Misogyny, Guns, Rape and Culture..

Please allow me to paraphrase our new neighbor's question...

From what I can understand so far, it appears that some posters believe that one should not engage in any form of behaviour that reduces the risk of harm rape to oneself. Is this correct?

Same answer T?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No, no, Tiassa, dear, I said to try not to fail while fighting for your life because that’s an EPIC FAIL!

I thought you liked men. What’s with all the misandry?

It’s Time to End ‘Rape Culture’ Hysteria

Rape-culture theorists dismiss critics who bring up examples of hysteria and false accusations as “rape denialists” and “rape apologists.” To even suggest that false accusations occur, according to activists, is to engage in “victim blaming.” But now, rape culturalists are confronting a formidable critic that even they will find hard to dismiss.

RAINN (Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network) is America’s largest and most influential anti-sexual-violence organization. It’s the leading voice for sexual-assault victim advocacy. Indeed, rape-culture activists routinely cite the authority of RAINN to make their case. But in RAINN’s recent recommendations to the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault, it repudiates the rhetoric of the anti–”rape culture” movement.

Moral panic over “rape culture” helps no one — least of all, survivors of sexual assault. College leaders, women’s groups and the White House have a choice. They can side with the thought police of the feminist blogosphere who are declaring war on Robin Thicke, the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition, male statues and Barbie. Or they can listen to the sane counsel of RAINN.


http://time.com/author/caroline-kitchens/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A bizarre question.

But ... no, not correct.

There are places I wouldn't go, certain D/S clubs, for instance, because I'm not up for being hauled into a dark corner and having an erect penis shoved into some bodily orifice.

This is a fairly easy "rape prevention" measure. I don't do swinger culture, either.

But while it sounds nice to appeal to "common sense" to "prevent" rape, what, really, are rape "prevention" measures?

You married? Not that it matters specifically, but, you know. Okay, so you're at dinner, and your wife/girlfriend/partner dips her finger into her drink and then stares at her fingernail. "What are you doing?" you might ask. And then she looks back across the table and says, "Making sure you're not about to try to rape me."

That relationship probably won't go very well.

"I thought you were going to the theatre," you might say as she dresses up in sweats and running shoes. "I have to be prepared for someone to try to rape me," she says.

A difficult circumstance such as a family emergency occurs. Your significant other arrives late. "I called!" you say. "I texted! Why didn't you answer?" And then she looks at you and says, "For my own safety. If I use my mobile phone downtown, I might get raped."

Perhaps you might note, "That's a new look. Why did you shave your head?" So she explains, "I don't want to tempt a rapist with my haircut, and this way he can't grab my hair."

And yes, sir, these are real rape prevention tips. Wear loose clothing so you can run better. Wear shoes suitable for running away from a rapist. Don't use your mobile phone downtown. The one about the hair? Don't look too sexy, or something, because you might tempt a rapist. (I had to add the bit about not grabbing someone by the hair.)

Some years ago, we tried to pin down the outer boundary to this rape prevention advocacy, and the advocates were incapable of doing so.

Question the First: At what point is this a quality of life issue?

To wit:

"As a woman, I'm told not to go out alone at night, to watch my drink, to do all of these things. That way, rape isn't just controlling me while I'm actually being assaulted — it controls me 24/7 because it limits my behavior."

—Rebecca Nagle​

If you or anyone else is prepared to tell her she's wrong, I would very much appreciate an explanation of just how Ms. Nagle is wrong.

Question the Second: Which rape "prevention" techniques actually prevent rape?

These are important questions, and ones the Infinite Protection Advocates are unwilling to answer.

To me, this is a human rights issue. Nobody seems to want to explicitly disagree, but at what point does living in fear become a quality of life issue?

One of the great subtle points of Barry Deutsch's recent cartoon about affirmative consent comes in the first panel:

Panel 1
BEARDY: In the old days, rape was when a thug jumped out of bushes, not this “date rape” and “affirmative consent” nonsense!

Panel 2
BEARDY: If we define “rape” so broadly, how can I know I’m not “raping” a girl I’m hooking up with?​

What "Beardy" is referring to is telling: Those rapes account for less than ten percent of reported rapes against women. By implication, the other approximately 94% of rapes, such as forcing a woman while she's asleep, or simply flat-out forcing a woman because, hey, he bought her dinner, after all, are apparently too confusing for some to figure out.

