Provocative clothing invites attacks?

[+joc]

Pray tell, why would a female signal males and then deny his behavior is the result of her signals?

We might compare the behavior of Chimps verse Bonobo. Comparing our behavior with other animals is most interesting. Exclusive sexual mating is controlled by females more than by males. Chimps are male dominant and bonobo are female dominant. Bonobo females feed together and defend each other, unlike chimps. Bonobo females also seem more sexually interested in each other.

Interesting is the male hating, human homosexuals, attempt to look like men! I don't mean all homosexual women hate men, nor that all homosexual females want to look like men. Just that hating men and wanting to look like one, seems confused. But these women signal each other by being masculine, not by dressing like a sexy female. "Hello, look at me, I am signalling you I am attracted to women, by looking like a man, those dirty, no good _______." Huh?

Along this line, I knew a male who hated San Fransisco because the male homosexuals there were so aggressive in trying to seduce young males. I never found female homosexuals to be as aggressive as heterosexual males. I suspect homosexual or heterosexual, males tend to be more sexually aggressive than females. What do you think?

We aren't animals. We are humans. There IS a difference.

I will say it again. Rape is the problem of the rapist...it has nothing to do with a woman's attire or lack thereof.

Edited January 7, 2013 by joc

[Lilly]

Actually, rape is more about power/control/violence than it is about sex. Many rapists have plenty of access to sex but still desire to rape. Keeping that in mind, I'm pretty sure rape isn't all that much about clothing choices either.

[Arbenol]

People prove daily that even Biology hasn't got a prayer against their politics. "Don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's made up."

What biology? Are you arguing that people should be slaves to their most base instincts. This has nothing to do with how human evolution. It's to do with how we behave now, not how we got here.

Would you also argue that our societies should cast off it's weakest members? That's consistent with evolution.

[Yamato]

What biology? Are you arguing that people should be slaves to their most base instincts. This has nothing to do with how human evolution. It's to do with how we behave now, not how we got here.

Would you also argue that our societies should cast off it's weakest members? That's consistent with evolution.

How we behave now and the reasons for it. Many points made by GirlSaidWhat in the video posted earlier are relevant. What Biology is the biology of the human brain and the differences between the male brain and the female brain, also posted earlier. With the way our society is trying to wash away the differences between men and women, I would think that even hard science might have to acquiesce. Per the South Park video also posted earlier, when women shave their balls, it's straaaaaaaaaange. Biology is what it is today, evolution or not. That it's so stunning to you that we take it into account says a lot.

[Arbenol]

How we behave now and the reasons for it. Many points made by GirlSaidWhat in the video posted earlier are relevant. What Biology is the biology of the human brain and the differences between the male brain and the female brain, also posted earlier. With the way our society is trying to wash away the differences between men and women, I would think that even hard science might have to acquiesce. Per the South Park video also posted earlier, when women shave their balls, it's straaaaaaaaaange. Biology is what it is today, evolution or not. That it's so stunning to you that we take it into account says a lot.

That's why I asked the question. Me-wonders brought evolution to the discussion. I was checking if you were expanding on her point. If not, fine.

Let's not get personal about differing opinions. I know I'm as guilty as anyone, but I'm trying.

[Yamato]

Only the answer isn't 'yes', is it, since he didn't ask if a women who dresses provocatively can be raped, he asked if they are more likely to be raped, and the study didn't conclude the answer to be yes.

You should have posted the conclusion, which said this:

[/color]

Key words: May and in some situations ...not "yes they are more likely to be raped.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Study findings on convicted rapists, and their motivations:

http://www.wcsap.org...ualViolence.pdf

Attire played no motivation, in fact in some cases it had the opposite effect, predators choosing women that looked more shy and easier to control.

References the study referred to:

References

1. Alaska State Legislature, Senate Journal, text for Senate Bill 218, February 16,

2006, 24th

Legislature, 2nd

session.

