Counterproposal: Don't dress like a slut...

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by visceral_instinct, May 22, 2008.

  1. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    Ack, be fair, he's not blaming the women, he was just pointing out that dressing a certain way would endanger yourself. Purely from an objective point of view, yes, he's right, someone in a miniskirt is probably more likely to get raped than, say, a girl wearing combat pants and a leather jacket. If you are trying to point out that the onus is on the rapist not to rape, rather than the woman to avoid being raped, I agree with you, but nowhere did francois say that it was a woman's fault for being raped.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. francois Schwat? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,515
    Simply put, moron, a woman who is dressed scantily in a dark alley is more likely to get raped than a woman who is not. This is similar to how a person who is pushing around a dangerous looking thug in an inner city at night is more likely to get murdered than a person who is not. Simple as that. It's an extremely simple fact to grasp, isn't it? I'm not saying that's the way it ought to be. I'm saying that's how it is. But nooooo, dipshits like you have to make personal attacks on my person simply because I don't live in some Cartesian fairyland, as if my person has anything to do with the argument. That's how I know I've already won this battle: idiots like you can't stop focusing on me and my "misogyny" when it's clear that I never expressed any such inclination.

    Again, me, me, me. You can't stop focusing on me. I could ask you to focus on the argument, but that's asking too much from a sack of blood like you. I was simply using the language of the OP, dipshit.
     
    Last edited: May 29, 2008
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,313
    An excellent issue

    An excellent issue. What is the difference between saying it's your own fault that it happened and simply saying you deserved it?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    There isn't one really...

    and I don't think he actually meant that it was the woman's fault...
     
  8. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    tiassa to be fair to the debate, if you know that there is a bank robbery happerning and you walk into that bank or you know that there is a police chace in a certian area yet you still chose to drive there then yes your not legally responcable for the coniquences. That being said legal responcability doesnt matter to the dead

    They say the same thing about learning to drive, just because you KNOW you were in the right doesnt change how dead you are. So take care and if that means walking to your car with a key between your fingers just in case or not dressing in the smallest skirt and shirt you can find or not assuming that you can take the gap on the roads that is just plain old risk management and if it keeps you alive then its a good thing. However if you get raped or murded or hit by a driver who is breaking the law then your still not at fault and no blame should be atached to you
     
  9. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,313
    Could you, then, fill in the blanks, please?

    And yet ...?

    Well, that presents a certain problem. Especially given that many people around here are regularly called upon to answer for things they did not say.

    So while we might agree that there's no apparent practical difference between saying a rape is the victim's fault and saying the victim deserved it, we are also supposed to accept that Francois didn't actually mean the things he posted?

    Okay, let's take a look at a few of the things posted:

    So what did he mean, VI? Don't get me wrong: I'm perfectly willing to accept an explanation of poor communication, but the repetition really undermines the idea that Francois is conveying the wrong message by choosing his words wrongly.

    Furthermore, as upset as he might get because people are apparently taking him so wrongly, the one thing he doesn't seem to want to do is actually address the points being put before him. I've now repeatedly proposed logical extensions of his "common sense", and while he might have the energy to be haughty, he hasn't, apparently, the knowledge or desire to make his allegedly intended point clearly.

    To consider the examples listed above, the parts from #13 are fairly obvious:

    • "a woman walking in a dangerous city at night by herself dressed really scantily is asking for it" — Any questions on this one?

    • "If she was raped there, it would be totally objectionable" — As opposed to what? Only partially objectionable? Oh, hold on. We do, in fact, have something of an answer.

    • "It's hard to make the decision each time, and make the judgment each time "Oh, well, she shouldn't have been dressed like a skank. Stupid woman," or "That's horrible that it happened; she totally didn't deserve that." Each situation is different." — Ah. So either a woman is stupid or else "totally didn't deserve" to be raped. Apparently, the women who don't hide enough of their sexuality—e.g., wear a burqua, although, it is entirely possible someone is turned on at the thought of such outward sexual repression, which would mean the woman was stupid and therefore asking to be raped—kind of, sort of, somewhat deserve whatever evil is visited upon them.​

    And then there is the (fairly explicit) proposition in #21 that "rape happens sometimes because of stupid decisions women make". In other words, a rape might happen, but it's not the rapist's fault? Well, we could leave Francois to plead that's not what he meant, and certainly he's welcome to do so, but compared to the ease of including some kind of mitigating modifier in the statement, it does not seem a stretch to consider the thematic repetition of a woman's guilt in a man's decision the more compelling key to resolving whatever gray zones we might invent about the proposition.

