|
On August 26 2012 12:38 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 11:59 Reason wrote:Why do you say this.... On August 26 2012 08:33 HULKAMANIA wrote:
Let's, for instance, go with the old hypothetical standby of a parent who robs a pharmacy at gunpoint because he or she cannot afford medication for his or her dying child. I don't think that parent is to blame at all but rather the system of healthcare that failed him or her. At worst, the parent is to blame for a lapse in judgement. As a jury member, however, would I vote to convict that parent for armed robbery? Of course
Or how about the example I mentioned before. It's a known fact that theft from vehicles is essentially a given in my city. Given that, would I blame myself if I left out something of value in my car and it got stolen? Yes, yes I would. The self-recriminations would be immense. It wouldn't be anyone's fault but my own. Does that mean that I think the culprit should be allowed to walk free? Absolutely not. Blameworthy =/= legally guilty.
and then say this.... On August 26 2012 09:31 HULKAMANIA wrote:
Well, I'm glad to say that I agree with you that blaming a woman, or any victim of sexual abuse, for what their attacker did to them is backwards and appalling. I think that such a conviction serves as an excellent common ground for any discussion about what improvements could be made to the way our courts and our societies deal with sexual predation in all its forms.
Very confusing. Anyway, Just because the crime is horrendous doesn't mean the victim is automatically immune to any blame, and it's also important to understand what that means. You don't penalise the criminal less because the victim acted with poor judgement, and you don't penalise the victim at all just because they acted with poor judgement. It's just acknowledging reality. Honestly I think this absolute phobia of partially "blaming" a victim is going to do more harm than good, actions have consequences, the more serious the crime is the more important it is to understand that and act upon it. I guess the short answer is that I was trying to shake hands, which I think is important after even heated disagreements. The longer answer is that the hypotheticals I was positing above were purposed simply to show that it is, in fact, reasonable to blame someone in a practical sense while still holding someone else legally responsible, that it's part and parcel of rule of law and all that. I think the reality of things is a bit messier than that, though, and that it's very important to treat victims of sexual crime (be they man, woman, or child) with respect and sympathy, to not play monday morning quarterback about what they might have done to more effectively safeguard themselves against their attackers. You could say the same of all crime victims, of course, and you'd be right. I just think that being taken advantage of sexually might put someone in a very vulnerable place psychologically, which probably demands some extra care. Ultimately, though, you're correct to point out that there is a discontinuity between my earlier statements and my more recent one. What can I say? You're the voice of Reason.
Yeah it felt like that's what you were doing, I just wanted to make sure. I hope you don't feel I was just pointing out the discontinuity for the sake of it, but it seemed like you weren't standing up for what you know is right.
I really like your following paragraph. I just wish every person in this thread who raged at somebody for daring to imply the victim was even partially to "blame" would understand what you've written there.
Well said, though it's a damn shame it doesn't go without saying.
|
Rape is what Violet did to Violet at MLG.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
United Kingdom3482 Posts
On August 26 2012 11:59 Reason wrote:
Just because the crime is horrendous doesn't mean the victim is automatically immune to any blame, and it's also important to understand what that means.
You don't penalise the criminal less because the victim acted with poor judgement, and you don't penalise the victim at all just because they acted with poor judgement.
It's just acknowledging reality.
Honestly I think this absolute phobia of partially "blaming" a victim is going to do more harm than good, actions have consequences, the more serious the crime is the more important it is to understand that and act upon it.
The problem is that the things women are blamed for in rape isn't something that can be reasonably expected of a free individual. Telling me to not leave my phone in my car has no negative effect on me. Telling me not to wear certain types of clothing has a fairly big negative effect and has a severe impact on my personal freedoms. There is also a large difference in the allowable things for each gender to do. I, as a man, am allowed to wear whatever I want out and flirt with as many girls as I like but women are not afforded the same freedom and are blamed if they do the same and are raped.