And this is the problem. The color-changing, roofie-detecting nail polish? A woman's biggest threat in this context are men she knows; accounting for non-spousal rape within the family, you're looking at around eighty percent of reported rapes against women. And there really aren't any "prevention" tips for that short of segregation of sexes, and that won't do a damn thing to curb the attitudes of rapists.

What the IPAs need to do is enumerate their rape prevention tips. And they don't seem to want to do that. Then again, we ought not wonder why; not only do they focus on the wrong problem, they are ineffective in terms of the real problem.

To paraphrase: The problem isn't that women are inadequately prepared to prevent a man from trying to rape them, but that men are trying to rape them.

And in the end, this prevention advice, including self-defense, really is cruel in its blindness. So a woman beats the hell out of her husband, boyfriend, lifelong friend, coworker, or even the random guy who tries to drag her into the bushes or behind the alley. Does that mean the sun is suddenly shining again? Observationally, I've never witnessed that. The attempt itself also has considerable impact.

And perhaps that matters to you and me, but it doesn't seem to matter to those who would tell women they failed to prevent some dude from trying to rape them.
___________________

Notes:

Deutsch, Barry. "Rape and Consent – Affirmative Consent Explained". Ampersand. October 9, 2014. LeftyCartoons.com. October 16, 2014. http://leftycartoons.com/2014/10/09/rape-consent-affirmative-consent-explained/

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Tiassa, it's clear that you think there are certain behaviours (which you refer to as 'common sense') that a woman should or should not engage in to reduce her risk of rape. So I'm not sure why you are getting so indignant when others put forward the same contention. Each individual performs their own risks/benefits analysis based on their limited wordly experience, and we could all sit around and argue about benefits vs. tradeoffs. However, it's not outrageous to contend that one can engage in certain behaviours to reduce their risk of rape. Even you have said as much.

 

No. That's wrong, dumb, and trollish.

Nobody here fits that description. Not one single person here is even opposed to rape prevention, let alone "fighting against" it.

You do see that, right? You aren't so completely lost here that you have absolutely no idea what anyone is talking about?

Sounds good. Let's start talking about the "certain behaviors" that men can engage in to reduce women's risk of rape.

And this new topic has relevance here how, exactly? There are, after all, several questions about your posting you have yet to deal with, including some ethical ones that bear some consideration and soon, and nothing in all of that post that even acknowledges them. Unless the reference to eschewing false accusations was meant as an apology?

 

Once again my responses seem forgotten in the sea of anger... ah well, cest' la vie

 

iceaura, I'd be happy to talk about what men can do to reduce rape, if you can simply clarify your position. Do you think that a woman can engage in certain preventative behaviours to reduce her risk of being raped? It's a yes or no answer.

 

To an extent, yes, a woman can do certain things to reduce her risk of being raped; one example that pertains to my area is to not walk around alone in downtown Harrisburg after dark (excluding Front Street / Main Street)... for example, wandering around 34th street in Harrisburg on your own after dark is just BEGGING for something bad to happen.

HOWEVER, this is all stuff that is covered under "general common sense and good judgement"... the fact remains that you cannot reliably tell if the person walking the other way has intentions to rape you or not... which is a sad state of affairs, to be honest.

 

As my answer to that - "yes" (with the caveat that one does not usually refer to such measures as "preventative", in other similar arenas) - has been repeatedly and explicitly clear for many pages now, I have to assume you haven't been reading my posts. Please read my posts, at least, before addressing my posting in the future, OK? Better yet, read somewhat of the thread in general, so as to avoid asking wrong, dumb, trollish questions of anyone.

 

Well, apparently, they include:

and

Do they not? It would seem so, since you clarify with

Assuming I'm not misunderstanding you, you have listed two examples of "rape prevention" measures, no?

Next, question... Would you advocate to your loved ones that they follow these "fairly easy 'rape prevention' measure{s}"?

Yes. Yes, we did try. But have you have succeeded where we failed? Is it clear that the outer boundary lies at any suggestions beyond not visiting "certain D/S clubs" and staying away from the "swinger culture"?

I can't speak for anyone else but I'm certainly not prepared to tell her she's wrong. Your point about quality of life is well taken. It is one I have struggled to express for over five years now. I believe prudence can be a virtue but I do not believe it should be allowed to rule nor destroy one's quality of life. The argument against IPA seems to be just that - how do we keep these prevention "tip" lists from becoming infinite?