(http://www.legis.sta...ssion=24&date=2

0060216&beg_page=2201&end_page=2227&chamber=S&jrn=2207)

2. Fisher, B.S., Cullen, F.T., & Turner, M.G. (2000). The sexual victimization of

college women (Report No. NCJ-182369). Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice

Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

3. National Victims Center (1992, April). Rape in America: A report to the nation.

Arlington, VA: Author.

4. Spears, J.W. & Spohn, C.C. (1997). The effect of evidence factors and victim

characteristics on prosecutors’ charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Justice

Quarterly, 14, 501-524.

5. Frazier, P. A., & Haney, B. (1996). Sexual assault cases in the legal system:

Police, prosecutor, and victim perspectives. Law and Human Behavior, 20,

607-628.

6. Burt, M. R. (1980). Cultural myths and supports for rape. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychhology, 38, 217-230.

7. Feild, H. S. (1978). Attitudes toward rape: A comparative analysis of police,

rapists, crisis counselors, and citizens. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 36, 156-179.

8. Koss, M. P., Gidycz, C. A., & Wisniewski, N. (1987). The scope of rape:

Incidence and prevalence of sexual aggression and victimization in a national

sample of higher education students. Journal of Consulting and Clinical

Psychology, 55, 162-170.

9. Tjaden, P. & Thoennes, N. (2000). Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence,

and Consequences of Violence Against Women (NCJ 183781). National Institute

of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Washinngton, DC.

10. Estrich, S. (1987). Real rape. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

11. Groth, N. A. (1979). Men who rape. New York: Plenum Press.

12. Prentky, R., Cohen, M. & Seghorn, T. (1985). Development of a rational

taxonomy for the classification of rapists: The Massachusetts Treatment Center

system. Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 13, 39-70

According to the conclusion "It may increase rape in some situations" to socrates.junior's point. Isn't that good enough? Doesn't it make more sense to admit what happens than pretend for what should? Women are being raped out there, tonight. Let's stop acting powerless to do something about it, folks.

[Yamato]

That's why I asked the question. Me-wonders brought evolution to the discussion. I was checking if you were expanding on her point. If not, fine.

Let's not get personal about differing opinions. I know I'm as guilty as anyone, but I'm trying.

Get personal? Okay, I didn't say a word about you, or any other poster. I'm not seeing you as getting personal either, so I'm not sure why you're bringing this up.

I hadn't used the word evolution and I'm not sure how you thought I was expanding on something me-wonders said. If there are relationships you can find in our respective thinking, I wouldn't be surprised.

[Yamato]

We have the freedom to dress as we please, just because a rapist MAY rape us because of it, should we give up the freedom to dress as we please? Should all women wear anti-rape condoms next?

I would want to learn all about what criminals MAY do in response to things I do before I make the mistake and become a victim of the crime. Gender doesn't confine that. Sexuality doesn't confine that. That's across the board, all crimes, at all times.

[Yamato]

The attraction is for control and subjugation of another human being, it is enjoyment in the pain and suffering of others.

Speaking of control and subjugation of another human being, I've seen a lot of MMA cage fights but I've never seen a guy sporting a huge erection in the middle of combat. Stop trying to strip the sex out of the rape. I know doing that is necessary to make these claims, but you can't have one without the other. You can't have rape without the sex.

Even if rape was just vanilla assault, there's many common sense ways of avoiding assault. If you're a vulnerable and attractive woman, not drawing unwanted attention to your body makes sense. When I go out in cracked sneakers and a t-shirt, women judge me, and I'm not going to play like they have no right to do so. People get judged for the way they dress every day they leave their house; it happens whether sex has something to do with it or not.

Sex in general, and sexual crimes more specifically, shouldn't be made into this double standard we can't apply to any other crime, particularly in light of how many societal problems sex is required to create.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Yamato

[Hasina]

I would want to learn all about what criminals MAY do in response to things I do before I make the mistake and become a victim of the crime. Gender doesn't confine that. Sexuality doesn't confine that. That's across the board, all crimes, at all times.

I concede. We are unsafe at all times no matter what we do, because everyone has different preferences.

