|
On April 05 2011 03:55 Mastermind wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 03:43 Zorkmid wrote: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 don't really agree with either of these statements. 1. I can't see how any level of horniness could bring on rape. 2. A girl that dresses like a slut may get more attention, but that's about all. 1. What other reason would someone rape for? 2. She is getting more attention because men are getting horny seeing here in revealing clothes.
It is absolutely astounding the amount of people who believe rape is predominately brought upon by horniness. People who rape others are not "more horny" than other people. They have other serious issues. Most noteably, control issues. And it's another reason why the overwhelming majority of rapes are not "random".
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
First, I'm happy to see the number of people in this thread that understand how victim blaming in any way (in cases of rape) not only enables rapists, but romanticizes the notion, in however small an extent, that rape is defensible or excusable in ANY way.
"Its your fault" and "you had poor judgment" are two completely different things (in practice, mode of dress should not be a mitigating factor in rape prosecutions). Just because you conflate the two doesn't mean that other people rationally don't. Oh, and accusing others of being pro-rape / enablers of such really doesn't add to the discussion. Its a complete red herring.
Also, the legal case you bring up also fairly irrelevant. The article makes no mention of the prosecution's argument (surely he/she must have had one relating to the jeans issue?), almost as if its intended to stir up public opinion than to actually present a factual account of the case...
Of course, a reporter would never do that, right?
In any case, let me draw the discussion back to the policeman's words, which say read:
Women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized
The "should" can either be interpreted as a moral judgment or a suggestion -- I think its the latter but maybe I'm being overly charitable.
"You shouldn't do X, to avoid Y" is very different from "If you do X, you deserve Y".
|
On April 05 2011 06:36 Atticus.axl wrote:Show nested quote +Here goes. I worked for a domestic violence shelter as an intake counselor, working directly with clients which are, quite often, victims of rape. I also worked at a women's center, providing legal services and referrals to the LGBTQ population, as well as victims of rape. Often, I would be the first person to approached by the victims for help or advice, with several occasions I can recall where the crime occurred the same day. As a result of this work, I had to know the official statistics that reached beyond the limited population I served. First, I'm happy to see the number of people in this thread that understand how victim blaming in any way (in cases of rape) not only enables rapists, but romanticizes the notion, in however small an extent, that rape is defensible or excusable in ANY way. Also, what I say here applies to male victims as well, as rape is not an issue limited by gender or sexuality, and I have had a large number of male clients. Second, I'm going to start addressing issues and posts in this thread. Obviously I can't get them all. If there is one you would like me to answer, please ask. On April 05 2011 04:36 checo wrote:
I think this data you guys are providing are kinda missleading. Some of you say dressing doesn't matter at all because most of the rapes hapend in the house of the victim or in the house of the criminal(a trust must been there for someone to enter or let enter in their home)
But thats only the data you get from the reported rapes that are way less than what is really hapening out there, yea its all especulation, but then again how do they decide if the victim was or not dress in a revealing way? It's not speculation. The only thing underreported is the number of rapes. "Causes," or false justifications for rape, remain consistent across cases that go immediately reported and cases that don't. As stated before (statistics are available earlier in the thread), the vast majority of rapes occur in the home, and the assailant is either a friend or family member. In all my time at both the shelter and the women's center, I have had only two cases (I've had many more cases than two) where women were raped by someone they just met. Only one where a woman was raped in public at night, and even then, it was a roommate that knew where she was going. On April 05 2011 04:35 meeyoop wrote:On April 05 2011 04:25 Torte de Lini wrote:On April 05 2011 04:23 Kamais_Ookin wrote:
In the article: "Just like sexual assault is not about appearance."