    Lastly, we come to an example posted after all of this bluster and complaint about how people are receiving Francois' argument already began. Notice the inherent comparison: Wearing a skirt is comparable to physically assaulting someone.

    Here, let's bring that one out to stand on its own for you to consider:

    "Simply put, moron, a woman who is dressed scantily in a dark alley is more likely to get raped than a woman who is not. This is similar to how a person who is pushing around a dangerous looking thug in an inner city at night is more likely to get murdered than a person who is not."​

    While I don't disagree with the idea giving a member the benefit of the doubt, I'm hard-pressed to see the basis of that doubt. What you don't think he meant is pretty apparent in the words he posted, and having encountered such rejection of his point, he is only getting angry about it. Would you propose that our neighbor Francois is simply incapable of expressing himself the way he intends?

    If so, perhaps you would be so kind as to do the talking for him, explain what he meant, and perhaps address people's concerns and extrapolations along the way.

    After all, purely from an objective point of view, the vast majority of women in the United States who are raped are attacked by men they know. So we ought to stop and consider the fact that the whole argument that a woman is asking for it according to what she wears and where she walks at once addresses only a slender portion of the rapes taking place while simultaneously attempting to justify, excuse, or otherwise mitigate rape by transferring the responsibility of one person's decision onto another.

    So what are the proper precautions a woman ought to take, Visceral Instinct? Never speak to men? Never go on a date with a man? Never allow oneself to be seen by men?

    Tell me what I need to tell my daughter so that she understands how to totally not deserve to be raped. After all, I wouldn't want to give the men any kind of excuse, right? Because there are degrees of non-totality. Like, you know, "She mostly didn't deserve to be raped, but I think her butt looked hot in those jeans, so she kind of did."

    How do women avoid that kind of culpability?
     
  10. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    He's using the wrong words to get you riled up, Tiassa. It should be pretty obvious that the hyperbole is there to upset you.
     
  11. francois Schwat? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,515
    No, I'm really not. I'm treating rape like a crime. But there are also other crimes and there are different levels of culpability for them. He's not acknowledging that. For example, if you walk out of your doorstep and get murdered instantly for no apparent reason, that's different from provoking a thug in a dark alley and getting murdered: there are different levels of culpability here. The same is true for all crimes, including rape. Rape is not some special crime, in which magical rules apply. I'm saying don't act like all rape is the same. It's an insult to women who have been raped. I'd like to see Tiassa tell that to a woman who had a rapist break into her apartment to rape her.
     
    Last edited: May 30, 2008
  12. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    ALL rape IS the same. ok there are various levels of torcher that can go with a rape that will differentiate but the crime itself is the same no matter what. If a girl (or guy) goes on a date and decides to have sex then for some reason changes there mind and the other person continues that is NO DIFFERENT than someone jumping out and raping someone. Its a loss of control which is unaceptable no matter what the circumstances.
     
  13. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,385
    I think comments such as this:

    "I think any idiot, whether a feminist or not, would agree that a woman walking in a dangerous city at night by herself dressed really scantily is asking for it"

    as one example, is probably a bigger insult to any rape victim.

    I mean for god's sake Francois, you made the statements. You.

    At some point, you'll simply need to accept your statements and stop trying to backpedal.
     
  14. francois Schwat? Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,515
    I never backpedaled. Everything I've said in this thread is true. You act like that quote is blasphemous, but you didn't tell me whether or not you think it's true.
     
  15. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    So you're honestly arguing that if a man rapes a woman in a burka, he should be more culpable than a man who raped a woman in a miniskirt?
     
  16. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,385
    What is true? That you think a woman's dress is somehow connected to her rape? The majority of reasonable thinking people out there would disagree with you. As do I.