Perhaps by cutting them off at the point where they begin to infringe unduly on one's quality of life... You may say "Ahh, but where is that point, precisely?". I say that it varies based on each individual's comfort level. After all, the very concept of quality of life is subjective, why should the steps each individual takes to achieve such not be? Just because a concept cannot be quantified absolutely does not invalidate the underlying premise.

Listen, I get that many of these "prevention tips" are promulgated by wackos with twisted agendas. I even get that preaching to people about steps they need to follow can lead to a transfer of blame if something unfortunate occurs. In spite of that, I still find it hard to accept or promote a culture of "take no precautions, because no precautions can absolutely prevent harm". That just sticks in my craw.

Philosophically, it distills down to a question of how much, if any, control we have over avoiding "bad things happening". I don't know the answer but I suspect that you and I may have fundamentally differing attitudes on the subject. Which is fine...

We all "live in fear" to one degree or another Tiassa. I believe that there's some sort of aphorism to the affect that bravery is not defined by lack of fear but rather how you deal with that fear. The whole "rape prevention" thing is just another aspect of that. It is possible to be prudent without allowing fear to cripple us. It is possible to avoid "certain D/S clubs" while still maintaining quality of life. Don't you agree?

I'm following the whole "affirmative consent" issue closely. I like it. For numerous reasons. Relative to this discussion, I like it because it sets up a "Dry Foot" policy for defining rape. At the same time, I'm not sure society is quite ready for it. After all, many of us would not be here if our Daddy took our Mommy's first "no" as be all end all gospel. We shall see though...

I don't know. There may be "tips" for this situation and there may not be. Such tips may be and probably are of dubious worth. Regardless, follow what makes sense to you. Don't let fear run your life - neither fall prey to fool hardiness. Tread the middle road. Just my two cents...

Well Tiassa, perhaps you have helped us out there. You've given us two such tips to start with. Maybe that's where the list ends for you. Maybe it's those plus one more for me. Plus ten more for one of neighbors. Etc. Each to his / her own...

Perhaps. Yet it would seem that they should be more effective than doing nothing. Which is what the great majority do.

That seems self evident. To whom is this supposed be a revelation?

As is much of life.

Perhaps this is an important distinction. There are those that believe in the ability to influence their own destiny without the need to "tell women they failed". That approach is wrong on so many levels...

 

Nobody is promoting a "culture of take no precautions" against anything, let alone rape.

The issue is the observable fact that lists of onerous and largely ineffective precautions and preparations for women to take are the sum total of the proposed "rape prevention" measures widely and loudly advocated by the public body of rape prevention advocates. They are even confused with the entire subject of "rape prevention" - observe the number of posts here which assert that objecting to women's behavior modification as one's major and highest priority recommended "rape prevention" measure is objecting to rape prevention altogether.

We have had many, many years of loud repetition of the recommended behavioral modifications women should adopt, according to the self-styled rape preventers who have dominated public discussion for generations now. These measures have failed for decades now to improve women's lives. We need another approach. One obvious possibility would be the behavioral modifications that rape prevention advocates should be advocating for men. Curfews? Buddy systems? DNA data banks? Legal liability for failure to report rapist behavior in others? Bar surveillance with data bases of photos of men connected to central rape association processors?

 

From my perspective, you dodged the original question on self-defense. In turn, you got a factious answer. Do you stand by your advice, to not fight back? You lecture on rape. So, this may be important.

Is the topic “Tropper’s a smartass”? If so, I concede.

Really? Because you implied that I was sadistic and non-empathetic towards your rape before anyone even knew you were raped. Were you being factious or manipulative?

I highly doubt that you or Tiasssa are capable of having an honest discussion. I’m not trying to change the subject. The subject is misogyny, guns, and rape culture.

Are you ready?

"ALL MEN ARE POTENTIAL RAPISTS, BEWARE!"

Your approach isn’t helping, is it? Tiassa is also contributing to the heightened sense of irrational fear of rape by sensationalizing rape and violence. The term "rape culture" has the same effect. How is this not negatively affecting our sense of security, you know, like rape prevention does?

Bystander intervention seems very promising, doesn’t it?

How are we going to elicit the help of law abiding males by comparing them to Elliot Rodger? If it is an indictment of societal norms, how are these conversations going to take place, if we assume that masculinity equals dominance. I don’t think that all men want to control women, do you?

Campaigns to prevent crime should be aimed at the criminals, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t teach our children how to protect themselves. Bad people exist and that’s that.

Let’s! I have a question?