That made me lol, I'm 100% sure appearance has some relevance to it. No one is going to sexually assault a 400 pound gorilla of a women as opposed to someone more attractive. Anyways I agree with the officer, I'm not saying that it's the sole reason for rape because it isn't but, stop dressing like damn sluts, it doesn't help matters at all. That's a misconception, women are often raped based on their status, their relationship with the rapist and their position socially and/or in the workplace. It's almost never about looks and the incite such an idea is actually perpetuating the "blaming the victim" card. Often times, men who rape are attracted and aroused by the idea of submission, control and domination of the woman and not by her attire, looks or weight. They get even more excited when they resist or even eventually submit. Blaming the victim is enabling rapists. This is similar to allowing police officers to entice crimes from citizens. EVERYONE LISTEN TO THIS GUY. You have hit the nail on the head here, Torte. Whatever a rape survivor is wearing at the time has fuck all to do with the rapist's actions. To suggest otherwise is to blame the victim. Please put the focus on ending the kind of thinking that makes rapists think that they are allowed to victimize others, and not on the victims who did NOTHING AT ALL to provoke an attack. JFC, guys, this is the reason why so many rapes go unreported. Even the people who are supposed to be supporting victims the most are going to say things like "Well, what were you wearing?"  Exactly this. When the issue of clothing is brought up, I bring up this case. The school of thought that this officer, judge, and millions of people around the world adhere to allows cases like this to be judged in this way. On April 05 2011 04:09 travis wrote:wow im not gonna bother anymore, some things are just common fucking sense. why do you even think guys rape women in the first place. On April 05 2011 03:58 Torte de Lini wrote:On April 05 2011 03:56 Gene wrote:On April 05 2011 03:55 Mastermind wrote:On April 05 2011 03:43 Zorkmid wrote: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 don't really agree with either of these statements. 1. I can't see how any level of horniness could bring on rape. 2. A girl that dresses like a slut may get more attention, but that's about all. 1. What other reason would someone rape for? power Bingo, it's a question of power, and not sexual restraint. riiight. it might be, sometimes, but ... jesus, uthink that even accounts for the majority of rapes? wtf? Travis, throughout this thread you have been 100% dead wrong. It does, as plainly as I may state it, account for the vast majority of rapes. Also, cases where women are raped by friends or family members (which again, accounts for the vast majority of rapes,) revolve entirely around exerting power and control over someone that cannot successfully fight back. Rape has always been motivated by power and control, which are both synonymous with forced gratification. Your stance here is erroneous because it avoids the fact that regardless of circumstances, the assailant, male or female, is entirely to blame. Blaming the clothes is blaming the victim, and excuses the criminal. Furthermore, consent is not situational. A man or a woman does not even need to say no. If no consent is given, and intercourse occurs anyway, it's rape. Which brings me to this poster. On April 05 2011 03:49 AlexDeLarge wrote:
I believe the vast majority of police officers are total idiots, so arguing about a statement they made, whether right or wrong, is laughable.
But for the sake of argument, i'm gonna assume his statement "women shouldn't dress like such sluts and they complain about being raped" stems from his inner frustrations. His history of violence (natural from the profession he chose) coupled with his mediocre IQ and the fact that his primal animalistic brain takes priority over this intelligent side, leads me to believe he actually lusts deep down to "force his way" upon some hot, slutty girls he would normally never have acces to, being the lowly person that he is in society.
What do i think about this particular subject? While i don't approve of rape, some sluts simply have it coming for them sometimes. Let's not glorify women and say they are pure, innocent creatures who deserve only affection. I'm sure many of these girls, if they were put in a position of power and raw strength compared to men, they would abuse the hell out of us.
tl;dr skip to the story below
P.S. Funny story. One night i had some girl alone over my place. She ended up smoking a lot of weed and passed out almost completely (was maybe 10% conscious). I tried to make her feel comfortable, carried her to bed cuz she obviously wasn't feeling well, gave her a light massage etc.
But then i started getting a little bit horny. So i said, ahh what the hell. Fucked the shit out of her while she was 90% unconscious (this was basically our first date).
Now before you think i'm a despicable person, she did text me a few days later and said "had fun the other night. thanks for "raping" me :p". I later ended up in a relationship with her, rofl.
