Preliminary
-----------
(The following applies to stranger-rape. I am not discussing other variations for now; just to keep things simple.)
Nobody is arguing that the perpetrator of an assault is blameless because of the clothing of the victim. Nobody is arguing that because a woman dresses prevocatively, if she gets raped, she "had it coming."
What is being argued, instead, is that a person has a responsibility to himself/herself to minimize the risk of such assaults.
This is no different than telling someone that if he doesn't want to be a drive-by shooting victim; he should avoid all contact with the trade in illegal drugs and armament. If he avoids these things, his odds of being the victim of a drive-by shooting drop tremendously.
The fact that a guy may participate in the illegal drug trade doesn't mean he DESERVES to be murdered; nor does it make the murderer any less culpable. But that doesn't change the fact that by involving himself in the illegal drug trade; he made himself more susceptible.
And, frankly, when a guy goes back to the drug trade again and again despite repeated warnings; people are generally a lot less sympathetic to his murder than they would be if an innocent child were the victim.
As human beings, we have a responsibility TO OURSELVES to undertake reasonable steps for our own protection. When people fail to exercise prudent responsibility for their own well-being; we are a lot less sympathetic.
We are not as sympathetic to the obese person with heart disease, the chronic smoker with lung cancer, or the drug dealer taken out in a drive-by. Perhaps we SHOULD be, but we aren't.
Abolishing Myths of Rape
------------------------
A great deal of research has been done on rape; and the 2nd-wave feminist agenda notwithstanding; there are certain facts about rape that indicate that it is NOT solely a crime of violence. It is, in fact, motivated by sex.
And a substantial amount of research indicates that it is an evolved behavior intended to propagate the genes of the rapist.
Men COMPETE for reproductive opportunities. Rape is a reproductive strategy employed mainly by males who fail to gain access to females through other more conventional means. (Such as being really hot or having lots of money.)
Consider the following facts:
> Most rape victims are of child-bearing age
> Rape exists among other primates
> Odds of being raped increase during ovulation
While it DOES happen; your typical rape-victim is NOT a 70-year-old woman in a housecoat smoking a cigar.
Take the time, and read the following article, entitled "Why Men Rape" by an evolutionary biologist and an evolutionary anthropologist:
http://iranscope.ghandchi.com/Anthology/Women/rape.htm
This is just ONE source; and I selected it more for its shortness and easy readability; but I could deluge you with additional sources demonstrating all of these points.
Bottom line is that rape is not just a crime of violence; but is also a crime of SEX.
Anything that is likely to increase a man's desire for sex with a particular woman is ALSO more likely to inspire a rapist to select her as a victim.
Yes, although it is a psychologically evolved behavior -- just like murder -- rape is unambiguously evil and the rapist should be condemned. Just like a drive-by shooter should be condemned.
But that doesn't mean that a religious group encouraging women to dress less provocatively in order to discourage rape is doing something evil.
The simple fact is that the less reproductively attractive a woman appears to a potential rapist; the less likely she is to be selected by him as a victim. (There are other factors such as accessibility, likelihood of getting caught, etc.)
As long as we are mired in the "rape as an act of violence ONLY" myth; women will continue to overexpose themselves to disproportionate risk of rape.
I see the results of rape every day. I am incredibly unsympathetic to rapists. (And that is an understatement).
Yet I won't silently allow the premise that rape is a crime of violence ONLY to slip by.
It is sexually motivated.
And that DOES make a difference in how people who fear rape should behave.
IDEALLY it would make no difference. In a PERFECT world, a man would never rape. But we do not live in a perfect world.
Instead we live in a world where men denied access to suitably desireable women via other means sometimes turn to rape.
And by grasping its sexual motivation rather than using Marxist Feminist theories of class power dynamics to explain it; more rapes will be prevented.
In Bristol, Va. It seems they hand these pamplets out to women they feel are dressed "provocatively". Someone should knock the hell out of these bastards. Suppose the woman they confront was a rape victim?
Fundamentalist Christians and Fundamentalist Muslims. They both give enormous power for evil, and hence blame to women, and make men out to be morally and emotionally weak, and not to blame for their behavior. Just another way to say that men have more human value than woman. Sick!
I can't believe that anyone still thinks like this and its not just religious folks who think this way. Victims of sex crimes are the only victims we blame for what happened to them. If someone got mugged while wearing a gold chain we don't bring out their past sexual history, or blame them for "taunting" their mugger. The idea that men rape for sex is also laughable. There's too many women who will give it away, or sell it (lol) to say men rape bc they can't get laid.
the pope and the victims of the catholic priest.