[Yamato]

I concede. We are unsafe at all times no matter what we do, because everyone has different preferences.

Life is a game of risk management.

[Arbenol]

According to the conclusion "It may increase rape in some situations" to socrates.junior's point. Isn't that good enough? Doesn't it make more sense to admit what happens than pretend for what should? Women are being raped out there, tonight. Let's stop acting powerless to do something about it, folks.

We're not powerless - or at least we shouldn't be.

And we don't really differ in how we think we can go about this. Should women do all they can to keep safe? Should they try to be aware of situations that may increase their vulnerability? I agree that it would help them not become victims.

But I objected to people describing women's dress as 'provocative'. I believe this is prejudicial and seeks to put blame on the woman. It also diminishes the responsibility of the perpetrator - no matter how much you protest that it doesn't. If you're provoked to do something, then the victim has done something to bring it on themselves. The implication is clear.

Rape is ALL about the perpetrator. There really shouldn't be any argument about this.

[NiteMarcher]

A rapist will rape no matter what the victim is wearing. Though there is sometimes a preference in general "looks" or "lifestyle"

In fact, some rapist actually enjoy "unlayering" a fully clothed victim.

But this is a difficult subject, as there does not appear to be any "solid" stereotype for all victims.

Some rape victims are even aged-seniors or babies.

The blame and focus should rest soley on the criminal, not a victims age, looks, clothing, etc...

I totally agree with your above statement about this being a difficult subject and the blame & focus being placed solely on the criminal.

1) I've heard of female patients in the hospital (different ages) being sexually molested or raped by male nurses while conscious & unconscious.

2) I know of a baby girl being penetrated (using his finger) by a male in his 20s

3) I know of an elderly woman in her late 70's who was raped.

4) I heard of a woman who went to the dentist, and eventually found out after that this dentist was fondling her while under an anesthetic.

All of these above examples had nothing whatsoever to do with what they were wearing. But, I do believe it has a lot to do with the psyche of the individual perpetrator. Each one of us have our own personal angel & demon sitting right inside of that little head of ours....and we're the only one who'll make a decision as to which one we choose to call upon.

[Render]

Alarming trend - The teenage girls who are fighting back at their peers who 'dress too provocatively or wear too much make-up'

• Hey Girl, Did You Know meme going strong after one teenager posted picture last summer shaming other girls for wearing revealing clothes
  
• Comes on the heels of 'Dear Girls, Don't Be Insecure,' a photo posted by model Cole Mohr
  

A deeply worrying trend, known as ‘****-shaming,’ has taken flight in recent years, fuelled by microblogging sites such as Tumblr, as well as Facebook.

In these posts, teenage girls – and sometimes boys – criticize certain body types or wardrobe choices, often being ruthless in the process.

In one such post, a blogger writes with accompanying pictures: ‘Hey girls, uhm did you know – open books, NOT legs?’

http://www.dailymail...ng-make-up.html

Edited January 7, 2013 by Render

[Mr.United_Nations]

Alarming trend - The teenage girls who are fighting back at their peers who 'dress too provocatively or wear too much make-up'

http://www.dailymail...ng-make-up.html

This is where tv comes in

[Yamato]

Dave Chapelle sheds some light on the women's clothing bit.

[media=]

[/media]

[libstaK]

Speaking of control and subjugation of another human being, I've seen a lot of MMA cage fights but I've never seen a guy sporting a huge erection in the middle of combat. Stop trying to strip the sex out of the rape. I know doing that is necessary to make these claims, but you can't have one without the other. You can't have rape without the sex.

You are going to claim that two combatants engaged in a competative fight is a valid comparison now? I am getting a little over your efforts to muddy the waters by bringing every possible side stepping paradigm into the realm of the crime of rape. They DO NOT BELONG IN THE SAME DISCUSSION, why are you so determined to belittle the magnitude of the crime?

Don't bother answering, this has gone far enough, rape is rape and everything else belongs in a different discussion. No one who enjoys sex would appreciate having their beliefs about that mixed in with what occurs when there is a rape. Rape and sex are two different things. To say they are not is a huge problem in your perception of the issue.