Would you guys consider what i did to her a criminal act of rape? Yes. You raped a woman who had no way of giving consent. Were you living in the state of California, and had I personally known you had done this, I would be obligated by law to report you to the police, and I would fully support them in a court to put you behind bars for a very long time. I had a girlfriend once that smoked a lot of pot when she was younger, and had this exact rape inflicted upon her. Whenever a movie advertisement, show, or situation (like reading a post like this) reminded her of that abuse, I sat up with her late into the night as she cried herself to exhaustion. She was the strongest personally I had ever met. This forum is not an appropriate platform for me to really say what I think of people like you. It's not a gray area. It's not ok because she dated you after. It's disgusting and horrible. To other posters, please feel free to ask questions if you have them.
Thanks for educating me.
So many people still have to learn the basic human rights and forget their "common-sense"...
If nobody implies that dresses justify the rape, why are we talking about how victims are dressed ?
It sounds like hypocrisy...
I'm tired of reading "Yes it's not the victim fault at all, blah blah blah, *but* if she didn't blah blah blah... increase risks blah blah blah"
Sorry, one can't say : "100% not the victim fault , but...".
The word "but" means one don't agree 100%.
Like someone said "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."
Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"...
Everything is in the "should not".
Speaking generally, everyone have the freedom to make mistakes and take dumb risks if it's not against the law... Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant. What is relevant is *what* happened and what the law says about it.
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"...
Alright, let me generalize your argument. The fact that something is a right invalidates all criticism of said thing.
Just because reproducing the stunts in Jackass is your First Amendment right doesn't mean that its morally wrong to advise against doing such.
Replace "stunts" with "having unprotected sex", "insulting strangers on the street", "not doing your homework", "playing with matches", etc. Same point.
Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant.
In the eyes of the prosecutor, yes.
In the eyes of citizens looking to protect themselves, no.
|
the problem with this arises through INDIVIDUALS political ideologies:
conservatives would agree more with the oppinion that: it is partially the woman's fault for dressing the way she does
whereas, a liberal ideology would agree more that: it is solely the perpetrators fault because people have the freedom to express themselves how they please (if dressing like a "slut" is one of those ways of expression.)
counter-intuitively, the conservatives actually believe in longer jail times for the perpetrator whereas liberals believe in less jail time which still boggles my mind but thats besides the point.
my personal take on it: people have the freedom to do what ever they want, and it shouldn't be infringed upon (by anyone including the government) unless the commonwealth of the people is in danger (within good reason). However, women [as this is the main group that are categorized as sluts] shouldn't be AS surprised if they get raped while wearing something scantily clad as they are basically being a "tease", which most guys hate teases first off and rapist obviously have no objections to violating someone else's personal freedoms. As for the punishment of the perpetrator: i believe that (he or she) should receive repressions of the fullest extent how many ever years in prison it may be.
edit: as for the official's word choice, it was probably the poorest word choice he could have made and should have made a public apology and done something else to prove he didn't mean what he said (although it is obvious he did).
|
On April 05 2011 06:44 Magic_Mike wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 06:32 ToxNub wrote:On April 05 2011 06:25 Magic_Mike wrote:
It seems people keep repeating the same arguments over and over without listening to the other side. LOOK!! I agree with you. Rape is the fault of the attacker only. Nobody else. Nobody is saying that here but one side of the argument seems to think we are. We are not. We are simply saying that by doing certain things, acting a certain way, saying certain things, or doing certain things for a living could raise the likelihood of a sexual attack. Should you be able to do whatever you want, act however you want, say whatever you want, and do whatever you want for a living? Hell yes. You SHOULD be able to. But this is reality. And in reality sometime certain things carry certain risks. It doesn't mean that it is your fault. That is not in any way, shape, or form what anybody that I've read in this thread so far is trying to say. No, you still don't get it. You're suggesting that people change their behaviour (that you admit they are entitled to) as if this is their responsibility to manage their risk. You can avoid calling this their "fault" but you are still making it their responsibility. It is not. It is their responsibility to manage their risk. [...]
