Travel in groups at night, don't get plastered without friends, don't invest too much trust in people you know nothing about...these are all good bits of advice for anyone, but I suppose some people here think it is more useful to let shit go wrong by pretending we live in an ideal fairyland where 100% of men can be educated to be a specific thing.
Well, for one thing it's a systemic problem. Rape is sexual assault. It has a perpetrator and it has a victim. So giving equal weight to what we can do to prevent rapes and what a women can do to avoid rapes is problematic. And I don't even see that happening here. I see some people almost enitrely focused on a woman's "self-responsibility."
And when it is shown that a culture that promotes victim-blaming leads to unhealthy entitlement complexes that in turn lead to rape, how exactly is it helpful to give voice to these. Maybe you're right that doing these things can increase safety. But you are choosing to focus on that instead of the rapist. Further, you are feeding back into this cultural,image that women can somehow prevent the assaults being perpetrated against them.
I don't know if you actually think "be more responsible" in the context of a discussion like this is helpful, but it isn't. It is harmful.
It is the opposite of useful to suggest that `oh well, if you got raped, its all the dudes fault, there is absolutely nothing you could've done.' if the goal is prevention and not punishment.
Most of the time, there isn't much that the woman could've done. There's no correlative link I'm aware of between certain items of clothing and rape, so the idea a woman even might be able to dissuade a rapist by wearing different clothes seems pretty unsubstantiated to me.
You'll have a lot more success in changing the behavior of potential victims than in changing the behavior of potential murderers and rapists, because the victims are the ones whose well being is at stake.
Wow, I've never seen this so bluntly stated before.
Since "potential victims" do nothing wrong and do not invite rape, maybe expecting them to change for potential criminals is total shit? That's how I feel anyway.
It is the opposite of useful to suggest that `oh well, if you got raped, its all the dudes fault, there is absolutely nothing you could've done.' if the goal is prevention and not punishment.
Most of the time, there isn't much that the woman could've done. There's no correlative link I'm aware of between certain items of clothing and rape, so the idea a woman even might be able to dissuade a rapist by wearing different clothes seems pretty unsubstantiated to me.
Pretty much. Hell, we were talking about this back in the 70s:
Travel in groups at night, don't get plastered without friends, don't invest too much trust in people you know nothing about...these are all good bits of advice for anyone, but I suppose some people here think it is more useful to let shit go wrong by pretending we live in an ideal fairyland where 100% of men can be educated to be a specific thing.
Well, for one thing it's a systemic problem. Rape is sexual assault. It has a perpetrator and it has a victim. So giving equal weight to what we can do to prevent rapes and what a women can do to avoid rapes is problematic. And I don't even see that happening here. I see some people almost enitrely focused on a woman's "self-responsibility."
In fact, even with all I've posted, this thread has not given equal weight to it.
And when it is shown that a culture that promotes victim-blaming leads to unhealthy entitlement complexes that in turn lead to rape, how exactly is it helpful to give voice to these. Maybe you're right that doing these things can increase safety. But you are choosing to focus on that instead of the rapist.
You're right, I am, and thats because a bunch of people here are giving the idea of a female role in prevention no time at all. I am a natural contrarian that got sucked in here.
I don't know if you actually think "be more responsible" in the context of a discussion like this is helpful, but it isn't. It is harmful.
I don't think it is helpful to have a discussion like this and pretend that `being more responsible' is not only not a useful preventative action but an active insult. In association with legal punishment and discouragement of rape as a practice, `be responsible' is entirely sensible for a society in which rape prevention is more important than rape punishment.
Travel in groups at night, don't get plastered without friends, don't invest too much trust in people you know nothing about...these are all good bits of advice for anyone, but I suppose some people here think it is more useful to let shit go wrong by pretending we live in an ideal fairyland where 100% of men can be educated to be a specific thing.
Well, for one thing it's a systemic problem. Rape is sexual assault. It has a perpetrator and it has a victim. So giving equal weight to what we can do to prevent rapes and what a women can do to avoid rapes is problematic. And I don't even see that happening here. I see some people almost enitrely focused on a woman's "self-responsibility."
In fact, even with all I've posted, this thread has not given equal weight to it.
And when it is shown that a culture that promotes victim-blaming leads to unhealthy entitlement complexes that in turn lead to rape, how exactly is it helpful to give voice to these. Maybe you're right that doing these things can increase safety. But you are choosing to focus on that instead of the rapist.
You're right, I am, and thats because a bunch of people here are giving the idea of a female role in prevention no time at all. I am a natural contrarian that got sucked in here.
I don't know if you actually think "be more responsible" in the context of a discussion like this is helpful, but it isn't. It is harmful.
I don't think it is helpful to have a discussion like this and pretend that `being more responsible' is not only not a useful preventative action but an active insult. In association with legal punishment and discouragement of rape as a practice, `be responsible' is entirely sensible for a society in which rape prevention is more important than rape punishment.
So in short, your strategy is to continue treating the symptoms while avoiding the actual problem.
None if this addresses the concern that people with low self control exist and do bad things with mild trigger prompts
Actually, it does. The problem isn't "they exist", it's "they've always been given excuses and outs for their conduct."
