[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463343]your analogy doesn't apply to this situation AT ALL. robbery is about trying to gain money or items that are worth something. anyone can be reduced to robbery if they're put in dire enough straits. rape is NOT about sex or fulfilling sexual desires, someones clothing has nothing to do with it. noone is going to start raping people because they haven't had sex in a long time[/QUOTE]
i dont see why the origin makes them both so different from each other when it happens. Im not talking about the solution in here btw, not going to be that optimistic, im just saying that we can be victims of evil at anytime, and that can be observed by possible criminals. Rape or robbery.
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;42463372]So basically, you're admitting here that the definition of rape needs to be changed to grant exceptions to people who are, in your opinion, "too drunk".
This idea you have that people have a tendency to "get drunk, have sex, and regret it" isn't backed by facts or statistics and it's not a special excuse for rape. Girls don't just go out and get drunk so they can have men arrested after having sex with them, on the extremely rare occasion that something like that does happen it's almost always motivated by revenge or something, not this inane notion of "crazy girls who cry rape"[/QUOTE]
If I mentioned consent then it wouldn't be rape would it?
People seem to keep wanting to title alcohol + consent + sex as 'rape'.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463407]If I mentioned consent then it wouldn't be rape would it?
People seem to keep wanting to title alcohol + consent + sex as 'rape'.[/QUOTE]
Who is 'people'? I almost never see the argument presented that way unless it's some kind of satire.
Consent is one thing, but you've made quite a few creepy fucking comments along the lines of consent not being needed if someone isn't "100% clear about saying no" or whatever.
[QUOTE=autodesknoob;42463399]i dont see why the origin makes them both so different from each other when it happens. Im not talking about the solution in here btw, not going to be that optimistic, im just saying that we can be victims of evil at anytime, and that can be observed by possible criminals. Rape or robbery.[/QUOTE]
it's different because noones going to rape you based on what you're wearing. whereas someone could quite possibly be more willing to rob you if they see you brandishing your wallet
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;42463432]Who is 'people'? I almost never see the argument presented that way unless it's some kind of satire.
Consent is one thing, but you've made quite a few creepy fucking comments along the lines of consent not being needed if someone isn't "100% clear about saying no" or whatever.[/QUOTE]
Yes in that instance I believe I mentioned them "undressing each other".
People undressing each other have consenting sexual relations: more at 11.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463439]it's different because noones going to rape you based on what you're wearing. whereas someone could quite possibly be more willing to rob you if they see you brandishing your wallet[/QUOTE]
so you all the sudden own that fact?
i refuse to believe that its not possible for a single rapists to rape after some visual stimulation. Saying that that does not happen by any chance is the false closure of a big cave full of possibilities to confront the topic.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463446]Yes in that instance I believe I mentioned them "undressing each other".
[/QUOTE]
I don't know what instance you're talking about, but I'm sickened at the one that was along the lines of "It can't be rape if the guy drags her to the room and she doesn't tell him 'no' in a way I find satisfactorily explicit"
And why is it always the girl you blame in this situation? Where is the blame for guys who get drunk, lose control of themselves and try to have sex with female strangers?
[QUOTE=BLOODGA$M;42463468]I don't know what instance you're talking about, but I'm sickened at the one that was along the lines of "It can't be rape if the guy drags her to the room and she doesn't tell him 'no' in a way I find satisfactorily explicit"[/QUOTE]
Please reference the specific text you are referring to; I do not recall using the term 'drag'.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463481]Please reference the specific text you are referring to; I do not recall using the term 'drag'.[/QUOTE]
I said "along the lines of", not "these were your exact words". Here they are anyways.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42454475]
And sorry but if some guy makes out with a girl and they start making moves towards the bedroom and she doesn't say an outright no then I find it hard to call that rape.[/QUOTE]
It's in the way you worded it, instead of "and she says yes" you chose to put "and she doesn't say an outright no". Alcohol is a factor that can very easily make an "outright no" difficult to get across even if consent isn't intended.