No. If there are risks related to criminal behavior, it is not people responsibility to avoid crime ! It is the State responsibility to punish criminals. The State should not suggest that people have to avoid getting in trouble in order to lower crime.
Like, you know, don't dress "slutty"...
When all we see on TV is slutty-dressed singers...
How can people argue against it ?
|
Well, here's a funny thread for you... http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=209076
In that thread, a girl shares a picture of her signed cleavage from MLG (Huk and Destiny each got to sign a boob). What follows is a horde of horny responses which demonstrate that to many posters in that thread, this girl is in fact a nothing more than a sex object.
On April 05 2011 07:23 Draz wrote:
So is there no headshot so we can see if this girl was attractive or not?
On April 05 2011 07:19 redFF wrote:
Need some response from either HuK or Destiny here, was she hot?
On April 05 2011 07:19 Arterial wrote:
Yep, this queen's definitely got a bit of meat on her. She should be spewing creep tumors or at least larva injecting. Might wanna transfuse some of it off too.
On April 05 2011 07:41 Martyandborg wrote:
she's fat and has veiny spider web tits. fucking gross
User was temp banned for this post.
On April 05 2011 04:53 ShotgunMessages wrote:
oh man she better have sucked huks dick off.
Go Canada hahahahahaha :D
User was warned for this post
On April 05 2011 04:53 s.Q.uelched wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 04:37 Gemini_19 wrote:
What a gigantic picture.
Other than that that is hilarious xD Yet the fat chick still doesn't fit in the picture... User was warned for this post
One girl was grossed out and said so, which was followed by the horde attacking her, one guy even saying if she wants to share her feelings 'blog it' wtf?
Now the reason I'm posting in this thread is because it's the same kind of issues.
A girl behaves in a manner that is risque.
This is followed by an evidently testerone-induced response from many of the male respondents.
Now, assuming that this sexual attention was unwanted and unwarranted (yeah it's not rape, just harassment and objectification in this case), who's fault is it that this girl got so many demeaning and objectifying responses?
I'm pretty sure I can piss off almost everybody with my take on it. On the one hand, it's insulting to me and males in general to suggest that we can't behave civilly towards women if they engage in 'risque behaviors'. On the other hand, it's fairly obtuse to ignore the fact that if this girl had her arm signed instead of her rack, the response would have been less sexualized.
check out this exchange between a well-meaning guy and a grossed out girl.
On April 05 2011 07:02 Armut wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 06:51 stephls wrote:
I said I wouldn't post again, but I just want final thoughts.
1) I started this because I saw a post saying "gotta love girl gamers". It offended me as a girl gamer. Can anyone understand that?
2) I don't care about this girl whatsoever. She can do what she wants to do.
3) I admit what I said has flaws. I was just speaking my feelings, not trying to make an argument (like I said 5 times)
4) This has taught me that I will no longer say anything about women on team liquid
Now please, lets drop all this? There are thousands of men on this forum. I understand what you feel. I respect that. But what I will suggest to you -by the way reading your opinion I have more respect to you- let the people get treated the way they want. You don't have to be Einstein to know getting your boobs signed is not something that has zero sexuality. Why not your forehead or arm but your boobs ? It is not MEN trying to turn women into META, unfortunately it is the women themselves. About being a sexy symbol, if you do this and post a picture of your signed boobs, I am sorry, even the most modest man will have a blood flow to his penis regardless of the context. Even if this girl was doing this to help the sick from radioactiveness in Japan, the moment I look at it -it is basic biology- the moment I forget about Japan. So don't take offence for what all the women do, like I don't care what all men say or write here. You are individual, protect yourself  Note : A Man's body contains a limited amount of blood, and unfortunately it is not enough for the brain and the weewee at the same time (at least for a decent sized one - jk jk) we should stop posting for a while (jk jk)
Essentially he says "don't hold us guys responsible, it's just our biology". On that much I call BS. At the same time however, he's absolutely right that 'getting your boobs signed is not something that has zero sexuality'. And by posting this pic on the internet, she was directing this sexualized action at a mass of horny nerds...which was kinda dumb if you think about it.
