skinz Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Its not about rape though is it, the police officer wasn't specifically advising how not to be raped. He said "victimised"...This can mean any sort of minor offence. Like this scenario. A drunken oaf sees a girl in a very short skirt. He (wrongly) assumes that she game. He touches her. She turns and slaps his face. The blokes sister sees this and dives on the girl dragging her to the floor. A brawl develops. Of course the girl in a short skirt has done nothing wrong but because of her clothing and the oafs reaction an incident occurred. I feel this is more what the officer was advising about, not how to avoid rape. You're fantasising again. Go get a shower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Its not about rape though is it, the police officer wasn't specifically advising how not to be raped. He said "victimised"...This can mean any sort of minor offence. Like this scenario. A drunken oaf sees a girl in a very short skirt. He (wrongly) assumes that she game. He touches her. She turns and slaps his face. The blokes sister sees this and dives on the girl dragging her to the floor. A brawl develops. Of course the girl in a short skirt has done nothing wrong but because of her clothing and the oafs reaction an incident occurred. I feel this is more what the officer was advising about, not how to avoid rape. Frank, have you gone over to the dark side?! I think the point that others are making, which I missed myself in the first instance, is that the drunken oaf would have assumed any woman was 'game' irrespective of what she was wearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 Frank, have you gone over to the dark side?! I think the point that others are making, which I missed myself in the first instance, is that the drunken oaf would have assumed any woman was 'game' irrespective of what she was wearing. No, I've just put two bob in the meter. IMO if the girl had not been wearing the type of clothing I've described he would have looked for a girl who was wearing a buttock revealer and molested her.. That's not only as I see it, but as I've seen it all too often. Lets be honest not many of the pro slutwalkers have spent much time in dives like what I have... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 No, I've just put two bob in the meter. IMO if the girl had not been wearing the type of clothing I've described he would have looked for a girl who was wearing a buttock revealer and molested her.. So would 'drunken oaf' find his way home if he couldn't find buttock revealing women to intimidate? Lets be honest not many of the pro slutwalkers have spent much time in dives like what I have...I dread to think what you look like in your half mast jailboy pants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 No, I've just put two bob in the meter. IMO if the girl had not been wearing the type of clothing I've described he would have looked for a girl who was wearing a buttock revealer and molested her.. That's not only as I see it, but as I've seen it all too often. Lets be honest not many of the pro slutwalkers have spent much time in dives like what I have... ....and still keep getting a knock back. :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 So would 'drunken oaf' find his way home if he couldn't find buttock revealing women to intimidate? That's not only as I see it, but as I've seen it all too often. I dream to think what you look like in your half mast jailboy pants I apologise for editing your post but you appear to have spelt a word wrong, I'll edit no problem...xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 You had me worried there for a moment boyfriday, I'm pleased if the penny has dropped. Let me just get this off my chest before bedtime. The fact that there is a +ve correlation between rapists and misogynistic views, such as girls dressed in a certain way are "asking for it", is hardly surprising. However, there is no evidence of correlation between clothing and rape. If that seems odd to anybody, then as somebody that does a fair amount of statistical analysis I can assure you it's not. Opportunity. Whilst leaving your car doors unlocked makes it easier for someone to rob your house, dressing sexily does nothing to make it easier for someone to rape you. Getting unconscious from alcohol or drugs, or going to the home of a stranger does make it easier. Temptation. The rhetoric goes on the baseless assumption that the more attractively a woman dresses, the more likely it is a rapist will target her because he is tempted. This is simply not true. Rape is about power and is most often done when it is convenient, as most victims are raped by people they know or who already have some sort of power over them. Family members, the mentally ill and drunk or drugged women are most likely to be victims of rape. Even if a rapist is tempted by a woman in attractive clothing, the ultimate victim will be the one that is presented by opportunity. Freedom. Everyone seems to be forgetting that sometimes women dress in an attractive way because they WANT TO, and sometimes even because they DO want to attract attention – of the consensual kind. Blaming the woman for wanting to look attractive is like blaming a store owner for having such nice things in his store, after the store is subject to an armed robbery. Clearly the owner should cover up and hide all the nice things so no one wants to steal them. Who's actually said women shouldn't dress sexually provocative? As far as I'm aware no one as said that. What has been said is women who do dress sexually provocative are far more likely to become a victim of sexual harassment, assault and possibly rape, than if they were dressed casually. Why would any man not want women to dress sexually provocative? Wouldn't be in their interests would it. Women- wear what you want to wear.. pleeeease!! But to those of you that want to go out looking and behaving like pussy-cat dolls, stop whining about being hassled by fella's who get the wrong idea about you. The pussy-cat dolls dress provocatively and behave provocatively because of one simple yet fundamental criterion - sex sells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Its not about rape though is it, the police officer wasn't specifically advising how not to be raped. He said "victimised"...This can mean any sort of minor offence. Like this scenario. A drunken oaf sees a girl in a very short skirt. He (wrongly) assumes that she game. He touches her. She turns and slaps his face. The blokes sister sees this and dives on the girl dragging her to the floor. A brawl develops. Of course the girl in a short skirt has done nothing wrong but because of her clothing and the oafs reaction an incident occurred. I feel this is more what the officer was advising about, not how to avoid rape. It can mean any sort of minor offence, but isn't usually used in that manner. If the officer had said "don't wear revealing clothes if you don't want any attention, wanted or otherwise", then there wouldn't have been the reaction that followed. The students would have been miffed at having a salaried public servant telling them something they had much more knowledge of. Besides, the reaction came from the fact that the students knew very well what the officer was referring to, he even said he shouldn't be saying it, and when he apologised he made no reference to his words being misinterpreted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I apologise for editing your post but you appear to have spelt a word wrong, I'll edit no problem...xx ..darn it, am I so transparent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Crikey, I sense a modifying of views here. Result. Perhaps those 31 people who ticked the second box just did so in error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.