Even if you fix that mentality, it still wouldn't be a good idea for a woman to go home from a party at night without a coat. It is a contributing factor to aggravated sexual assault and is as much risky behavior as not locking your doors when you go out. It's not your fault that you got robbed, but you could have taken extra measures to prevent yourself from becoming a statistic.
Way to blame that victim.
Blame is a useless gesture. There are steps that should be taken to help increase the probability of safety for hostile situations. Don't try to stop an armed robbery - get descriptions and information and call the police immediately afterward. Don't talk about death to a suicidal person. Don't let your children play with convicted sex offenders. Don't run with scissors. Don't trust people when they offer you a once in a lifetime opportunity to get rick quick. Don't go down a dark alley in the middle of the night wearing expensive clothing.
It is undeniable that these actions can help prevent bad things from happening to you. If you disobey this advice, you're not to blame, but you are irresponsible. The difference is meaningless because in the end these are all precautions necessary for a good measure of safety.
And in a discussion like this, where the context from the OP is the entitlement complex men feel toward women, these are terrible observations.
You are feeding into a culture that tries to chill a woman's behavior and lay the responsibility of being assaulted at her feet. In a discussion of this nature, in this context, discussing what a woman could have done to not be rapeable is unhelpful.
Have we ever successfully weeded out any vice?
Yes, it sucks that we have to lock our doors and monitor our children's online activities, but it's still necessary to do those things, because unless we develop some sort of scorched earth plan, internet creeps and creeps in general will never go away, at least in our lifetime.
Let's use this controversial straw man to think about this another way: a drunk driver crashes into a guy not wearing a seatbelt and the guy without the seatbelt is killed. It's a straw man because buckling up is the law and humans aren't perfect at driving high speed automotive machines, but consider the fact that you're not harming anyone but yourself in not wearing a seatbelt, mostly. If cars drove themselves and there were no drunk drivers, you wouldn't think anything about not wearing a seatbelt.
It's obviously the drunk driver's fault that the accident occurred, but you cannot deny that the victim could have protected himself more against the odds of a fatal accident. Sure, anti-drunk driving laws are great, but that doesn't mean that if they're superbly enforced that you don't have to wear a seatbelt anymore. There will always be crazies on the road.
I'm thinking about it this way: if I had a daughter, would I tell her off for coming home extra late from a party alone in a revealing dress without a coat and without taking a cab or asking for a ride from a friend? You bet, because she has an increased risk compared to the median population of getting on the radar of some rapist. Would I tell her, "you'd deserve it if you got raped?" What do you think my intention is here?
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Travel in groups at night, don't get plastered without friends, don't invest too much trust in people you know nothing about...these are all good bits of advice for anyone, but I suppose some people here think it is more useful to let shit go wrong by pretending we live in an ideal fairyland where 100% of men can be educated to be a specific thing.
Well, for one thing it's a systemic problem. Rape is sexual assault. It has a perpetrator and it has a victim. So giving equal weight to what we can do to prevent rapes and what a women can do to avoid rapes is problematic. And I don't even see that happening here. I see some people almost enitrely focused on a woman's "self-responsibility."
In fact, even with all I've posted, this thread has not given equal weight to it.
And when it is shown that a culture that promotes victim-blaming leads to unhealthy entitlement complexes that in turn lead to rape, how exactly is it helpful to give voice to these. Maybe you're right that doing these things can increase safety. But you are choosing to focus on that instead of the rapist.
You're right, I am, and thats because a bunch of people here are giving the idea of a female role in prevention no time at all. I am a natural contrarian that got sucked in here.
I don't know if you actually think "be more responsible" in the context of a discussion like this is helpful, but it isn't. It is harmful.
I don't think it is helpful to have a discussion like this and pretend that `being more responsible' is not only not a useful preventative action but an active insult. In association with legal punishment and discouragement of rape as a practice, `be responsible' is entirely sensible for a society in which rape prevention is more important than rape punishment.
I'm not saying its an active insult. No no no.
I'm saying it propagates the feeling of power and entitlement that is often directly responsible for rape and sexual assault.
I mean, it is also insulting to lay responsibility for rape at a victim's feet, but insult is the least of my problems with this. The culture that comments like "she shouldn't have been wearing that" or "she shouldnt have drunk so much" feeds into actively promote the behaviors that lead to sexual assault and rape. So by propagating those mindsets, you are being actively harmful.
So in short, your strategy is to continue treating the symptoms while avoiding the actual problem.
What? Please explain this further, because I'm not sure what you're perceiving my `strategy' to be, or what you're viewing as the `actual problem'?
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
None if this addresses the concern that people with low self control exist and do bad things with mild trigger prompts
Actually, it does. The problem isn't "they exist", it's "they've always been given excuses and outs for their conduct."
Even if you fix that mentality, it still wouldn't be a good idea for a woman to go home from a party at night without a coat. It is a contributing factor to aggravated sexual assault and is as much risky behavior as not locking your doors when you go out. It's not your fault that you got robbed, but you could have taken extra measures to prevent yourself from becoming a statistic.
Way to blame that victim.
