Flirty women responsible for rape?

Post Reply New Topic

The analogy compares probable outcomes from certain actions, or inactions. It doesn't imply women are property. Do you dispute that women can take some preventative measures?

Why are you talking about cellphones?

They can, but the extent to which they can do so can be very limited, so I don't think this argument flies too well in many cases. I don't think anyone would walk down a dark alleyway alone or something like that if it wasn't necessary. Some of us must work at night, go to our homes alone, etc. and don't really have much of a choice in that matter. Also, some rapists, as well as some serial killers, lure there victims in very cunning ways, and some also know their victims and even have a position of trust with their victims. Some break into people's houses. Also, it can be very difficult to fight back. It can be very, very difficult to avoid.
And no matter to what extent you can prevent it, no one should ever have to live in such fear.



I agree. It's so ingrained though that I think a lot of people don't really see this. Also, a lot of people don't realize rapists, especially in the classic dark alleyway at night scenario, are often sociopaths, like serial killers, which makes them difficult to escape and avoid and makes the idea that the woman has some responsibility even more ludicrous.

She has a responsibility not to be in that alleyway drunk and dressed like a cheap hooker. We all have to take some responsibility for the way we behave, even if that means avoiding doing something perfectly legal that may provoke an illegal response. For example, I wouldn't go into a UK inner city area full of radical Muslims, get on my soapbox, and tell 'em all about my political views.

Not related to the dark alleyway, but showing the dangers of getting drunk:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4467078.stm

.... nor would you want to come into my household and express your political views because you might get the same response!! !

No seriously, if my Hecate wants to dress up sexy, she should be able to, and not live in fear!!

in that case, a person who has a high-salaried job is a more attractive victim to a credit / debit card thief- does that mean that people who accept jobs that pay higher than minimum wage are to blame if they get targetted for credit / debit card theft?

you can't compare a phone to a human being- not flaunting expensive possessions is common sense, but expecting a person to moderate their life (including the card theft scenario above) is an issue of civil liberties.

let's say- for arguments sake- that women who dress in sexy clothes are more at risk than those that dress more conservatively. i still do not think that the woman should be held responsible for the actions that another person chose to take.


if someone you care about (perhaps you have a partner or sister, or perhaps you are close to your mum) were raped, and the jury let the rapist go free because your partner / sister / mother happened to be intoxicated or wearing make-up etc when the crime was committed, can you honestly say that you would be content with the verdict?

Women do not choose to come into this world as females. You get to choose which possessions you carry, heck, you get to pick which ones you'll own but save for a sex change, a female will always be that gender. To blame a female for rape is the same as blaming a black person for segregation because they happened to be born in the U.S. in 1950.

It's also like being blamed for being bullied because of having AS .....and I know many of us have experienced this. Yes, evil people will always be among us but everyone should be free from being victimized twice, first by being assaulted, then by being assaulted for being assaulted.

Not if they behave sensibly — like being careful not to disclose their PINs.


But it's OK to flaunt your body — when you know most guys are just thinking about f*****g you — then to drink so much alcohol as to leave yourself incapable of knowing whether you consented to sex or not? Get real. We're not in RobertN's socialist Utopia here. Actions, or inactions, have consequences. Yes, rapists shouldn't rape, but every individual has responsibility for their own well being, too.


Personal emotions play no part in real justice. Unfortunately, it appears that in many cases the UK government has forgotten this, and just panders to the whim of the masses when creating new legislation.

Yes, that explains the difference between our political views, and the close relationship between yours and those of the Islamic fundamentalists.

Every person has a right to live the way they want to live and not have to do so in fear, or be attacked though. It's certainly true that everyone has a responsibilty for their actions and inactions, but this is more complex than that. First of all, there is enormous social pressure among young people to drink, even to the point of getting drunk. Even I don't really blame anyone for doing it, and I am not a fan of that sort of thing at all. Not drinking and not attending parties can make you a bit of an outcast. Also, there is social pressure on women to dress in a way that makes themselves look attractive and/or flaunts their body-we're inundated with images of women doing so from day one; in many clothing stores, a majority of the young women's clothes aim to do this (I know I often have a hard time finding jeans that aren't low-rise and tight). So that's certainly a factor.

In addition, putting even partial blame on women distracts people from the real issues. First, it perpetuates the misconception that a woman's attractiveness has anything to do with rape; notwithstanding the intoxication scenario (which I'll get to later) I really don't think it does. A significant portion of rapists are sociopaths in which case it's not sexual arousal then overpowering the victim, but overpowering the victim then sexual arousal. If they do go after a person who is young and attractive, it is only because overpowering such a victim makes them feel more powerful, not because of the way she was dressed. It makes people forget that we have a serious social problem to deal with here. Since violent criminals are often made rather than born, we have the potential power to decrease their numbers.