Why do you deem it necessary to so diligently defend your misguided opinion that girls tend to lie about being raped or that rape isn't as bad if they bring it upon themselves by "not being in control"?
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463439]it's different because noones going to rape you based on what you're wearing. whereas someone could quite possibly be more willing to rob you if they see you brandishing your wallet[/QUOTE]
Except that is wrong.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Strangler"]The "Boston Stranger" pretty much targeted women who were wearing nylon stockings.[/URL]
Clothes also tie in with how attractive someone looks and their general presentation; I'd imagine rapists are more inclined to target people they are attracted to.
Does that mean I believe it is someone's fault for dressing a certain way or that they deserve to be raped? No.
Does that mean I believe it could be a factor in some instances? Yes.
[QUOTE=autodesknoob;42463284]saying clothing does nothing on the topic, is like saying you can take a walk in the night waving your wallet up the air, getting robbed and then saying you didnt add any to the equation. [/QUOTE]
That's an absurd comparison.
"Waving your wallet in the air at night" is indeed abnormal, out-there, and perhaps even enticing advertisement. But asking people not to wave their wallet in the air does not infringe on anyone's ability to wear normal clothing or behave in a normal fashion, nor is it allowing choice and agency among one group while limiting the choice and agency of another group.
Nobody is really going to walk around waving their wallet in the air.
But women would like to be able to go places alone, unchaperoned, in clothes they chose to wear, drink alcohol, and not get assaulted. This is not outlandish behavior — [I]it's what people do[/I], all the time. And unfortunately, not doing those things does not change a single thing about your level of protection.
Date rape, family assault, coworkers, bosses, friends, etc. committing assault—these things happen. Probably more often than a woman being snatched off the street by a stranger. Women wearing a tee shirt and jeans, perfectly sober, have been attacked. Women in groups get attacked. Women escorted by a familiar, trusted man get attacked/assaulted by that same man.
[QUOTE=gtanoofa;42463634]It's a small factor and if there is a killer that targets people with B&W cars does that mean it will be my fault or part of the fault if i am his or her victim because i am driving a certain type of car i own to go to work or do other activities?[/QUOTE]
Did you seriously skip over the part where I said I didn't believe it was anyone's fault for dressing a particular way?
EDIT: and are you seriously trying to disagree that the boston strangler targeted women in particular who were wearing stockings?
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463509]Except that is wrong.
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Strangler"]The "Boston Stranger" pretty much targeted women who were wearing nylon stockings.[/URL]
Clothes also tie in with how attractive someone looks and their general presentation; I'd imagine rapists are more inclined to target people they are attracted to.
Does that mean I believe it is someone's fault for dressing a certain way or that they deserve to be raped? No.
Does that mean I believe it could be a factor in some instances? Yes.[/QUOTE]
what a idiotic thing to bring up
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463647]what a idiotic thing to bring up[/QUOTE]
Explain how me bringing up a rapist/murderer who targeted women who wore a particular item of clothing is 'idiotic' in a discussion where you are claiming that clothing is irrelevant.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463654]Explain how me bringing up a rapist/murderer who targeted women who wore a particular item of clothing is 'idiotic' in a discussion where you are claiming that clothing is irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
It might be because statistics and studies have repeatedly shown that clothing is [B][I]not [/I][/B]a factor in rape.
The exception does not make the rule, nigerianprince.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463654]Explain how me bringing up a rapist/murderer who targeted women who wore a particular item of clothing is 'idiotic' in a discussion where you are claiming that clothing is irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
he was a serial killer, it's not like you can exactly take precautions when it comes to avoiding serial killers. and why do you say he targeted women who wore nylon stockings? could it not just be a coincidence that he strangled women with something that A HUGE AMOUNT OF WOMEN wore?
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;42463662]It might be because statistics and studies have repeatedly shown that clothing is [B][I]not [/I][/B]a factor in rape.
The exception does not make the rule, nigerianprince.[/QUOTE]
How about [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlton_Gary"]"The Stocking Strangler"[/URL] then?
or [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy"]Ted Bundy[/URL]?
What about [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1528049/Jail-for-serial-rapist-who-kept-victims-shoes.html"]this guy[/URL] who kept shoes and other items (presumably including stockings) from his victims?
I would actually be interested to know how proportionate violent crime is to people who were wearing stockings.
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463715]he was a serial killer, it's not like you can exactly take precautions when it comes to avoiding serial killers. and why do you say he targeted women who wore nylon stockings? could it not just be a coincidence that he strangled women with something that A HUGE AMOUNT OF WOMEN wore?[/QUOTE]
I didn't say it was a precaution one could take, nor did I blame anyone for dressing a certain way (I believe I did clearly say that earlier on) but I don't think there is any argument that clothing can easily be a factor in rape.
I'm not saying it 'should' be a factor, or people should be blamed for dressing a certain way, I am just saying that there is evidence to suggest that rapists target people who wear particular items of clothing.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463647]what a idiotic thing to bring up[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;42463755]what a idiotic thing to bring up[/QUOTE]
Because you don't have anything to counter what I have presented?
Unless you are denying that there were several serial rapists/murderers who seemed to be fixated with stockings.
I find it extremely offensive of you to deny the existence of these people who have committed reprehensible crimes, and I find it almost both as disgusting and disturbing as people who attempt to deny the existence of the holocaust.
I hope you know that by denying the existence of these criminals you are also denying the existence of the victims of these criminals.
The issue here is not that someone is insisting that women should wear less promiscuous clothing or that we shouldn't do anything about rape, it's that people should take whatever action is relevant at the time to lessen the risk of getting hurt. What those things are depends on the situation and depends on the person, but these knee-jerk reactions about exact phrasings of things that really should be perfectly explicit in meaning is really getting tiresome. Women should be able to go out and wear whatever they want, it really depends on the situation, but if they, for instance, get in a car with a complete stranger or do something else along those lines you could argue that those things are potentially risky.
The only thing the guy was arguing here was that it's unfair to just say that parents are to blame and they should just teach their children not to rape. It's disrespectful to parents, it's disrespectful to the whole idea of rape to just say the answer is as simple as telling kids not to rape.
It really isn't doing anything to help the cause when all you're doing is advocating harassment of even more people who may not have anything to do with the problem. When you take something like this so far you end up working against the movement you were originally supposed to be supporting.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463804]Because you don't have anything to counter what I have presented?
Unless you are denying that there were several serial rapists/murderers who seemed to be fixated with stockings.
I find it extremely offensive of you to deny the existence of these people who have committed reprehensible crimes, and I find it almost both as disgusting and disturbing as people who attempt to deny the existence of the holocaust.
I hope you know that by denying the existence of these criminals you are also denying the existence of the victims of these criminals.[/QUOTE]
okay now i get it lol
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463654]Explain how me bringing up a rapist/murderer who targeted women who wore a particular item of clothing is 'idiotic' in a discussion where you are claiming that clothing is irrelevant.[/QUOTE]
look at all the women who didnt have nylon stockings that he killed
[QUOTE=thisispain;42463833]look at all the women who didnt have nylon stockings that he killed[/QUOTE]
Well the murders weren't referred to as "the silk stocking murders" with no reason at all.
[QUOTE=gtanoofa;42463828]
- skimpy clothes? wtf is this she dresses like a nun ewww 0/10 would not rape[/QUOTE]
I'd guess that most rapes that happen are the result of young men who look at a girl who they think is 'easy', who then proceed to solicit their attention with drinks until they are too off their face to resist or (espicially is they've had a few shots themselves) they grab them out back when they are about to leave and 'solicit' them that way.
The completely random violent murder rapes that occur are probably less common than the unfortunately semi-sanctioned activities that happen in and around bars late at night and early in the morning.
[QUOTE=gtanoofa;42463828]Yeah but most of these guys you showed us are mostly if not all mentally unstable(pretty sure they are all unstable) and as far as i know the US mental care is really bad, correct me if i am wrong though.
