Rape and the "Civilized" World

[James R]

wellwisher:

We live in a world of cause and effect, with women not always rational enough to see this.

Is it just women who are irrational, or men too? Are you saying that men are more rational than women?

Or if they see the cause and effect, the current political trend is woman expect all the advantaged and none of the liability; dual standard.

Do you think that, until recently, men and women were on an essentially equal footing, but now women are advantaged over men? Do you think that the feminist movement has had a net negative effect for women? For men? For society in general?

The dual standard that women have been able to create, due to retroactive guilt, appears to be based on getting men to put aside their ability to react with cause and effect. Cause and effect is part of male training since the self reliance needed by a male needs the ability to anticipate action and reaction from the environment.

Who has the retroactive guilt? Men? What do you think men are feeling guilty about, wellwisher? And is that guilt justified, or not?

Also, I'm not clear on what these men are reacting to with cause and effect, under "ordinary" circumstances. Please explain what you mean in the context of rape.

Has a study ever been done where we compare how dress and behavior correlate to sexual harassment? We can take 100 women, and dress them in a range of clothes with various behavior, from the drunk hooker party girl, to the proper church lady, and then see how the men react. Some dress and behavior will even induce the reaction of protector in many of the men. Others men will want to stay away.

Do you think we'll need 100 men, too, or do you think all men are the interchangeable, essentially?

It sounds like you think there are some styles of dress that are appropriate for women and some that are not. Tell us, wellwisher. How do you think a woman should dress to best avoid being raped? Is there a best way?

Also, what about age? Do you think that perhaps 20 year old women should dress as proper church ladies, disguising themselves as, perhaps, 60 years old, in order to help avoid being raped? Would that be good advice? Or should they dress as nuns, perhaps? Or should we make burqas compulsory?

My guess is sex is the easiest way for women to manipulate men. The tools include dress and flirting behavior. Although this can be fun in privacy, it can backfire in a public places, since the induction will often extend beyond the target.

Do you feel that, in general, women go out of their way to manipulate men? Do you think you're on an unfair playing field, wellwisher? Does it upset you?

For example, say you have a man and women who like to argue with anger. They know each other and this is how they build passion in their little world. This is fine in their little world, but if they bring it outside into public, strangers do not know this is their choice of a game. Some men will get very protective of the gal. Some women will gossip about the woman. Proper social protocol will require they reduce this interaction in public, because it will a ripple effect among strangers. Even if innocent. at the level of the couple, it can rub some people the wrong way and create a situation that is predictable but will appear unexpected if totally self centered.

What if it's two male friends instead? What would the difference be? What about two female friends? What about a gay couple (of either gender)?

Do you think that, in general, women should be restricted from expressing themselves in certain ways in public, and that this restriction should be different than for men? If so, please explain.

The analogy is like walking in the jungle with a deep love for all the animals. This attitude is fine at home or at the zoo, but you are dealing with wild animals in the jungle, that have instincts. So if some of the animals begin to attack, it is not a surprise to the rational minded, since this is predictable. The love of all animals will not magically make the jungle safe for you. You can't wear a meat coat and expect the lions to wink and wave at you. This is not good training for the ladies, even if the guys traditionally go in advance of her and try to sterilize the jungle into a zoo, so she can pretend to be safe as mother nature. Men will do that for nice gals but not hookers.

Do you think that the "ladies" need to be trained and herded by men, wellwisher? Do you think it's possible that the ladies can work things out for themselves? You know, things like basic social interaction? Or are they just not rational enough? Or just not smart enough, perhaps?

I'm not entirely clear on what you're advocating with this post, wellwisher. Are you saying that women shouldn't be surprised if they are raped if they are not a "nice gal"? What should they do to be a "nice gal", wellwisher? What do you suggest?

 

[Tiassa]

If It Ain't Rape, Then They Can Get Laid

Has a study ever been done where we compare how dress and behavior correlate to sexual harassment? We can take 100 women, and dress them in a range of clothes with various behavior, from the drunk hooker party girl, to the proper church lady, and then see how the men react.

That outcome will tell us more about men than anything else, including possibly validating to some functional degree the ludicrous assertion that men just can't help their natural, raping nature.

To the one, it would be a self-reporting survey, which by nature is subject to all manner of interpretive disagreement.

To the other, we might recall a limited-sample survey suggesting that homophobes are actually self-loathing closet cases. This is important to bear in mind, because there is what one says and what reality actually reflects. A vitriolic homophobe might tell us no way no how is he a queer, but when gay porn makes him harder than an identifying heterosexual with no inclination toward a gay experience? Right. There is what he says, and then there is what actually excites him.

We come back to a comparison with our Infinite Prevention Advocates. It's easy enough to warn against the person one is not but when the target of that warning is a data set that includes the advocate, the average human being runs into the sort of cognitive dissonance that renders one useless in the given context.

No, really, consider that, to the one, plenty of people are happy to remind women what they need to do to prevent their own rape when that warning addresses less than ten percent of reported male on female rapes, but they hedge when it comes to prevention advice aimed at addressing the overwhelming majority of reported male on female rapes, which are committed by men known to the female.

That is to say, they want to warn against the "bad" people, which naturally does not include them. It's a twisted vested interest; they'll press and harass more (ahem!) "appropriately" if it's not sexual violence. And I sincerely doubt any one of them is willing to submit to the penile tumescence experiment as relates to rape pornography. Indeed, the most predictable outcome is that when sexual violence pornography makes them hard, they'll try to argue it isn't really sexual violence.