|
On August 26 2012 12:49 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 12:38 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 26 2012 11:59 Reason wrote:Why do you say this.... On August 26 2012 08:33 HULKAMANIA wrote:
Let's, for instance, go with the old hypothetical standby of a parent who robs a pharmacy at gunpoint because he or she cannot afford medication for his or her dying child. I don't think that parent is to blame at all but rather the system of healthcare that failed him or her. At worst, the parent is to blame for a lapse in judgement. As a jury member, however, would I vote to convict that parent for armed robbery? Of course
Or how about the example I mentioned before. It's a known fact that theft from vehicles is essentially a given in my city. Given that, would I blame myself if I left out something of value in my car and it got stolen? Yes, yes I would. The self-recriminations would be immense. It wouldn't be anyone's fault but my own. Does that mean that I think the culprit should be allowed to walk free? Absolutely not. Blameworthy =/= legally guilty.
and then say this.... On August 26 2012 09:31 HULKAMANIA wrote:
Well, I'm glad to say that I agree with you that blaming a woman, or any victim of sexual abuse, for what their attacker did to them is backwards and appalling. I think that such a conviction serves as an excellent common ground for any discussion about what improvements could be made to the way our courts and our societies deal with sexual predation in all its forms.
Very confusing. Anyway, Just because the crime is horrendous doesn't mean the victim is automatically immune to any blame, and it's also important to understand what that means. You don't penalise the criminal less because the victim acted with poor judgement, and you don't penalise the victim at all just because they acted with poor judgement. It's just acknowledging reality. Honestly I think this absolute phobia of partially "blaming" a victim is going to do more harm than good, actions have consequences, the more serious the crime is the more important it is to understand that and act upon it. I guess the short answer is that I was trying to shake hands, which I think is important after even heated disagreements. The longer answer is that the hypotheticals I was positing above were purposed simply to show that it is, in fact, reasonable to blame someone in a practical sense while still holding someone else legally responsible, that it's part and parcel of rule of law and all that. I think the reality of things is a bit messier than that, though, and that it's very important to treat victims of sexual crime (be they man, woman, or child) with respect and sympathy, to not play monday morning quarterback about what they might have done to more effectively safeguard themselves against their attackers. You could say the same of all crime victims, of course, and you'd be right. I just think that being taken advantage of sexually might put someone in a very vulnerable place psychologically, which probably demands some extra care. Ultimately, though, you're correct to point out that there is a discontinuity between my earlier statements and my more recent one. What can I say? You're the voice of Reason. Yeah it felt like that's what you were doing, I just wanted to make sure. I hope you don't feel I was just pointing out the discontinuity for the sake of it, but it seemed like you weren't standing up for what you know is right. I really like your following paragraph. I just wish every person in this thread who raged at somebody for daring to imply the victim was even partially to "blame" would understand what you've written there. Well said, though it's a damn shame it doesn't go without saying.
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense.
|
Northern Ireland25648 Posts
On August 26 2012 20:21 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 11:59 Reason wrote:
Just because the crime is horrendous doesn't mean the victim is automatically immune to any blame, and it's also important to understand what that means.
You don't penalise the criminal less because the victim acted with poor judgement, and you don't penalise the victim at all just because they acted with poor judgement.
It's just acknowledging reality.
Honestly I think this absolute phobia of partially "blaming" a victim is going to do more harm than good, actions have consequences, the more serious the crime is the more important it is to understand that and act upon it. The problem is that the things women are blamed for in rape isn't something that can be reasonably expected of a free individual. Telling me to not leave my phone in my car has no negative effect on me. Telling me not to wear certain types of clothing has a fairly big negative effect and has a severe impact on my personal freedoms. There is also a large difference in the allowable things for each gender to do. I, as a man, am allowed to wear whatever I want out and flirt with as many girls as I like but women are not afforded the same freedom and are blamed if they do the same and are raped.
It doesn't even have to be as restrictive as that.
Women can flirt and dress how they want in my view, the only sensible precautions that I would advocate above and beyond that are all relating to alcohol: Minding drinks, keeping friends close by and the likes.
In the smal sample size consisting of people I personally know, the only issues people have had around inappropriate male sexual behaviours (of varying degrees), were all related to intoxication and the diffiulties that can cause
|
On August 26 2012 20:59 Crushinator wrote:
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense.