And to add to the whole skimpy clothes thing, lets step into the rapists mind for a bit
"oh man look at that girl passing from my alley lets check the list of the rapists agenta"
-attractive check
-short and thus easy target check
- skimpy clothes? wtf is this she dresses like a nun ewww 0/10 would not rape
Not talking about people who target certain individuals with certain characteristics, and also yeah skimpy clothes do arouse me more than less revealing clothes but if i was a person who was out to rape then i am pretty sure clothing wouldn't stop me.
I do aknowledge that there are people who would be triggered at the sight of a woman wearing skimpy clothing and would harrash her or sexually violate her, but hey they are probably mentally unstable since well being triggered and incredibly arroused with no self control is something only a very insane individual person would do.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I'd guess that most people that commit these sorts of violent rapes have something wrong going on in their head.
However given that there are several serial rapists who have had fetishes for stiletto shoes, stockings, tights etc it seems obvious that [B]clothing can be a factor in rape[/B]. (and no, I'm still not blaming anyone for dressing a certain way or saying "they deserved it!", I'm just saying that it is obviously a factor in some instances).
[QUOTE]Oh and i am pretty sure Lachz0r is ignoring you since you are both so far entrenched to your opinions that you will probably go round an round till someone gets bored of it and keeps his views on the subject intact.[/QUOTE]
I don't much care for Lachz0r's opinion at this point in time; whereas he has his opinion and I have mind I at least backed mine up with some sources. Lachz0r seems to think that by denying the existence of a notorious serial murderer/rapist who targeted women (misogyny!) who wore stockings he can somehow prove his point.
It really just makes him sound like a dolt along with the other people who are trying to say the cases I brought up are 'irrelevant'.
the reason was it sold better as a new article piece than "the murders"
if you want to use him as an example in your argument then youll have to explain why he killed and raped women who didnt wear stockings.
your original point was "yes someone will rape you based on what you were wearing". at least 4 of these women do not fit your profile.
[QUOTE=thisispain;42463877]the reason was it sold better as a new article piece than "the murders"
if you want to use him as an example in your argument then youll have to explain why he killed and raped women who didnt wear stockings.
your original point was "yes someone will rape you based on what you were wearing". at least 4 of these women do not fit your profile.[/QUOTE]
I also provided instances of other rapists/murderers who targeted people based upon items of clothing (be it shoes, stockings etc).
Just because there were a few that didn't meet their exact pattern, I don't think that throws out the idea that these people had a 'target' in mind.
What do you think they'd do if they attacked someone who didn't wear what they were interested in? Send them home on their way with a happy meal?
basically you have very weak ground and you should just concede instead of trying to drive your point into the ground for another couple of pages
we have psychological insight into why people rape, sexual attraction is hardly a factor when it comes to violent rape by strangers. the perpetrators of such crimes are mental ill and simply seek out victims based on circumstance. there's very little these women could have done.
[QUOTE=thisispain;42463877]the reason was it sold better as a new article piece than "the murders"
if you want to use him as an example in your argument then youll have to explain why he killed and raped women who didnt wear stockings.
your original point was "yes someone will rape you based on what you were wearing". at least 4 of these women do not fit your profile.[/QUOTE]
I think the point is to say that the reasoning used by these rapists is completely unpredictable. It's unreasonable to say that choice of clothing does not and could not affect your chances of being raped, but you should always take whatever precautions you think are right to have at the time. It's impossible to say what you could have done differently in retrospect, but we should always take whatever reasonable precautions make sense rather then taking risks for the heck of it. It's personally up to you and how you want to behave versus what risks could possibly happen.
[QUOTE=nigerianprince;42463883]
Just because there were a few that didn't meet their exact pattern, I don't think that throws out the idea that these people had a 'target' in mind.[/QUOTE]
that's exactly what it does. they didnt find targets, they attacked whomever was vulnerable in order to satisfy a psychological craving for violence. the fact that some of them wore stockings is coincidental at best. no psychological profile was conducted to prove he was targeting victims based on stockings.
[editline]9th October 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zyler;42463895]It's unreasonable to say that choice of clothing does not and could not affect your chances of being raped[/QUOTE]
its not supported by any psychological profile.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
