Rape and the "Civilized" World

Anyhows, let's back up a bit, as I composed that responses a few posts up immediately upon awakening after about 90 minutes of sleep. So, again:

How is that as response to this?:

(emphasis added--for emphasis)

Also, you may have noted at some point in your life that nearly everything has attributes; that is to say, "and yet" there are factors associated with everything--is there a point here?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The only thinking you are displaying is getting stuck on criteria that stands outside of preventative models as some excuse to reject all preventative models ...
:shrug:

you were pointing out how wearing garbage bags doesn't help, no?

try scouring the link I gave earlier for factors surrounding rape to see if the scenario incorporates any risk factors

So with you is it a case that because the most prominent scenario is difficult or beyond prevention measures, all or any other prevention measure are totally ineffective?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If you read the factors (like for instance why poverty is often a contributing factor) you can see that there are a range of things an individual can do to lessen their chances of becoming a victim. This doesn't mean that they will not become a victim ... anymore than having high grade security on one's house prevents burglary (although to act in such a manner would certainly lessen the likelihood of it).

You might have also noted at some point in your life "action" and "behavior" are also part of "everything". ... namely in establishing a precedent for preventative action.

I mean its not the case that because the bank gets robbed one thinks "whats the point in locking my door?" ... yet for some reason you completely refuse to discuss preventative models for rape based solely on the example that it still has the potential to happen regardless.
:shrug:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

One confusion that has been created is connected to the commandeering of language by liberalism. When I picture rape, I see a helpless female, minding her own business, being attacked by a beast-man who stocks and attacks her in a brutal way. Now the word rape has been modified to mean things less than this image, but with the same word able to simultaneously induce the brutal image of the beast man. Often this is induced using the inflection of the voice.

For example, if a guy and gal date and love each other and have sex based on mutual consent, if she is too young, this is rape. It was consensual, there is no beast-man with a dark hood, there was no violence, there was no attack, etc. , yet the word brings the darkness baggage along with it, so you will think in terms of worse than it was. There is a loss of clarity and degree, when language is commandeered. This can be exploited, which was the goal all along.

The original image in the first paragraph has 100% evil on the side of the beast man. But in the second scenario one should also take into account the female being an accomplice to crime. But the dual standard does not benefit by proper proportions. It is 100% or else it is hard to trigger the over-visualization of the original definition.

Let me turn this around and commandeer a word; prostitution. I will use the liberal template. Instead of the traditional definition of a drugged dependent gal on the street offering sex for money, I will also add the exchange of goods and services, such as dining, movies and charm. This widens the spectrum analogous from brutal beast man and young underaged in love. But it has to 100% or not since the game works best that way.

If an innocent gal is on a date with someone she loves, and the guy assumes this date will end in sex, she is now a prostitute according to my new definition, designed with a dual standard for males. She did not say no to dinner and was therefore paid up front. If she does not have sex, this would be stealing, which allows the male to get the law involved. If he says she was a prostitute who stole his money, everyone will picture her as the street girl based on the original definition. If the wife wants a new ring or she decides to withhold sex, she would be propositioning a John.

I don't condone using language commandeering and manipulation games, but maybe the way to deal with one side using language to set up a dual standard, is to do the same thing, until the playing field is level.

If you go back to rape, what do you visualized when you hear the word?

 

Because it is the height of mental and moral deficiency to be careful about one's choice of spouse, right?



You are again misrerpresenting my stance, and LG's, and some other people's.


You work out of a simplistic notion of assigning blame, ie. that the whole blame is always and exclusively to be assigned to one party, either to the perpetrator, or to the victim.
It's a very dramatic approach, very loaded with emotion, bound to rile people up and to provoke strong feelings of moral indignation, and thus is likely to make the case that you represent this way in court, easily winnable for you.

Unfortunately, the negative side-effect of your approach is that it encourages people not to look after themselves.

 

It's girls who need to be taught that even more.

It's especially "women's magazines" and other media "for women" that teach women to think of themselves as sex objects and that their right to their body is not paramount.

Have you noticed that there is no poster here who would be excusing rape, or blame women for being raped? That's all in your mind, part of your ploy.
This isn't a court case where you would defend a rape victim.

 

Problematic Forumlation

I would like you to think through your formulation of the above.

Please.

You keep coming back to a circumstance where women essentially need to avoid interacting with men, or men simply need to be locked away.

There are reasonable precautions anyone can take against "crime" in general. But the inability of rape prevention theory advocates to establish an idea of reasonable precautions is more than a little disconcerting.

Under this open-ended theory of rape prevention, the greatest number of rapes could be prevented if women simply follow some common-sense rules according to statistical outcomes:

• Don't marry a man.

— If she marries a man, she should never consummate the marriage, lest she accidentally imply that her husband has the right to use her body for sexual gratification despite her lack of consent.​

• Do not accept a date from a man, for fear of accidentally implying that he can expect sexual congress.