+ Show Spoiler +
FYI when something "goes without saying" it means it is understood and accepted by everyone and doesn't need to be said. Sticking "the literal sense" onto the end doesn't change the meaning of it.
Woman goes out, dressed modestly, drinks with responsibility, goes home early or gets a lift home or walks home along a safe route, with friends.
Woman goes out, dressed immodestly, drinks too much, goes home late or walks home along a dangerous route, alone.
I can't believe you need the obvious spelt out for you. That's just a really basic example and is all that's required.
"Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped."
Leaving my iPhone on the seat of my car is a personal freedom that I shouldn't have to forfeit in order to avoid it getting stolen, but I do because that's the world we live in.
Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that.
On August 26 2012 20:21 imallinson wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 11:59 Reason wrote:
Just because the crime is horrendous doesn't mean the victim is automatically immune to any blame, and it's also important to understand what that means.
You don't penalise the criminal less because the victim acted with poor judgement, and you don't penalise the victim at all just because they acted with poor judgement.
It's just acknowledging reality.
Honestly I think this absolute phobia of partially "blaming" a victim is going to do more harm than good, actions have consequences, the more serious the crime is the more important it is to understand that and act upon it. The problem is that the things women are blamed for in rape isn't something that can be reasonably expected of a free individual. Telling me to not leave my phone in my car has no negative effect on me. Telling me not to wear certain types of clothing has a fairly big negative effect and has a severe impact on my personal freedoms. There is also a large difference in the allowable things for each gender to do. I, as a man, am allowed to wear whatever I want out and flirt with as many girls as I like but women are not afforded the same freedom and are blamed if they do the same and are raped.
You are "allowed" to wear whatever you want out and you are "allowed" to flirt with as many girls as you like, but if you step out of line you might just get the shit kicked out of you. Women have a lot more freedom in this respect.
Men and woman are different and as a result we each face (most of the time) a different set of rules to follow and a set of dangers to avoid. So what?
It's wise for individuals of either gender to exercise some responsibility when it comes to drinking, the amount you drink, who your drinking partners are, any other intoxicants you may ingest, how you are getting home etc
Saying this level of common sense can't be "reasonably expected of a free individual" is ludicrous.
|
If "dressing immodestly and drinking too much" increases the odds of a woman being raped, it still doesn't mean it's her fault. Using my car rather than staying at home increases my chances of being killed by a bad driver, but let's not put any fault on me if it happens. Sometimes you have to live life and it comes with hazards.
The thing with leaving your iPhone on your car seat is it's not a very valuable freedom to want to maintain.
|
On August 26 2012 23:22 Reason wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 20:59 Crushinator wrote:
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense. It's really simple. Woman goes out, dressed modestly, drinks with responsibility, goes home early or gets a lift home or walks home along a safe route, with friends. Woman goes out, dressed immodestly, drinks too much, goes home late or walks home along a dangerous route, alone. Crushinator have you ever been out on a Friday night ? lol I can't believe you need the obvious spelt out for you. "Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped." Leaving my iPhone on the seat of my car is a personal freedom that I shouldn't have to forfeit in order to avoid it getting stolen, but I do because that's the world we live in. Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that.
Statistically, you would be more likely to get raped if a friend or acquintance walks you home. I would bet the scenario you described is only a very small part of all rapes. But I suppose that isn't the point. My resistance to this determination is not because of it lacks truth, but because it lacks value. What is the point? Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things? Perhaps I am too sentimental.
Forfeiting your freedom to leave overpriced phones on the seat of your car isn't a big deal. I'm fine with that. An entire sex having to forfeit their right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone is a pretty big deal. It is not as mundane as leaving a phone out.
Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said.
|
On August 26 2012 23:45 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 23:22 Reason wrote:On August 26 2012 20:59 Crushinator wrote:
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense. It's really simple. Woman goes out, dressed modestly, drinks with responsibility, goes home early or gets a lift home or walks home along a safe route, with friends. Woman goes out, dressed immodestly, drinks too much, goes home late or walks home along a dangerous route, alone. Crushinator have you ever been out on a Friday night ? lol I can't believe you need the obvious spelt out for you. "Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped." Leaving my iPhone on the seat of my car is a personal freedom that I shouldn't have to forfeit in order to avoid it getting stolen, but I do because that's the world we live in. Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that. Statistically, you would be more likely to get raped if a friend or acquintance walks you home. I would bet the scenario you described is only a very small part of all rapes. But I suppose that isn't the point. My resistance to this determination is not because of it lacks truth, but because it lacks value. What is the point? Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things? Perhaps I am too sentimental. Forfeiting your freedom to leave overpriced phones on the seat of your car isn't a big deal. I'm fine with that. An entire sex having to forfeit their right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone is a pretty big deal. It is not as mundane as leaving a phone out. Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said.
At 3AM, a man is more likely to get robbed or stabbed by dressing wealthily, while drunk, and alone.
That isn't rape culture, it's the fact that criminals, of any sort, are more likely to prey on targets that are attractive or lucrative, more vulnerable due to alcohol consumption, and alone.
That isn't to say that a rape victim is at fault, no more than a man who got robbed is. However, they are guilty of leaving themselves more open to the crime, and it's up to them as to whether it's worth the risk. I for one enjoy walking the cities at 3AM, in expensive clothing, alone, because I like the atmosphere and it's a nice break from clubs, which I don't enjoy as much as my friends. I understand that I'm at a heightened risk of being robbed, but am willing to risk it for the simple pleasures I get from the walks.
|
On August 26 2012 23:51 RockIronrod wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 23:45 Crushinator wrote:On August 26 2012 23:22 Reason wrote:On August 26 2012 20:59 Crushinator wrote:
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense. It's really simple. Woman goes out, dressed modestly, drinks with responsibility, goes home early or gets a lift home or walks home along a safe route, with friends. Woman goes out, dressed immodestly, drinks too much, goes home late or walks home along a dangerous route, alone. Crushinator have you ever been out on a Friday night ? lol I can't believe you need the obvious spelt out for you. "Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped." Leaving my iPhone on the seat of my car is a personal freedom that I shouldn't have to forfeit in order to avoid it getting stolen, but I do because that's the world we live in. Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that. Statistically, you would be more likely to get raped if a friend or acquintance walks you home. I would bet the scenario you described is only a very small part of all rapes. But I suppose that isn't the point. My resistance to this determination is not because of it lacks truth, but because it lacks value. What is the point? Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things? Perhaps I am too sentimental. Forfeiting your freedom to leave overpriced phones on the seat of your car isn't a big deal. I'm fine with that. An entire sex having to forfeit their right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone is a pretty big deal. It is not as mundane as leaving a phone out. Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said. At 3AM, a man is more likely to get robbed or stabbed by dressing wealthily, while drunk, and alone. That isn't rape culture, it's the fact that criminals, of any sort, are more likely to prey on targets that are attractive or lucrative, more vulnerable due to alcohol consumption, and alone.
Yes, I don't claim that predators preying on drunk people walking alone is a result of ''rape culture''. So what?
|
On August 26 2012 23:36 Djzapz wrote:
If "dressing immodestly and drinking too much" increases the odds of a woman being raped, it still doesn't mean it's her fault. Using my car rather than staying at home increases my chances of being killed by a bad driver, but let's not put any fault on me if it happens. Sometimes you have to live life and it comes with hazards.
The thing with leaving your iPhone on your car seat is it's not a very valuable freedom to want to maintain.
The argument that how a woman dresses is a factor her chance of getting raped is bloody retarded!