Objectification leads to depersonalization, but what leads to objectification, and is objectification always wrong?

Did you happen to read that book that I suggested earlier, Bells?

According to Martha Nussbaum, there are seven features involved in the idea of objectification: instrumentality, denial of autonomy, inertness, fungibility, violability, ownership, denial of subjectivity. Objectification need not have devastating consequences to a person's humanity. In fact, Nussbaum criticises MacKinnon and Dworkin for conceiving of objectification as a necessarily negative phenomenon.

Nussbaum believes that it is possible that “some features of objectification… may in fact in some circumstances… be even wonderful features of sexual life”, and so “the term objectification can also be used… in a more positive spirit. Seeing this will require … seeing how the allegedly impossible combination between (a form of) objectification and equality, respect, and consent might after all be possible” Objectification is negative, when it takes place in a context where equality, respect and consent are absent.

http://www.mit.edu/~shaslang/mprg/nussbaumO.pdf

Is objectification always wrong?

 

It does mean that anything you call a rape prevention campaign should be aimed primarily at the potential rapists (for prevention, remember), rather than the potential victims. It means that you were in error when you confused rape prevention with women's behavior modification. It means you've been wrong for pages, in your references and accusations. But you knew that already, didn't you.

Gibberish, apparently intended as yet another deflection. How about you stop changing the subject, and deal with the several matters in front of you for pages now.

 

And you're an ignorant troll.

Rape culture and binge drinking.

"I wrote a story whose message is obvious: The campus culture of binge drinking is toxic, and many rapists prey on drunk young women. I said that when women lose the capacity to be responsible for their actions, sexual predators target them for attack. The overwhelming majority of critics accused me of blaming the victim and promoting "rape culture".

The need to close down discourse on difficult subjects was another popular response to my piece. This was best summed up in Jezebel’s rebuttal to my story, which stated: “DON'T write ‘how not to get raped’ columns in the first place.” It’s unfortunate that instead of wanting to engage in discussion of complicated, sensitive topics, a fellow journalist would prefer to dictate that only certain points of view are ideologically acceptable. As I was working on this story, several of my friends counseled me not do it. Talking about things women can do to protect themselves from rape is the third rail, they said. But why be a journalist unless you’re willing to dig into difficult subjects and report your findings? My story churned up a lot of outrage, but I remain hopeful it will start some conversations and prevent at least some sexual assaults."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_facto...king_emily_yoffe_responds_to_her_critics.html

 

Maybe so but it sometimes seems that way. In the same way that any advocacy of prudence is met with anguished accusations of "blaming women". The one does not necessarily imply the other, nor do I believe for a moment that anyone participating in this discussion is not guilty of following their own little "list" of prevention tips - whether that be practicing situational awareness or avoiding certain locations. We all do it. And we all advocate the same to our loved ones, the only differences are a matter of degree.

I object to the "sum total" in this statement just as stridently as you deny that nobody is saying "take no precautions". Some segments of the public also seem to be advocating education and public awareness, raising funds for counseling and restating the standards as to what's acceptable in organizations such as the NFL. This isn't an entirely new phenomenon, for example:

Rape, and other forms of sexual violence, is preventable. Recognizing this, Congress passed the Violence Against Women Act in 1994. This landmark legislation established the Rape Prevention and Education (RPE) program at CDC. The goal of the RPE program is to strengthen sexual violence prevention efforts at the local, state, and national level. It operates in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and six U.S. territories.
http://www.cdc.gov/Violenceprevention/RPE/index.html
​

These are the right ideas but long term, requiring deep sociological changes. They don't represent something you or I can do now or tomorrow to lessen our chances of experiencing violent assault.

It can be easy to conflate the two at times - both side's actual positions get lost in the noise.

Some of those ideas have merit (IMO) ice. Some of them seem overly intrusive and infringe too much on the quality of life. Again, IMO. Society is responsible for finding that balance though, not me. Notice that all of these "behavioral modifications" focus on changing the behavior of others - none, excepting voluntary curfews, allow an individual the choice of participating or not.

Legal liability for failure to report rapist behavior in others? - All for it. Go lobby for a referendum - I'll vote aye...

Bar surveillance with data bases of photos of men connected to central rape association processors? - Sounds good to me, we're on camera 300 times a day as is. I personally believe that the concept of privacy, as we knew it, is dying a protracted death but dying nonetheless. Our kid's kid's kids will probably not have a clue what all the fuss was about anyway...