Just to be clear about my opinion. Women are not in any way responsible for the actions of violence or harassment made against them by men. When it comes to harassment or unwanted sexual attention or sexual objectification, women would be well advised to take common-sense actions and precautions before dressing/behaving lewdly.
|
On April 05 2011 08:35 419 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"... Alright, let me generalize your argument. The fact that something is a right invalidates all criticism of said thing. Just because reproducing the stunts in Jackass is your First Amendment right doesn't mean that its morally wrong to advise against doing such. Replace "stunts" with "having unprotected sex", "insulting strangers on the street", "not doing your homework", "playing with matches", etc. Same point. Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant. In the eyes of the prosecutor, yes. In the eyes of citizens looking to protect themselves, no.
This thread is not about "how to avoid getting raped".
It's around the question : "are people responsible for their own likelihood of being raped".
|
I am totally in support of the destigmatization of "slutty" behavior for women. The fact that promiscuous women are "slutty" while promiscuous men are "players" is one of the most obnoxious double standards in modern Western society. And along with that double standard goes the idea that a woman that gets raped is ever "asking for it." That idea is totally ridiculous.
What does annoy me, however, is the women that go out partying all the time in "slutty" clothes and hook up every weekend, and then turn around and act all uppity and complain about all guys are douchebags who are only interested getting in their pants. But that's another topic...
|
Women should be able to wear anything they want without being blamed for their own rape. By saying that "dressing slutty" incites rape, you're by extension declaring that women should only dress covered up and conservatively otherwise they're asking to be raped. Isn't that was Muslim women are forced to do with wearing a hijab that only shoes their face and hands? Do you think that is the "right" way for women to dress and should be forced upon all women otherwise they're just asking for rape? Not that it stops rape, women wearing hijabs are raped all the time, and they're stoned for reporting it since their culture blames the woman for being raped. Do we want to adopt that same cultural oppression of women?
A man who intends to rape a woman is going to do it regardless of what she wears. Rapists often know and stalk their targets, it isn't just a "hey you look slutty" whim out of nowhere. Even rapists who go hunting for victims doesn't pick women based on slutty clothes, rapists pick victims based on vulnerability. If it's a small woman alone at night with no one around, she's more likely to get raped regardless of what she's wearing, simply due to her vulnerable position. You always hear about the rapist that assaults a woman walking alone somewhere. You don't hear about the rapist who grabs a slutty girl out of a crowd because he wouldn't put himself in the crowd where he is likely to get caught.
|
On April 05 2011 08:49 PrincessLeila wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 08:35 419 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"... Alright, let me generalize your argument. The fact that something is a right invalidates all criticism of said thing. Just because reproducing the stunts in Jackass is your First Amendment right doesn't mean that its morally wrong to advise against doing such. Replace "stunts" with "having unprotected sex", "insulting strangers on the street", "not doing your homework", "playing with matches", etc. Same point. Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant. In the eyes of the prosecutor, yes. In the eyes of citizens looking to protect themselves, no. This thread is not about "how to avoid getting raped". It's around the affirmation : "are people responsible for their own likelihood of being raped".
from the linked article: Speaking to students at York University about community safety tips, Sanguinetti said, “Women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized,” according to media reports.
This is what set off the whole debate. "how to avoid getting raped". I think 419 has a point, in fact.
|
On April 05 2011 08:49 PrincessLeila wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 08:35 419 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"... Alright, let me generalize your argument. The fact that something is a right invalidates all criticism of said thing. Just because reproducing the stunts in Jackass is your First Amendment right doesn't mean that its morally wrong to advise against doing such. Replace "stunts" with "having unprotected sex", "insulting strangers on the street", "not doing your homework", "playing with matches", etc. Same point. Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant. In the eyes of the prosecutor, yes. In the eyes of citizens looking to protect themselves, no. This thread is not about "how to avoid getting raped". It's around the affirmation : "are people responsible for their own likelihood of being raped".