|
On August 26 2012 23:53 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 23:51 RockIronrod wrote:On August 26 2012 23:45 Crushinator wrote:On August 26 2012 23:22 Reason wrote:On August 26 2012 20:59 Crushinator wrote:
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense. It's really simple. Woman goes out, dressed modestly, drinks with responsibility, goes home early or gets a lift home or walks home along a safe route, with friends. Woman goes out, dressed immodestly, drinks too much, goes home late or walks home along a dangerous route, alone. Crushinator have you ever been out on a Friday night ? lol I can't believe you need the obvious spelt out for you. "Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped." Leaving my iPhone on the seat of my car is a personal freedom that I shouldn't have to forfeit in order to avoid it getting stolen, but I do because that's the world we live in. Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that. Statistically, you would be more likely to get raped if a friend or acquintance walks you home. I would bet the scenario you described is only a very small part of all rapes. But I suppose that isn't the point. My resistance to this determination is not because of it lacks truth, but because it lacks value. What is the point? Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things? Perhaps I am too sentimental. Forfeiting your freedom to leave overpriced phones on the seat of your car isn't a big deal. I'm fine with that. An entire sex having to forfeit their right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone is a pretty big deal. It is not as mundane as leaving a phone out. Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said. At 3AM, a man is more likely to get robbed or stabbed by dressing wealthily, while drunk, and alone. That isn't rape culture, it's the fact that criminals, of any sort, are more likely to prey on targets that are attractive or lucrative, more vulnerable due to alcohol consumption, and alone. Yes, I don't claim that predators preying on drunk people walking alone is a result of ''rape culture''. So what?
I'm saying that making yourself vulnerable to attack isn't restricted to rape, and in all other crimes people take precautions to mitigate those chances. I am not saying that it's right that people should live in constant fear of rape, or that victims should be blamed. I AM saying that doing something excessive like walking around drunk and alone at night is not a good decision and has risks attached, for anyone. In fact, you could call it reckless and negligent.
On August 26 2012 23:55 yOngKIN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 23:36 Djzapz wrote:
If "dressing immodestly and drinking too much" increases the odds of a woman being raped, it still doesn't mean it's her fault. Using my car rather than staying at home increases my chances of being killed by a bad driver, but let's not put any fault on me if it happens. Sometimes you have to live life and it comes with hazards.
The thing with leaving your iPhone on your car seat is it's not a very valuable freedom to want to maintain. The argument that how a woman dresses is a factor her chance of getting raped is bloody retarded!
I'm a bit tired, so if you're being sarcastic here I'm sorry for taking you seriously.
It does have a factor in it. Dressing up yourself to appear "sexy" will increase your chances of being sexually assaulted, just as dressing up to make yourself appear rich increases your chances of being robbed.
I feel I've got to stress the fact that I'm not saying this is right, I'm saying this is how things are. Acknowledging that is the first step in prevention, and then eradication of a crime.
Well, hopefully. I don't see a time without criminals and monsters in the near future.
|
On August 26 2012 23:45 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 23:22 Reason wrote:On August 26 2012 20:59 Crushinator wrote:
I would think anyone would recognise that there are things you can and probably should do to avoid being the victim of a crime, any crime. But I have a hard time imagining any realistic scenario in which I would say a rape victim was reckless or negligent. Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped. In my eyes asking women to do this is not acceptable in the slightest. Then why the constant emphasis on hypothetical situations in which a woman is supposedly to blame? I cannot figure out the motive.
In other words. Maybe it should go without saying. In the literal sense. It's really simple. Woman goes out, dressed modestly, drinks with responsibility, goes home early or gets a lift home or walks home along a safe route, with friends. Woman goes out, dressed immodestly, drinks too much, goes home late or walks home along a dangerous route, alone. Crushinator have you ever been out on a Friday night ? lol I can't believe you need the obvious spelt out for you. "Wearing certain clothing and flirting are personal freedoms, that nobody should have to forfeit in order to avoid getting raped." Leaving my iPhone on the seat of my car is a personal freedom that I shouldn't have to forfeit in order to avoid it getting stolen, but I do because that's the world we live in. Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that. Statistically, you would be more likely to get raped if a friend or acquintance walks you home. I would bet the scenario you described is only a very small part of all rapes. But I suppose that isn't the point. My resistance to this determination is not because of it lacks truth, but because it lacks value. What is the point? Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things? Perhaps I am too sentimental. Forfeiting your freedom to leave overpriced phones on the seat of your car isn't a big deal. I'm fine with that. An entire sex having to forfeit their right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone is a pretty big deal. It is not as mundane as leaving a phone out. Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said.