    Rape is not the fault of the victim. The sole responsibility is with the rapist. He/she has a responsibility to not rape. Whether the victim is dressed in a mini skirt or a burka does not determine whether they are more or less likely to be raped. Short of living in a self imposed prison, where no one can get in or out of the house, there is no way to determine who will be raped and where or when.

    The fact that the majority of rapes are committed by people known to the victim is completely ignored by you. Do you honestly think a guy would care if his wife is wearing a mini skirt or not when he rapes her? Think about it.

    You are putting the blame on the victim, saying that if she dressed or behaved a certain way, she could avoid being raped or attacked. When that is completely false. A woman can be raped having a cup of coffee with a trusted friend or relative in her home or on the way to her car, as she can be raped by a complete stranger who breaks into her house. What she happens to be wearing at the time or where she happens to be at the time has nothing to do with it.

    Your quote is not blasphemous. It is down right stupid.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  17. Asguard Kiss my dark side Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,049
    Bells stop being so biased. Men can be raped to as can children, locality or opertunity may increase the liklyhood a paticualar person MAYBE raped but this is still not there fault. The blame goes to the rapist just as it goes to the drink driver even if the other car driver didnt check there was no one comming before driving through the green light.
     
  18. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,313
    So what did you do to deserve it?

    So rape is like, what, having your car stolen?

    Very well. How will an insurance company replace, for instance, a young girl's virginity? Better yet, how will an insurance company replace a newly-infected HIV patient's clean health? I mean, sure there is plastic surgery for the scars, or time in the dentist's chair for the broken teeth. Certainly torn flesh can heal. And then what? It's all over? Good as new? Just like it never happened?

    I'm curious, Francois. How many times have you been raped? And what, exactly, did you do to deserve it?

    Because, frankly, I don't see the dignity in pretending a woman is a car or flatscreen television. The police cannot recover, and an insurance company cannot replace, the things taken in a rape.

    One other note, though:

    It's not just any idiot that "would agree that a woman walking in a dangerous city at night by herself dressed really scantily is asking for it". Specifically, it takes a very special brand of idiot.
     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    23,385
    No.. really?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Yes, victims of rape can be men and women. I was answering Francois' assertion about female rape victims.

    You really do not need to lecture me about rape, its perpetrators and victims. I've dealt with enough of it to know where the responsibility lies.
     
  20. lepustimidus Banned Banned

    Messages:
    979
    I don't agree that a male who rapes a scantily clad women is less culpable than a male who rapes a conservatively dressed woman. I mean, the culpability of a thief isn't altered simply because the victim leaves their valuables unsecured.

    I do think that if a woman is socially smart and doesn't like being raped, she would take certain precautions to avoid rape. That's my main contention, a contention which is yet to be addressed by all the disapproving feminists here.

    Tiassa:
    No, it's worse. That's exactly why you should take precautions to lower the chances of being raped. I mean, you lock your car doors, lock your steering wheel, and have a car alarm to protect a piece of metal on wheels. So why wouldn't you be just as (if not more) careful with your own body?

    I just don't understand why the feminists get so riled up when it's suggested that they take measures to avoid rape.
     
  21. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,313
    Notes for Asguard

    Notes for Asguard

    It's not that I'm trying to ignore you, Asguard. It's just that every time I look, there's something else going on. I'll probably miss a few here, but a couple of things do stand out.

    Well, what in a rape is the equivalent of a bank robbery taking place? If you walk into an orgy of rape and sexual violence? Or if you know a man has a sexually-functioning penis? What is the comparable if, in this case?

    There is a difference between risk management and living in fear. As I have repeatedly reiterated, and our man Francois has refused to address:

    Given that going out on a date counts as slutting it up for some men, I would hope women never give this attempt to excuse sexual violence serious consideration ....

    .... Just to cover a few excuses along these lines, in order to be safe from rape, women should not:
    • Dress in any manner that might possibly sexually stimulate a male
    • Consume any sort of intoxicant around a male
    • Allow herself to be alone with any male
    • Respond in any affirmative way to a male's general advances (don't give him the idea that he can ask you out in the first place)​

    Have you ever been in a club, mate, and just watched some random woman dance? Not because you intended to be creepy, but because something about the way she moved just caught your fancy?

