Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CBC)   Lingerie Football League player tells women not to dress like whores (with Lingerie Football pic)   (cbc.ca) divider line 179
    More: Ironic, Toronto, Lingerie Football League, York University, nieces, Toronto Police  
•       •       •

17284 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Aug 2012 at 12:38 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



179 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-30 11:30:30 AM  
When it comes to rape how the woman dress does matter. That's why women should only wear dresses and skirts! A woman can run faster with her skirt pulled up than a man can with his pants around his ankles!
 
2012-08-30 11:50:49 AM  
Post-apocalyptic whore though? Ok.
 
2012-08-30 12:40:21 PM  
How are we going to be able to tell they're whores though? Some sort of special shoe?
 
2012-08-30 12:40:29 PM  
Then why watch?

Oh yeah, they're better at the fundamentals...
 
2012-08-30 12:41:18 PM  
img.photobucket.com

More like "disappointing"
 
2012-08-30 12:41:30 PM  
If lingerie football leaguers aren't dressed as whores, there's no point.
They're models. None of that is Real Athleticism, even though the models may be athletic.
Women's basketball league is real.

Lingerie football is not, so let them whore it up. It's what they're paid to do.
 
2012-08-30 12:41:35 PM  
img442.imageshack.us
 
2012-08-30 12:41:56 PM  
Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World
 
2012-08-30 12:42:25 PM  
www.cbc.ca
So according to her logic, she is just asking for it on the field.

Way to blame the victim.
Stupid victims not preventing the urges of men. 

Also:
FTA:Her advice to "carry mace" is also controversial, since mace is a prohibited and restricted weapon.
 
2012-08-30 12:43:53 PM  
Technically, she may be right. You can't play football wearing stiletto heals.

/feels dirty for even jokingly agreeing
 
2012-08-30 12:45:59 PM  
And people wonder why Toronto is hated outside of Ontario
 
2012-08-30 12:47:12 PM  
Man, the Ford gene runs strong in her.
 
2012-08-30 12:47:24 PM  

WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World


Yes, because sensibly dressed women never get raped.
 
2012-08-30 12:47:58 PM  
Niece of the beloved dumbass Mayor Rob Ford? The stupid is genetic!
 
2012-08-30 12:50:11 PM  
It must be "Arrogant, Self-Absorbed biatches Handing Out Unsolicited Advice to People They Consider Their Inferiors Day" today.

Usually, it's the Republican party handing out more arrogant, unsolicited advice before 9 AM than most people do all day. They must be saving it up for the big finale tonight.

Newt Gingrich will give advice about the sanctity of marriage. Then that Akin guy will discuss female reproduction. Then Ryan, a government employee for most of his working life, will tell us all about how government doesn't work and we need to vote for him so he can prove it. Then Mitt will wind up by telling all the poor people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps and work really hard to find someplace to live better than a cardboard box in a vacant lot. Because something just isn't as satisfying unless you work for it, as opposed to having it handed to you by your rich dad who used to be a governor and CEO.
 
2012-08-30 12:50:18 PM  
It would make for less confusion. I never expect to see the female cast of Jersey Shore playing semi-real football.
 
2012-08-30 12:51:09 PM  
It does not place blame on the victims. It is common sense. Certain modes of dress dress do suggest, rightly or wrongly, certain things about the wearer. That could be gang membership, being a slut, employment by a Wall St firm, whatever. It's just the way humans think.

/the victim shares no blame, regardless of her clothing
 
2012-08-30 12:51:32 PM  
25.media.tumblr.com

... i'm... ok with this.
 
2012-08-30 12:51:47 PM  
I think we're going to need more research in order to make a conclusive decision.
 
2012-08-30 12:51:53 PM  
Attention whores are founts of wisdom, aren't they?.
 
2012-08-30 12:52:22 PM  
this might be a good thread
 
2012-08-30 12:52:39 PM  

BruinsHockey: And people wonder why Toronto is hated outside of Ontario


Right now they should be pitied. The Ford family mayors are turrible.
 
2012-08-30 12:52:53 PM  

fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.


Looks like she's going deep.
 
2012-08-30 12:55:38 PM  

NutznGum: WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World

Yes, because sensibly dressed women never get raped.


Yes, because criminals prefer to break into the locked car with the visible wallet over the unlocked car with the visible wallet.

/Just because it's not their fault doesn't mean they can't "lock their doors".
//I have no desire to rape scantily clad women (actually, they aren't the least bit attractive to me as a mate) but that doesn't mean that there's some psycho who will
 
2012-08-30 12:55:40 PM  

ChubbyTiger: It does not place blame on the victims. It is common sense. Certain modes of dress dress do suggest, rightly or wrongly, certain things about the wearer. That could be gang membership, being a slut, employment by a Wall St firm, whatever. It's just the way humans think.

/the victim shares no blame, regardless of her clothing


The type of man who would rape a woman is going to do it regardless of the clothes she wears.
 
2012-08-30 12:57:14 PM  
25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-08-30 12:57:18 PM  

MoronLessOff: fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.

Looks like she's going deep.


She should tackle her.
 
2012-08-30 12:58:51 PM  

CygnusDarius: MoronLessOff: fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.

Looks like she's going deep.

She should tackle sack her.


I'd sack her too, IYKWIM.
 
2012-08-30 01:00:12 PM  

WhoGAS: NutznGum: WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World

Yes, because sensibly dressed women never get raped.

Yes, because criminals prefer to break into the locked car with the visible wallet over the unlocked car with the visible wallet.

/Just because it's not their fault doesn't mean they can't "lock their doors".
//I have no desire to rape scantily clad women (actually, they aren't the least bit attractive to me as a mate) but that doesn't mean that there's some psycho who will


And that same psycho would rape a nun or an old lady too. The way the woman is dressed is irrelevant.

If I leave my car unlocked that's carelessness. If I'm a woman and I get raped because I was walking down the street in a skirt, that's still rape.
 
2012-08-30 01:01:40 PM  

MoronLessOff: CygnusDarius: MoronLessOff: fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.

Looks like she's going deep.

She should tackle sack her.

I'd sack her too, IYKWIM.


She. Could. Go. All. The. Way.
 
2012-08-30 01:03:24 PM  

BruinsHockey: And people wonder why Toronto is hated outside of Ontario


We're not all like that, you know. The Fords are, God be praised, an aberration, a lapse, a freak accident. The number of people who voted for that fat feck is only around 30% of the city's population, and most of that comes from the GTA as opposed to Toronto proper. We got stuck with this guy by our cousins from such exotic places as Etobicoke and Oakville. If it helps he's this close to being thrown out of office for a conflict of interest. We are just as chagrined as you, and we have to live with him, catching up on his reading tearing down the Gardiner at 100kph.

Also, crime is always the fault of the perpetrator. It wouldn't be crime otherwise, and the fact that this has to be explained in the 21st century makes me wonder what would really be so bad about an apocalypse. Doesn't matter if you see a woman walking down the street wearing nothing but a bonnet, you keep your hands to yourself and your pants zipped. She is not inviting you to have a go, and if you think so then please kill yourself quickly, life is hard enough without that level of malevolent stupidity powering the citizens.
 
2012-08-30 01:04:17 PM  

NutznGum: WhoGAS: NutznGum: WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World

Yes, because sensibly dressed women never get raped.

Yes, because criminals prefer to break into the locked car with the visible wallet over the unlocked car with the visible wallet.

/Just because it's not their fault doesn't mean they can't "lock their doors".
//I have no desire to rape scantily clad women (actually, they aren't the least bit attractive to me as a mate) but that doesn't mean that there's some psycho who will

And that same psycho would rape a nun or an old lady too. The way the woman is dressed is irrelevant.

If I leave my car unlocked that's carelessness. If I'm a woman and I get raped because I was walking down the street in a skirt, that's still rape.


That's carelessness, too... Shouldn't have gone around being a woman, eh?

/not that that would necessarily help, in some cases
 
2012-08-30 01:05:58 PM  
This is good advice, from a family planning perspective. I mean, if you don't dress like a whore, then you can't get pregnant according to Todd Akin.
 
2012-08-30 01:06:12 PM  
I am going to weigh in with a yes-but... Yes, it is wrong to imply that a victim is in any way at fault, but dressing in a way that stands out may make an attack more likely. People notice that.

Oh well people make with more pictures of LFL players!
 
2012-08-30 01:10:16 PM  

Theaetetus: That's carelessness, too... Shouldn't have gone around being a woman, eh?


Duh - you should have been in the kitchen, making sandwiches!
 
2012-08-30 01:11:23 PM  

Dicky B: MoronLessOff: CygnusDarius: MoronLessOff: fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.

Looks like she's going deep.

She should tackle sack her.

I'd sack her too, IYKWIM.

She. Could. Go. All. The. Way.


back...back...back....back....gone!!

DOH!!
 
2012-08-30 01:11:32 PM  
ITT: people who think repeating false, sexist* statements about why rapists rape is "common sense".

* because it's sexist to imply that men simply can't control themselves around attractively-dressed women. Guys, stop doing that. Take responsibility for your own actions and thoughts, and hold your fellow men to that standard, instead of handing out easily-disproven "common sense".
 
2012-08-30 01:11:55 PM  

Dicky B: MoronLessOff: CygnusDarius: MoronLessOff: fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.

Looks like she's going deep.

She should tackle sack her.

I'd sack her too, IYKWIM.

She. Could. Go. All. The. Way.


What a meal those girls are having!.
 
2012-08-30 01:11:58 PM  
If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?
 
2012-08-30 01:13:09 PM  

NutznGum: WhoGAS: NutznGum: WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World

Yes, because sensibly dressed women never get raped.

Yes, because criminals prefer to break into the locked car with the visible wallet over the unlocked car with the visible wallet.

/Just because it's not their fault doesn't mean they can't "lock their doors".
//I have no desire to rape scantily clad women (actually, they aren't the least bit attractive to me as a mate) but that doesn't mean that there's some psycho who will

And that same psycho would rape a nun or an old lady too. The way the woman is dressed is irrelevant.

If I leave my car unlocked that's carelessness. If I'm a woman and I get raped because I was walking down the street in a skirt, that's still rape.


Look, I'm not going to argue your belief system so whatever you want to believe is okay with me. I just won't shed a tear when someone who dresses less than conservatively gets raped. Just like I shed no tear for Chelsea King when she went jogging late afternoon on a trail in the middle of nowhere (I walk that trail) and got raped and murdered.

If a woman gets raped walking home from wherever and she's not dressed like a street walker, I will give more sympathy.

From my POV, I agree with you: a woman's dress SHOULD have nothing to do with whether she gets raped or not.

However, her state of dress WILL affect how much sympathy I have for her afterwards.

My opinion; you can share it if you like but it's mine and mine alone.

/Personaly Responsibility is greatly lacking from kids these days
 
2012-08-30 01:13:29 PM  
are we talking "legitimate rape" , "illegitimate rape", or "rape-rape rape"?
 
2012-08-30 01:14:19 PM  

lunkhed: If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?


No, you're not. One of these things is not like the other, one of these things doesn't belong.

/consent - do you understand the meaning of that word?
//how about assault?
///"he was wearing a Romney t-shirt - he practically begged to be punched" is OK to you, right?
 
2012-08-30 01:14:41 PM  

NutznGum: If I leave my car unlocked that's carelessness. If I'm a woman and I get raped because I was walking down the street in a skirt, that's still rape.


You are missing the point. If someone steals your visible wallet out of your unlocked car it is still theft and still illegal. Doesn't matter that you were stupid and made it easy, it is still illegal. Same deal with sexual assault. No matter what you did to make it easy for the criminal, that doesn't excuse the crime and they are just as guilty.

However that doesn't mean you shouldn't be careful and try to make it harder/less likely that they commit a crime against you. If a woman is walking down a dark alley alone at midnight in a bad part of down and skimpy, suggestive clothing that in no way gives anyone the right to rape her. However that doesn't mean it is a good idea for her to be doing that in the first place.

You seem to be confused in to thinking that people are arguing that it makes it ok. That's not the argument at all. The argument is that it is a bad idea, it makes victimization more likely and that is something to be avoided.
 
2012-08-30 01:15:01 PM  

Meerlar: are we talking "legitimate rape" , "illegitimate rape", or "rape-rape rape"?


You said rape five times.
 
2012-08-30 01:15:12 PM  
I think I got this figured out...

"Don't dress like a whore", said the whore.
 
2012-08-30 01:16:18 PM  
So, the last few threads that started like this had a lot of potential, but ended very un-fulfilling. I should be able to do a little contributing tonight. But for now, what if I said LIE?
 
