sandywinder
Madrigal Member
Holistic Philosopher
The private sector makes boxes, the public sector ticks them
Posts: 16,929
|
Post by sandywinder on Jun 13, 2011 6:45:07 GMT
I'm really tired of going over the arguments again and again...but here's someone who does it quite well. the unlocked door analogy only makes sense if it goes like this:
If I’m in my house and the door is unlocked, a burglar might think that this is an opportunity worth taking. He* comes in. I see him and ask him what the hell he thinks he’s doing and tell him to get out. He doesn’t. He overpowers me (physically or with a threat of violence) and burgles my house. No she misses the point. She is assuming that the rapist cares. Instead of thinking of the rapist as someone with morals, think of the rapist as some kind of wild beast, like a lion or tiger and then rerun the analogy. Or use the analogy of someone wandering around in the middle of the Seregenti without any protection. www.youtube.com/watch?v=vB39UDmeXYsMaking it easier for someone to burgle a house by leaving the door is unlocked is an added risk as is having expensive objects on display in the window. There are far too many rapes as it is without encouraging them or making it even easier for them. The acid test here is would you be happy if your own daughter walked around on her own at night with her skirt hemline around her backside and only half conscious?
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on Jun 13, 2011 7:47:10 GMT
No she misses the point. She is assuming that the rapist cares. Instead of thinking of the rapist as someone with morals, think of the rapist as some kind of wild beast, like a lion or tiger and then rerun the analogy. Or use the analogy of someone wandering around in the middle of the Seregenti without any protection. And a few extra garments, a couple more inches of length to the skirt, are going to provide protection? Or make rape more difficult?How, exactly?
|
|
excoriator
Madrigal Member
nearly a genius
Posts: 37,165
|
Post by excoriator on Jun 13, 2011 7:54:54 GMT
I think we really need to do a controlled experiment in order to determine whether the ambassador is correct in his assumption that less attractive clothing reduces the chances of being raped.
As this is hardly a practical or morally defensible proposition, perhaps it would be a good idea for police to record the level of provocativeness of the clothing in those rape cases that do occur.
The argument as to whether women SHOULD wear less attractive clothing in order to protect themselves is a quite separate one. However, if the result of the study proposed in the previous para. turns out to be negative - in other words it makes no difference WHAT clothes a woman wears - then this argument would be entirely superfluous anyway.
|
|
everso
Madrigal Member
On my chaise longue, somewhere in tropical Essex
Posts: 829
|
Post by everso on Jun 13, 2011 8:34:15 GMT
Sandy, if a woman goes out in very revealing clothing there's no doubt she will attract a lot of attention. Men will be men after all. She might expect wolf whistles and being chatted up with lots of sexual talk. If a woman complains about it and says she's being treated like less than a "lady", well I would say that she might want to dress in a more ladylike way. If, however, she enjoys the attention, fair enough. If that's how she wants to act that's her business.
BUT she still doesn't deserve to be brutally raped and possibly beaten up. The rapist makes that decision himself. Nobody deserves to be punished for wearing revealing clothing.
Actually, I'd be interested to see just how many women in skimpy clothes are actually raped, as opposed to women in more modest clothing.
I may have mentioned this before on MCL(can't remember) but I used to do volunatry work for a rape crisis telephone line. Most of the women I spoke to had been raped by people they knew (some of them by relatives) and what they were wearing didn't come into it.
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on Jun 13, 2011 9:05:14 GMT
BUT she still doesn't deserve to be brutally raped and possibly beaten up. The rapist makes that decision himself. Nobody deserves to be punished for wearing revealing clothing. No, but what sandy and others claim is that while she may not deserve it, the 'revealing clothing' she's wearing just makes rape more likely, and to that extent she's responsible for what happens to her. I don't believe that, and I agree with you that But if we accept that all rapists aren't brutal psychopaths (for whom clothing will be irrelevant), but that some may have honestly misread the 'signals', then getting the message across that there's no such thing as unconditional sexual availabilty is something women have to keep on doing - and that's what the SlutWalks are all about.
|
|
loop
Madrigal Member
bozo hypocritical prat
Posts: 2,218
|
Post by loop on Jun 13, 2011 10:33:42 GMT
I rather think that the slut walks have about as much to do with rape as terrorism has to do with religion. As a previous writer wrote, most rapes are carried out by someone who knows the victim, either a relative, partner, ex-partner etc. I imagine that in these cases it would matter not what the victim was wearing.
Wiki The rallies began in response to remarks made by Constable Michael Sanguinetti, a Toronto Police officer, who suggested that in order not to be victimized, "women should avoid dressing like sluts.
No mention of rape, but of victimisation. It was advice, a suggestion, someone who was concerned for the unwelcome attentions that 'some men' may display to women who dress inappropriately. If this is true then I believe the whole thing is a setup by a group of attention seeking women who should have more sense.
Perhaps the fashion editors in the media (mainly women) should consider what sort of example they are setting when they are publishing the 'latest fashion' pictures. Perhaps whilst they are at it they (the mainly female fashion editors) should also consider the anorexic models they choose for their magazines.
Just so I don't put all the blame at the door of these sorry women, how about the celebs and wags who parade themselves in skimpy outfits, it is their choice what to wear for their pouting, botox faced photos, they set the example.