Blame is a useless gesture. There are steps that should be taken to help increase the probability of safety for hostile situations. Don't try to stop an armed robbery - get descriptions and information and call the police immediately afterward. Don't talk about death to a suicidal person. Don't let your children play with convicted sex offenders. Don't run with scissors. Don't trust people when they offer you a once in a lifetime opportunity to get rick quick. Don't go down a dark alley in the middle of the night wearing expensive clothing.
It is undeniable that these actions can help prevent bad things from happening to you. If you disobey this advice, you're not to blame, but you are irresponsible. The difference is meaningless because in the end these are all precautions necessary for a good measure of safety.
And in a discussion like this, where the context from the OP is the entitlement complex men feel toward women, these are terrible observations.
You are feeding into a culture that tries to chill a woman's behavior and lay the responsibility of being assaulted at her feet. In a discussion of this nature, in this context, discussing what a woman could have done to not be rapeable is unhelpful.
Have we ever successfully weeded out any vice?
Yes, it sucks that we have to lock our doors and monitor our children's online activities, but it's still necessary to do those things, because unless we develop some sort of scorched earth plan, internet creeps and creeps in general will never go away, at least in our lifetime.
Let's use this controversial straw man to think about this another way: a drunk driver crashes into a guy not wearing a seatbelt and the guy without the seatbelt is killed. It's a straw man because buckling up is the law and humans aren't perfect at driving high speed automotive machines, but consider the fact that you're not harming anyone but yourself in not wearing a seatbelt, mostly. If cars drove themselves and there were no drunk drivers, you wouldn't think anything about not wearing a seatbelt.
It's obviously the drunk driver's fault that the accident occurred, but you cannot deny that the victim could have protected himself more against the odds of a fatal accident. Sure, anti-drunk driving laws are great, but that doesn't mean that if they're superbly enforced that you don't have to wear a seatbelt anymore. There will always be crazies on the road.
I'm thinking about it this way: if I had a daughter, would I tell her off for coming home extra late from a party alone in a revealing dress without a coat and without taking a cab or asking for a ride from a friend? You bet, because she has an increased risk compared to the median population of getting on the radar of some rapist. Would I tell her, "you'd deserve it if you got raped?" What do you think my intention is here?
Yes, but there's no pre-existing culture suggesting that children are responsible for being molested. There IS a prexisting culture of blaming rape victims. So discussing personal responsibilities in this particular context is, in fact, contributing to that pre-existing culture that still exists. And it is harmful.
Also, I have no fucking idea what kind of argument you are trying to make with drunk driving. The victim often can't prevent an accident when the other party was totally sober. I mean, not all driving accidents are equal, but an actual accident is an actual accident.
I don't mean to be personal, but I've had family that died because a drunk driver hit their car. Other than "stay at home" I don't see how they could have prevented anything.
I'm saying it propagates the feeling of power and entitlement that is often directly responsible for rape and sexual assault.
I mean, it is also insulting to lay responsibility for rape at a victim's feet, but insult is the least of my problems with this. The culture that comments like "she shouldn't have been wearing that" or "she shouldnt have drunk so much" feeds into actively promote the behaviors that lead to sexual assault and rape. So by propagating those mindsets, you are being actively harmful.
Mmm...I'm going to borrow an argument from the `opposition' in this thread, and say that if you think just by (people like) me stating that they exist, that those very minor mitigating circumstances are of equal weight to the act of rape, then its YOUR PROBLEM.
I think it would be dishonest to have this discussion without at least referring to a role that females can play in preventing `rape circumstances', regardless of how some parties may pretend that such circumstances provide a get-out-of-jail-free card.
You're right, I am, and thats because a bunch of people here are giving the idea of a female role in prevention no time at all. I am a natural contrarian that got sucked in here.
Date rape happens most often when a young woman has imbibed too much alcohol (often in the company of friends) and is taken advantage of while either unconscious or all-but unconscious (often by someone she knew). What is the realistic & pragmatic 'prevention' method you would recommend, here?
Violent rape by some stranger happens most often when a victim is ambushed (often in their own home). The attack is opportunistic, based far more on the perceived state of the victim's awareness than anything they're wearing (except for a select few serial killers who chose victims based on certain clothing items they wore). What is the realistic & pragmatic 'prevention' method you would recommend, here?
I'm thinking about it this way: if I had a daughter, would I tell her off for coming home extra late from a party alone in a revealing dress without a coat and without taking a cab or asking for a ride from a friend? You bet, because she has an increased risk compared to the median population of getting on the radar of some rapist. Would I tell her, "you'd deserve it if you got raped?" What do you think my intention is here?
Just because you're irresponsible doesn't mean you're responsible for a crime, especially against your person. In some cases, like malpractice, it is, but that is because it's a profession based responsibility you chose to accept.
You have to propagate safety as restrictions on personal freedom because not doing so is downright chilling: Stop advising females to do blah and blah so all the rapists come out of the woodwork and we can finally deal with the true extent of the problem. It's terrifying and it's never going to happen.
Until rape risk is pushed below signficant boundaries for certain groups, those groups have to modify their behavior. It sucks, but there's no other way around it because the world is a horrible place
Wait, Ender, are you saying that walking down the street alone in the middle of the night, happening to be female at an age that can go to parties and wearing revealing and/or expensive clothing does not increase your risk of being sought after by criminals? I don't know how to prove something like that.