+ Show Spoiler +Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said. But it still goes. That is the literal interpretation and the whole meaning of the sentence. Lol. 
Statistically? Link your source? I'm calling absolute bullshit. You are using another well known statistic and making your own incorrect assumptions based upon it. There's a good reason people (particularly women) are advised not to walk home alone late at night. You are just making stuff up to be perfectly honest t.t.
You are right that one single scenario I've described is only a very small part of rapes, and similarly the iPhone on the car seat is only a very small part of thefts, and you are also right that isn't the point. So don't bother bringing it up.
I've already made it clear in my post : "Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that."
You quote my post which includes this statement and then you still ask me this question "Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things?"
Do you even bother reading a post before you quote and disagree with it?
I don't think women are doing too little or too much to avoid rape. That's an absurd and impossible generalisation to make.
I don't think there should be efforts to advise all women not to do these things. Do what you want, but know the risks.
That's all.
What's all this "right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone"???
What world do you live in?
If you want to walk alone in a dangerous neighbourhood you are at a greater risk of attack/robbery/rape than if you do it with friends or in a safer neighbourhood.
Why do I feel like I am explaining the way the "grown up" world works to a child?
|
Why do I feel like I am explaining the way the "grown up" world works to a child?
I am perfectly aware of how the world works, there is no need to be condesecending
Fyi, in the literal sense, if something goes without saying, it is not said. But it still goes. That is the literal interpretation and the whole meaning of the sentence. Lol.
Yes, and that is exactly what I meant to say. I dispute the value of constantly bringing up that women do things that make them more at risk of rape. What is the point? While this is not necessarily victim blaming, it just isn't terribly interesting, it isn't disputed by anyone.
Statistically? Link your source? I'm calling absolute bullshit. You are using another well known statistic and making your own incorrect assumptions based upon it. There's a good reason people (particularly women) are advised not to walk home alone late at night. You are just making stuff up to be perfectly honest t.t.
I recall explicitly reading this interpretation of a statsitcal survery, it may be incorrect, but it is not my own. I will attempt to find it, but upon further consideration I find it likely that it is incorrect. I will tentatively concede this irrelevant point.
|
On August 27 2012 00:03 Reason wrote:
I've already made it clear in my post : "Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that."
You quote my post which includes this statement and then you still ask me this question "Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things?"
Do you even bother reading a post before you quote and disagree with it?
I don't think women are doing too little or too much to avoid rape. That's an absurd and impossible generalisation to make.
I don't think there should be efforts to advise all women not to do these things. Do what you want, but know the risks.
That's all.
What's all this "right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone"???
What world do you live in?
I would expect it to be a world where people take responsibility for and are held accountable for their own actions. Like not raping women who decided to "dress as you please, drink, and walk alone."
A world where your clothing lets people not only rape you, but also lets others tell you that you deserved it, isn't a nice, happy world.
|
On August 27 2012 00:26 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 00:03 Reason wrote:
I've already made it clear in my post : "Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that."
You quote my post which includes this statement and then you still ask me this question "Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things?"
Do you even bother reading a post before you quote and disagree with it?
I don't think women are doing too little or too much to avoid rape. That's an absurd and impossible generalisation to make.
I don't think there should be efforts to advise all women not to do these things. Do what you want, but know the risks.
That's all.
What's all this "right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone"???
What world do you live in? I would expect it to be a world where people take responsibility for and are held accountable for their own actions. Like not raping women who decided to "dress as you please, drink, and walk alone." A world where your clothing lets people not only rape you, but also lets others tell you that you deserved it, isn't a nice, happy world.
The person to blame is the rapist, the robber, the criminal, in all cases. No one will dispute it, and no one will blame the victim, at least, no one with any form of sense or logic will.
However, so long as you acknowledge that rapists, robbers and criminals exist, you've got to also acknowledge that you are putting yourself at risk if you put yourself in a scenario wherein you can be harmed, in any way. This statement isn't saying that victims deserve blame, it's that criminals can, and will, take advantage of everything and anything. Walking through downtown Detroit, covered in jewelry, counting your hundred dollar stacks, and lamenting the fact you are alone and no one knows where you are is a sure way to get robbed.
