But it's still more uncommon than domestic violence against women and isn't really comparable to rape. I hate the argument that because there's an under-reported crime against men, then that makes it okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women.
|
On April 06 2011 01:38 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:27 buhhy wrote:On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
The fact that the term "dressing like a slut" is used already speaks to double standards and a misogynistic mindset on the police officer.
There's double standards everywhere, nothing strange or terrible about it. Also, it's not a double standard since guys don't wear clothing that barely cover their bodies, thus guy wear =/= girl wear. On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
Dressing comfortably when the weather is turning warm doesn't mean somebody is dressing like a slut.
Guys can dress comfortably in hot weather without short shorts or miniskirts. On April 06 2011 00:36 andrewlt wrote:
I actually see guys shirtless pretty often here and nobody calls them sluts.
I believe the common term for them is either disgusting or douchebag, depending on their build. What the hell? Do guys where you live wear coat and tie everywhere? I'm in LA. Wearing light clothing is normal here, even in places far from the beach. If a woman wears fetish gear or all those slut accessories, it's one thing. But short shorts or miniskirts are pretty normal.
I'm in Canada, so take that as you will  Guys wear t-shirts, and shorts down to knees. Short shorts and miniskirts end at the upper thighs. There's a lot more skin showing.
Also, how provocative are you talking about?
|
On April 06 2011 01:40 fidelity wrote:
Wait what? "the guy gets too horny/drunk to control himself" do you really believe that? Do you think that if truely believe that both sexes are equal and that women are worth as much as men you would rape someone because you're drunk?okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women.
No, I say that being drunk/high/whatever is also a common cause for rape. Didn't you read that post earlier on from a TL.net who admitted to raping a girl while stoned?
On April 06 2011 01:40 fidelity wrote:
I agree, domestic violence against men is a very under-reported crime and that horrible. But it's still more uncommon than domestic violence against women and isn't really comparable to rape.okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women.
If it's severely under-reported, why would you say it is more uncommon that violence against women?
On April 06 2011 01:40 fidelity wrote:
I hate the argument that because there's an under-reported crime against men, then that makes it okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women.
It's an argument against people saying that if rape was against men, then shit like this wouldn't happen.
|
On April 06 2011 01:47 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:40 fidelity wrote:
Wait what? "the guy gets too horny/drunk to control himself" do you really believe that? Do you think that if truely believe that both sexes are equal and that women are worth as much as men you would rape someone because you're drunk?okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women. No, I say that being drunk/high/whatever is also a common cause for rape. Didn't you read that post earlier on from a TL.net who admitted to raping a girl while stoned? Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:40 fidelity wrote:
I agree, domestic violence against men is a very under-reported crime and that horrible. But it's still more uncommon than domestic violence against women and isn't really comparable to rape.okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women. If it's severely under-reported, why would you say it is more uncommon that violence against women? Show nested quote +On April 06 2011 01:40 fidelity wrote:
I hate the argument that because there's an under-reported crime against men, then that makes it okay for there to be an under-reported crime against women. It's an argument against people saying that if rape was against men, then shit like this wouldn't happen.
You seem to miss my point, being drunk/high/whatever is never the cause for rape. Believing that you have the right to someone elses body whatever they have to say about it is the cause . Being drunk/high/whatever is the trigger.
Because violence against women is also under-reported, of course it's hard to know for sure, but all evidence points to that women are more often the victim to domestic violence.
Ok, I understand your point and it's valid. Still I find a bit different. Men are probably treated badly by some cops and not believed in as much as they should but is that really comparable to being asked in court what you were wearing, how drunk you were, how many men you've slept with etc?
|
Way to completely miss the point. I fully acknowledge that people who commit sexual assault are horrible, awful people and should take all of the blame they can get. How does saying they exist and that we can't always control their actions take anything away from that? Maybe you can control yourself, but the fact that rape exists is literal proof that you're wrong in assuming everyone can and will.
The rapists comits rape because it is his personality. Raping a stranger isn't about sex, it's about domination and control.
If I go out and start systematically murdering anyone who wears yellow, I am accountable, I'm a horrible murderer, and I should be executed or put away for life or wahtever, but would you fault the cops for asking you not to wear yellow until I'm caught?
That falls flat because people would not wear yellow for a short period until you are caught and there is a direct link proveable between your hatred against yellow and your crimes.
You are asking all women to never wear "revealing" clothing, a phrase so loose it can mean anything from bikini's to a burqa where you can see the eyes.
Rapists will continue to rape, if it gets put out there that women shouldn't wear "revealing" clothing then women will still get raped and now they will also be told that they are partly responsible for being raped.
There is still not a single piece of evidence that proves that there is a link between wearing revealing clothing and being the victim of rape. This is one of those things people believe because "it sounds logical" wich is one of the worst things in the world.
People accept a lot of things because it sounds logical and it's always stupid to do so. It sounds pretty logical that when you beat your kid he will listen to you, but it never turns out to be a very effective tool to raise a child.
Do not accept an idea just because it's logical, require proof. There is no proof that reveals a link between the way you dress and the odds of being raped. If it was so obvious, it would exist and be shown.
It's just a very nasty idea that has gotten stuck in people's mind.
|
People seem to be confusing risk and responsibility. The culpable criminal is always responsible for the crime, no matter what other risk factors were present. Whatever degree other parties could've lowered the risk or otherwise dissuaded the crime does not make the criminal any less responsible. It does not suddenly become the bank's fault for getting robbed just because they could've invested in a more secure vault. Absolutely not.
So when people argue that dress is a risk factor in rape, they are not necessarily arguing that neglect of that risk factor suddenly shifts blame from the rapist to the victim. Some might be arguing such nonsense, but it certainly doesn't logically follow.
Rape, like many other issues that fall under sociology rather than science, is one of many human plights that is difficult to empirically analyze. I don't think we'll ever see comprehensive, definitive studies on it globally until all notions of shame disappear. So we're stuck either with complete skepticism, in which case we have absolutely nothing to say, or with intuitive, opinionated, "common-sense" type arguments.
I'm personally of the opinion that sure, any number of factors from homely attire to concealed carry could protect a woman from victimization and they can only benefit from considering them. I also think people in general are right to be incensed at the notion that all scantily dressed women desire to be victimized. I really hope that no one actually thinks that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