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
In a world where we want to prevent rape, not just punish it, is the responsibility for this entirely on the male population to self-monitor to achieve this (including a significant minority of males with serious impulse control issues), or do females have some role in preventing rape from happening?
How do women prevent rape from happening? Rape is sexual assault, perpetrated by one person against another. The only way to prevent rape is to lock yourself in your home, forever.
Really? So there's nothing more that can be done except one strawman extreme thing?
So a given woman being raped is 100% chance, and nothing to do with behaviour?
It's entirely to so with the behavior of the rapist, yes. When have I ever argued that it was chance?
No it isn't, but that's where we start running into the refusal of modern discourse to distinguish between 'responsibility' and 'blame'.
It is (by definition) never a rape victim's fault that they are raped, but they can certainly behave irresponsibly. To choose a deliberately ludicrous example, if I, a 19-year old cheerleader, chose to dress in a g-string and a tight T-shirt with a "CUM DUMPSTER" slogan and hired a helicopter to drop me into a prison riot, then it would take some truly hyper-Euclidean logic-bending to argue that I was not in some way partyl responsible for what would immediately ensue.
Rape is never excusable because it's just straight up against the rules. These are the rules: you can't have sex with someone unless they agree, and if you do, then you're a rapist.
However, it is a sad fact of life that not everyone agrees 100% on the exact boundaries of those rules and what, precisely, constitutes 'agreement', and futhermore sex (like violence or love or fear) isn't something that is based on logic and reason to start with. Futher complication is caused by the fact that our society, along with most (but not all) others has a massive problem with sex and the whole subject is slathered in shifting, schizophrenic, ambiguous and unspoken rules, customs and laws. And then there are fetishes and sexual preferences, oh boy.
There is plenty of scope for real miscommunication and misunderstanding (and of course that means there is even more scope for deceitfully hiding behind misunderstanding and miscommunication). And whilst final blame will lie with anyone who 'misunderstands', it's also the responsible thing to do to make sure that you're not exacerbating the problem by miscommunicating.
In short there are things that can reasonably done to reduce the risk of rape, and there are behaviours and choices which we can reasonably say irresponsibly increase the risk and are less extreme than walking into a prison riot.
So in short, your strategy is to continue treating the symptoms while avoiding the actual problem.
What? Please explain this further, because I'm not sure what you're perceiving my `strategy' to be, or what you're viewing as the `actual problem'?
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
Other than the extremes I gave before, there really isn't. They can choose to stay home, never go to parties, and not socialize. Not drink. Not be alone with someone else.
None of those are reasonab,e behavioral restrictions to lay on a woman or all of women.
Furthermore, the reason this kind of thing should have no traction in this kind of discussion is because it extends a pre-existing culture of misogynistic victim blaming. That may not be your personal intent, but the words are the same and those that hear them and want to justify their own feelings of entitlement will take them to heart.
Just because you're irresponsible doesn't mean you're responsible for a crime, especially against your person. In some cases, like malpractice, it is, but that is because it's a profession based responsibility you chose to accept.
You have to propagate safety as restrictions on personal freedom because not doing so is downright chilling: Stop advising females to do blah and blah so all the rapists come out of the woodwork and we can finally deal with the true extent of the problem. It's terrifying and it's never going to happen.
Until rape risk is pushed below signficant boundaries for certain groups, those groups have to modify their behavior. It sucks, but there's no other way around it because the world is a horrible place
No, they don't have to modify their behavior. What do you even mean by "have to"?
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
What is your point here? What exactly are you trying to argue?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
Just because you're irresponsible doesn't mean you're responsible for a crime, especially against your person. In some cases, like malpractice, it is, but that is because it's a profession based responsibility you chose to accept.
You have to propagate safety as restrictions on personal freedom because not doing so is downright chilling: Stop advising females to do blah and blah so all the rapists come out of the woodwork and we can finally deal with the true extent of the problem. It's terrifying and it's never going to happen.
Until rape risk is pushed below signficant boundaries for certain groups, those groups have to modify their behavior. It sucks, but there's no other way around it because the world is a horrible place
No, they don't have to modify their behavior. What do you even mean by "have to"?
If they want to have an acceptable level of personal safety.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Date rape happens most often when a young woman has imbibed too much alcohol (often in the company of friends) and is taken advantage of while either unconscious or all-but unconscious (often by someone she knew). What is the realistic & pragmatic 'prevention' method you would recommend, here?
How about `don't get unconscious or all-but unconscious by getting completely pissed. If you do, there is some risk that something bad can happen?'. Is that really unreasonable?
Violent rape by some stranger happens most often when a victim is ambushed (often in their own home). The attack is opportunistic, based far more on the perceived state of the victim's awareness than anything they're wearing (except for a select few serial killers who chose victims based on certain clothing items they wore). What is the realistic & pragmatic 'prevention' method you would recommend, here?
Well, it starts with `lock your door' from the earlier post. But sure, this sort of thing is harder to prevent. But just because there is no 100% foolproof way to avoid rape, does that mean no measures should be taken? There's always a chance of getting pregnant when using a condom, but does that mean you just don't use them?
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
What is your point here? What exactly are you trying to argue?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
OK, but this tells me that your primary interest is in punishment for rape rather than prevention of rape.