Is it the guys fault he got robbed there? No, it's the criminals. But it could have been prevented. The risk could have been mitigated.
|
On August 27 2012 00:39 RockIronrod wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 00:26 NicolBolas wrote:On August 27 2012 00:03 Reason wrote:
I've already made it clear in my post : "Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that."
You quote my post which includes this statement and then you still ask me this question "Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things?"
Do you even bother reading a post before you quote and disagree with it?
I don't think women are doing too little or too much to avoid rape. That's an absurd and impossible generalisation to make.
I don't think there should be efforts to advise all women not to do these things. Do what you want, but know the risks.
That's all.
What's all this "right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone"???
What world do you live in? I would expect it to be a world where people take responsibility for and are held accountable for their own actions. Like not raping women who decided to "dress as you please, drink, and walk alone." A world where your clothing lets people not only rape you, but also lets others tell you that you deserved it, isn't a nice, happy world. The person to blame is the rapist, the robber, the criminal, in all cases. No one will dispute it, and no one will blame the victim, at least, no one with any form of sense or logic will. However, so long as you acknowledge that rapists, robbers and criminals exist, you've got to also acknowledge that you are putting yourself at risk if you put yourself in a scenario wherein you can be harmed, in any way. This statement isn't saying that victims deserve blame, it's that criminals can, and will, take advantage of everything and anything. Walking through downtown Detroit, covered in jewelry, counting your hundred dollar stacks, and lamenting the fact you are alone and no one knows where you are is a sure way to get robbed. Is it the guys fault he got robbed there? No, it's the criminals. But it could have been prevented. The risk could have been mitigated.
While I agree that blaming the victim shows a lack of reasoning skills, and I agree with most of the rest of your post, we have already been over the statistics in this thread. Actually quite a lot of people will report that they blame the victim, some even blame the victim exlusively. And the reasons of why this is a bad thing have been discussed.
|
On August 27 2012 00:44 Crushinator wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 00:39 RockIronrod wrote:On August 27 2012 00:26 NicolBolas wrote:On August 27 2012 00:03 Reason wrote:
I've already made it clear in my post : "Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that."
You quote my post which includes this statement and then you still ask me this question "Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things?"
Do you even bother reading a post before you quote and disagree with it?
I don't think women are doing too little or too much to avoid rape. That's an absurd and impossible generalisation to make.
I don't think there should be efforts to advise all women not to do these things. Do what you want, but know the risks.
That's all.
What's all this "right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone"???
What world do you live in? I would expect it to be a world where people take responsibility for and are held accountable for their own actions. Like not raping women who decided to "dress as you please, drink, and walk alone." A world where your clothing lets people not only rape you, but also lets others tell you that you deserved it, isn't a nice, happy world. The person to blame is the rapist, the robber, the criminal, in all cases. No one will dispute it, and no one will blame the victim, at least, no one with any form of sense or logic will. However, so long as you acknowledge that rapists, robbers and criminals exist, you've got to also acknowledge that you are putting yourself at risk if you put yourself in a scenario wherein you can be harmed, in any way. This statement isn't saying that victims deserve blame, it's that criminals can, and will, take advantage of everything and anything. Walking through downtown Detroit, covered in jewelry, counting your hundred dollar stacks, and lamenting the fact you are alone and no one knows where you are is a sure way to get robbed. Is it the guys fault he got robbed there? No, it's the criminals. But it could have been prevented. The risk could have been mitigated. While I agree that blaming the victim shows a lack of reasoning skills, and I agree with most of the rest of your post, we have already been over the statistics in this thread. Actually quite a lot of people will report that they blame the victim, some even blame the victim exlusively. And the reasons of why this is a bad thing have been discussed.
Well it depends on your definition of blame.
Did they put themselves in a situation where they could be harmed? Then, arguably, they are partially to blame. Putting yourself in dangerous situations will get you lambasted in any other scenario by most people.