The Pope Forgives The Children Who Caused Priests To Molest Them
in that article the victims were blamed for enticing the priest to rape and molest them and the pope forgave them of that sin
What does it say that this was written back in 2002 and things have only gotten worse? Or that it doesn’t sound as satiric these days as it did back then given some of the statements made recently?
Here’s one article that says the Pope should do more than just saying pedophilia is sinful.
UPDATE: Since there are so many who apparently aren’t smart enough to click links or recognize satire when they see it — DISCLAIMER: THIS IS SATIRE except where it represents the truth. Yes, that last part was satire, too. Maybe.
Calling forgiveness “one of the highest virtues taught to us by Jesus,” Pope John Paul II issued a papal decree Monday absolving priest-molested children of all sin.
“Though grave and terrible sins have been committed, our Lord teaches us to turn the other cheek and forgive those who sin against us,” said the pope, reading a prepared statement from a balcony overlooking St. Peter’s Square. “That is why, despite the terrible wrongs they have committed, the church must move on and forgive these children for their misdeeds.”
“As Jesus said, ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone,’” the pope continued. “We must send a clear message to these hundreds—perhaps thousands—of children whose sinful ways have tempted so many of the church’s servants into lustful violation of their holy vows of celibacy. The church forgives them for their transgressions and looks upon them not with intolerance, but compassion.”
[...]
“By forgiving these children, primarily churchgoing boys between the ages of 5 and 15, the pope has shown true Christian kindness,” said Father Thomas O’Malley, a member of the New York archdiocese and one of the many priests implicated in charges of sexual activity with minors. “The pope is saying that, in their own way, these sinful youths are victims, too. Through their absolution, he sends the important message that empathy, contrary to what naysayers and critics in the secular media would have us believe, does have a place in modern Catholicism.”
http://www.theonion.com/articles/pope-forgives-molested-children,101/
http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2010/03/20/the-pope-forgives-the-children-who-caused-priests-to-molest-them/
-- Modified on 4/26/2010 11:33:07 PM
The most un-Christian ideas come from the mouths of the fundamentalist Christians!
SOME untruth comes from the mouths of zealots. TRUTH also comes from the mouths of Fundamentalists.
What truth? Which part of that nonsense did you find true? 2 year old babies and 92 year old women get raped. Was it bc they dressed provocatively? The idea that men rape bc of women dress was debunked ages ago. Please come into the 21st century.
Rape victims are disproportionately young:
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/1/2/7/1/1/p127115_index.html
83% of rape victims are 29 or younger:
http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/ohe/library/violence/statistics.htm
Per-incident conception rates are higher for rape than for voluntary sex:
www.springerlink.com/index/wp5cnp43k6byxj4d.pdf
And for a lot more data:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1619386.A_Natural_History_of_Rape_Biological_Bases_of_Sexual_Coercion
You cannot make decisions based upon the exceptions. You should make them based on likelihoods.
I agree that there are groups more than willing to 'point fingers'.
I do, however, believe in personal responsibility. Read into that whatever you wish.
Consider sexual harassment for a moment. If a man mentions to a woman how great/sexy she looks, he may/not be accused of harassment. What is the determining factor? Whether or not the woman in question did/not dress a particular way to attract that particular man. They love it if the RIGHT person is affected. Something to think about.
No, means no! Yes, some women dress to hopefully attract a man she could develop interests in, but she does not dress that way in order to be a target, particularly to rape.
Wtf are you talking about? If someone is FORCED into sex, its rape. That's the only "determing" factor.
'personal responsibility' being a two-headed coin. Never mind.
We disregarded it bc it implies a rape victim takes some responsibility in her rape. That's fucking why. My mother was raped in her home in 1997. I guess that granny gown she had on makes her partially "responsible". You're disgusting.
You haven't any idea concerning my board rep regarding the issue of rape. You just want to ATTACK. I don't play that game. I'm not about to feed your vendetta.
No I don't have a clue. The topic was rape. Then you made the correlation to sexual harassment and spoke of responsibility of both parties. How exactly was I supposed to take it? And there's no "vendetta" I just have a issue with rapist apologists.
Preliminary
-----------
(The following applies to stranger-rape. I am not discussing other variations for now; just to keep things simple.)
Nobody is arguing that the perpetrator of an assault is blameless because of the clothing of the victim. Nobody is arguing that because a woman dresses prevocatively, if she gets raped, she "had it coming."
What is being argued, instead, is that a person has a responsibility to himself/herself to minimize the risk of such assaults.
This is no different than telling someone that if he doesn't want to be a drive-by shooting victim; he should avoid all contact with the trade in illegal drugs and armament. If he avoids these things, his odds of being the victim of a drive-by shooting drop tremendously.
The fact that a guy may participate in the illegal drug trade doesn't mean he DESERVES to be murdered; nor does it make the murderer any less culpable. But that doesn't change the fact that by involving himself in the illegal drug trade; he made himself more susceptible.