2012-08-30 01:17:38 PM  

WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World


Do the right thing and kill yourself.
 
2012-08-30 01:17:42 PM  

sycraft: The argument is that it is a bad idea, it makes victimization more likely and that is something to be avoided.


Too bad for those women who live in "bad" parts of town, right?
 
2012-08-30 01:20:43 PM  
Rape victims aren't all dressed like whores or something. I could see it as being perhaps a bad idea, to go for a whorish look if you aren't as "available" as you appear.. consider your audience, perhaps? However, that has nothing to do with rape, merely a comment on your apparent sluttiness, versus your actual sluttiness.

It'll never change the fact that committing rape is illegal and immoral who act is solely the fault of the person committing it. The reality is that folks break laws all the time.

It just seems to make sense to be clear and be sure there's no mixed signal being sent regarding your willingness to have sex. Again, on a normal person it makes no difference what you wear, rape is wrong and your clothing will not create rapists. However, to someone who IS a rapist, you could be profiled as a person who is an "easy target", or less likely to be believed if they were caught, etc.

In that regard, it set's you up as a more appealing target. Rape isn't about sex, it's about control, and if you appear controllable, you are a preferred target. A slut who isn't going to be beleived in court, is easier to control. Dressing/acting whorishly set's up a situation where someone can act as a character witness and say "Hey, look how she's dressed, she had it coming." or "She's obviously tried to lure men in to accuse them of rape." etc. It doesn't make them right, but in a courtroom it could create a shadow of doubt regarding your character, and raise the possibility that you may have actually acted to entrap someone. Considering your sole "sin" was to wear slutty clothes, it seems like a hell of a price to pay, losing your respectability, and apparent reliability as a witness in a case where you were the victim.

I wear a Buc's shirt sometimes (laundry day), and suddenly find myself being included in various sports discussions. I don't care about sports at all. I'm actually mystified by the appeal, but I'm a minority in that regard, apparently. As a result, I avoid wearing that shirt, because I'm pretty sure I come across as an idiot when I tell 'em I don't know the first thing about sports, while wearing a team shirt. It's not me, so I stay away from it, unless I know I'm hanging out with other folks that also don't care about sports.
 
2012-08-30 01:20:59 PM  

lunkhed: If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?


Yep. Of course:
If you leave your car keys in the ignition, your car may be more likely to be stolen.
If you leave your house wide open, you may be more likely to be burgled.
If you leave your credit card at the supermarket, you may be more likely to be defrauded.
If you walk around dressed like a hooker... You're less likely to be raped.
 
2012-08-30 01:22:57 PM  

WhoGAS: I just won't shed a tear when someone who dresses less than conservatively gets raped.


Farky'd.

You should put that on a t-shirt and wear it when you go out, because, uh, like-minded people will strike up conversations with you! That's the ticket!
 
2012-08-30 01:22:58 PM  
Date rape and what the FBI sometimes calls "drunk rape," when the victim has been drinking and is incapable of rational decisions, are affected by what the woman is wearing. Violent, coercive rape is not about sex - it's about terrorizing, dominating, controlling, and generally showing disregard and contempt for the victim. What a woman is wearing has no affect on violent, psychotic rapists.

Lingerie football players dress to titillate. Any guy who makes a pass at one and is rebuffed but continues to harass the player needs to be locked up. Not only because of harassing the woman but because he is ruining it for the rest of us who are responsible adults and can enjoy such displays of feminine pulchritude without losing control. Attractive women who dress scantily need to be praised and encouraged, not harassed.
 
2012-08-30 01:23:28 PM  

Nezorf: Also:
FTA:Her advice to "carry mace" is also controversial, since mace is a prohibited and restricted weapon.


She's related to the mayor. If there's anything Torontonians have learned is that laws don't apply to the Ford family in this city.

Drunk and disorderly at a leafs game? No problem!
Domestic disturbance? Silly misunderstanding!
Making demonstrably false reports to 911? No biggie!
Reading while driving on an expressway? No problem!

Laws are for little people, and I'm sure Mr. Ford is big enough that those un-laws trickle down to his relations.
 
2012-08-30 01:25:41 PM  

Mr. Right: Date rape and what the FBI sometimes calls "drunk rape," when the victim has been drinking and is incapable of rational decisions, are affected by what the woman is wearing.


Not that I don't disagree with the rest of your post - and in fact, agree wholeheartedly with the second paragraph - I do want a citation for this, because I believe I've seen the opposite: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.
 
2012-08-30 01:26:33 PM  

Theaetetus: WhoGAS: I just won't shed a tear when someone who dresses less than conservatively gets raped.

Farky'd.

You should put that on a t-shirt and wear it when you go out, because, uh, like-minded people will strike up conversations with you! That's the ticket!


I respect you. I really do. But only in threads which have to do with Copyright law and patent law.

When you target me like this, I understand you think I'm an intellectual equal in Troll baiting and biting, but please don't assume that as I have no desire to argue opinions. You have yours; I have mine and nothing will change that.

I can still like you in other areas but when you do this, it really makes you look petty.
 
2012-08-30 01:28:39 PM  

Theaetetus: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.


Oh. That's your problem. You think we're arguing that it makes it more likely.

No, that's not it at all. I'm telling you the level of sympathy for the victim I would show for those who do get raped. More clothing = More sympathy.

Rape naked or rape in a bhurka = Illegal and bad
 
2012-08-30 01:30:22 PM  
I don't deserve cancer so I smoked. Then I smartened the fark up because the virus doesn't give a damn what I think.
 
2012-08-30 01:30:51 PM  

WhoGAS:
When you target me like this, I understand you think I'm an intellectual equal in Troll baiting and biting, but please don't assume that as I have no desire to argue opinions. You have yours; I have mine and nothing will change that.

I can still like you in other areas but when you do this, it really makes you look petty.


Oh, you. I'm neither trolling nor targeting you. I merely copied your words, to be forever immortalized as representative of you. As you note, we disagree in opinion, and you are welcome to yours... Just as I'm welcome to judge you based on yours, and espouse a fervent wish that you express your opinion to everyone you meet, particularly women. After all, you feel it's nothing to be ashamed of, no?
 
2012-08-30 01:30:56 PM  
Three things from Toronto this very morning:

One of the recent sexual assault victims responds to Ford's wrongheaded message, and notes what she was wearing when she was attacked.

I guess this woman was just asking for it living in a "bad" part of town. I used to live one block over, so I know very well how low-rent it is.

I wonder what this woman was wearing when the impostor decided to pull over the car she and her partner were in, and whether it mattered.

Then there's this statistic, from RAINN: "Approximately 2/3 of rapes were committed by someone known to the victim."

So, please, keep propagating the victim-shaming falsehood that a woman's manner of dress (it's always aimed at women, even though about 10% of sexual assault victims outside of prison are men; I guess they shouldn't have worn those jeans or that t-shirt) has anything to do with her chances of being sexually assaulted. Continue diverting responsibility away from the people who actually commit assault and ignoring the reality of when and where it happens.
 
2012-08-30 01:31:03 PM  

lunkhed: If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?


Well, it seems like the first three could lead to crimes of opportunity. I guess rape can be a crime of opportunity too, but in that case I don't think how someone is dressed contributes to the opportunity for the rapist. More like if they walk down a dark alleyway with that "you gonna get raped" photo prominently displayed at the entrance to the dark alleyway. The victim could be wearing a Burka and it probably wouldn't stop the rape.
 
2012-08-30 01:31:27 PM  
This week, on a very special episode of the Etobicoke Hillbillies...

/Like the Sarah Palin show, but for Canadians.
//The Ford family clearly has no idea what irony is -- listening to too much Alanis Morissette no doubt.
 
2012-08-30 01:33:17 PM  

WhoGAS: Theaetetus: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.

Oh. That's your problem. You think we're arguing that it makes it more likely.

No, that's not it at all. I'm telling you the level of sympathy for the victim I would show for those who do get raped. More clothing = More sympathy.

Rape naked or rape in a bhurka = Illegal and bad


So, you agree that it doesn't change the likelihood of occurrence, but still vary your sympathy to the victim based on their clothing... May I ask if this holds for other crimes? If a woman dressed "non-conservatively" is robbed, do you have less sympathy?
 
2012-08-30 01:36:10 PM  

PlatinumDragon: One of the recent sexual assault victims responds to Ford's wrongheaded message, and notes what she was wearing when she was attacked.


oh, snap!
 
2012-08-30 01:36:40 PM  
"Problematic" LOL

Can you imagine if a man had said this? Or even an old lady?
 
2012-08-30 01:36:42 PM  

Theaetetus: WhoGAS:
When you target me like this, I understand you think I'm an intellectual equal in Troll baiting and biting, but please don't assume that as I have no desire to argue opinions. You have yours; I have mine and nothing will change that.

I can still like you in other areas but when you do this, it really makes you look petty.

Oh, you. I'm neither trolling nor targeting you. I merely copied your words, to be forever immortalized as representative of you. As you note, we disagree in opinion, and you are welcome to yours... Just as I'm welcome to judge you based on yours, and espouse a fervent wish that you express your opinion to everyone you meet, particularly women. After all, you feel it's nothing to be ashamed of, no?


Lol. Such a silly request you've made of me. Tell you what, if you make the T-Shirt and send it to me, I'll gladly wear it just for you. I will also record any comments made so you can tell me that just because I wore the shirt that I shouldn't have had people attack me for it. It's not about what we wear, right? (okay, you know I'm just poking you here - I won't insult your intelligence by having you think otherwise)
 
2012-08-30 01:36:42 PM  

Theaetetus: Mr. Right: Date rape and what the FBI sometimes calls "drunk rape," when the victim has been drinking and is incapable of rational decisions, are affected by what the woman is wearing.

Not that I don't disagree with the rest of your post - and in fact, agree wholeheartedly with the second paragraph - I do want a citation for this, because I believe I've seen the opposite: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.


Perhaps the word "are" was too strong. Date rape can be affected what the woman wears. Those are the kinds of "rapists" where the perp says "She was asking for it." Makes the rape no less wrong but that's a frequent excuse. I don't have a citation, just anecdotal from cops and lawyers I've known and the fact that, over the years, I've had the great misfortune to be on the jury for several cases, 3 of them forms of date rape. And in every case the perp allowed as how the victim was dressed indicated to him that she was asking for it. And jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by non-victims as well as victims.
 
2012-08-30 01:38:51 PM  
I think we need to test this hypothesis by raping WhoGAS over and over again in different types of clothes.

what a sub-human.
 
2012-08-30 01:39:44 PM  

Theaetetus: lunkhed: If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?

Yep. Of course:
If you leave your car keys in the ignition, your car may be more likely to be stolen.
If you leave your house wide open, you may be more likely to be burgled.
If you leave your credit card at the supermarket, you may be more likely to be defrauded.
If you walk around dressed like a hooker... You're less likely to be raped.


If you leave your keys in the ignition and your car is stolen, the person stealing it is still a thief and should be prosecuted.
If you leave your house wide open, the person going in is still a thief and should be prosecuted..
If you leave your credit card at the supermarket, the person using it is still a thief and should be prosecuted..
If you walk around dressed like a hooker... and you get raped, the person doing the raping is still a rapist, and should be put to death.

In not a single one of those instances is it the persons "fault". Blaming a victim is still wrong, regardless of if they didn't take enough action to "prevent" it. And women still get raped, regardless of what they're wearing. Simply attempting to think on a level which allows for a woman to be at blame for being raped causes my brain to hurt. It requires a staggering degree of idiocy which can only be explained by parents being too closely related or consumption of large amounts of mercury, or perhaps lead paint chips.
 
2012-08-30 01:40:45 PM  

Theaetetus: WhoGAS: Theaetetus: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.

Oh. That's your problem. You think we're arguing that it makes it more likely.

No, that's not it at all. I'm telling you the level of sympathy for the victim I would show for those who do get raped. More clothing = More sympathy.

Rape naked or rape in a bhurka = Illegal and bad

So, you agree that it doesn't change the likelihood of occurrence, but still vary your sympathy to the victim based on their clothing... May I ask if this holds for other crimes? If a woman dressed "non-conservatively" is robbed, do you have less sympathy?


Correct, I would definitely say this is across the board.

You know what, are you ever in San Diego? If you are or I'm where you are, we should really get together and have a beer. I think you're the kind of person I could have a conversation with and understand what you'd I'm saying. Then we can objectify the women who walks in the bar...

Seriously, though, if you're ever here holler at me.
 
2012-08-30 01:40:52 PM  

Mr. Right: And in every case the perp allowed as how the victim was dressed indicated to him that she was asking for it.