Personally, regardless of the scenario, I think blame should be put solely on the instigators and aggressors of an incident.
|
On August 27 2012 00:51 RockIronrod wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2012 00:44 Crushinator wrote:On August 27 2012 00:39 RockIronrod wrote:On August 27 2012 00:26 NicolBolas wrote:On August 27 2012 00:03 Reason wrote:
I've already made it clear in my post : "Nobody is asking women not to do anything, but if you don't take precautions or act responsibly you are at a higher risk of something bad happening to you.... it's important to recognise that."
You quote my post which includes this statement and then you still ask me this question "Do you really think women aren't doing enough to avoid rape? That there should be efforts to advise all women not to do those things?"
Do you even bother reading a post before you quote and disagree with it?
I don't think women are doing too little or too much to avoid rape. That's an absurd and impossible generalisation to make.
I don't think there should be efforts to advise all women not to do these things. Do what you want, but know the risks.
That's all.
What's all this "right to dress as you please, drink, and walk alone"???
What world do you live in? I would expect it to be a world where people take responsibility for and are held accountable for their own actions. Like not raping women who decided to "dress as you please, drink, and walk alone." A world where your clothing lets people not only rape you, but also lets others tell you that you deserved it, isn't a nice, happy world. The person to blame is the rapist, the robber, the criminal, in all cases. No one will dispute it, and no one will blame the victim, at least, no one with any form of sense or logic will. However, so long as you acknowledge that rapists, robbers and criminals exist, you've got to also acknowledge that you are putting yourself at risk if you put yourself in a scenario wherein you can be harmed, in any way. This statement isn't saying that victims deserve blame, it's that criminals can, and will, take advantage of everything and anything. Walking through downtown Detroit, covered in jewelry, counting your hundred dollar stacks, and lamenting the fact you are alone and no one knows where you are is a sure way to get robbed. Is it the guys fault he got robbed there? No, it's the criminals. But it could have been prevented. The risk could have been mitigated. While I agree that blaming the victim shows a lack of reasoning skills, and I agree with most of the rest of your post, we have already been over the statistics in this thread. Actually quite a lot of people will report that they blame the victim, some even blame the victim exlusively. And the reasons of why this is a bad thing have been discussed. Well it depends on your definition of blame. Did they put themselves in a situation where they could be harmed? Then, arguably, they are partially to blame. Putting yourself in dangerous situations will get you lambasted in any other scenario by most people. Personally, regardless of the scenario, I think blame should be put solely on the instigators and aggressors of an incident.
I agree that the definition of blame is an issue. I would personally not blame a woman for leaving the kitchen, even though that increases her chance of being raped, if I may borrow that example from Kwark. For the same reason I would also not blame her for drinking, for dressingly scantily, and for walking alone. Clearly increasing your chance of being victimized is not a sufficient requirement for being blamed.
If your stuff gets stolen, lambasting someone for being careless is something that isn't very harmful, though most of the time not very helpful either. But in the case of rape, telling somone they have only themselves to blame, is pretty harmful. The culture of blaming raped women for being too promiscuous, partly legitimizes the rapist way of thinking, and it further victimizes women after the fact.
|
On August 26 2012 23:55 yOngKIN wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2012 23:36 Djzapz wrote:
If "dressing immodestly and drinking too much" increases the odds of a woman being raped, it still doesn't mean it's her fault. Using my car rather than staying at home increases my chances of being killed by a bad driver, but let's not put any fault on me if it happens. Sometimes you have to live life and it comes with hazards.
The thing with leaving your iPhone on your car seat is it's not a very valuable freedom to want to maintain. The argument that how a woman dresses is a factor her chance of getting raped is bloody retarded!
That's why I said "if" because I don't know, but has there been research showing that it has 0 effect? I mean, rapists may perhaps be slightly more likely to go after girls who are dressed in more attractive ways. Maybe not at all!
I mean, if it happens to be the case, it would be pretty ridiculous if people denied it because it'd be an inconvenient truth, and something that we can't talk about. People are resistant to the notion because the implications may feel wrong to some...
That said I'm just bringing up an hypothesis and I have no clue whatsoever which way it goes. So how do you know what's true? Do you have research showing what you're saying or is your guess just the right one?
Either way it doesn't matter because it's still not her fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