Even if rape was just vanilla assault, there's many common sense ways of avoiding assault. If you're a vulnerable and attractive woman, not drawing unwanted attention to your body makes sense. When I go out in cracked sneakers and a t-shirt, women judge me, and I'm not going to play like they have no right to do so. People get judged for the way they dress every day they leave their house; it happens whether sex has something to do with it or not.

Vanilla assault???? will you cut it out, there is no "even if rape was vanilla assault" because there is no "vanilla assault". Every crime of assault is serious, it doesn't have the lame flavouring of vanilla attached to it unless you are trying to minimise the seriousness of what has just occurred to someone.

Sex in general, and sexual crimes more specifically, shouldn't be made into this double standard we can't apply to any other crime, particularly in light of how many societal problems sex is required to create.

Of course they should, they are a specific crime that has been happening since Adam and Eve and is only in the most recent of times being recognised as what it really is. Stealing was always stealing because it occurred equally to both sexes, same with assault but rape has had it's impact muddied by the arguments you keep throwing out here for far too long. It's over, those days are done, there is no hiding behind sidewinding arguments anymore. There simply is NO EXCUSE that mitigates the nature of rape. It is a crime of the perpetrator on a VICTIM regardless of what they are wearing, regardless of where they are attacked or what time of day or night they happened to have been attacked, period.

[libstaK]

Dave Chapelle sheds some light on the women's clothing bit.

[media=]

[/media]

Who cares what a bunch of mysoginists find amusing about women's choice of dress except other mysoginists.

[Mr.United_Nations]

might as well agree with the women Yam, you never was going to win

[Jinxdom]

Can we all agree that rape is just sex without the consent of both parties then work from there?

That crime is because of opportunity and if the person who commits a crime will most likely go after the target they are attracted to more?

That the things people are attracted to are different for each person?

That the person who commits said crime is pretty much a complete and utter dick?

pretty please?

Edited January 7, 2013 by Jinxdom

[libstaK]

Can we all agree that rape is just sex without the consent of both parties then work from there?

That crime is because of opportunity and if the person who commits a crime will most likely go after the target the want more?

That the person who commits said crime is pretty much a complete and utter dick?

pretty please?

If you hadn't used the term "just sex without consent" I might have been swayed by the "pretty please".

Let's try:

Let's all agree that rape is a heinous assault on the body of the victim and doesn't belong in civil discourses regarding sex between law abiding citizens.

I can live with the other two sentences, specially the last one.

[Mr.United_Nations]

If you hadn't used the term "just sex without consent" I might have been swayed by the "pretty please".

Let's try:

Let's all agree that rape is a heinous assault on the body of the victim and doesn't belong in civil discourses regarding sex between law abiding citizens.

I can live with the other two sentences, specially the last one.

Spoken like a true MOD lol

[Jinxdom]

Sex without consent covers everything. Including wives, drugs, violent assaults, child abuses, the dead, people who are unconscious. Anybody who legally can't consent are also covered

Sex without consent protects everybody.

I like your idea though too, Mine will be the law and yours can be the definition for society so they can understand... Every type of rape is wrong and no excuse is acceptable.

Edited January 7, 2013 by Jinxdom

[TSS]

According to the conclusion "It may increase rape in some situations" to socrates.junior's point. Isn't that good enough? Doesn't it make more sense to admit what happens than pretend for what should? Women are being raped out there, tonight. Let's stop acting powerless to do something about it, folks.

Good enough for what? Maybe you missed the question the post was alluding too. The question asked was are women who wear provocative clothes more likely to be raped? The answer given by Junior Socrates was 'Yes', then a quote was posted. But the answer wasn't yes, merely that it can happen, which is as obvious as any situation a women might find herself in, whether it's to drunk, walking home alone at night, in a car lot, an abusive partner, a member of the family etc....the only thing that connects all those instances is that some deranged low life has that women in his sights. Research has shown (from many resources) that clothing has no more impact on whether she is raped any more then any other of the scenarios.