Then the perp was farking stupid, and needs to learn what "consent" means. Not an excuse, ever. Please teach any young men you know what consent means so they don't land themselves in jail for trying to force themselves upon a person who didn't consent.
 
2012-08-30 01:41:03 PM  
"Date rape"

Never got this term. Ostensibly created to warn women that they could be raped by an acquaintance and dudes that they should not rape their acquaintances.

Erm, did people really need to be reminded of that?
 
2012-08-30 01:43:34 PM  

Tigger: I think we need to test this hypothesis by raping WhoGAS over and over again in different types of clothes.

what a sub-human.


I never claimed to be human.

/And I could use the sex...
 
2012-08-30 01:45:44 PM  

WhoGAS: Theaetetus: WhoGAS: Theaetetus: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.

Oh. That's your problem. You think we're arguing that it makes it more likely.

No, that's not it at all. I'm telling you the level of sympathy for the victim I would show for those who do get raped. More clothing = More sympathy.

Rape naked or rape in a bhurka = Illegal and bad

So, you agree that it doesn't change the likelihood of occurrence, but still vary your sympathy to the victim based on their clothing... May I ask if this holds for other crimes? If a woman dressed "non-conservatively" is robbed, do you have less sympathy?

Correct, I would definitely say this is across the board.

You know what, are you ever in San Diego? If you are or I'm where you are, we should really get together and have a beer. I think you're the kind of person I could have a conversation with and understand what you'd I'm saying. Then we can objectify the women who walks in the bar...

Seriously, though, if you're ever here holler at me.


Uh, no. I don't think so. I don't break bread with people who want to punish victims of crimes based on what they're wearing.
 
2012-08-30 01:46:40 PM  
I should add: it's equally (more?) likely those perps were simply trying to excuse their behaviour by trying to blame their victims for "asking for it" using any available excuse, regardless of relation to reality. Someone who doesn't care about consent in the first place will happily rationalize their choices afterward if they think anyone will accept those arguments.
 
2012-08-30 01:47:30 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-30 01:49:12 PM  

Theaetetus: WhoGAS: Theaetetus: WhoGAS: Theaetetus: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.

Oh. That's your problem. You think we're arguing that it makes it more likely.

No, that's not it at all. I'm telling you the level of sympathy for the victim I would show for those who do get raped. More clothing = More sympathy.

Rape naked or rape in a bhurka = Illegal and bad

So, you agree that it doesn't change the likelihood of occurrence, but still vary your sympathy to the victim based on their clothing... May I ask if this holds for other crimes? If a woman dressed "non-conservatively" is robbed, do you have less sympathy?

Correct, I would definitely say this is across the board.

You know what, are you ever in San Diego? If you are or I'm where you are, we should really get together and have a beer. I think you're the kind of person I could have a conversation with and understand what you'd I'm saying. Then we can objectify the women who walks in the bar...

Seriously, though, if you're ever here holler at me.

Uh, no. I don't think so. I don't break bread with people who want to punish victims of crimes based on what they're wearing.


Oh, wait a minute, now. When did we switch to the punishment phase of this?

Am I punishing a stranger by laughing behind their back, no.

If you asked me what I would do sitting on a jury, then my response would be "I would evaluate my recommendations based on law and not my personal feelings."

You know how this works and I already knew you were baiting me.

Now, you are saying that because you don't agree with one aspect of my beliefs that you would discount the entire person? Really?

Who's being closed and narrow minded here? Respect -2 on that one.
 
2012-08-30 01:49:52 PM  

Mr. Right: Theaetetus: Mr. Right: Date rape and what the FBI sometimes calls "drunk rape," when the victim has been drinking and is incapable of rational decisions, are affected by what the woman is wearing.

Not that I don't disagree with the rest of your post - and in fact, agree wholeheartedly with the second paragraph - I do want a citation for this, because I believe I've seen the opposite: jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by victims.

Perhaps the word "are" was too strong. Date rape can be affected what the woman wears. Those are the kinds of "rapists" where the perp says "She was asking for it." Makes the rape no less wrong but that's a frequent excuse. I don't have a citation, just anecdotal from cops and lawyers I've known and the fact that, over the years, I've had the great misfortune to be on the jury for several cases, 3 of them forms of date rape. And in every case the perp allowed as how the victim was dressed indicated to him that she was asking for it. And jeans or sweats are the most common clothing worn by non-victims as well as victims.


It's also considered an "easy target" by predators, in that they know that police, prosecutors, the media, and juries are more likely to minimize the crime and let them off. Your anecdotal evidence may have a confirmation bias with regard to cases that went to trial, mind you.
 
2012-08-30 01:50:18 PM  
I am an older woman and never have had an assault happen to me? Am I lucky? Yeah, there is an element of good fortune. But there is a larger element of caution. I do not and have never dressed to attract attention--I don't care how much I have the right to but I sure as hell never wanted to gain unwanted and dangerous attention through exercising my rights. It is just not worth it. I was always careful where I went and with who.
Look after yourself. Frankly, no one else is. Yes, we all have rights, absolutely, but who the hell wants to explain them to the prosecuting attorney for your case against the rapist or even worse, the coroner?
What the hell is wrong with people? And this is no new thing, this idiocy in the name of personal freedom and rights has been going on for years.
Take care of yourself, women. Give NO ONE an opportunity to hurt you. Accept that there are aggressive, crazy people out there who will prey on you if given a chance.
 
2012-08-30 01:51:49 PM  

Bronzemom: I am an older woman and never have had an assault happen to me? Am I lucky? Yeah, there is an element of good fortune. But there is a larger element of caution. I do not and have never dressed to attract attention--I don't care how much I have the right to but I sure as hell never wanted to gain unwanted and dangerous attention through exercising my rights. It is just not worth it. I was always careful where I went and with who.
Look after yourself. Frankly, no one else is. Yes, we all have rights, absolutely, but who the hell wants to explain them to the prosecuting attorney for your case against the rapist or even worse, the coroner?
What the hell is wrong with people? And this is no new thing, this idiocy in the name of personal freedom and rights has been going on for years.
Take care of yourself, women. Give NO ONE an opportunity to hurt you. Accept that there are aggressive, crazy people out there who will prey on you if given a chance.


Watch out, they'll brand you as a rapist lover for using common sense.
 
2012-08-30 01:53:52 PM  

Theaetetus: This is good advice, from a family planning perspective. I mean, if you don't dress like a whore, then you can't get pregnant according to Todd Akin.


Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Have a nice day.
 
2012-08-30 01:55:25 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Mr. Right: And in every case the perp allowed as how the victim was dressed indicated to him that she was asking for it.

Then the perp was farking stupid, and needs to learn what "consent" means. Not an excuse, ever. Please teach any young men you know what consent means so they don't land themselves in jail for trying to force themselves upon a person who didn't consent.


You do realize that when you're talking about someone who forces himself on a non-consenting woman, intelligence has nothing to do with it - the fellow is a sociopath? I do try to teach all young men I know about proper respect for women. I also counsel them against drunk driving, against driving on a suspended license, and against trafficking in illicit drugs. The intelligent ones realize that following the law is always the best course. Those with personality disorders or other mental deficiencies do not believe that rules apply to them. So they do believe if a woman is dressed in a manner that they find provocative, they are entitled to "have their way" with her because "She was asking for it." No matter how wrong it is, those whose mental defects are severe enough to permit them to believe they are entitled to have sex with a woman on the basis of how she's dressed are not susceptible to suggestions to the contrary. It's why they should be locked up until the nature and extent of their defect can be identified and corrected.
]
 
2012-08-30 01:56:10 PM  
This thread,while intellectually stimulating,suffers from a scarcity of lingerie-clad footballer pics....Let's try and change that,shall we?



m.nypost.com
i.usatoday.net
photos.lasvegassun.com
photos.lasvegassun.com
 
2012-08-30 01:56:25 PM  

WhippingBoy: Theaetetus: This is good advice, from a family planning perspective. I mean, if you don't dress like a whore, then you can't get pregnant according to Todd Akin.

Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Have a nice day.


He's bored and just playing. He may or may not believe it but the inconsistencies he's using and the bait tactics to try to get people to respond seem to imply that he is just having fun.

Don't take it personal. He's a genius when it comes to copyright and patent law, though.
 
2012-08-30 01:57:15 PM  
She's now offered the classic non-apology:

I didn't mean to cause such an alarm and I apologize if I did. I just want women to be safe 

She's sorry that she caused alarm, not for saying something so condescending and stupid. fark her.
 
2012-08-30 01:57:35 PM  

WhoGAS:
Oh, wait a minute, now. When did we switch to the punishment phase of this?

Am I punishing a stranger by laughing behind their back, no.


I disagree. Where they're a victim of a crime, laughing at them is minimizing the crime, particularly where you laugh at them based on an action or trait that is associated with the crime, even if it's done so erroneously. It sends a public message that you believe they're less worthy of sympathy and status as a member of society, and I find that despicable.

I did not ask what you'd do on a jury. What you do in public is enough.
 
2012-08-30 01:59:18 PM  

WhippingBoy:
Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a feminist


Oh, noes...
 
2012-08-30 01:59:32 PM  

Theaetetus: WhoGAS:
Oh, wait a minute, now. When did we switch to the punishment phase of this?

Am I punishing a stranger by laughing behind their back, no.

I disagree. Where they're a victim of a crime, laughing at them is minimizing the crime, particularly where you laugh at them based on an action or trait that is associated with the crime, even if it's done so erroneously. It sends a public message that you believe they're less worthy of sympathy and status as a member of society, and I find that despicable.

I did not ask what you'd do on a jury. What you do in public is enough.


Oh. Okay. That's cool, then. I can agree that you have an opinion on that. I disagree with the assumption but okay.

Have a beer now? Or did I misjudge your intellect?
 
2012-08-30 02:00:23 PM  
Whenever the light turns green I immediately step on the gas pedal without looking, because it's my right to go!!!
It doesn't matter if I die, because it's not my fault if I get hit by some idiot running the red light. The important thing is that I stood up for my rights!
 
2012-08-30 02:02:59 PM  

Theaetetus: WhippingBoy:
Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a feminist witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Oh, noes...



/now with context!
 
2012-08-30 02:03:31 PM  

Bronzemom: I am an older woman and never have had an assault happen to me? Am I lucky? Yeah, there is an element of good fortune. But there is a larger element of caution.


Please look over the information from RAINN at the link I posted above. You're more likely to be assaulted by someone you know than a stranger. Frankly, good fortune is probably the entire reason you haven't been assaulted, because you're more likely to be assaulted by a friend, relative, co-worker, or other acquaintance than a random person, so unless "caution" involves "never being alone around any male", your assertion is likely incorrect (and people who point that logical extension of "common sense" out, using the term "Schroedinger's Rapist", are called misandrists - quite telling about the mindset of the people who most promote myths about rape. Not saying you are, just betting someone will in this thread now that I've brought it up.)

My partner has worked with abuse and assault victims for years. Believe me when I say all the supposed common-sense advice means less than nothing; it actually makes things worse by encouraging survivors to question whether they could have done anything to prevent the assaults that happened to them and promoting incorrect assumptions about who is assaulted.
 
2012-08-30 02:05:07 PM  

Theaetetus: Your anecdotal evidence may have a confirmation bias with regard to cases that went to trial, mind you.


You're right, however, we found all 3 of the bastards guilty. Once, only because I was selected jury foreman and refused to let the jury go home until we reached a verdict. The two Teamsters on the jury were holding out for "not guilty" because they didn't want to "ruin the poor guy's reputation and life on the word of a girl who was dressed the way she was." Whether it was ethical or not, I told them that the only way the jury was leaving (so they could go home to dinner) was to reach a verdict and my mind was firmly made up; my vote wouldn't change. Fortunately, concern for their stomachs was greater than concern for the perp's future. 

BTW, not all Teamsters are like those two. But they bragged about being Teamsters and had about the most backwards opinions I've run across in a jury room, that's why it stuck these 20 years.
 
2012-08-30 02:07:23 PM  

WhoGAS:
He's bored and just playing. He may or may not believe it but the inconsistencies he's using and the bait tactics to try to get people to respond seem to imply that he is just having fun.

Don't take it personal. He's a genius when it comes to copyright and patent law, though.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-30 02:08:53 PM  

Mr. Right: Theaetetus: I told them that the only way the jury was leaving (so they could go home to dinner) was to reach a verdict and my mind was firmly made up; my vote wouldn't change.


Henry Fonda?
 
2012-08-30 02:11:45 PM  

WhippingBoy: Theaetetus: WhippingBoy:
Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a feminist witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Oh, noes...

/now with context!