And, frankly, when a guy goes back to the drug trade again and again despite repeated warnings; people are generally a lot less sympathetic to his murder than they would be if an innocent child were the victim.
As human beings, we have a responsibility TO OURSELVES to undertake reasonable steps for our own protection. When people fail to exercise prudent responsibility for their own well-being; we are a lot less sympathetic.
We are not as sympathetic to the obese person with heart disease, the chronic smoker with lung cancer, or the drug dealer taken out in a drive-by. Perhaps we SHOULD be, but we aren't.
Abolishing Myths of Rape
------------------------
A great deal of research has been done on rape; and the 2nd-wave feminist agenda notwithstanding; there are certain facts about rape that indicate that it is NOT solely a crime of violence. It is, in fact, motivated by sex.
And a substantial amount of research indicates that it is an evolved behavior intended to propagate the genes of the rapist.
Men COMPETE for reproductive opportunities. Rape is a reproductive strategy employed mainly by males who fail to gain access to females through other more conventional means. (Such as being really hot or having lots of money.)
Consider the following facts:
> Most rape victims are of child-bearing age
> Rape exists among other primates
> Odds of being raped increase during ovulation
While it DOES happen; your typical rape-victim is NOT a 70-year-old woman in a housecoat smoking a cigar.
Take the time, and read the following article, entitled "Why Men Rape" by an evolutionary biologist and an evolutionary anthropologist:
http://iranscope.ghandchi.com/Anthology/Women/rape.htm
This is just ONE source; and I selected it more for its shortness and easy readability; but I could deluge you with additional sources demonstrating all of these points.
Bottom line is that rape is not just a crime of violence; but is also a crime of SEX.
Anything that is likely to increase a man's desire for sex with a particular woman is ALSO more likely to inspire a rapist to select her as a victim.
Yes, although it is a psychologically evolved behavior -- just like murder -- rape is unambiguously evil and the rapist should be condemned. Just like a drive-by shooter should be condemned.
But that doesn't mean that a religious group encouraging women to dress less provocatively in order to discourage rape is doing something evil.
The simple fact is that the less reproductively attractive a woman appears to a potential rapist; the less likely she is to be selected by him as a victim. (There are other factors such as accessibility, likelihood of getting caught, etc.)
As long as we are mired in the "rape as an act of violence ONLY" myth; women will continue to overexpose themselves to disproportionate risk of rape.
I see the results of rape every day. I am incredibly unsympathetic to rapists. (And that is an understatement).
Yet I won't silently allow the premise that rape is a crime of violence ONLY to slip by.
It is sexually motivated.
And that DOES make a difference in how people who fear rape should behave.
IDEALLY it would make no difference. In a PERFECT world, a man would never rape. But we do not live in a perfect world.
Instead we live in a world where men denied access to suitably desireable women via other means sometimes turn to rape.
And by grasping its sexual motivation rather than using Marxist Feminist theories of class power dynamics to explain it; more rapes will be prevented.
And, if one want's to reduce the probability of being raped, that person wears something that is not revealing regarding her figure, and keeps her eyes open to those who are in her surrounding, and is mindful about where she goes. But, that does not stop rapes all together.
Then, you get into what constitutes rape-ble clothing, and who determines that, and how subjective that is. Seems less confusing to go by: "No means, no."
May all of your, and OSP's women, you find yourself in the company of, wear outfits that no man would consider a legitimate reason to rape her.
Just kidding of course! Just making a point. 
Is that women should just plain be armed and dangerous.
All the women in my personal sphere are not trained in namby-pamby self-defense crap. I'm a former mercenary. They are trained to KILL instantly and effectively. They are, quite seriously, even down to the teenagers; dangerous women to assault. And that is in their unarmed state.
So they get to dress however in the hell they want.
But too many groups BENEFIT from victimology and fear. Actually EMPOWERING women in reality would negate the reasons for the groups' existence.
So they tell women stuff like "don't struggle" etc.
With proper training they can dress any way they please, and I always encourage proper training to my daughters, granddaughters, and all the women I know. BTW. I know a little woman in Hong Kong you'd like very much.
P.S. I almost forgot. I encourage that training for my son, and grandson's. And, I don't think many guys think like us, and would not appreciate us telling their women to get training.
-- Modified on 4/27/2010 12:36:55 PM
in "wordology"(LOL) catching your BACK.
When johngaltnh posts a response I have no need for google.
He has earned my trust and admiration.
Thats a very small club.
Apples-rape. Oranges-sexual harassment.
Don't want to even get into the sexual harassment issue; the line between verbalizing attraction vs. sexual harassment is way too murky for me.
My point was that of personal responsibility.