How about `don't get unconscious or all-but unconscious by getting completely pissed. If you do, there is some risk that something bad can happen?'. Is that really unreasonable?
So women should not be able to enjoy the same privilege as men?
How about `don't get unconscious or all-but unconscious by getting completely pissed. If you do, there is some risk that something bad can happen?'. Is that really unreasonable?
So women should not be able to enjoy the same privilege as men?
Do you think nothing bad can happen to men that are pissed out of their brain and walking home alone?
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
What is your point here? What exactly are you trying to argue?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
OK, but this tells me that your primary interest is in punishment for rape rather than prevention of rape.
This is bizarre logic. Following your reasoning, I'm not interested in preventing being mugged(or the crime of mugging in society) because I choose to leave my home.
If they want to have an acceptable level of personal safety.
But you don't even have any basis for your argument that wearing certain clothing somehow makes a person more or less susceptible to rape.
Well, if you take that away, that means that all males have enough self control to ignore the state of a woman's appearance when assessing the possibility of rape. It doesn't really mean anything to my argument, since I provided lots of other risk factors, but since males can be aroused by females in different states of dress, it's kind of peculiar that dress is not one of the things that rapists look for.
Women have to take extra precautions compared to men when it comes to their personal safety, in general. It sucks, and it's not their fault, but it's true that they are more in danger. I can trivialize it and say that a good analogy is the anatomy of women compared to men: women are born into having to be more responsible for their biology than men. A woman that does not take enough folic acid when pregnant is irresponsible, whereas men that don't take enough folic acid are not nearly as irresponsible, because they are not the ones at risk of neonatal complications. Again, it sucks, the world is horrible, but we have to do this as we don't have enough power to satisfactorily change the situation.
Long story short, I doubt that eradicating rape culture will change anything. It will help, but rape is older than rape culture, and the risk of that is still great enough in my opinion that precautionary behaviors need to be maintained.
Paladin on
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
What is your point here? What exactly are you trying to argue?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
OK, but this tells me that your primary interest is in punishment for rape rather than prevention of rape.
This is bizarre logic. Following your reasoning, I'm not interested in preventing being mugged(or the crime of mugging in society) because I choose to leave my home.
OK, I've had enough of this. I'm not responding to anyone else that does not provide a REAL situation, rather than a stupid extreme hypothetical.
In a world where we want to prevent rape, not just punish it, is the responsibility for this entirely on the male population to self-monitor to achieve this (including a significant minority of males with serious impulse control issues), or do females have some role in preventing rape from happening?
How do women prevent rape from happening? Rape is sexual assault, perpetrated by one person against another. The only way to prevent rape is to lock yourself in your home, forever.
Really? So there's nothing more that can be done except one strawman extreme thing?
So a given woman being raped is 100% chance, and nothing to do with behaviour?
It's entirely to so with the behavior of the rapist, yes. When have I ever argued that it was chance?
No it isn't, but that's where we start running into the refusal of modern discourse to distinguish between 'responsibility' and 'blame'.
It is (by definition) never a rape victim's fault that they are raped, but they can certainly behave irresponsibly. To choose a deliberately ludicrous example, if I, a 19-year old cheerleader, chose to dress in a g-string and a tight T-shirt with a "CUM DUMPSTER" slogan and hired a helicopter to drop me into a prison riot, then it would take some truly hyper-Euclidean logic-bending to argue that I was not in some way partyl responsible for what would immediately ensue.
Rape is never excusable because it's just straight up against the rules. These are the rules: you can't have sex with someone unless they agree, and if you do, then you're a rapist.
However, it is a sad fact of life that not everyone agrees 100% on the exact boundaries of those rules and what, precisely, constitutes 'agreement', and futhermore sex (like violence or love or fear) isn't something that is based on logic and reason to start with. Futher complication is caused by the fact that our society, along with most (but not all) others has a massive problem with sex and the whole subject is slathered in shifting, schizophrenic, ambiguous and unspoken rules, customs and laws. And then there are fetishes and sexual preferences, oh boy.
There is plenty of scope for real miscommunication and misunderstanding (and of course that means there is even more scope for deceitfully hiding behind misunderstanding and miscommunication). And whilst final blame will lie with anyone who 'misunderstands', it's also the responsible thing to do to make sure that you're not exacerbating the problem by miscommunicating.
In short there are things that can reasonably done to reduce the risk of rape, and there are behaviours and choices which we can reasonably say irresponsibly increase the risk and are less extreme than walking into a prison riot.
No, the crime of rape is entirely to do with the behavior of the rapist. The responsibility for the act of rape is not on the victim. Ever. In fact, your post makes that pretty clear, clearer than other posts have.
People like to pull out these extreme hypotheticals in a discussion like this to justify discussions of "responsibility" but the reality is that we aren't talking about extreme hypotheticals, we are taking about a very small range of normal social behaviors, and we are asking women to think twice about engaging in these behaviors, or to not engage in them at all.
This is sexist against women because we don't expect men to behave with these restrictions, at least not to the same degree. And it is sexist against men, or misanthropic against society as a whole, because the implication is that "men" or "people you are partying/drinking with" cannot be trusted.
This is not good. Those implications are not good, and putting a chilling effect on a normal range of female behaviors is terrible.