It was the only part that I agreed with, plus the only part relevant to your opinion, so I figured I'd save time of the reader.
 
2012-08-30 02:12:28 PM  

Mr. Right: The intelligent ones realize that following the law is always the best course. Those with personality disorders or other mental deficiencies do not believe that rules apply to them. So they do believe if a woman is dressed in a manner that they find provocative, they are entitled to "have their way" with her because "She was asking for it." No matter how wrong it is, those whose mental defects are severe enough to permit them to believe they are entitled to have sex with a woman on the basis of how she's dressed are not susceptible to suggestions to the contrary.


The very existence of victim-blaming "advice", and entire communities who treat assault victims poorly based on assumptions that they were "asking for it" based upon how they dressed, should demonstrate that the problem is at least partly societal, not just limited to sociopaths and people with low intelligence or mental disorders. Rape culture exists, it is communicated socially. Where do you think men (and, distressingly, a lot of women) get the idea that an attractively-dressed woman is "asking for it" and is at least partly responsible for an assault? Because that's exactly what Krista Ford's "don't dress like a whore" statement communicates.
 
2012-08-30 02:12:44 PM  

Old Smokie: "Problematic" LOL

Can you imagine if a man had said this? Or even an old lady?


img838.imageshack.us
 
2012-08-30 02:13:08 PM  

Apos: This thread,while intellectually stimulating,suffers from a scarcity of lingerie-clad footballer pics....Let's try and change that,shall we?



[m.nypost.com image 500x379]
[i.usatoday.net image 490x854]
[photos.lasvegassun.com image 653x420]
[photos.lasvegassun.com image 653x416]


Much appreciated!
 
2012-08-30 02:16:55 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Bronzemom: I am an older woman and never have had an assault happen to me? Am I lucky? Yeah, there is an element of good fortune. But there is a larger element of caution.

Please look over the information from RAINN at the link I posted above. You're more likely to be assaulted by someone you know than a stranger. Frankly, good fortune is probably the entire reason you haven't been assaulted, because you're more likely to be assaulted by a friend, relative, co-worker, or other acquaintance than a random person, so unless "caution" involves "never being alone around any male", your assertion is likely incorrect (and people who point that logical extension of "common sense" out, using the term "Schroedinger's Rapist", are called misandrists - quite telling about the mindset of the people who most promote myths about rape. Not saying you are, just betting someone will in this thread now that I've brought it up.)

My partner has worked with abuse and assault victims for years. Believe me when I say all the supposed common-sense advice means less than nothing; it actually makes things worse by encouraging survivors to question whether they could have done anything to prevent the assaults that happened to them and promoting incorrect assumptions about who is assaulted.


Your last statement reads to me like you are saying that there is nothing a woman can do to prevent or reduce risk of sexual assault.
 
2012-08-30 02:25:25 PM  

darkmayo: PlatinumDragon: Bronzemom: I am an older woman and never have had an assault happen to me? Am I lucky? Yeah, there is an element of good fortune. But there is a larger element of caution.

Please look over the information from RAINN at the link I posted above. You're more likely to be assaulted by someone you know than a stranger. Frankly, good fortune is probably the entire reason you haven't been assaulted, because you're more likely to be assaulted by a friend, relative, co-worker, or other acquaintance than a random person, so unless "caution" involves "never being alone around any male", your assertion is likely incorrect (and people who point that logical extension of "common sense" out, using the term "Schroedinger's Rapist", are called misandrists - quite telling about the mindset of the people who most promote myths about rape. Not saying you are, just betting someone will in this thread now that I've brought it up.)

My partner has worked with abuse and assault victims for years. Believe me when I say all the supposed common-sense advice means less than nothing; it actually makes things worse by encouraging survivors to question whether they could have done anything to prevent the assaults that happened to them and promoting incorrect assumptions about who is assaulted.

Your last statement reads to me like you are saying that there is nothing a woman can do to prevent or reduce risk of sexual assault.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-08-30 02:25:28 PM  

darkmayo: Your last statement reads to me like you are saying that there is nothing a woman can do to prevent or reduce risk of sexual assault.


You mean aside from packing heat and drawing on any guy who even jokes about doing something she doesn't want to do? Go look at the statistics and tell me what those women could have done to reduce their chances of being attacked by a friend, relative, co-worker, or acquaintance. You eventually end up at a Schroedinger's Rapist-type situation, which the Fark Independents repeatedly assure me is misandrist and man-hating stuff. Maybe the problem isn't that women don't do enough to prevent people from assaulting them -- maybe the problem is that people (overwhelmingly men) force sexual contact upon others, regardless of circumstances. Barring telepathic control of potential perpretrators, you tell me, based on actual research and evidence, what someone can do to "reduce the risk" of encouraging someone to attack them.

You know would reduce a woman's risk of being sexually assaulted? Teaching men that being around an intoxicated woman, her mode of dress, or being alone in the same friggin' room does not mean "yes, let's have sex". Dropkicking frat boys who chant things like "No means yes! Yes means anal!" out of school and making them explain to their families why might also have an effect.
 
2012-08-30 02:25:43 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Mr. Right: The intelligent ones realize that following the law is always the best course. Those with personality disorders or other mental deficiencies do not believe that rules apply to them. So they do believe if a woman is dressed in a manner that they find provocative, they are entitled to "have their way" with her because "She was asking for it." No matter how wrong it is, those whose mental defects are severe enough to permit them to believe they are entitled to have sex with a woman on the basis of how she's dressed are not susceptible to suggestions to the contrary.

The very existence of victim-blaming "advice", and entire communities who treat assault victims poorly based on assumptions that they were "asking for it" based upon how they dressed, should demonstrate that the problem is at least partly societal, not just limited to sociopaths and people with low intelligence or mental disorders. Rape culture exists, it is communicated socially. Where do you think men (and, distressingly, a lot of women) get the idea that an attractively-dressed woman is "asking for it" and is at least partly responsible for an assault? Because that's exactly what Krista Ford's "don't dress like a whore" statement communicates.


I've never considered the origins of the excuse, just how to deal with it. In dealing with everyone from rapists to mild-mannered employees, we seem, societally, to have an inordinately high number of people who are, to varying degrees, pathologically incapable of being wrong. No excuse is too flimsy, too irrational, to be tried. The worst among them seem to believe that nothing they do is wrong so long as they can come up with an excuse. For "date rapists" the SHE WAS ASKING FOR IT works.

I've likened people like that to folks who drive the wrong way down a one way street. Normal people do that on occasion, but usually by accident. If you tell a sociopath that he's going the wrong way down a one way street, he'll find an excuse (I didn't see the arrow) which not only absolves him from all blame but it, in his warped mind, permits him to continue driving the wrong way. If he gets a ticket, the cop is a jerk because he doesn't understand that the fact that our driver didn't see the sign means he should be allowed to drive the wrong way whenever he wants!!!!

Our driver will also, by the way, be the most intolerant, road-raging SOB ever to get behind a wheel if he witnesses someone else driving the wrong way down the one-way street.

That's why I say that you can reach normal people with the message that no means no. Nothing gets through to the sociopath. I would also argue that people who are not rapists but believe the "she was asking for it" excuse have their own form of mental defect.
 
2012-08-30 02:26:33 PM  
The Accused 1988
Case closed
 
2012-08-30 02:30:12 PM  

PlatinumDragon: darkmayo: Your last statement reads to me like you are saying that there is nothing a woman can do to prevent or reduce risk of sexual assault.

You mean aside from packing heat and drawing on any guy who even jokes about doing something she doesn't want to do? Go look at the statistics and tell me what those women could have done to reduce their chances of being attacked by a friend, relative, co-worker, or acquaintance. You eventually end up at a Schroedinger's Rapist-type situation, which the Fark Independents repeatedly assure me is misandrist and man-hating stuff. Maybe the problem isn't that women don't do enough to prevent people from assaulting them -- maybe the problem is that people (overwhelmingly men) force sexual contact upon others, regardless of circumstances. Barring telepathic control of potential perpretrators, you tell me, based on actual research and evidence, what someone can do to "reduce the risk" of encouraging someone to attack them.

You know would reduce a woman's risk of being sexually assaulted? Teaching men that being around an intoxicated woman, her mode of dress, or being alone in the same friggin' room does not mean "yes, let's have sex". Dropkicking frat boys who chant things like "No means yes! Yes means anal!" out of school and making them explain to their families why might also have an effect.


So if there is no way to decrease it from happening, is there ways to increase your risk (not just from people you know, but from strangers as well)

/being a bit of a DA here.
 
2012-08-30 02:34:41 PM  
PlatinumDragon:

BTW, while no means no and how a woman is dressed in no way permits a man to take any liberties with her whatsoever, let's also make clear that when an attractive woman is provocatively dressed, men will look. I understand that drooling is classless but when an attractive woman is wandering the beach in 3 postage stamps and a small piece of yarn, men are going to stare, unless accompanied by a sharp-elbowed spouse. And even then, we're going to get the most out of our peripheral vision. Still no permission to touch or otherwise harass, but we will gaze longingly. And she was asking for that.
 
2012-08-30 02:35:33 PM  
Fark, i find the lack of pictures disturbing
 
2012-08-30 02:36:45 PM  
So whats wrong with dressing like a whore?
 
2012-08-30 02:38:30 PM  

darkmayo: Your last statement reads to me like you are saying that there is nothing a woman can do to prevent or reduce risk of sexual assault.


There are lots of things that a woman can do that will make it more likely that a rapist will target someone else instead of her.

Rapists will always go for the best target, no matter what that is. If all women wear more conservative clothing, it won't reduce rape at all. All women are doing by taking these precautions is making sure that somebody else gets raped instead of her.

Rape is NOT a crime of opportunity. Normal people don't head for the store for a gallon of milk and decide to rape somebody instead because she's dressed like a slut. If you have an uncontrollable urge to rape somebody because she's dressed sluttily or because you think you'd get away with it, seek professional help.
 
2012-08-30 02:41:16 PM  
darkmayo: So if there is no way to decrease it from happening, is there ways to increase your risk (not just from people you know, but from strangers as well)

Again, Schroedinger's Rapist. Practically the only truly common factor in 85% of assaults is that the victim is female and the attacker male, with another 10%-odd being male-on-male. Woman on man does happen; some of those get posted to Fark all the time. Statutory assault and authority figure-taking-advantage-of-teenage male is still assault. However, the overwhelming majority of assaults are male-on-female, and as noted by actual facts 3/4 of those are committed by people known to the victim, so unless risk mitigation involves treating every male as a potential rapist, then there is nothing a person can do to influence the chances of a given individual trying to assault her or him. This has to be a society-wide effort to make it damned clear that there is no excuse or mitigating factor that makes it OK to sexually assault another person, under any circumstances, because any such mitigation requires placing responsibility upon a person who in no way invited or encouraged an assault, not by wearing a skirt, not by smiling, not by having a drink. This has to be a big, bright, do-not-cross line, because as noted above rapists will use any available excuse to introduce doubt and uncertainty where there is none, and a distressing number of people will choose to side with known assaulters in order to avoid "ruining their lives", or to "stop ruining the scene", or because "I've heard she likes to sleep around anyway".

No means no. End of story.
 
2012-08-30 02:41:29 PM  

The Jami Turman Fan Club: .

Rape is NOT a crime of opportunity. Normal people don't head for the store for a gallon of milk and decide to rape somebody instead because she's dressed like a slut. If you have an uncontrollable urge to rape somebody because she's dressed sluttily or because you think you'd get away with it, seek professional help.


FTFY.
 
2012-08-30 02:43:35 PM  

Theaetetus: WhippingBoy: Theaetetus: WhippingBoy:
Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a feminist witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Oh, noes...

/now with context!

It was the only part that I agreed with, plus the only part relevant to your opinion, so I figured I'd save time of the reader.


It's too bad you can't see what you've become.
 
2012-08-30 02:47:00 PM  

MoronLessOff: Apos: This thread,while intellectually stimulating,suffers from a scarcity of lingerie-clad footballer pics....Let's try and change that,shall we?



[m.nypost.com image 500x379]
[i.usatoday.net image 490x854]
[photos.lasvegassun.com image 653x420]
[photos.lasvegassun.com image 653x416]

Much appreciated!


*tips bowler hat* Think nothing of it,good sir.
 
2012-08-30 02:47:03 PM  

Mr. Right: I've never considered the origins of the excuse, just how to deal with it.


You cannot properly counteract the effects of the excuse until you understand the genesis and context of the excuse.

And if someone you're staring at gives you a dirty look, or tries to hurry away after noticing your leer, or tells you to stop... you stop. You don't keep doing it. That's basic respect.
 
2012-08-30 02:47:16 PM  
back to reality...

www2.pictures.zimbio.com
 
2012-08-30 02:49:04 PM  

PlatinumDragon: darkmayo: So if there is no way to decrease it from happening, is there ways to increase your risk (not just from people you know, but from strangers as well)

Again, Schroedinger's Rapist. Practically the only truly common factor in 85% of assaults is that the victim is female and the attacker male, with another 10%-odd being male-on-male. Woman on man does happen; some of those get posted to Fark all the time. Statutory assault and authority figure-taking-advantage-of-teenage male is still assault. However, the overwhelming majority of assaults are male-on-female, and as noted by actual facts 3/4 of those are committed by people known to the victim, so unless risk mitigation involves treating every male as a potential rapist, then there is nothing a person can do to influence the chances of a given individual trying to assault her or him. This has to be a society-wide effort to make it damned clear that there is no excuse or mitigating factor that makes it OK to sexually assault another person, under any circumstances, because any such mitigation requires placing responsibility upon a person who in no way invited or encouraged an assault, not by wearing a skirt, not by smiling, not by having a drink. This has to be a big, bright, do-not-cross line, because as noted above rapists will use any available excuse to introduce doubt and uncertainty where there is none, and a distressing number of people will choose to side with known assaulters in order to avoid "ruining their lives", or to "stop ruining the scene", or because "I've heard she likes to sleep around anyway".

No means no. End of story.


There was a very interesting and sickening article that was posted (I think on fark) a few months ago that was a bunch of responses from rapists on why or what they thought when they raped or were about to rape someone, of course none of them thought it was rape and like you mentioned above had every excuse in the world to justify what they were doing.
 
2012-08-30 03:00:03 PM  

darkmayo: There was a very interesting and sickening article that was posted (I think on fark) a few months ago that was a bunch of responses from rapists on why or what they thought when they raped or were about to rape someone, of course none of them thought it was rape and like you mentioned above had every excuse in the world to justify what they were doing.


And those were just the ones who got caught, IIRthe articleC. Grasping at any possible excuse they can conceive of to deflect attention away from the fact that they forced themselves upon women who didn't want to do anything. I'm also reminded of that bigshot RCC bishop (the story was linked here last night) who asserted that some abusive priests were the innocent victims of teen "seducers" - blame the victim, absolve the attacker of responsibility.

I remember the case of that 11-year-old girl who was gang-raped, and later blamed by the entire bloody town for the assault because she "dressed like a slut". People were more concerned with the lives of her attackers being ruined by the charges than the assault that led to those charges in the first place.

Don't get me started on Dominique Strauss-Kahn or Roman Polanski. The creepy euphemisms used to refer to the former's "advances" toward women, and the way otherwise-rational people act as if the latter was somehow the victim when he jumped bail to avoid being sentenced for raping a 13-year-old, send my rage meter off-scale.

There are a lot of things I can't discuss for various personal and confidentiality reasons, but suffice it to say every time someone offers so-called "common sense advice", I think "you're lucky you don't personally know the reality."
 
2012-08-30 03:01:41 PM  
If she was wearing purple, she was just begging to get graped.
 
2012-08-30 03:05:35 PM  
So the moral of the story is: if anyone asks for your advice on preventing sexual assault, say nothing, lest their delicate sensitivities are violated.
 
2012-08-30 03:15:47 PM  

WhippingBoy: So the moral of the story is: if anyone asks for your advice on preventing sexual assault, say nothing, lest their delicate sensitivities are violated.


Pretty much. I think it's reasonable to say that if you are wearing clothing that draws additional attention to you that there is added risk to being assaulted. Even if it is only very slight. There is a very slight chance my airbag will go off in my truck if I get in an accident tonight, but I'm glad it's there.

You CAN wear a KKK costume in Harlem, but not a great idea. Looking in a mirror and asking yourself if your outfit is appropriate for the situation is just smart.

I appreciate myself a scantily clad woman, and don't want them to stop. All I'm saying is consider a jacket over top of that skirt if you are going to walk through the park at night alone. use common sense
 
2012-08-30 03:18:11 PM  

WhippingBoy: So the moral of the story is: if anyone asks for your advice on preventing sexual assault, say nothing, lest their delicate sensitivities are violated.


In regards to the majority of sexual assaults that happen are by someone the victim knows, there really isn't a lot one can do other than some extreme measures.

Of course the stranger in a dark alley rape situations, which do happen but not anywhere near the frequency of other forms of rape yea you can not walk down dark alleys at night, be aware of your surroundings, being in shape and being able to smash a persons face in with your elbow likely also helps.
 
2012-08-30 03:25:28 PM  

WhippingBoy: So the moral of the story is: if anyone asks for your advice on preventing sexual assault, say nothing, lest their delicate sensitivities are violated.


As opposed to simply offering it unasked, like a lot of people do, regardless of accuracy. After all, it's "common sense", even if it has no relation to or basis in what actually happens. It's factesque.
 
2012-08-30 03:26:42 PM  

WhippingBoy: So the moral of the story is: if anyone asks for your advice on preventing sexual assault, say nothing, lest their delicate sensitivities are violated.


After the Aiken thing this last week, I think silence on the matter might be the right course.
 
2012-08-30 03:30:41 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: You CAN wear a KKK costume in Harlem, but not a great idea. Looking in a mirror and asking yourself if your outfit is appropriate for the situation is just smart.


So what you're saying is that dressing attractively equals telling other people you want to have sex, amirite? Because that's the equivalence you're making here. A KKK costume has specific racist political meanings intended to trigger particular reactions in people. A short skirt or tank top, by the standard you've just established, must mean something. What ever could that intention you're mapping on to a wide range of clothing choices be?
 
2012-08-30 03:31:28 PM  

WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World


True, but we should be strving for the ideal as much as possible.

Also, your correlation is flawed in multiple ways.

Try to be less stupid.
 
2012-08-30 03:32:09 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World

True, but we should be striving for the ideal as much as possible.

Also, your correlation is flawed in multiple ways.

Try to be less stupid.


Typo fixed.
 
2012-08-30 03:38:32 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Representative of the unwashed masses: You CAN wear a KKK costume in Harlem, but not a great idea. Looking in a mirror and asking yourself if your outfit is appropriate for the situation is just smart.

So what you're saying is that dressing attractively equals telling other people you want to have sex, amirite? Because that's the equivalence you're making here. A KKK costume has specific racist political meanings intended to trigger particular reactions in people. A short skirt or tank top, by the standard you've just established, must mean something. What ever could that intention you're mapping on to a wide range of clothing choices be?


Way to take it out of context. I was picking an outlandish example, not saying anything at all bad about any outfit. Please don't try to put words into my mouth. Hell if you had read my entire post you'd realize I just want people to be careful and consider the situations that they may find themselves in, from there make a smart decision.

Perhaps a better analogy is sure you CAN wear a Boston Red Sox Jersey to a game at Yankee stadium but SHOULD you do that? That's everyone's choice, but even myself (white male) I'll consider wearing or not wearing an item of clothing that may offend someone.
 
2012-08-30 03:44:43 PM  
Interesting thread.
 
2012-08-30 03:45:25 PM  

MoronLessOff: CygnusDarius: MoronLessOff: fknra: [25.media.tumblr.com image 500x575]

... i'm... ok with this.

Looks like she's going deep.

She should tackle sack her.

I'd sack her too, IYKWIM.


Never stick your dick in crazy, and she has a documented family history of batshiat crazy.
 
2012-08-30 03:46:39 PM  

lunkhed: If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?


Correct.
 
2012-08-30 03:48:16 PM  

Agent Smiths Laugh: Agent Smiths Laugh: WhippingBoy: Women should be able to dress how they want, just as I should be able to leave a wallet full of cash in plain sight in my unlocked car in the bad part of town.

Real World != Ideal World

True, but we should be striving for the ideal as much as possible.

Also, your correlation is flawed in multiple ways.

Try to be less stupid.

Typo fixed.


Try to be less stupid.
 
2012-08-30 04:03:58 PM  
You'd think she would have learned from the cop who got burned at York University for saying EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

Stupid idiot.
 
2012-08-30 04:32:18 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: PlatinumDragon: Representative of the unwashed masses: You CAN wear a KKK costume in Harlem, but not a great idea. Looking in a mirror and asking yourself if your outfit is appropriate for the situation is just smart.

So what you're saying is that dressing attractively equals telling other people you want to have sex, amirite? Because that's the equivalence you're making here. A KKK costume has specific racist political meanings intended to trigger particular reactions in people. A short skirt or tank top, by the standard you've just established, must mean something. What ever could that intention you're mapping on to a wide range of clothing choices be?

Way to take it out of context. I was picking an outlandish example, not saying anything at all bad about any outfit. Please don't try to put words into my mouth. Hell if you had read my entire post you'd realize I just want people to be careful and consider the situations that they may find themselves in, from there make a smart decision.

Perhaps a better analogy is sure you CAN wear a Boston Red Sox Jersey to a game at Yankee stadium but SHOULD you do that? That's everyone's choice, but even myself (white male) I'll consider wearing or not wearing an item of clothing that may offend someone.


You implied that wearing a jacket over a skirt can somehow magically make you invisible to rapists, and that it is common sense to hold such a belief.

/Common sense may be common, but that doesn't make it good sense.
 
2012-08-30 04:47:15 PM  

Theaetetus: lunkhed: If I leave my car keys in the ignition, there's no blame on me.
If I leave my house wide open, there's no blame on me.
If I write my credit card number and PIN at a supermarket cashpoint, there's no blame on me.
If I walk around dressed as a hooker, there's no blame on me.

Amirite?

Yep. Of course:
If you leave your car keys in the ignition, your car may be more likely to be stolen.
If you leave your house wide open, you may be more likely to be burgled.
If you leave your credit card at the supermarket, you may be more likely to be defrauded.
If you walk around dressed like a hooker... You're less likely to be raped.


Proof? Evidence? Citation?
 
2012-08-30 04:50:49 PM  
If you walk around dressed like a hooker... You're less likely to be raped.

Proof? Evidence? Citation?


What I meant to say.
 
2012-08-30 04:56:22 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: PlatinumDragon: Representative of the unwashed masses: You CAN wear a KKK costume in Harlem, but not a great idea. Looking in a mirror and asking yourself if your outfit is appropriate for the situation is just smart.

So what you're saying is that dressing attractively equals telling other people you want to have sex, amirite? Because that's the equivalence you're making here. A KKK costume has specific racist political meanings intended to trigger particular reactions in people. A short skirt or tank top, by the standard you've just established, must mean something. What ever could that intention you're mapping on to a wide range of clothing choices be?

Way to take it out of context. I was picking an outlandish example, not saying anything at all bad about any outfit. Please don't try to put words into my mouth. Hell if you had read my entire post you'd realize I just want people to be careful and consider the situations that they may find themselves in, from there make a smart decision.

Perhaps a better analogy is sure you CAN wear a Boston Red Sox Jersey to a game at Yankee stadium but SHOULD you do that? That's everyone's choice, but even myself (white male) I'll consider wearing or not wearing an item of clothing that may offend someone.


And again; the implication you make is that wearing a particular piece or set of clothing communicates a message to others that may incite a negative reaction. It's not as if people in Harlem just loathe people wearing white robes and hoods, and Yankees fans supposedly loathe people wearing Red Sox journeys, for no reason, right? Your argument relies on the implication that clothing choices can communicate messages, even messages such as "I'm a member of a racist group and think dark-skinned people are inferior" or "Fark New York", and that those unspoken messages can trigger reactions. By making a comparison using that outlandish, as you described it, example, you also imply that people who choose to dress in an attractive manner are communicating a message and inviting a reaction. I'm curious to learn what you think that message is, because it goes to the root of the dispute here - does a person who dresses attractively necessarily communicate that s/he wants to have sex? I would strongly disagree with such an assertion. Wanting to look sexy does not mean wanting to have sex, and we should strictly expect people to avoid conflating the two ideas.

If all you were trying to say is that men just can't control themselves, that's offensive to all of us men that can control ourselves - and it still doesn't place any responsibility upon a woman (or man) for dressing in a fashion deemed attractive. That's the excuse peddled by fine, upstanding folks like the Taliban.
 
2012-08-30 05:03:47 PM  
These threads are a great way to see which Farkers are misogynists, assholes, and idiots. Glad to know they enjoy getting off on women being attacked and brutalized by men who can't control themselves.

Also, what's your definition of "dressing like a whore"? Some people think anything less than an Eskimo outfit in the middle of summer is whorish, while others find complete nudity normal.