Yes, but society is also responsible for making the choice less necessary to begin with.
If you drive really slowly and carefully you don't need really good brakes. That doesn't mean car makers can stop researching brakes.
It might be the case that dressing promiscuously raises the risk of being raped, and in that case dressing promiscuously isn't really a good idea. The point is though that this shouldn't be the case, which is I believe what these women are saying. I doubt any of them would go waddling around half-naked in a back alley saying "la la la la you can't rape me".
|
On April 05 2011 08:57 aidnai wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 08:49 PrincessLeila wrote:On April 05 2011 08:35 419 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"... Alright, let me generalize your argument. The fact that something is a right invalidates all criticism of said thing. Just because reproducing the stunts in Jackass is your First Amendment right doesn't mean that its morally wrong to advise against doing such. Replace "stunts" with "having unprotected sex", "insulting strangers on the street", "not doing your homework", "playing with matches", etc. Same point. Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant. In the eyes of the prosecutor, yes. In the eyes of citizens looking to protect themselves, no. This thread is not about "how to avoid getting raped". It's around the affirmation : "are people responsible for their own likelihood of being raped". from the linked article: Show nested quote +Speaking to students at York University about community safety tips, Sanguinetti said, “Women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized,” according to media reports. This is what set off the whole debate. "how to avoid getting raped". I think 419 has a point, in fact.
And what point does it makes about the question "are people responsible for their own likelihood of being raped" ?
Edit : and no, i'm sorry, this thread is not about "how to avoid getting raped"...
Edit2 : I'm sure there are plenty of things you can do to avoid getting raped... This is not the point...
|
the problem is with the men who want to rape people not with the women who dress like sluts. i don't respect sluts (not the same as dressing like one mind you) but to act like women who are raped at fault because of what they wore is really retarded when they're the victims
|
Russian Federation3631 Posts
Women should be able to wear anything they want without being blamed for their own rape. By saying that "dressing slutty" incites rape, you're by extension declaring that women should only dress covered up and conservatively otherwise they're asking to be raped.
Non sequitur. No one's claiming any inciting of actions, or, if so, that such inciting is a valid legal defense.
What I'm arguing here:
However, there may well be a correlation between women choosing to dress in certain ways and their chances of getting raped. Yes / no? If yes:
Is it unreasonable to communicate this fact to responsible women? Yes / no?
***
In a less inflammatory context, is suggesting people lock their bikes an implicit 'blaming the victim' of bike thefts? And if so, should these suggestions be discouraged?
In a slightly more inflammatory context, is suggesting children not to get in the cars of strangers an implicit 'blaming the victim' of abductions? And if so, should these suggestions be discouraged?
***
Not that it stops rape, women wearing hijabs are raped all the time, and they're stoned for reporting it since their culture blames the woman for being raped. Do we want to adopt that same cultural oppression of women?
This is what happens when you double down on a very tenuous line of the argument. Slippery slope arguments are valid if used carefully -- but I have never seen this rare creature on the TL forums, unfortunately...
PS holy shit im a zergling I post too much
|
On April 05 2011 09:00 Redmark wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2011 08:49 PrincessLeila wrote:On April 05 2011 08:35 419 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +Come on, it's basic freedom. How can some people suggest that victims should not have dressed "slutty"... Alright, let me generalize your argument. The fact that something is a right invalidates all criticism of said thing. Just because reproducing the stunts in Jackass is your First Amendment right doesn't mean that its morally wrong to advise against doing such. Replace "stunts" with "having unprotected sex", "insulting strangers on the street", "not doing your homework", "playing with matches", etc. Same point. Once a crime happened, *why* the victim has been involved is irrelevant. In the eyes of the prosecutor, yes. In the eyes of citizens looking to protect themselves, no. This thread is not about "how to avoid getting raped". It's around the affirmation : "are people responsible for their own likelihood of being raped". Yes, but society is also responsible for making the choice less necessary to begin with.
what choice are you talking about ?
the choice to rape ?
is it necessary ???