    Just remember the moment. Remember the beauty you perceived. And remember that risk management suggests that neither you nor I should ever see such things again, because a woman who lets herself be seen being beautiful is not managing her risks well.

    Imagine what would happen if the women in our lives took this degree of risk management remotely seriously.

    Actually, I'm going to disagree. We tend to make the point that rape is rape is rape is rape because there are actually people out there who will tell a rape survivor to get over it. It was just her boyfriend. It was just her husband. It was just her father or brother or the neighbor boy. It's not like some home invasion or brutal gang rape in the park or whatever.

    Or something like that.

    There are common effects found among rape survivors. And in a practical context, I would have difficulty telling any rape survivor to cheer up, it could have been worse.

    I don't disagree on this one, but I would suggest that it is not a symptom of any bias on Bells' part that we're focused so intently on the rape of women. It is, after all, at the heart of the issue. Part of the problem is that it would be hard for me to look at some guy dressed up like a Slim Shady and tell him he shouldn't make such a point of dressing sexy. This isn't just because I reject the general argument, but because I fail to see what is attractive about the look. In fact, most of what counts as sexy men seems to puzzle me. By the time we get into what counts for men as the equivalent, there really isn't much question as to what the guy is asking for.

    Really, between the leather chaps and the "Give me your Glory!" scrawled on his bare ass in lipstick, I can probably figure out which one I'm supposed to jump at random. Now, maybe gay men are that much more civilized than heterosexual men, but I'm actually of the opinion that the differences are mostly superficial. Seriously, though, when are you ever going to hear, "His Joe Boxers were showing over the top of his baggy jeans. The way he let the crotch of his pants hang just above his knees, you could tell he wanted it."

    And you're never going to hear someone say, "He was wandering around in a golf shirt and a Speedo. So hot. So sexy. You could just tell he wanted me to drag him into the alley and fuck him in the ass until he required surgical repair."

    Besides, given that the argument about dressing like a slut originates with men intending to justify their own desires, we should not expect to hear much about the rape of children, or of grown men. Because even if people believe it, most are smart enough to not talk about what a two or three or five year old did to deserve or ask for it. And, yeah, since most heterosexual men simply don't look at other men that way ...?

    And, just to cover that base, if you want to bring us the pathology of female-on-male rape and sexual assault, by all means do so. We don't intend that these attackers or survivors should be excluded, either.
     
  22. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    He used the phrase 'asking for it', so yes he was. Learn to read, and stop excusing the disgusting prig.
     
  23. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    You call me a moron because you are a closet rapist, interesting. Blaming me, for not seeing it your way does nothing to dispell the idea that you have some dark thoughts in your mind.

    Got statistics to back that up? I bet not. Rapists are mentally unstable. Hell they attack wrinkly old ladies sane people would not get aroused by. It's not just about clothing, but about their messed up heads, the hatred they carry, and their inability to interact with women satisfactorily in real life.

    Also, as it has been pointed out to you, women are not 'asking for it' for dressing a certain way, and using the term 'sluts' is unacceptable. Changing your terms to 'woman' now is too late, you've shown yourself up to be the petty little hate monger.


    No it's not, and stick to the topic.


    So calling me a diphsit isn't a personal attack? Again, you show your ego, and that little streak of hatred you carry.


    Your opinion, the one you express here, is part of your personality. You show your flaws, your hatred, and spite in this thread, by the terms you use, and the way you excuse rapists.


    I'm an idiot because you used the word 'slut' and thought it was OK? No, you are just a nasty piece of work. Maybe you don't consider yourself a misogynist, but you do try and defend rapists, so your view is warped. Try looking at life from the sane side of the fence, eh?

    You didn't have to use the phrase 'asking for it', for the term 'sluts' to enter the debate. Others have made their points without such denigration. And again, the insults just prove your frustration that you can't put yourself across, and I guess you feel inadequate around women too because you aren't that articulate. Keep it coming, you are making my case for me; you are a flawed individual.
     

Share This Page