[Yamato]

You are going to claim that two combatants engaged in a competative fight is a valid comparison now? I am getting a little over your efforts to muddy the waters by bringing every possible side stepping paradigm into the realm of the crime of rape. They DO NOT BELONG IN THE SAME DISCUSSION, why are you so determined to belittle the magnitude of the crime?

Don't bother answering, this has gone far enough, rape is rape and everything else belongs in a different discussion. No one who enjoys sex would appreciate having their beliefs about that mixed in with what occurs when there is a rape. Rape and sex are two different things. To say they are not is a huge problem in your perception of the issue.

Vanilla assault???? will you cut it out, there is no "even if rape was vanilla assault" because there is no "vanilla assault". Every crime of assault is serious, it doesn't have the lame flavouring of vanilla attached to it unless you are trying to minimise the seriousness of what has just occurred to someone.

Of course they should, they are a specific crime that has been happening since Adam and Eve and is only in the most recent of times being recognised as what it really is. Stealing was always stealing because it occurred equally to both sexes, same with assault but rape has had it's impact muddied by the arguments you keep throwing out here for far too long. It's over, those days are done, there is no hiding behind sidewinding arguments anymore. There simply is NO EXCUSE that mitigates the nature of rape. It is a crime of the perpetrator on a VICTIM regardless of what they are wearing, regardless of where they are attacked or what time of day or night they happened to have been attacked, period.

You are going to claim that two combatants engaged in a competative fight is a valid comparison now?

It fit the description you gave, verbatim.

I am getting a little over your efforts to muddy the waters by bringing every possible side stepping paradigm into the realm of the crime of rape.

I'm not side stepping anything. I'm just not going to accept this need to have it both ways. Either I can wear what I want and not hear another word about "flamebaiting" from you defending violent criminals who attack me, or not. You need to understand your own position better and apply it to everyone, or else take it the other way which is what I've been discussing the whole time.

why are you so determined to belittle the magnitude of the crime?

That's what you're doing, by stripping the sex out of the rape. I'm taking rape for exactly what it is. As I said, claiming that rape has nothing to do with sex is as disingenuous as claiming it has nothing to do with force. By definition, rape is sexual intercourse by force. I don't care about the supposed inner psychology of the rapist who somehow gets a boner and commits his crime without any sexual attraction at all, as you would have others believe. If it was just subjugation of another human being, if it was just the thrill of the violence and overpowering of another human being, there wouldn't be an erection present. That's how the cage fighting was relevant in case you didn't follow. Moreover, the damage caused by rape isn't dependent on the motive. I'm interested in preventing the damage this crime causes because I know by experience how painful it is. Please calm down and accept different perspectives here and not try to jail the discussion to your opinion.

Vanilla assault???? will you cut it out, there is no "even if rape was vanilla assault" because there is no "vanilla assault". Every crime of assault is serious, it doesn't have the lame flavouring of vanilla attached to it unless you are trying to minimise the seriousness of what has just occurred to someone.

Vanilla meaning plain. There is no plain old assault? Of course there is. Assault is a legal term with a definition. Look it up. You're trying to surgically remove sex from the crime of rape when you've been given the definition of the word from the dictionary more than once on this thread if you review everything.

Of course they should, they are a specific crime that has been happening since Adam and Eve and is only in the most recent of times being recognised as what it really is. Stealing was always stealing because it occurred equally to both sexes, same with assault but rape has had it's impact muddied by the arguments you keep throwing out here for far too long.

How am I muddying the impact of rape? They should have a double standard for rape because of antiquated historical pretexts about Adam and Eve? Well that admission explains many of your prior statements. You understood provocative dress immediately when a male was getting assaulted violently. When I hear you make these statements, like "It is a crime of the perpetrator on a VICTIM regardless of what they are wearing, regardless of where they are attacked or what time of day or night they happened to have been attacked, period." you should eat your own cooking when it applies just as well to all examples of violent crime, INCLUDING MURDER. There is no excuse for crime and precious little excuse for feminist hypocrisy, even here.