I don't condone 'forced sexual contact' of any nature.
John states a case there-for much better than i.
I feel incredibly sorry for valid cases of rape which go unprosecuted due to 'invalid' cases flooding the courts.
I my area that's usually not the case. The case is that the rape kit's seldom get processed until, maybe, years later.
I have no issue with basic common sense of not getting in cars with strangers, walking alone in bad areas, getting drunk around men you don't know well etc. I DO have a big problem with the idea that I must dress to thwart some sicko from rape when most rapists in prison admit their actions were premeditated. A man just doesn't see a woman in a short skirt and say "hey! I think ill attack her". It just doesn't happen like that and the fact that most of these attacks happen in her OWN home thwarts that bullshit. A man who attacks women and esp if he has a pattern of it isn't doing it bc all his victims were showing some clevage. I like you John, but that's crap. There's a pathology involved.
We agree there is a pathology involved. In fact, that is exactly what I said. Some pathologies occur naturally. The fact they occur naturally is NOT a statement that they are "good." Murder is also a natural pathology. And strychnine and arsenic are both "all natural."
You are just using a different word to describe the same thing. But we agree -- it is a pathology.
It IS a crime of violence. But it is ALSO a crime of sex.
Please see another source who comes at it from an evolutionary psychology perspective rather than the biological and anthropological perspectives cited earlier:
http://www.toddkshackelford.com/downloads/McKibbin-et-al-RGP-2008.pdf
So I have given you, altogether, experts in biology, anthropology and psychology to support this point of view.
You have a right to reject it as "crap" -- but I wouldn't put it forth if I didn't think there was some tangible benefit. Specifically, I don't want to see women harmed.
This source is heavier reading; but very informative. Pay particular attention to page 88; where "attractiveness" of females is evaluated by rapists in terms of their fertility, and juxtapose the peak of women's fertility with the age ranges of rape victims here:
http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/ohe/library/violence/statistics.htm
Amazing coincidence?
Yes, like most other crimes, it involves a degree of premeditation. And I explicitly excluded daughter-father, acquaintance and date rapes from my analysis for a reason. Obviously, in these cases, how the woman dresses, etc. has little impact. We are going to agree.
In the case of stranger-rape; to put the finest point on it; it is the woman's apparent (not actual) age that will effect the way a rapist ascertains her attractiveness.
Many things affect how fertile a woman appears. Some are obvious, some less so.
Now, I am talking averages and odds here, not absolutes. Debating absolutes as generalizations is impossible. After all, SOME women are born without vaginas. But that doesn't mean I can't reasonably guess that most women have them.
What I am telling you is simply that there is nothing intrinsically evil about telling someone to reduce their odds of being a victim.
You, as a woman, have an absolute right to ignore that. And I SUPPORT that right.
But, here's the problem. The fact that I might support all sorts of heinous punishments AFTER a rape has occured does not do a damned thing to undo the enormous and possibly lifetime psychologically debilitating effects of a rape on the victim.
And my mouthing the words that are approved by the National Organization for Women won't un-rape a woman.
The tie between CLOTHING STYLE and being a rape victim is, in fact, quite tenuous. I'd say it is non-existent. However, to the extent that clothing style and makeup etc reveal or enhance the appearance of fertility; they could reasonably be deduced from these sources to contribute to one's being targeted as a victim.
Will I state this as an ABSOLUTE? No. There are exceptions to everything. And, again, we are talking about ODDS.
It is technically possible for the most attractive woman on earth to tie herself naked to a wall in front of 20 convicted rapists and never be touched. But I assure you that would be an exception.
But I'll say there is enough data out there that I believe her ODDS of being chosen as a victim CAN be increased by the way she dresses and so forth. This is just ONE of many factors.
Again, women who believe I'm full of crap on this have an absolute right to ignore it.
Please DO keep in mind that I live with a debilitated rape-victim. Years of therapy have not un-raped her yet.
So I'm a big fan of any preventive measures that are reasonable.
I agree that most victims of rape are younger, not very old or very young. But my point was, the blanket assumption that "she must've dressed like a slut" gets tiresome, as many victims of rape were not only not dressed like "sluts" but were not sexually attractive in the first place.
Yes, rape does have a sexual element but it IS about power and control MOSTLY, not desire.
and clothing is subjective. How does one know what a rapist will find stimulating?
Ted Bundy chose victims on appearance, not dress. He preferred medium build brunettes (like me). Other serial rapists and killers liked long legs and blonde hair. Jerry Brudos had a shoe fetish and attacked women whose SHOES he liked. They ranged in age from teens to their fifties.
What I am getting at, clothing itself is just a minor thing when dealing with why these freaks do what they do.
They are fucked up upstairs (in the head) in the first place.