DNA data banks? - Don't we already have these?

Buddy systems? - Not sure what context this is supposed to apply, but OK.

Curfews? - Really ice? Wouldn't this degrade the quality of life? This one seems right up there with Burqas, perhaps it was meant tongue in cheek. Or, perhaps society as a whole will decide this is the price we need to pay to prevent rape - everyone needs to be home by midnight. Oh, wait, most rapes occur at home anyway, don't they? Nope, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with this proposal. For the same reasons the anti IPA crowd disagrees with carrying a weapon - it degrades the quality of life and potentially makes the problem worse.​

Point of that exercise being to illustrate that not all men, not even all prudence and prevention advocates are averse to discussing macro alternatives or behavioral modifications for men or even measures that curtail men's freedoms. If they will work. If the balance is struck between prevention and quality of life.

However, one approach does not necessarily preclude the other...

 

um maybe because its always in response to actual discussion on rape. Bringing it up all on its own is all well and good even if its highly ineffective as it ignores 75% of rapes. but when its brought up, like the people in this are constantly doing, in response to actual cases of rape and discussions of you know who keep rapists from raping it is victim blaming. ie its telling a victim well if you didn't want to be raped you should have followed the rules " list the 'prevention' techniques"

 

Part the First

Yes and no.

There is part of me that wonders, "Are you serious?" After all, I'm talking about a gay dude walking unescorted into a D/S club in collar and cuffs; I'm just not up for that kind of exposure. Maybe in younger years, but more than being fucked into the ground, my caution has more to do with STD prevention. Barebacking is one thing, but barebacking several strangers in a setting devoted to risky behavior qualifies as a no-brainer.

Really, it's a different set of considerations.

It's hard to explain just how my years in the closet educate and influence me on these issue, but consider a simple proposition: It turns out I have a more vigorous expectation of sexual congress than, say, my last girlfriend. Or, perhaps, any of them.

I don't know if you recall how I used to bitterly joke that masturbation was a more satisfying experience than congress with my female partner, but I'm not bitter about it anymore. It actually required coming out in order to get a handle on that part of the specific interpersonal issue.

Truth of the matter is, though, I take it harder and larger than she does. But just because I do does not mean she should.

No.

There are plenty of things I might tell my daughter when she's old enough to ask and I wouldn't be arrested for answering, but I'll worry about that when it comes up.

My mother? Well, if we ever happen to be standing outside the Cap & Tash and she suggests a drink, would certainly tell her what she's proposing we walk into, but that's mostly so she doesn't stare unduly at the bears in their gladiator straps.

No. But I'm still trying. The point is to put this zombie to rest.

The outer boundary I would suggest, based on observation, is that IPAs stop with their advice when said advice would put them on the list of men women should be wary of.

And what does that mean? Well, look at this advice about the right shoes, and the haircut that doesn't get a woman dragged into an alley and all. As I've noted, this pertains to a slender proportion of reported rapes against women. Yet there really is no good advice for how a woman should protect herself against her husband, save for not marrying a man.

Boyfriend? No, seriously. You're on your first date with a woman, and she puts her nail in her drink and watches it, and explains that she's making sure you're not about to try to rape her. Honestly, how would you feel? Because if this is what it comes to, what kind of relationship can you build together?

Well, right, but looking to the counterpoint, at what comfort level does a woman "fail"? (As in, "If you fail to prepare, you fail".)

Part of it is a general lack of pathos.

Some rape victims apparently fail to meet other people's standards for rape victims, and if that was all there was to it, so what? Except, of course, as you and I are well aware, human psychology, emotions, and behavior are far more complex than that moralistic excremental pabulum.

With the line you're trying to draw, there comes a point where you'll have to tell a rape survivor to stuff it.

As I have said before, there are precautions we can all take against crime in general, and that ought to be sufficient.

Perhaps for you, but I'm always dubious when, "Which is fine ...", resolves to you have your opinion and I have mine and yours will allow for more people to be hurt, which is fine with you.

It's a functional outcome.

Indeed.

But it's far different than dressing for an evening out according to the expectation of being sexually assaulted. I have to ask, is the difference really so confusing?

Two points on this paragraph:

• I'm not sure society is quite ready for it — While I don't disagree, I would propose that this is part of the problem, and, furthermore, that such a condition is no justification for not going forward.

