Frank Sidney Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 Could there be a class element to it? If some girls off the local council estate dress up like some pole dancing nymphomaniac and gets drunk, there's more condemnation. But if some middle class students do the same then they have the right to do it and its everybody elses fault? Dunno, just saying...Trying to create a debate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 What does he mean by victimised then? And what exactly is the definition of dressing 'like a slut'? Hands up if you have been victimised my a man for how they look? I have. I've been touched up, man handled, called names that relate to my rather large boobies. Do I feel like a 'victim'? Hell no. see previous post why I am not a victim. Do I dress like a slut? no - my mother taught me better. 9pretty much said what the cop said. I still don't think you've got the point. Don't worry you're not alone. The point is they would be safer if they didn't dress provocatively. Ignore everything else just concentrate on that issue. He was trying to advise them how to avoid attracting unwanted attention... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob1 Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 Why oh why do I bother? I have NOT EVER put the responsibility of the CRIME upon the VICTIM. You personally may not be, however rapists' defence lawyers frequently do and only reason that they bother is that it might work with a jury due to society's subconcious belief that what women wear is a mitigating factor. In a court case involving the theft of a car, the car owner is never posed questions such as "is it not true that you had recently had your car repainted making it more attractive to a potential car thief?" However in rape cases the victim will frequently be questioned on her clothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 Just to emphasise the point. Here are two clips of girls. Which one do you think would receive (albeit unwanted) attention from men? 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZbB1PdajLU&feature=related 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PT6Po4XqP5E Anyway I think the officer was stating that the girl in 2 is less likely to attract unwanted attention from predatory males. He advised the girls for their own safety that this type of clothing would not attract the same attention as the girl in 1. Try to ignore all the moral and legal arguments in that women should be able to wear what they like. Of course they should. The cold truth is that women who wear provocative clothes are more likely to be harassed by some men.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 if they didn't dress provocatively. Once again, your words give the game away. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 I still don't think you've got the point. Don't worry you're not alone. The point is they would be safer if they didn't dress provocatively. Ignore everything else just concentrate on that issue. He was trying to advise them how to avoid attracting unwanted attention... That isn't the issue is it though, although what provocatively means would be open to interpretation anyway. The issue is what was said, the words that were used and the attitude that causes it. If the topic was to discuss "Should people be aware of how their own behaviour affects their safety?" then nobody would say "No". But it isn't. Which seems to be the point that you're missing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 Try to ignore all the moral and legal arguments in that women should be able to wear what they like. Is there any point to this discussion if we do that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 That isn't the issue is it though, although what provocatively means would be open to interpretation anyway. The issue is what was said, the words that were used and the attitude that causes it. If the topic was to discuss "Should people be aware of how their own behaviour affects their safety?" then nobody would say "No". But it isn't. Which seems to be the point that you're missing. But that is the topic. That's what the Officer was discussing with the girls.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sidney Posted May 8, 2011 Author Share Posted May 8, 2011 Is there any point to this discussion if we do that? If you'd rather discuss that than find a practical solution feel free.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 8, 2011 Share Posted May 8, 2011 But that is the topic. That's what the Officer was discussing with the girls.. I disagree, I think we're discussing what he actually said, rather than what you interpret his motive to be. If you'd rather discuss that than find a practical solution feel free.. You've lost me there, we're discussing a police officers inappropriate comments, what practical solution do you think we're searching for? And even if we were searching for a solution (to what problem?) how can the solution be found without reference to morality or legality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.