I for one, find that following an overweight, short skirted woman/girl showing off excess skin/fat and huge thighs to be an utter turn off and pity the young men of today.
|
|
sandywinder
Madrigal Member
Holistic Philosopher
The private sector makes boxes, the public sector ticks them
Posts: 16,929
|
Post by sandywinder on Jun 13, 2011 10:37:59 GMT
No she misses the point. She is assuming that the rapist cares. Instead of thinking of the rapist as someone with morals, think of the rapist as some kind of wild beast, like a lion or tiger and then rerun the analogy. Or use the analogy of someone wandering around in the middle of the Seregenti without any protection. And a few extra garments, a couple more inches of length to the skirt, are going to provide protection? Or make rape more difficult?How, exactly? Not more difficult but a rapist is going to be more inclined to perpetrate rape if it is made more easier for him to do so. The same goes for burglars, expense fraudsters, pickpockets and many more crimes. Why do people see rape as if it were so different to any other crime?
|
|
sandywinder
Madrigal Member
Holistic Philosopher
The private sector makes boxes, the public sector ticks them
Posts: 16,929
|
Post by sandywinder on Jun 13, 2011 10:43:36 GMT
I think we really need to do a controlled experiment in order to determine whether the ambassador is correct in his assumption that less attractive clothing reduces the chances of being raped. As this is hardly a practical or morally defensible proposition, perhaps it would be a good idea for police to record the level of provocativeness of the clothing in those rape cases that do occur. The argument as to whether women SHOULD wear less attractive clothing in order to protect themselves is a quite separate one. However, if the result of the study proposed in the previous para. turns out to be negative - in other words it makes no difference WHAT clothes a woman wears - then this argument would be entirely superfluous anyway. I would like to see those statistics as well if they are available. However the comparison could not just be the number of women raped with scanty clothing versus those with usual clothing as most women normally do not wear scanty clothing when outside. In fact I think it would be impossible to make any such a meaningful comparison. For one thing what someone may think as scanty would not be to someone else. But logic alone tells us that a rapist will find it easier to rape a victim if he doesn't have to take as many clothes off the victim. Maybe only marginally more so but a rapist will often not want to waste too much time in case he is disturbed by passers by.
|
|
sandywinder
Madrigal Member
Holistic Philosopher
The private sector makes boxes, the public sector ticks them
Posts: 16,929
|
Post by sandywinder on Jun 13, 2011 10:50:37 GMT
Sandy, if a woman goes out in very revealing clothing there's no doubt she will attract a lot of attention. Men will be men after all. She might expect wolf whistles and being chatted up with lots of sexual talk. If a woman complains about it and says she's being treated like less than a "lady", well I would say that she might want to dress in a more ladylike way. If, however, she enjoys the attention, fair enough. If that's how she wants to act that's her business. BUT she still doesn't deserve to be brutally raped and possibly beaten up. The rapist makes that decision himself. Nobody deserves to be punished for wearing revealing clothing. Who has ever argued anything else? Nobody deserves to have their house burgled because they haven't locked their door. Nobody deserves to be the victim of a mugging or any other crime, no matter what precautions they have or have not taken. But ignoring the dangers of rape by saying 'men shouldnt do it' is sending out entirely the wrong message to young vulnerable women.
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on Jun 13, 2011 10:51:00 GMT
But logic alone tells us that a rapist will find it easier to rape a victim if he doesn't have to take as many clothes off the victim. I don't think you quite understand how women's clothes work, sandy. Those apparently skimpy outfits are often multi-layered and complicated. Whereas an all-enveloping garment is often a simple matter by comparison. No, I'm afraid that argument doesn't work.
|
|
sandywinder
Madrigal Member
Holistic Philosopher
The private sector makes boxes, the public sector ticks them
Posts: 16,929
|
Post by sandywinder on Jun 13, 2011 11:01:55 GMT
But logic alone tells us that a rapist will find it easier to rape a victim if he doesn't have to take as many clothes off the victim. I don't think you quite understand how women's clothes work, sandy. Those apparently skimpy outfits are often multi-layered and complicated. Whereas an all-enveloping garment is often a simple matter by comparison. No, I'm afraid that argument doesn't work. You are just pretending not to understand my meaning here. Are you really arguing a rapist knows all about this kind of clothing before he attacks? The argument stands.
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on Jun 13, 2011 11:06:23 GMT
|
|
loop
Madrigal Member
bozo hypocritical prat
Posts: 2,218
|
Post by loop on Jun 13, 2011 11:54:24 GMT
An official retraction - politics vs the original statement which we can only assume was his true conviction. Or maybe you are right and the world is ruled by spin and pc
|
|
jean
Madrigal Member
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by jean on Jun 13, 2011 12:02:26 GMT
An official retraction - politics vs the original statement which we can only assume was his true conviction. You could only possibly have a point if the word victimisation could not include sexual assault.But is a woman subject to sexual assault not a victim? (Am I going mad, or is this thread?)
|
|
loop
Madrigal Member
bozo hypocritical prat
Posts: 2,218
|
Post by loop on Jun 13, 2011 12:15:47 GMT
You have moved from rape to sexual assault, now we hit the grey areas. When does a snog become a grope become a sexual assault?
Too complicated so let's keep it to rape when A inserts into B and B does not want it and A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
Do I believe that a man should rape any woman, no - it is heinous and he should be subjected to the maximum the law allows, indeed, any man found guilty twice should never be let out of prison.
My point is/was that this 'movement' is misplaced as are so many. I believe this to be a movement of exhibitionist women taking over a word, just like the queer word and the n1gger word. It is a case of 'owning' a word that only they can use and woe betide anyone else who does.
|
|