If my daughter came to me and said she wanted to be lowered, naked, into a prison full of rapists then yeah I'd advise her not to. But if I were to advise her not to go to a party out of fear she will be raped, well that is crap in my opinion. And let's be honest here: the range of restrictions parents and society expect of women are different for that of men. Most parents wouldn't think twice about their boy going to a party with 10 girls but would think twice about their daughter going to a party with 10 boys. That kind of sexism targets both genders and is ingrained in society. It also does everyone a lot more harm than good.
Just in case my point is not clear: Attempting to restrict the behavior of women iis pretty harmful in and of itself, even if it is in the spirit of trying to help them not be raped. So basically, they are damned either way by this cultural mindset, one that continues to propagate.
How about `don't get unconscious or all-but unconscious by getting completely pissed. If you do, there is some risk that something bad can happen?'. Is that really unreasonable?
Yes, it is unreasonable, because there aren't reliable ways for anyone to test how much alcohol is in the beverage they are currently drinking, and peer pressure compromises judgement. Very few people will say, "This drink is too stiff for me," and ask to have it replaced.
It's very, very easy for someone to buy you doubles all night long while claiming to buy you singles. If you're used to consuming, say, three drinks and then wrapping the night up, that's a lot of extra alcohol you weren't expecting.
'Had sex with you while you were unconscious' doesn't mean 'Waited until you literally passed-out at the table', either. It often means being led to a bed (sometimes your own bed) or a couch, and then being molested as you fall asleep.
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
What is your point here? What exactly are you trying to argue?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
OK, but this tells me that your primary interest is in punishment for rape rather than prevention of rape.
This is bizarre logic. Following your reasoning, I'm not interested in preventing being mugged(or the crime of mugging in society) because I choose to leave my home.
OK, I've had enough of this. I'm not responding to anyone else that does not provide a REAL situation, rather than a stupid extreme hypothetical.
It's odd that you can't see the irrationality of your stance.
How about `don't get unconscious or all-but unconscious by getting completely pissed. If you do, there is some risk that something bad can happen?'. Is that really unreasonable?
Yes, it is unreasonable, because there aren't reliable ways for anyone to test how much alcohol is in the beverage they are currently drinking, and peer pressure compromises judgement. Very few people will say, "This drink is too stiff for me," and ask to have it replaced.
Isn't that something that also needs to be addressed?
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
What is your point here? What exactly are you trying to argue?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
Threads like these make me miss The Cat
As a somewhat overweight, not especially good looking almost 40-year old guy, I don't spend a lot of time worrying about being raped, but I sure don't want to be robbed. Am I just "giving more power to offenders" when I lock my doors and windows, don't carry much cash money on my person, don't flash my smartphone around when I'm in high crime areas, and avoid going to high-crime areas alone at night? I'm certainly choosing to circumscribe and modify my behaviour and limit my freedom, but my POV is that I'm acting responsibly in taking reasonable precautions to avoid being burgled or robbed.
It's not convenient to have to remember to lock my door (and remember to take my door key) when i go out, and in summer, I sure would like to be able to leave the windows open all the time because the place gets pretty hot and stuffy inside. Should I continue to do so or should I refuse to concede my lifestyle to criminals?
Posts
Well, for one thing it's a systemic problem. Rape is sexual assault. It has a perpetrator and it has a victim. So giving equal weight to what we can do to prevent rapes and what a women can do to avoid rapes is problematic. And I don't even see that happening here. I see some people almost enitrely focused on a woman's "self-responsibility."
And when it is shown that a culture that promotes victim-blaming leads to unhealthy entitlement complexes that in turn lead to rape, how exactly is it helpful to give voice to these. Maybe you're right that doing these things can increase safety. But you are choosing to focus on that instead of the rapist. Further, you are feeding back into this cultural,image that women can somehow prevent the assaults being perpetrated against them.
I don't know if you actually think "be more responsible" in the context of a discussion like this is helpful, but it isn't. It is harmful.
Most of the time, there isn't much that the woman could've done. There's no correlative link I'm aware of between certain items of clothing and rape, so the idea a woman even might be able to dissuade a rapist by wearing different clothes seems pretty unsubstantiated to me.
Wow, I've never seen this so bluntly stated before.
Since "potential victims" do nothing wrong and do not invite rape, maybe expecting them to change for potential criminals is total shit? That's how I feel anyway.
Are you saying that people should be chaperoned when mixed gender couples go out together?
I believe he's using it as proof that a portion of the male population just can't control themselves.
Pretty much. Hell, we were talking about this back in the 70s:
You're right, I am, and thats because a bunch of people here are giving the idea of a female role in prevention no time at all. I am a natural contrarian that got sucked in here.
I don't think it is helpful to have a discussion like this and pretend that `being more responsible' is not only not a useful preventative action but an active insult. In association with legal punishment and discouragement of rape as a practice, `be responsible' is entirely sensible for a society in which rape prevention is more important than rape punishment.
You mean Chez de Bachmann?
Kidding aside, yes, there are such cultures, and it's still a stupid view.
So in short, your strategy is to continue treating the symptoms while avoiding the actual problem.
Have we ever successfully weeded out any vice?