It might be the case that dressing promiscuously raises the risk of being raped, and in that case dressing promiscuously isn't really a good idea. The point is though that this shouldn't be the case, which is I believe what these women are saying.".
you are saying : "There will always be rapes... Victims should learn to not to incite them."
This is ridiculous.
Try with murder :
"There will always be murder... Victims should learn to not to incite them."
|
There is something I want to address after skimming through the comments:
There is no sure way to conduct research in hopes of finding legitimate statistical evidence that correlates victims of rape to their attire. You would need a control group (easy), and then the group dressed like sluts... who would then maybe or maybe not be raped. It's just an unethical trial and can never happen. That said, when someone says they believe the clothing can affect the crime, don't jump in and say something like, "where's your proof?" or, "there aren't any statistics proving it".
My opinion is that women should take it upon themselves to dress appropriately, or at least exercise some safety unless they want to get raped. I don't mean to sound harsh, but let me use another example: don't expect to cross the road without getting hit by a car if you don't look both ways first.
Regardless, rape is rape, and the victim should not be held accountable. The accused should receive the full punishment and be held fully responsible for his actions.
Edit: It upsets me when certain groups will only pull the negative aspects from a situation like this and turn it into a shitstorm. I wish they could turn it into a learning experience. Taking my crossing the road example again:
Let's say a kid crossed the road without looking and was killed by a passing car, and someone called him stupid for doing so. Some people ("certain groups" from above for the sake of consistency in the analogy) would only criticize the person who called the kid stupid. I just wish they would use that energy to educate kids about looking twice before crossing the road.
|
Female:
Age
Gender
Race
Social Status
Predictability of Schedule
Their normal attire/Appearance
I believe that the rapist filter out all the women until they find one that fits their likes from the list above. Then they find an opportune moment to take them.
This is the typical kidnapping rape case not the date rape ones.
|
This is yet another one of those sad few thread that make me ashamed to have 1k posts on this forum.
It's hard enough to explain ESPORTs to females without having the argument "it's a great and mature community" swept from under your feet time and time again.
The ignorance displayed by some becomes the shame of all.
Imagine for a second that all you say is true. That the cause of rape is lust and that lust is triggered by female clothing. You do realize that if we lived in a matriarchal society and that was how things work - every single male would be castrated at puberty save for a few selected specimen who would be kept for breeding purposes. Young boys would be brought up by their eunuch fathers and there would be inquisitorial squads tracking down uncastrated males.
|
On April 05 2011 09:22 garlicface wrote:
There is something I want to address after skimming through the comments:
There is no sure way to conduct research in hopes of finding legitimate statistical evidence that correlates victims of rape to their attire. You would need a control group (easy), and then the group dressed like sluts... who would then maybe or maybe not be raped. It's just an unethical trial and can never happen. That said, when someone says they believe the clothing can affect the crime, don't jump in and say something like, "where's your proof?" or, "there aren't any statistics proving it".
Well the fact that "clothing can affect the crime" *is* "common sense" knowledge. It means it worth nothing. Reality is rarely how we expected it to be before looking at it.
There are statistics strongly suggesting that rape doesn't correlate with slutty-dressing. But ok, go with your "common sense".
Indeed, it's called "how you want the world to be" :
My opinion is that women should take it upon themselves to dress appropriately, or at least exercise some safety unless they want to get raped. I don't mean to sound harsh, but let me use another example: don't expect to cross the road without getting hit by a car if you don't look both ways first.
Regardless, rape is rape, and the victim should not be held accountable. The accused should receive the full punishment and be held fully responsible for his actions.
the common flawed "not the victim responsibility, but..." arguement...
My opinion is that men should begin to support women against rape rather than tell them to dress properly.
Edit : i know that not all rape victims are women, but it seems to me that the debates revolves around proper female behavior. It's sad.
Edit2 : "at least exercise some safety unless they want to get raped" ?? Are you jocking ? Am i being trolled ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