• Do not acknowledge when a man speaks to her, as that might encourage the man to think she's interested in him.

• Do not answer the door if the delivery agent is a male; after all, he's a stranger.

— Even if the delivery man is well-known, she shouldn't answer the door, as the most part of rapes are committed by perpetrators known to the victim. Being friendly, or even answering the door, might encourage him to think she wants him for sexual intercourse.​

• In fact, it's better if women live alone and never leave the house, since some men prefer frumpy attire and "granny panties" over short skirts and g-strings. That is to say, there is no women's attire guaranteed to not excite a man's sexual impulses.​

Is this the sort of society you want?

But even running with the misconception that the greatest dangers to women are walking alone at night, or going to the bar and drinking, it's still problematic.

• When I belly up to a bar, my habit is to nod, smile, and say hello to the people beside me. If one of those people is a woman, should she feel threatened? Maybe she should pack some heat, so she can point her gun at me for threatening her by saying hello. After all, I'm not going to rape her, but she doesn't know that. And saying, "Hi, how's it going? Oh, by the way, I'm not going to rape you," doesn't work, because as far as she knows I could be lying.

• Should women never use public transportation for their work commute? You know, in case they have to wait at a somewhat vacant train station, or walk from a quiet bus stop?

• Of course, I think of a friend whose story I used as a general basis for my "Jane" example. She probably shouldn't drive to work, either, since she might be endangering herself by walking through a parking lot in the evening. (Though it's true, I did embellish the story; I'm not certain how fun Bob actually is to have a beer and watch the game with.)​

At what point does this get ridiculous?

Actually, I'll tell you two stories from my own experience.

• I used to have a partner that I didn't get along with. One day, I tried to end the relationship, as it was obvious neither of us were happy. She didn't like me, didn't like being around me, and didn't like having sex with me. Seemed pretty obvious that this wasn't a successful relationship. At least, that's how I saw it. But she wept and told me none of it was true. She liked me. I was more than a trophy when we went out. And sex? Well, she was tired. Or drunk. "Just have sex with me, anyway," she said. And, indeed, I did try that a few times. And she said no, so I stopped. And the point came up repeatedly: "Why didn't you just fuck me, anyway?" The one time she didn't say no, she waited until I was finished and said, in a tone I will never forget, "You ... fucking ... bastard!" Wow. Lesson learned, but in truth I shouldn't have needed to learn it. I should have known. To this day, she has never accused me of rape, and we're still quite good friends, and she does not feel unsafe in my presence. But that doesn't mean I wasn't a complete idiot; rather, I'm just lucky as hell. And no, I don't get to pretend she was playing out some rape fantasy. Unless she ever explicitly tells me that's what was up, it's not a consideration.

• There was an occasion once when I probably could have gotten away with a "rape". I put the word in quotes in order to acknowledge the apparent confusion males claim in these situations. The first time I met her, we were in a bar. She and a friend invited me to leave with them. We went to another bar, and then to an all-night party. We ran into each other at the bar several times, and one night she was essentially cornered by police in the context of facing a DUI after she vomited behind a bar. "Don't any of you drive," the cop said. "No problem," I told him. "I walked. I live right over there." She asked if she could crash at my place. Of course I said yes. We wandered back to my place; she had some pot to smoke. We even did kiss-hits together. She asked if I had anything more comfortable she could wear, and then changed in front of me. True, I'm not a fan of frilly g-strings, but the pink satin was tempting. I offered her the spare bedroom, but she asked if she could share the bed with me. Well, duh. Yes. When she climbed into bed, she spooned up against me. And as is my habit in such postures, I had my hand on her hip, and of course it started drifting. "Please don't do that," she said. "Sorry," I replied, rolled over, and fell asleep. I ran into her at the bar again a few days later, and while her boyfriend was distracted playing pool, I said, "I'm really sorry about the other night." And she looked at me with genuine puzzlement and said, "For what?" And, yes, that rattled me. I really did have the thoughts running through my mind: Should I have pressed? Did she want me to press? And you know, I don't think there will ever be a time in my life when I come to regret not having tested the situation.​

I should never feel proud for having given a friend a safe place to crash for the night. That would be kind of like getting an award for simply doing my job.

Yet, strangely, had I raped her, look at all the things she did that people would pick on in my defense, and yes, it could have been enough to win acquittal or even see the charges dropped.

She said, "Please don't do that." None of those other things matter. After she said that, there was never any question, regardless the number of prevention theory "failures" one might suggest about her conduct.

This is not difficult. So she got drunk. So she went home with a guy. So she gave him open mouth kisses. So she changed clothes in front of him, letting him see her lingerie and know that her pubic hair was neatly trimmed to be aesthetic. So she climbed into bed next to him. So she spooned up against him.

But she said no.

It's not difficult at all. This isn't a matter of putting the onus of her protection on a perpetrator. Quite simply, it's a matter of not being a perpetrator necessitating her protection. It is not a matter of protecting her at the expense of her protecting herself. It's a matter of her not needing to protect herself.