/it's truly amazing the lengths people will go to paint women as sinful beasts trying to seduce and spoil men
//also says a lot about how weak and worhtless the men are when they admit to being unable to resist
 
2012-08-30 05:11:22 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Maybe the problem isn't that women don't do enough to prevent people from assaulting them -- maybe the problem is that people (overwhelmingly men) force sexual contact upon others, regardless of circumstances.


But it's not irregardless of circumstance. Rapists are predators. Predators look for their prey to show certain signs or weaknesses. They look for a victim that has their senses compromised or may show a lack of awareness. They will maneuver their prey into the situation that will allow them to rape their victim yet have plausible deniability that is was consensual.
 
2012-08-30 05:13:43 PM  
Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

Would I wear a my favorite red bandana in a Crips run neighborhood late at night? NO! BECAUSE I'M NOT A MORON AND I LEFT IT AT HOME JUST IN CASE!

I wear my seatbelt in a car because there is a chance I'll get in a collision. More than likely I won't. But it's a PRECAUTION. I wear a hardhat on an industrial site just in case something falls on my head.

If you're walking in a secluded area with poor lighting late at night wouldn't you feel safer wearing something that is instantly forgettable or a tight little dress that draws the attention of NASA. These are decisions that everyone has to make for themselves. Most people are good and won't think of attacking a lone woman. Just I'm not saying that anyone should be required to wear anything that they don't want to. And I will feel just as bad for someone wearing a skimpy dress as old sweatpants who is assaulted. But don't just on me just because I'm suggesting that people take a variety of precautions when they go out. For example, keep your wallet tucked away, or your purse close to you so a mugger can't take your money easily.

Expect the best of people but be wary for the worst of them.
 
2012-08-30 05:15:00 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Wanting to look sexy does not mean wanting to have sex, and we should strictly expect people to avoid conflating the two ideas.


How can you have any concept of looking sexy with out it being implicitly tied to wanting sex. I mean that's why looking sexy is one form of dress that anybody could identify and looking cute is totally different. Looking sexy and wanting sex, or at least wanting to advertise sexual availability cannot be separated as the concept of sexy cannot exist without the former.
 
2012-08-30 05:26:38 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

Would I wear a my favorite red bandana in a Crips run neighborhood late at night? NO! BECAUSE I'M NOT A MORON AND I LEFT IT AT HOME JUST IN CASE!

I wear my seatbelt in a car because there is a chance I'll get in a collision. More than likely I won't. But it's a PRECAUTION. I wear a hardhat on an industrial site just in case something falls on my head.

If you're walking in a secluded area with poor lighting late at night wouldn't you feel safer wearing something that is instantly forgettable or a tight little dress that draws the attention of NASA. These are decisions that everyone has to make for themselves. Most people are good and won't think of attacking a lone woman. Just I'm not saying that anyone should be required to wear anything that they don't want to. And I will feel just as bad for someone wearing a skimpy dress as old sweatpants who is assaulted. But don't just on me just because I'm suggesting that people take a variety of precautions when they go out. For example, keep your wallet tucked away, or your purse close to you so a mugger can't take your money easily.

Expect the best of people but be wary for the worst of them.


Somehow I doubt that a person lurking in a dark alley for someone to rob/rape would care what they were wearing as long as they could rape/rob them.
 
2012-08-30 05:28:48 PM  

manimal2878: PlatinumDragon: Wanting to look sexy does not mean wanting to have sex, and we should strictly expect people to avoid conflating the two ideas.

How can you have any concept of looking sexy with out it being implicitly tied to wanting sex. I mean that's why looking sexy is one form of dress that anybody could identify and looking cute is totally different. Looking sexy and wanting sex, or at least wanting to advertise sexual availability cannot be separated as the concept of sexy cannot exist without the former.


By that logic, everyone at the beach is just begging for a farking.
 
2012-08-30 05:30:59 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah:

Somehow I doubt that a person lurking in a dark alley for someone to rob/rape would care what they were wearing as long as they could rape/rob them.



fc09.deviantart.net

Then I take it no one should ever take precautions because it's destined to happen? Hell you'd think I came in here and called all women sluts or something. One last time. Be careful. Consider taking precautions. It's what smart people do.
 
2012-08-30 05:38:20 PM  
The Fords unfortunately still not found on road dead

Link

Worst mayor any city has ever had
 
2012-08-30 05:53:09 PM  

Inflatable Rhetoric: If you walk around dressed like a hooker... You're less likely to be raped.

Proof? Evidence? Citation?

What I meant to say.


You should spend less time fixing typos and more time clicking on the cited links to read the evidence and proof therein.
 
2012-08-30 05:59:45 PM  

BruinsHockey: And people wonder why Toronto is hated outside of Ontario


Not just outside of Ontario.

/905-er here
//hates T.O.
///commutes in to work there
 
2012-08-30 06:04:03 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

Would I wear a my favorite red bandana in a Crips run neighborhood late at night? NO! BECAUSE I'M NOT A MORON AND I LEFT IT AT HOME JUST IN CASE!

I wear my seatbelt in a car because there is a chance I'll get in a collision. More than likely I won't. But it's a PRECAUTION. I wear a hardhat on an industrial site just in case something falls on my head.

If you're walking in a secluded area with poor lighting late at night wouldn't you feel safer wearing something that is instantly forgettable or a tight little dress that draws the attention of NASA. These are decisions that everyone has to make for themselves. Most people are good and won't think of attacking a lone woman. Just I'm not saying that anyone should be required to wear anything that they don't want to. And I will feel just as bad for someone wearing a skimpy dress as old sweatpants who is assaulted. But don't just on me just because I'm suggesting that people take a variety of precautions when they go out. For example, keep your wallet tucked away, or your purse close to you so a mugger can't take your money easily.

Expect the best of people but be wary for the worst of them.


Maybe you could tell us where all of the "Rapist Neighbourhoods" are so we can make sure that we can take the proper precaution to not get caught there at night in our bar outfits.

If I'm walking alone in a dark, secluded area, I would feel safer simply not being there. The clothes I'm wearing wouldn't make me feel more or less safe, because the risk factor is that I'm walking alone in a dark, secluded area. A rapist is not looking to steal my dress and my high heels, they are looking to violate my body. I would have to wear a literal suit of armor if I wanted my clothing to reduce my risk factor of being raped, and even that would be no guarantee of safety.

I don't take issue with promoting safety precautions and awareness, I would just prefer if we could focus on safety precautions that might actually help to mitigate risk, rather than just making women feel ashamed for wanting to wear clothes that make them feel confident and attractive.
If you make the decision to walk home alone, inebriated, through a dark, secluded area where there happens to be a rapist hanging around, do you really think that you would be safer wearing a jacket?

/That's like thinking that home intruders won't find you if you just hide in bed under the blankets.
 
2012-08-30 06:09:16 PM  

suziequzie: BruinsHockey: And people wonder why Toronto is hated outside of Ontario

Not just outside of Ontario.

/905-er here
//hates T.O.
///commutes in to work there


Not just outside Toronto, some days I hate this place, other days I love it. So far the love it is winning.
 
2012-08-30 06:17:07 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Keizer_Ghidorah:

Somehow I doubt that a person lurking in a dark alley for someone to rob/rape would care what they were wearing as long as they could rape/rob them.


[fc09.deviantart.net image 750x600]

Then I take it no one should ever take precautions because it's destined to happen? Hell you'd think I came in here and called all women sluts or something. One last time. Be careful. Consider taking precautions. It's what smart people do.



And the point being made is that wearing more concealing clothing doesn't really constitute a precaution (at least according to many studies linked ITT). Not walking home alone, drunk, in the dark, through a secluded/dangerous place? That's a precaution. Walking tall, as Ms. Ford suggested, as to not make oneself look weak and rape-able, while also carrying a weapon? That's a precaution, too. But if you're gonna be the victim of a 'wrong place, wrong time' rape, how sexily you're dressed doesn't really play into it.
 
2012-08-30 06:31:12 PM  

Loomy: Representative of the unwashed masses: Keizer_Ghidorah:

Somehow I doubt that a person lurking in a dark alley for someone to rob/rape would care what they were wearing as long as they could rape/rob them.


[fc09.deviantart.net image 750x600]

Then I take it no one should ever take precautions because it's destined to happen? Hell you'd think I came in here and called all women sluts or something. One last time. Be careful. Consider taking precautions. It's what smart people do.


And the point being made is that wearing more concealing clothing doesn't really constitute a precaution (at least according to many studies linked ITT). Not walking home alone, drunk, in the dark, through a secluded/dangerous place? That's a precaution. Walking tall, as Ms. Ford suggested, as to not make oneself look weak and rape-able, while also carrying a weapon? That's a precaution, too. But if you're gonna be the victim of a 'wrong place, wrong time' rape, how sexily you're dressed doesn't really play into it.


sigh... ok pretend I am a dad talking to a daughter then. I don't care. I have no issue with people wearing whatever the fark they want. Of course there are people out there who mean to harm others. Nothing you do can prevent that. As a friendly statement I would say think about what you are doing, where you are going etc and try to be ready for it.

Look we're basically saying the same thing. I'm merely suggesting that in some cases it may not be wise to wear something that draws attention to you. How that's defined is different for everyone. I had my opinion on what I would want my daughter/girlfriend etc to wear in those kinds of cases. And just like assholes, everyone has an opinion.
 
2012-08-30 06:41:26 PM  

manimal2878: PlatinumDragon: Wanting to look sexy does not mean wanting to have sex, and we should strictly expect people to avoid conflating the two ideas.

How can you have any concept of looking sexy with out it being implicitly tied to wanting sex. I mean that's why looking sexy is one form of dress that anybody could identify and looking cute is totally different. Looking sexy and wanting sex, or at least wanting to advertise sexual availability cannot be separated as the concept of sexy cannot exist without the former.


If you can't perceive a difference between wanting to look attractive and specifically wanting to have sex, then congratulations on demonstrating your lack of knowledge about consent.
 
2012-08-30 06:48:26 PM  
Does expressing intense outrage and flying into histrionics every time someone gives potentially naive advice (e.g. "don't dress like a whore") really address the root of the problem? Does telling people to kill themselves or insinuating that they, themselves, are "probable rapists" because they advocate what they believe to be valid safety precautions make people want to listen to what you have to say?

Perhaps if we could drop the dramatics and act like adults, we might actually make some progress...
 
2012-08-30 06:49:35 PM  
Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.
 
2012-08-30 06:54:15 PM  
Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

And when you assert that clothing choice is an influence upon an individual's decision to sexually assault another, you'd better have evidence to back that assertion up and understand what you're communicating. So far, you haven't presented any evidence that rapists, stranger or acquaintance, are motivated enough by clothing for wearing "non-provocative" items to make any appreciable difference - in fact, research indicates that a sense of entitlement to a potential victim's body, a desire to control and dominate, and perceived physical vulnerability are the main factors (note that "attractive" != "vulnerable"). The fact that a person was wearing a short skirt or high heels doesn't seem to be even a secondary motivation, and given the wide array of ages, classes, and sartorial choices of victims across the population it's insulting to victims to imply such. I posted a link to a statement by a recent victim who made that very point.

In short: clothing choice does fark-all to mitigate the risk of being assaulted, and if you're going to assert otherwise you'd better bring facts, because bluster won't cut it. If you feel personally insulted that I continue to disagree and point out flaws in your assertions, tough shiat - demonstrate that your "common sense" suggestions have any evident relation to what actually happens.
 
2012-08-30 06:54:31 PM  

ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.


You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.
 
2012-08-30 06:57:02 PM  

ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.


Now that's just crazy talk.
 
2012-08-30 07:04:33 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

And when you assert that clothing choice is an influence upon an individual's decision to sexually assault another, you'd better have evidence to back that assertion up and understand what you're communicating. So far, you haven't presented any evidence that rapists, stranger or acquaintance, are motivated enough by clothing for wearing "non-provocative" items to make any appreciable difference - in fact, research indicates that a sense of entitlement to a potential victim's body, a desire to control and dominate, and perceived physical vulnerability are the main factors (note that "attractive" != "vulnerable"). The fact that a person was wearing a short skirt or high heels doesn't seem to be even a secondary motivation, and given the wide array of ages, classes, and sartorial choices of victims across the population it's insulting to victims to imply such. I posted a link to a statement by a recent victim who made that very point.

In short: clothing choice does fark-all to mitigate the risk of being assaulted, and if you're going to assert otherwise you'd better bring facts, because bluster won't cut it. If you feel personally insulted that I continue to disagree and point out flaws in your assertions, tough shiat - demonstrate that your "common sense" suggestions have any evident relation to what actually happens.