• After all, many of us would not be here if our Daddy took our Mommy's first "no" — Again, while this may be true, I would propose that it is part of the problem and, furthermore, that such a condition is no justification for not dealing with the problem.​

I need to ask about the connection between rhetorical abstraction and practical application. What you say makes a certain amount of sense rhetorically, but exactly zero sense practically. We live in a country where rapists get light sentences because they didn't "shred" the vagina. Or a rapist can be acquitted because the woman was asking for it according to her clothes. There's a guy running for Congress in Virginia who was a military prosecutor and argues that there is no such thing as marital rape. Perhaps that makes no sense to you, either, but if what a woman did wrong was sleep in a bed with her husband?

Come on, dude. Really?

It's a nice literary outlook, but would you really pretend daily life is so easily classified?

And here's a point to consider, please: Sometimes we can make the point clear to others when those others have to go through the same thing. Nancy Reagan flipped on stem cell research when it was her husband dying of Alzheimer's. Rob Portman, Dick Cheney, and Newt Gingrich all flipped on gay rights when they found out their bigotry hit close family—in order, a son, a daughter, a sister. This is a far cry from someone flipping their attitudes on rape because it was one of their family who got hurt. It shouldn't have to come to that.

A straightforward question: Do you presume women so stupid as to require being told that it would be better to not enter a sex club if they're not in the mood to get laid?

 

Part the Second

Which is a nice, comfortable position when one is merely expounding from the armchair. Doesn't mean shit to the person trying to live through being raped.

The problem is not a failure to prepare for being raped. The problem is that people rape.

Really, think about that one functionally.

Those who would insist on dispensing useless "prevention" advice that doesn't prevent anything.

I find it adorable—admittedly, in the same way I find hematuria adorable—when I link back to what I'm referring to and the response absolutely ignores that point.

Glib vacuity is not a good look on you.

In such a context, I would ask you to at least be up to date on the discussion before attempting to play the grape in the middle of the road.

Consider, for a moment, that you're willing to answer certain questions I put before you. And, you know, thank you.

But also, please, consider the scales you're trying to balance. One side of the discussion won't answer those questions. After a while, we might wonder why they won't.

As a side note, please consider the following "I, Anonymous" from The Stranger:

I doubt you remember me, but I am the 20-year-old girl who came up to you crying because a man tried to grab me from behind earlier that day. I was terrified and embarrassed. And you guys laughed at me. You pretended to write down the description I gave you. You pretended that you were going to keep an eye out for him while you stood inside the movie theater. A friend asked me later what I expected from you guys. I expected you to not be assholes. I expected you to give two shits about my safety. But congratulations, SPD, you did it. You made me feel humiliated about almost being attacked. Thanks, I will remember to not try again.​

And then, please, consider an ongoing story in the same town, with the same police department: A woman is groped in Seattle, and after the shock passes she's at least as pissed off as you or I might imagine. So she looks around for the assailant, snaps his picture, takes it to the police. They're not interested. So she tweets the photo, causing a public reaction, and shortly thereafter SPD is suddenly interested in what happened. And once they started their investigation, they quickly found their man:

Seattle police have identified a level 3 sex offender with a long history of assaulting strangers in public places as the suspect who allegedly groped a woman Sunday near Westlake Park.

The 36-year-old Kirkland man, who is under state Department of Corrections (DOC) supervision, was recognized by DOC officers after the victim of Sunday’s alleged groping posted his photo on her Twitter account, police said.

He was taken into custody Wednesday for probation violations, according to DOC spokeswoman Norah West.

(Clarridge and Sullivan)​

You know, because it just wasn't important enough for them to do anything about the crime until they were humiliated into action and discovered they were dealing with a serial sex offender.

Seattle's finest.

And people can say what they want about self-defense training bolstering the woman's courage, but it sure as hell didn't stop the guy from trying.

GOSUB The attempt itself also has considerable impact RETURN
____________________

Notes:

Anonymous. "Thanks for Nothing, SPD". The Stranger. January 1, 2014. TheStranger.com. October 16, 2014. http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/i-anonymous/Content?oid=18547746

Clarridge, Christine. "Woman takes to Twitter to shame alleged groper, police reaction". The Seattle Times. October 14, 2014. SeattleTimes.com. October 16, 2014. http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024779885_internetshamingxml.html

Clarridge, Christine and Jennifer Sullivan. "Sex offender now called suspect in Westlake groping". The Seattle Times. October 15, 2014. SeattleTimes.com. October 16, 2014. http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024790583_westlakesexoffenderxml.html