Secondly, in the case of the intoxication scenario, it detracts from the real problem which is that anyone would even consider taking advantage of someone in that state; we should be outraged and realize the need to educate people that this is wrong, and teach respect for women. If a woman is dressed provactively and people act on this, or even are just thinking about nothing more than having sex with her, they are most likely only seeing her as a sex object and not a person, which is a problem in our society. A woman is a person to be respected, not a body to be f*cked by whoever gets the urge. Putting partial blame on women makes people forget this.

All this has made me realize just how much blame is put on women in our society, especially when it comes to sex (but also in other realms too-feminism is blamed for many social problems by religous conservatives; if a women stays at home and takes care of her kids, she's looked down on, if she doesn't, she's also looked down on for not taking care of them, etc.). Rape is the absolute worst example, but there are others as well. Single mothers are always blamed for getting pregnant because everyone has forgotten that it takes two to make a baby and that just because the woman is the one who can carry the baby does not make her 100% or even 75% responsible-it's a fifty fifty deal. A girl can have sex with someone and she'll be called a slut or a whore while her partner just gets a few slaps on the back from his buddies. Women who enjoy sex a lot, and/or with different partners, are also called derogatory names, as if it's abnormal for her to be that way, and normal or expected for everyone else. If a woman is pressured into it and/or her partner tells her lies to get what he wants, and he never talks to her again, she's blamed for that too. Prostitutes and strippers are exploited by people who only see them as a body and put a price on that body, and they in turn are the ones who are stigmatized rather than their patrons and bosses (pimps and strip club owners tend to be glorified in pop culture). A woman can be taken advantage of while tipsy or drunk and be called derogatory names like "beer slut" but nothing is said of the people who took advantage of her.

We've got a long way to go.

there is a huge difference between expecting people to follow basic security procedures and denying them their civil rights just so that they are seen in a favourable light by a jury should they become the victim of a crime.

personally, i do try to avoid taking unnecessary risks to reduce the probability of being attacked- i am very much aware that we are not living in an ideal world. but i take these precautions for the purpose of survival- not out of a sense of moral duty.

anyway, a rapist would probably find some insignificant detail to use against his victim to label her a "p***k tease" even if she had led a completely virtuous lifestyle. and someone capable of rape would not hesitate to exploit society's prejudices about how women should behave to get acquitted of his crime.

In theory, yes. The reality is a little different. Government in the country I live are always quick to remind people of their rights (good selling point come election time) but don't keep up their end of the bargain by implementing and policing legislation in a way that allows those rights to be exercised. There are plenty of places in the UK I wouldn't visit, as a white male; I don't like that, but I accept that's how it is, and don't tempt fate by going to those places. I do what any human being has a responsibility to themselves to do. What makes things any different for women?

Because women are one of the favoured groups of "oppressed" individuals that liberal politicians can make heaps of political capital from. So, they can do no wrong — er... well they can, but best not speak of it.


Isn't this all about choice? Someone can choose to be a hooker and choose to get drunk. You're turning commonsense on it's head by exonerating an individual of blame, who's clearly made a choice to put herself in a position where she's at risk, then directing it to the other party who may have entered into the sexual encounter in good faith. I can't understand this attitude you ladies have that it's always someone elses fault. You're the ones who get pregnant, you're the ones most likely to get raped — why the hell shouldn't you take on some responsibility?

Us guys have to behave in a way that conforms with the "law of the jungle" too, you know. It is socially unacceptable for a man to hit a woman (good thing too), but perfectly acceptable for him to hit other guys, or for a woman to hit a man. So, we (as men) have to behave in a way that doesn't explore the full bounds of the "rights" the state has so kindly granted us (unless we fancy a visit to the local A&E department by offending someone). You don't hear much about this, do you? Of course not; women and ethnic minorities are the current cause célèbre in the liberal camp(and have been for some time). And even if they don't hold high office, they still carry a lot of clout.


Whichever way you look at it, I don't think you can remove attractiveness from the equation, so to speak. Attractive women generally exert a high degree of influence over men, would that not be the best type of woman to exert power over, if your mind was wired up in that way?

What would you do if men were like women and women were like men?

that's a good question, dragons. i'm sure if men were expected to behave like monks or take responsibility if they are attacked they wouldn't be very happy about it!

We do:

Society constrains our actions and freedoms, too; but in slightly different ways.

I'd probably celebrate