I get it you want to be angry and infer more into my statements than was intended. Now go away
 
2012-08-30 07:07:40 PM  

WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.


Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.
 
2012-08-30 07:10:07 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: PlatinumDragon: Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

And when you assert that clothing choice is an influence upon an individual's decision to sexually assault another, you'd better have evidence to back that assertion up and understand what you're communicating. So far, you haven't presented any evidence that rapists, stranger or acquaintance, are motivated enough by clothing for wearing "non-provocative" items to make any appreciable difference - in fact, research indicates that a sense of entitlement to a potential victim's body, a desire to control and dominate, and perceived physical vulnerability are the main factors (note that "attractive" != "vulnerable"). The fact that a person was wearing a short skirt or high heels doesn't seem to be even a secondary motivation, and given the wide array of ages, classes, and sartorial choices of victims across the population it's insulting to victims to imply such. I posted a link to a statement by a recent victim who made that very point.

In short: clothing choice does fark-all to mitigate the risk of being assaulted, and if you're going to assert otherwise you'd better bring facts, because bluster won't cut it. If you feel personally insulted that I continue to disagree and point out flaws in your assertions, tough shiat - demonstrate that your "common sense" suggestions have any evident relation to what actually happens.

I get it you want to be angry and infer more into my statements than was intended. Now go away


I'm angry? You're the one telling me to "get farked" and "go away" because I keep challenging you to present evidence to support your assertions.
 
2012-08-30 07:13:44 PM  

PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.


You're arguing that most rapists are men; I agree that this is true.
I'm arguing that most men are not rapists; therefore the general, unqualified statement "teach men not to rape" is insulting and sexist. I don't know any men who need to be taught not to rape.
 
2012-08-30 07:23:27 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: Loomy: Representative of the unwashed masses: Keizer_Ghidorah:

Somehow I doubt that a person lurking in a dark alley for someone to rob/rape would care what they were wearing as long as they could rape/rob them.


[fc09.deviantart.net image 750x600]

Then I take it no one should ever take precautions because it's destined to happen? Hell you'd think I came in here and called all women sluts or something. One last time. Be careful. Consider taking precautions. It's what smart people do.


And the point being made is that wearing more concealing clothing doesn't really constitute a precaution (at least according to many studies linked ITT). Not walking home alone, drunk, in the dark, through a secluded/dangerous place? That's a precaution. Walking tall, as Ms. Ford suggested, as to not make oneself look weak and rape-able, while also carrying a weapon? That's a precaution, too. But if you're gonna be the victim of a 'wrong place, wrong time' rape, how sexily you're dressed doesn't really play into it.

sigh... ok pretend I am a dad talking to a daughter then. I don't care. I have no issue with people wearing whatever the fark they want. Of course there are people out there who mean to harm others. Nothing you do can prevent that. As a friendly statement I would say think about what you are doing, where you are going etc and try to be ready for it.

Look we're basically saying the same thing. I'm merely suggesting that in some cases it may not be wise to wear something that draws attention to you. How that's defined is different for everyone. I had my opinion on what I would want my daughter/girlfriend etc to wear in those kinds of cases. And just like assholes, everyone has an opinion.


Anything you wear can draw attention to you for any reason. The point is that rapists don't give a flying fig about what someone wears, if they're going to rape someone they're going to rape someone regardless of dress. Women get raped in the middle of winter while wearing snow pants and wool jackets, should they not have worn those provocative clothes? How about all those women on beaches and at pools, if clothes is why rapes occurred those places should be filthy with rapes.

You can keep trying to make attire the main cause of rape all you want, the rest of us will be sensible and stop trying to blame the victim and stop spreading the notion of slut-shaming.
 
2012-08-30 07:24:09 PM  

PlatinumDragon: Representative of the unwashed masses: PlatinumDragon: Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

And when you assert that clothing choice is an influence upon an individual's decision to sexually assault another, you'd better have evidence to back that assertion up and understand what you're communicating. So far, you haven't presented any evidence that rapists, stranger or acquaintance, are motivated enough by clothing for wearing "non-provocative" items to make any appreciable difference - in fact, research indicates that a sense of entitlement to a potential victim's body, a desire to control and dominate, and perceived physical vulnerability are the main factors (note that "attractive" != "vulnerable"). The fact that a person was wearing a short skirt or high heels doesn't seem to be even a secondary motivation, and given the wide array of ages, classes, and sartorial choices of victims across the population it's insulting to victims to imply such. I posted a link to a statement by a recent victim who made that very point.

In short: clothing choice does fark-all to mitigate the risk of being assaulted, and if you're going to assert otherwise you'd better bring facts, because bluster won't cut it. If you feel personally insulted that I continue to disagree and point out flaws in your assertions, tough shiat - demonstrate that your "common sense" suggestions have any evident relation to what actually happens.

I get it you want to be angry and infer more into my statements than was intended. Now go away

I'm angry? You're the one telling me to "get farked" and "go away" because I keep challenging you to present evidence to support your assertions.


And how many times did I say that I don't really care, but tht in certain situations based on a persons comfort level dressing slightly more conservatively can't hurt. I'm not pointing going slut, whore or otherwise. I can respect "I have a different opinion" not a wall of text lecturing me.

Big difference
 
2012-08-30 07:25:04 PM  

WhippingBoy: PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.

You're arguing that most rapists are men; I agree that this is true.
I'm arguing that most men are not rapists; therefore the general, unqualified statement "teach men not to rape" is insulting and sexist. I don't know any men who need to be taught not to rape.


The problem, as demonstrated by the ongoing Julian Assange debacle, is that a lot of people who wouldn't consider themselves rapists are willing to tolerate acts that are, in fact, rape, or excuse otherwise obvious acts of assault because they like the alleged rapist. You're correct in that most men don't commit sexual assault, but I strongly suspect a lot of people don't quite understand what "consent" means, or don't really care. Some of them have demonstrated as much in this thread, and other comment threads. This results in people trying to excuse spousal or acquaintance assaults, or claiming "date rape" is somehow nebulous and less serious than "forcible rape". You have legislators trying to make such garbage the law again. Sexual assault laws didn't apply to married couples on this continent until unnervingly recently, and it is practically ignored in many other places, even though spouses commit at least a tenth of all sexual assaults.
 
2012-08-30 07:26:33 PM  

Representative of the unwashed masses: PlatinumDragon: Representative of the unwashed masses: PlatinumDragon: Oh good grief, I try to say consider the places you are going and give a second thought to your choice of wardrobe so as to mitigate (even though it's only a fractional thing) potential risks and I'm a bad guy for saying it? Get farked! There are bad people in the world, sure it is a very small percentage but you have to be prepared and know that they are out there.

And when you assert that clothing choice is an influence upon an individual's decision to sexually assault another, you'd better have evidence to back that assertion up and understand what you're communicating. So far, you haven't presented any evidence that rapists, stranger or acquaintance, are motivated enough by clothing for wearing "non-provocative" items to make any appreciable difference - in fact, research indicates that a sense of entitlement to a potential victim's body, a desire to control and dominate, and perceived physical vulnerability are the main factors (note that "attractive" != "vulnerable"). The fact that a person was wearing a short skirt or high heels doesn't seem to be even a secondary motivation, and given the wide array of ages, classes, and sartorial choices of victims across the population it's insulting to victims to imply such. I posted a link to a statement by a recent victim who made that very point.

In short: clothing choice does fark-all to mitigate the risk of being assaulted, and if you're going to assert otherwise you'd better bring facts, because bluster won't cut it. If you feel personally insulted that I continue to disagree and point out flaws in your assertions, tough shiat - demonstrate that your "common sense" suggestions have any evident relation to what actually happens.

I get it you want to be angry and infer more into my statements than was intended. Now go away

I'm angry? You're the one telling me to "get farked" and "go away" because I keep challenging you to present evidence to support your assertions.

And how many times did I say that I don't really care, but tht in certain situations based on a persons comfort level dressing slightly more conservatively can't hurt. I'm not pointing going slut, whore or otherwise. I can respect "I have a different opinion" not a wall of text lecturing me.

Big difference


So you're willing to "make suggestions", but you don't care when multiple people point out in detail the flaws with those suggestions.

OK.
 
2012-08-30 07:30:38 PM  

WhippingBoy: PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.

You're arguing that most rapists are men; I agree that this is true.
I'm arguing that most men are not rapists; therefore the general, unqualified statement "teach men not to rape" is insulting and sexist. I don't know any men who need to be taught not to rape.


Sorry if it offends your fragile ego that men are the aggressors more often than women and maybe something should be done about it. Maybe if more men stopped thinking "She's dressed in a way I find hot, she obviously wants me to lay her" and stopped trying to pin the world's problems on women (even the Bible states that it's all woman's fault we're where we are today), we wouldn't be having these problems.

If you're a kind and understanding guy, good for you. You don't need to get indignant and offended for the rest of malekind when someone suggests that more men could be like you.
 
2012-08-30 07:37:06 PM  

PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.

You're arguing that most rapists are men; I agree that this is true.
I'm arguing that most men are not rapists; therefore the general, unqualified statement "teach men not to rape" is insulting and sexist. I don't know any men who need to be taught not to rape.

The problem, as demonstrated by the ongoing Julian Assange debacle, is that a lot of people who wouldn't consider themselves rapists are willing to tolerate acts that are, in fact, rape, or excuse otherwise obvious acts of assault because they like the alleged rapist. You're correct in that most men don't commit sexual assault, but I strongly suspect a lot of people don't quite understand what "consent" means, or don't really care. Some of them have demonstrated as much in this thread, and other comment threads. This results in people trying to excuse spousal or acquaintance assaults, or claiming "date rape" is somehow nebulous and less serious than "forcible rape". You have legislators trying to make such garbage the law again. Sexual assault laws didn't apply to married couples on this continent until unnervingly recently, and it is practically ignored in many other places, even though spouses commit at least a tenth of all sexual assaults.


I agree. The flip side, however, is that seems to be some people who want to change the spirit of the law from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent" when it comes to rape. There also seems to be a double standard when it comes to consent. For example, if a man and a woman get equally drunk and have sex without either of them giving consent, and they both wake up in the morning and regret it, certain... individuals would claim that the woman was raped whereas the man was not. There's also the devastating power of false accusations (which, although very rare, seem to be getting less rare).
 
2012-08-30 07:39:59 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: WhippingBoy: PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.

You're arguing that most rapists are men; I agree that this is true.
I'm arguing that most men are not rapists; therefore the general, unqualified statement "teach men not to rape" is insulting and sexist. I don't know any men who need to be taught not to rape.

Sorry if it offends your fragile ego that men are the aggressors more often than women and maybe something should be done about it. Maybe if more men stopped thinking "She's dressed in a way I find hot, she obviously wants me to lay her" and stopped trying to pin the world's problems on women (even the Bible states that it's all woman's fault we're where we are today), we wouldn't be having these problems.

If you're a kind and understanding guy, good for you. You don't need to get indignant and offended for the rest of malekind when someone suggests that more men could be like you.


I'm not personally offended. I'm just saying you're going to have a more difficult time convincing people of the validity of your argument if you treat them with contempt and disrespect. I don't think a lot will get accomplished if we adopt an "us" vs. "them" mentality.
 
2012-08-30 07:45:19 PM  

WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.


You may not have intended it, but your comment to my comment is one of the most dumbest things I've read in a while.
 
2012-08-30 07:48:26 PM  

PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: PlatinumDragon: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

Well, you can tell people in general not to rape, and that's an equitable enough statement. The fact that the overwhelming majority of assaults on people - male, female, transmale/female - are committed by men is something worth studying. All else being equal, the rate of assault should be close to equal between men and women. It's not, not even close, and there are people who've been trying to figure out why.

You're arguing that most rapists are men; I agree that this is true.
I'm arguing that most men are not rapists; therefore the general, unqualified statement "teach men not to rape" is insulting and sexist. I don't know any men who need to be taught not to rape.

The problem, as demonstrated by the ongoing Julian Assange debacle, is that a lot of people who wouldn't consider themselves rapists are willing to tolerate acts that are, in fact, rape, or excuse otherwise obvious acts of assault because they like the alleged rapist. You're correct in that most men don't commit sexual assault, but I strongly suspect a lot of people don't quite understand what "consent" means, or don't really care. Some of them have demonstrated as much in this thread, and other comment threads. This results in people trying to excuse spousal or acquaintance assaults, or claiming "date rape" is somehow nebulous and less serious than "forcible rape". You have legislators trying to make such garbage the law again. Sexual assault laws didn't apply to married couples on this continent until unnervingly recently, and it is practically ignored in many other places, even though spouses commit at least a tenth of all sexual assaults.


Well said.
 
2012-08-30 07:51:35 PM  

ParallelUniverseParking: WhippingBoy: ParallelUniverseParking: Don't teach women what to wear - teach men not to rape.

You may not have intended it, but your comment is one of the most disgustingly sexist things I've heard in a while.

You may not have intended it, but your comment to my comment is one of the most dumbest things I've read in a while.


Thanks. I try my best.
 
2012-08-30 08:44:31 PM  

WhippingBoy: Theaetetus: This is good advice, from a family planning perspective. I mean, if you don't dress like a whore, then you can't get pregnant according to Todd Akin.

Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Have a nice day.


Oh little guy, looks like your feelings got hurt. But your Fark handle makes you such an easy target.
Have a Kleenex.
 
2012-08-30 08:50:15 PM  

Mr. Right: PlatinumDragon:

BTW, while no means no and how a woman is dressed in no way permits a man to take any liberties with her whatsoever, let's also make clear that when an attractive woman is provocatively dressed, men will look. I understand that drooling is classless but when an attractive woman is wandering the beach in 3 postage stamps and a small piece of yarn, men are going to stare, unless accompanied by a sharp-elbowed spouse. And even then, we're going to get the most out of our peripheral vision. Still no permission to touch or otherwise harass, but we will gaze longingly. And she was asking for that.


why the fark are you writing this? Relevancy? Because posting this derp in a rape thread kind of sounds like you might really believe women who dress like "whores" really sorta kinda are responsible for unwanted anything, up to and maybe sorta including rape. But you know you'll get pummelled for saying it outright, so you just go up to the line but don't cross it.
 
2012-08-30 08:56:42 PM  

precious_crotchflake: WhippingBoy: Theaetetus: This is good advice, from a family planning perspective. I mean, if you don't dress like a whore, then you can't get pregnant according to Todd Akin.

Theaetetus, you outed yourself as a witch-hunting, bigoted feminist in the recent "Oklahoma Hate Crimes" threads. Your opinion has no relevance anymore.

Have a nice day.

Oh little guy, looks like your feelings got hurt. But your Fark handle makes you such an easy target.
Have a Kleenex.


I have no feelings.
 
2012-08-30 09:12:57 PM  

precious_crotchflake: Mr. Right: PlatinumDragon:

BTW, while no means no and how a woman is dressed in no way permits a man to take any liberties with her whatsoever, let's also make clear that when an attractive woman is provocatively dressed, men will look. I understand that drooling is classless but when an attractive woman is wandering the beach in 3 postage stamps and a small piece of yarn, men are going to stare, unless accompanied by a sharp-elbowed spouse. And even then, we're going to get the most out of our peripheral vision. Still no permission to touch or otherwise harass, but we will gaze longingly. And she was asking for that.

why the fark are you writing this? Relevancy? Because posting this derp in a rape thread kind of sounds like you might really believe women who dress like "whores" really sorta kinda are responsible for unwanted anything, up to and maybe sorta including rape. But you know you'll get pummelled for saying it outright, so you just go up to the line but don't cross it.



I think he's undelicately pointing out that the oft-mentioned "it" provocatively dressed and/or scantily clad women are "asking for" is the visual attention (and lustful thoughts) of surrounding males, nothing more. Not a good rogering, as some would like to suggest.

Perhaps it's also a commentary on how some clueless women will liken a boorish gaze to 'visual rape', or some other nonsense, which is ironic, since a woman can generally control, with their fashion choices, how much unsavoury visual attention they attract (to a degree; "men are pigs" and whatnot), whereas they can't similarly control their rape victimhood.
 
2012-08-30 09:16:11 PM  

WhoGAS: Theaetetus: WhoGAS:
Oh, wait a minute, now. When did we switch to the punishment phase of this?

Am I punishing a stranger by laughing behind their back, no.

I disagree. Where they're a victim of a crime, laughing at them is minimizing the crime, particularly where you laugh at them based on an action or trait that is associated with the crime, even if it's done so erroneously. It sends a public message that you believe they're less worthy of sympathy and status as a member of society, and I find that despicable.

I did not ask what you'd do on a jury. What you do in public is enough.

Oh. Okay. That's cool, then. I can agree that you have an opinion on that. I disagree with the assumption but okay.

Have a beer now? Or did I misjudge your intellect?


What is this weird "will you be my friend?" thing you have going on? You've said some really asinine stuff here, (telling everyone that some rape victims are "worthier" of your sympathy than others? Why do you think your ignorant opinion is any yardstick for doling out who should get what kind of treatment?) But seriously, you just sound really lonely and awkward, trolling for beer buddies here. Might have to do with your arrogance about what you think rape victims deserve. Makes for very creepy company.
 
2012-08-30 09:21:25 PM  

Loomy: precious_crotchflake: Mr. Right: PlatinumDragon:

BTW, while no means no and how a woman is dressed in no way permits a man to take any liberties with her whatsoever, let's also make clear that when an attractive woman is provocatively dressed, men will look. I understand that drooling is classless but when an attractive woman is wandering the beach in 3 postage stamps and a small piece of yarn, men are going to stare, unless accompanied by a sharp-elbowed spouse. And even then, we're going to get the most out of our peripheral vision. Still no permission to touch or otherwise harass, but we will gaze longingly. And she was asking for that.

why the fark are you writing this? Relevancy? Because posting this derp in a rape thread kind of sounds like you might really believe women who dress like "whores" really sorta kinda are responsible for unwanted anything, up to and maybe sorta including rape. But you know you'll get pummelled for saying it outright, so you just go up to the line but don't cross it.


I think he's undelicately pointing out that the oft-mentioned "it" provocatively dressed and/or scantily clad women are "asking for" is the visual attention (and lustful thoughts) of surrounding males, nothing more. Not a good rogering, as some would like to suggest.

Perhaps it's also a commentary on how some clueless women will liken a boorish gaze to 'visual rape', or some other nonsense, which is ironic, since a woman can generally control, with their fashion choices, how much unsavoury visual attention they attract (to a degree; "men are pigs" and whatnot), whereas they can't similarly control their rape victimhood.


yes,I understand, what I'm saying it the context is just peculiar. I'm just wondering why there is always some guy who feels a thread about rape is the right place to get into the whole "but women who dress provocatively like the attention" thing.
 
2012-08-30 09:48:28 PM  

precious_crotchflake: Loomy: precious_crotchflake: Mr. Right: PlatinumDragon:

BTW, while no means no and how a woman is dressed in no way permits a man to take any liberties with her whatsoever, let's also make clear that when an attractive woman is provocatively dressed, men will look. I understand that drooling is classless but when an attractive woman is wandering the beach in 3 postage stamps and a small piece of yarn, men are going to stare, unless accompanied by a sharp-elbowed spouse. And even then, we're going to get the most out of our peripheral vision. Still no permission to touch or otherwise harass, but we will gaze longingly. And she was asking for that.

why the fark are you writing this? Relevancy? Because posting this derp in a rape thread kind of sounds like you might really believe women who dress like "whores" really sorta kinda are responsible for unwanted anything, up to and maybe sorta including rape. But you know you'll get pummelled for saying it outright, so you just go up to the line but don't cross it.


I think he's undelicately pointing out that the oft-mentioned "it" provocatively dressed and/or scantily clad women are "asking for" is the visual attention (and lustful thoughts) of surrounding males, nothing more. Not a good rogering, as some would like to suggest.

Perhaps it's also a commentary on how some clueless women will liken a boorish gaze to 'visual rape', or some other nonsense, which is ironic, since a woman can generally control, with their fashion choices, how much unsavoury visual attention they attract (to a degree; "men are pigs" and whatnot), whereas they can't similarly control their rape victimhood.

yes,I understand, what I'm saying it the context is just peculiar. I'm just wondering why there is always some guy who feels a thread about rape is the right place to get into the whole "but women who dress provocatively like the attention" thing.


This isn't a thread about rape. It's a thread about women dressing like whores.
 
2012-08-30 10:45:55 PM  

precious_crotchflake: yes,I understand, what I'm saying it the context is just peculiar. I'm just wondering why there is always some guy who feels a thread about rape is the right place to get into the whole "but women who dress provocatively like the attention" thing.


This is a thread about dressing like a whore. It has been posited that rape may be precipitated by a woman's dress. I think it has been pretty well argued that how a woman dresses is never an excuse for rape, if for no other reason than rape is inexcusable. But it was also argued that another reason that dress is probably not a reason women get raped is that forcible rape is not about sex or being sexy. It is about controlling and terrorizing the victim. The goal is to demean the victim and destroy her security and self-confidence.

I made the comment about women dressing provocatively because I don't think women who dress very provocatively are doing themselves any favors in the respect department. As much as I enjoy feminine beauty, it does not have to be crassly displayed in order to be attractive. My argument is that a woman who wears 3 postage stamps and a bit of string to the beach is going to get attention and it will not be respectful attention. It is, in my opinion, a demonstration of the woman's insecurity and need for attention. It's not hard to get attention when you leave nothing to the imagination.. And while rape is never excused, dressing provocatively will draw attention, even if the woman protests that she doesn't want the attention. As an old professor of mine used to say, "If you keep sending out invitations, don't be surprised when people show up expecting to find a party."
 
2012-08-31 12:22:12 AM  

Mr. Right: precious_crotchflake: yes,I understand, what I'm saying it the context is just peculiar. I'm just wondering why there is always some guy who feels a thread about rape is the right place to get into the whole "but women who dress provocatively like the attention" thing.

This is a thread about dressing like a whore. It has been posited that rape may be precipitated by a woman's dress. I think it has been pretty well argued that how a woman dresses is never an excuse for rape, if for no other reason than rape is inexcusable. But it was also argued that another reason that dress is probably not a reason women get raped is that forcible rape is not about sex or being sexy. It is about controlling and terrorizing the victim. The goal is to demean the victim and destroy her security and self-confidence.

I made the comment about women dressing provocatively because I don't think women who dress very provocatively are doing themselves any favors in the respect department. As much as I enjoy feminine beauty, it does not have to be crassly displayed in order to be attractive. My argument is that a woman who wears 3 postage stamps and a bit of string to the beach is going to get attention and it will not be respectful attention. It is, in my opinion, a demonstration of the woman's insecurity and need for attention. It's not hard to get attention when you leave nothing to the imagination.. And while rape is never excused, dressing provocatively will draw attention, even if the woman protests that she doesn't want the attention. As an old professor of mine used to say, "If you keep sending out invitations, don't be surprised when people show up expecting to find a party."


I'm pretty sure not all women who dress "skankily" do it because they have low self-esteem. Some probably enjoy showing off, some are probably confident enough in themselves to not try to hide, and some probably don't give a damn. Plus the fact that a large percentage of rape and assault is by friends, relatives, co-workers, people who would likely not be interested in how she dresses anyway. With total stranger rape, they're not interested in clothes either, they want the woman and it doesn't matter what she's wearing they want what's underneath and to impose themselves upon somebody. Rape is about domination, humiliation, and power far more often than it is about satisfying sexual urges.

Also, going by "The more she shows, the more she'll be wanted and eventually raped", explain why nude beaches (and beaches in general), nudist colonies, swimming pools, and other low-clothing places aren't orgies of rape.
 
2012-08-31 01:28:47 AM  

precious_crotchflake: WhoGAS: Theaetetus: WhoGAS:
Oh, wait a minute, now. When did we switch to the punishment phase of this?

Am I punishing a stranger by laughing behind their back, no.

I disagree. Where they're a victim of a crime, laughing at them is minimizing the crime, particularly where you laugh at them based on an action or trait that is associated with the crime, even if it's done so erroneously. It sends a public message that you believe they're less worthy of sympathy and status as a member of society, and I find that despicable.

I did not ask what you'd do on a jury. What you do in public is enough.

Oh. Okay. That's cool, then. I can agree that you have an opinion on that. I disagree with the assumption but okay.

Have a beer now? Or did I misjudge your intellect?

What is this weird "will you be my friend?" thing you have going on? You've said some really asinine stuff here, (telling everyone that some rape victims are "worthier" of your sympathy than others? Why do you think your ignorant opinion is any yardstick for doling out who should get what kind of treatment?) But seriously, you just sound really lonely and awkward, trolling for beer buddies here. Might have to do with your arrogance about what you think rape victims deserve. Makes for very creepy company.


Awwww. Aren't you cute thinking your words have any weight with me. *smooches*
 
2012-08-31 05:53:27 AM  
"Stay alert, walk tall, carry mace, take self-defence classes & don't dress like a whore."

If Mittens said the same thing, he'd be crucified instead of just criticized.
 
Displayed 179 of 179 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report