Yes, it sucks that we have to lock our doors and monitor our children's online activities, but it's still necessary to do those things, because unless we develop some sort of scorched earth plan, internet creeps and creeps in general will never go away, at least in our lifetime.
Let's use this controversial straw man to think about this another way: a drunk driver crashes into a guy not wearing a seatbelt and the guy without the seatbelt is killed. It's a straw man because buckling up is the law and humans aren't perfect at driving high speed automotive machines, but consider the fact that you're not harming anyone but yourself in not wearing a seatbelt, mostly. If cars drove themselves and there were no drunk drivers, you wouldn't think anything about not wearing a seatbelt.
It's obviously the drunk driver's fault that the accident occurred, but you cannot deny that the victim could have protected himself more against the odds of a fatal accident. Sure, anti-drunk driving laws are great, but that doesn't mean that if they're superbly enforced that you don't have to wear a seatbelt anymore. There will always be crazies on the road.
I'm thinking about it this way: if I had a daughter, would I tell her off for coming home extra late from a party alone in a revealing dress without a coat and without taking a cab or asking for a ride from a friend? You bet, because she has an increased risk compared to the median population of getting on the radar of some rapist. Would I tell her, "you'd deserve it if you got raped?" What do you think my intention is here?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I'm not saying its an active insult. No no no.
I'm saying it propagates the feeling of power and entitlement that is often directly responsible for rape and sexual assault.
I mean, it is also insulting to lay responsibility for rape at a victim's feet, but insult is the least of my problems with this. The culture that comments like "she shouldn't have been wearing that" or "she shouldnt have drunk so much" feeds into actively promote the behaviors that lead to sexual assault and rape. So by propagating those mindsets, you are being actively harmful.
I have not at any point said that men raping women is not the main problem. The only difference between what I've said and what most people in this thread have said is that one of the tools for prevention of rape (besides harsh punishments and education of males) lies in female behaviour; that there are things women can also do to reduce their chances of being raped.
Yes, but there's no pre-existing culture suggesting that children are responsible for being molested. There IS a prexisting culture of blaming rape victims. So discussing personal responsibilities in this particular context is, in fact, contributing to that pre-existing culture that still exists. And it is harmful.
Also, I have no fucking idea what kind of argument you are trying to make with drunk driving. The victim often can't prevent an accident when the other party was totally sober. I mean, not all driving accidents are equal, but an actual accident is an actual accident.
I don't mean to be personal, but I've had family that died because a drunk driver hit their car. Other than "stay at home" I don't see how they could have prevented anything.
I think it would be dishonest to have this discussion without at least referring to a role that females can play in preventing `rape circumstances', regardless of how some parties may pretend that such circumstances provide a get-out-of-jail-free card.
Date rape happens most often when a young woman has imbibed too much alcohol (often in the company of friends) and is taken advantage of while either unconscious or all-but unconscious (often by someone she knew). What is the realistic & pragmatic 'prevention' method you would recommend, here?
Violent rape by some stranger happens most often when a victim is ambushed (often in their own home). The attack is opportunistic, based far more on the perceived state of the victim's awareness than anything they're wearing (except for a select few serial killers who chose victims based on certain clothing items they wore). What is the realistic & pragmatic 'prevention' method you would recommend, here?
Provide evidence for the bolded part, please.
You have to propagate safety as restrictions on personal freedom because not doing so is downright chilling: Stop advising females to do blah and blah so all the rapists come out of the woodwork and we can finally deal with the true extent of the problem. It's terrifying and it's never going to happen.
Until rape risk is pushed below signficant boundaries for certain groups, those groups have to modify their behavior. It sucks, but there's no other way around it because the world is a horrible place
Wait, Ender, are you saying that walking down the street alone in the middle of the night, happening to be female at an age that can go to parties and wearing revealing and/or expensive clothing does not increase your risk of being sought after by criminals? I don't know how to prove something like that.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
No it isn't, but that's where we start running into the refusal of modern discourse to distinguish between 'responsibility' and 'blame'.
It is (by definition) never a rape victim's fault that they are raped, but they can certainly behave irresponsibly. To choose a deliberately ludicrous example, if I, a 19-year old cheerleader, chose to dress in a g-string and a tight T-shirt with a "CUM DUMPSTER" slogan and hired a helicopter to drop me into a prison riot, then it would take some truly hyper-Euclidean logic-bending to argue that I was not in some way partyl responsible for what would immediately ensue.
Rape is never excusable because it's just straight up against the rules. These are the rules: you can't have sex with someone unless they agree, and if you do, then you're a rapist.
However, it is a sad fact of life that not everyone agrees 100% on the exact boundaries of those rules and what, precisely, constitutes 'agreement', and futhermore sex (like violence or love or fear) isn't something that is based on logic and reason to start with. Futher complication is caused by the fact that our society, along with most (but not all) others has a massive problem with sex and the whole subject is slathered in shifting, schizophrenic, ambiguous and unspoken rules, customs and laws. And then there are fetishes and sexual preferences, oh boy.
There is plenty of scope for real miscommunication and misunderstanding (and of course that means there is even more scope for deceitfully hiding behind misunderstanding and miscommunication). And whilst final blame will lie with anyone who 'misunderstands', it's also the responsible thing to do to make sure that you're not exacerbating the problem by miscommunicating.