There are realistic threats in the world, but we come back to de Beauvoir: When women try to act like human beings, they are accused of wanting to be like men.

I've crashed with men, and they've crashed with me. And sure enough, they were drinking, having fun, being crazy, and never for a moment did they need to fear that someone was about to rape them. (You would be erroneous to presume that lack of fear should come from any idea that I won't be with another man.)

However, prevention theory suggests that women shouldn't have that security. If a woman trusts a man, and he rapes her, society has a nasty habit of telling her why it's her fault.

Without some reasonable boundary on prevention theory—that is, without some expectation that men behave themselves appropriately—a woman should never trust any man, because if he exploits that trust and hurts her, it somehow becomes her fault.

This isn't difficult. Or, at least, it shouldn't be.

 

• There was an occasion once when I probably could have gotten away with a "rape". I put the word in quotes in order to acknowledge the apparent confusion males claim in these situations. The first time I met her, we were in a bar. She and a friend invited me to leave with them. We went to another bar, and then to an all-night party. We ran into each other at the bar several times, and one night she was essentially cornered by police in the context of facing a DUI after she vomited behind a bar. "Don't any of you drive," the cop said. "No problem," I told him. "I walked. I live right over there." She asked if she could crash at my place. Of course I said yes. We wandered back to my place; she had some pot to smoke. We even did kiss-hits together. She asked if I had anything more comfortable she could wear, and then changed in front of me. True, I'm not a fan of frilly g-strings, but the pink satin was tempting. I offered her the spare bedroom, but she asked if she could share the bed with me. Well, duh. Yes. When she climbed into bed, she spooned up against me. And as is my habit in such postures, I had my hand on her hip, and of course it started drifting. "Please don't do that," she said. "Sorry," I replied, rolled over, and fell asleep. I ran into her at the bar again a few days later, and while her boyfriend was distracted playing pool, I said, "I'm really sorry about the other night." And she looked at me with genuine puzzlement and said, "For what?" And, yes, that rattled me. I really did have the thoughts running through my mind: Should I have pressed? Did she want me to press? And you know, I don't think there will ever be a time in my life when I come to regret not having tested the situation.

If you would not stop and perused would that considered rape ?

 

You happened to have something in pink satin for her to change into?

 

If you are a bachelor you always should have available, but before a bath should be take together to conserve water

 

Nothing illegal about reading, but ....

Depends on how far I took it. Sexual harassment, sexual assault ... possibly unlawful imprisonment, depending on specific circumstances and applicable statutes.

 

I think you are confusing my posts with bells.

I never said any of that

PS : this is a discussion forum, not a blog

 

Stay away from bars , be nice to the old lady.

The remedy for women is they should have a German Shepard dog instead moving women to one island.

 

Notice how you can't say "all"

hence :

okay then no problem
if you have a daughter and she wants to catch the train like that regularly after a night's drinking, fine.
you just have to be vigilant if she wants to form trusting long term friendships with men .... unless of course you are capable of incorporating anecdotal experiences into the wider body of statistical events to construct a different model of prevention

which you are still yet to reply to

nonsense.

Just see how this link takes the information given about risk factors contributing to rape and puts it into a preventative model (none of which include treating each and every man as a rapist, which seems to be the only option you or tiassa can come up with between you)

again, notice how you cannot say "none"

will the irony never end?

once again, go back to the railway scenario to see which risk factors associated with being a rape victim are included (notice how I didn't say "all").

and as I indicated in my first post on this thread, most people will subscribe to more practical self-empowering models of prevention in the meantime

If its really got you stumped go back to the railway scenario and see what risk factors it does and does not incorporate and give see how it measures up as a "good plan"

according to your mode of thought, unless a prevention model is 100% effective in all scenarios, it is 100% ineffective in all scenarios.
such two dimensional thinking would prohibit one from even carrying an umbrella when it rains (because, you know, the umbrella might break or something).

I think however that we both know that you are purposefully not addressing any of the points I raise in order to simply rant. At this point you are more or less just having a conversation with yourself.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

:shrug:

 

This and That

Nope. I'm quite certain it's your post I quoted and responded to.

I absolutely adore that excuse.

Go to SFOG, propose a rule to establish whatever it is you're on about, open a poll, and perhaps the community will endorse your idea. With a strong enough vote outcome, it won't be a question of whether the administration accepts the proposal, but, rather, how to implement it.

• • •​

Put it on the public tab and I would probably support it as a supplemental stopgap measure, especially as it would make the point about how breathtakingly, stupidly insane the situation is. But I really do think it would be less expensive and a much better outcome for society if we started mopping up the persistent misogyny that continues to stain even cultures that believe themselves the height of human achievement.

We can put an end to this. It's just that there are a whole lot of people who, for whatever reasons, don't want to.

 

I'm not contending that.

Its just that your response has nothing much to do with anything I posted

you say that like you receive it quite often .....

quantity is never a suitable substitute for quality
:shrug: