You seem to have skipped over the entire "Most rape is committed by someone the victim has been acquainted with previously and has spent the night with them," part. As children cannot consent, they cannot have 'spent the night' - it would be rape.JonnWood said:
'Slut' Parade
- Thread starter Jimbo1212
- Start date
Yes, but more because of hypothermia than the chance of rape.
Look, I personally believe that there's stuff people shouldn't wear. Like a 200 lb. woman in a tube top. Do I have a right to an opinion? Yes. Do they? Also yes. I don't have a right to force my beliefs of what they should or shouldn't wear on them? No, unless I'm a cop enforcing some sort of public exposure statute. Does dressing a certain way justify or mollify rape? No, never, and there's no statistical connection either. Quite the opposite.
What caught my attention about this story was how intuitive the officer's suggestion was. Every guy here known that a vulnerable woman is somehow more attractive than a powerful woman, in most cases. Every guy knows it's the other way around when a girl finds a guy attractive. A man is more attractive when he's in control. When he's vulnerable, he is rejected even further. Every guy here knows this if they've been to high school.
Since that is the case, and speaking from a male perspective, a woman wearing less clothes looks more attractive in general, but also more vulnerable. It is also a sign that she is more open to sex if she appears to be pea-cocking. That is, showing herself off. We are not horrible people for interpreting these signals this way. Those who cannot control themselves are the horrible ones.
Do not twist my words.
Most men are perfectly happy watching a woman's features shift as she walks along, but watch out, because there are predators out there, and they are not always content with watching. Anything that can be seen as an invitation could make a girl more likely to be assaulted. Be aware.
Since that is the case, and speaking from a male perspective, a woman wearing less clothes looks more attractive in general, but also more vulnerable. It is also a sign that she is more open to sex if she appears to be pea-cocking. That is, showing herself off. We are not horrible people for interpreting these signals this way. Those who cannot control themselves are the horrible ones.
Do not twist my words.
Most men are perfectly happy watching a woman's features shift as she walks along, but watch out, because there are predators out there, and they are not always content with watching. Anything that can be seen as an invitation could make a girl more likely to be assaulted. Be aware.
In all likelihood the assumption that dressing sexy increases your potential to be raped stems from the increase in lewd attention from idiots you do get.Liviola said:
Didn't know about the actual research though - think it's time for me to look up a back issue of the American Journal of Orthopsychiatry.
And to the side here: wasn't that whole demonstration aimed at changing preconceptions on the side of the public and law enforcement?
Still, kids are not a majority. The onus is on you to find statistics about the number of adult victims which have or haven't slept with their attacker voluntarily before the rape, then do some math as to how much of the toatal rape victims they make up.Hive Mind said:
That's how it's most commonly known. People that have raped kids are usually called pedos, whether it's the correct term or not. It's a lot easier to differentiate them from the ones that have only raped adults ...
But thanks for the enlightenment.
But thanks for the enlightenment.
>200 lb. woman in a tube top.JonnWood said:
I'll take "first result to appear on Google Images if I type the word 'ew' in the search bar" for 500, Alex.
Longest Jeopardy category ever.
Poorly worded; should be constructive advice, rather than criticism and denigration.
The fact of the matter is that rapists are not rational beings. In some cases, especially in heat of the moment...actions, how a girl dresses WILL make a difference to a drunk animal, an urban youth revelling in his emotional state of perceived self-empowerment, or a cold-blooded psycho.
This is not to blame them - and is certainly not to say that they deserve it (although how some of them dress and act can be pretty sleazy) - it is simply to express the opinion that girls should bear this in mind when they make their choices. These choices are, however, theirs to make, and the blame should always fall on the rapist.
The fact of the matter is that rapists are not rational beings. In some cases, especially in heat of the moment...actions, how a girl dresses WILL make a difference to a drunk animal, an urban youth revelling in his emotional state of perceived self-empowerment, or a cold-blooded psycho.
This is not to blame them - and is certainly not to say that they deserve it (although how some of them dress and act can be pretty sleazy) - it is simply to express the opinion that girls should bear this in mind when they make their choices. These choices are, however, theirs to make, and the blame should always fall on the rapist.
I don't see the purpose of it...even if they manage to "reclaim" the word a woman that sleeps with a lot of men would still be looked down upon ( i think it's mainly because women don't have to do anything really to have sex...send a man and a woman down a street and flat out ask people if they want to have sex with them and see what happens ;P)
I think that officer was wrong by saying that dressing provocatively is like asking for rape....People dont deserve rape by how they dress.......not that it would kill these "sluts" to dress more appropriately at least -__- but hey whatever.......LOL but I think parading with signs like "Proud Slut" and "Sluts Say Yes" just might have given the wrong impression to passers-by 
I see you tried to throw it back on me there. You failed. You stated that the majority of rapes occur upon a victim who has previously had sex with their attacker. You are wrong. It has nothing to do with the rest o the thread - I was simply calling you out.SillyBear said:
I agree wholeheartedly with this. The point of this protest (what the OP offensively refers to as a "slut parade"), is to refute the long standing stereotype that only sluts get raped and that they pretty much earned it. That train of thought alone makes me shiver.sethzard said:
Right. Well, it seems you are being anal. I was pretty clearly talking about adults. Not once has child abuse been mentioned in this thread, so I didn't feel the need to specifically mention I was strictly talking about individuals over eighteen. If you want to nitpick and what not that's on you. I don't really mind if you want to spend your time doing that, but you don't have to push the attitude around.Hive Mind said:
I realise most cases of rape are child related and I knew this before you pointed it out for me. Cheers. That's sorted.
The both of you make me sick. This is no longer a discussion between the two of you about the issue at hand, but a game of semantics; a petty waste of space. I'm going to bed.
EDIT: Directed at SillyBear and Hivemind.
EDIT: Directed at SillyBear and Hivemind.
How were you pretty clearly talking about adults? You simply said 'most cases of rape,' before then going on to insert what you consider the most common rape scenario -- nothing to do with a child. However, you just mentioned in the above quote that sex with a child is rape. You then claim to have known this all along, making your entire point incorrect and in need of clarification.SillyBear said:
Labeling it child abuse does nothing to change the fact that it is rape.