In short there are things that can reasonably done to reduce the risk of rape, and there are behaviours and choices which we can reasonably say irresponsibly increase the risk and are less extreme than walking into a prison riot.
Other than the extremes I gave before, there really isn't. They can choose to stay home, never go to parties, and not socialize. Not drink. Not be alone with someone else.
None of those are reasonab,e behavioral restrictions to lay on a woman or all of women.
Furthermore, the reason this kind of thing should have no traction in this kind of discussion is because it extends a pre-existing culture of misogynistic victim blaming. That may not be your personal intent, but the words are the same and those that hear them and want to justify their own feelings of entitlement will take them to heart.
It is not helpful, it is harmful.
No, they don't have to modify their behavior. What do you even mean by "have to"?
I can mitigate crime on my person by never leaving my home, but that does nothing to address the actual crime itself. It's simply giving more power to the offender.
Threads like these make me miss The Cat
If they want to have an acceptable level of personal safety.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Well, it starts with `lock your door' from the earlier post. But sure, this sort of thing is harder to prevent. But just because there is no 100% foolproof way to avoid rape, does that mean no measures should be taken? There's always a chance of getting pregnant when using a condom, but does that mean you just don't use them?
But you don't even have any basis for your argument that wearing certain clothing somehow makes a person more or less susceptible to rape.
Well, if you take that away, that means that all males have enough self control to ignore the state of a woman's appearance when assessing the possibility of rape. It doesn't really mean anything to my argument, since I provided lots of other risk factors, but since males can be aroused by females in different states of dress, it's kind of peculiar that dress is not one of the things that rapists look for.
Women have to take extra precautions compared to men when it comes to their personal safety, in general. It sucks, and it's not their fault, but it's true that they are more in danger. I can trivialize it and say that a good analogy is the anatomy of women compared to men: women are born into having to be more responsible for their biology than men. A woman that does not take enough folic acid when pregnant is irresponsible, whereas men that don't take enough folic acid are not nearly as irresponsible, because they are not the ones at risk of neonatal complications. Again, it sucks, the world is horrible, but we have to do this as we don't have enough power to satisfactorily change the situation.
Long story short, I doubt that eradicating rape culture will change anything. It will help, but rape is older than rape culture, and the risk of that is still great enough in my opinion that precautionary behaviors need to be maintained.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
No, the crime of rape is entirely to do with the behavior of the rapist. The responsibility for the act of rape is not on the victim. Ever. In fact, your post makes that pretty clear, clearer than other posts have.
People like to pull out these extreme hypotheticals in a discussion like this to justify discussions of "responsibility" but the reality is that we aren't talking about extreme hypotheticals, we are taking about a very small range of normal social behaviors, and we are asking women to think twice about engaging in these behaviors, or to not engage in them at all.
This is sexist against women because we don't expect men to behave with these restrictions, at least not to the same degree. And it is sexist against men, or misanthropic against society as a whole, because the implication is that "men" or "people you are partying/drinking with" cannot be trusted.
This is not good. Those implications are not good, and putting a chilling effect on a normal range of female behaviors is terrible.
If my daughter came to me and said she wanted to be lowered, naked, into a prison full of rapists then yeah I'd advise her not to. But if I were to advise her not to go to a party out of fear she will be raped, well that is crap in my opinion. And let's be honest here: the range of restrictions parents and society expect of women are different for that of men. Most parents wouldn't think twice about their boy going to a party with 10 girls but would think twice about their daughter going to a party with 10 boys. That kind of sexism targets both genders and is ingrained in society. It also does everyone a lot more harm than good.
Just in case my point is not clear: Attempting to restrict the behavior of women iis pretty harmful in and of itself, even if it is in the spirit of trying to help them not be raped. So basically, they are damned either way by this cultural mindset, one that continues to propagate.
Yes, it is unreasonable, because there aren't reliable ways for anyone to test how much alcohol is in the beverage they are currently drinking, and peer pressure compromises judgement. Very few people will say, "This drink is too stiff for me," and ask to have it replaced.
It's very, very easy for someone to buy you doubles all night long while claiming to buy you singles. If you're used to consuming, say, three drinks and then wrapping the night up, that's a lot of extra alcohol you weren't expecting.
'Had sex with you while you were unconscious' doesn't mean 'Waited until you literally passed-out at the table', either. It often means being led to a bed (sometimes your own bed) or a couch, and then being molested as you fall asleep.
As a somewhat overweight, not especially good looking almost 40-year old guy, I don't spend a lot of time worrying about being raped, but I sure don't want to be robbed. Am I just "giving more power to offenders" when I lock my doors and windows, don't carry much cash money on my person, don't flash my smartphone around when I'm in high crime areas, and avoid going to high-crime areas alone at night? I'm certainly choosing to circumscribe and modify my behaviour and limit my freedom, but my POV is that I'm acting responsibly in taking reasonable precautions to avoid being burgled or robbed.
It's not convenient to have to remember to lock my door (and remember to take my door key) when i go out, and in summer, I sure would like to be able to leave the windows open all the time because the place gets pretty hot and stuffy inside. Should I continue to do so or should I refuse to concede my lifestyle to criminals?