'Slut' Parade

[scw55]

Im a proud 'siut' too. Isn't that like animal fat? Ironic.

Does seem very short-sighted of them 'siuts'.

 

[NickCooley]

So do you keep a dust sheet over your car at all times in case some people think it looks nice? Do you bar all your doors and windows with the curtains shut just in case someone sees inside and takes a liking to it? Are you gonna cover any children/future children in a full length burka in case a wandering pedophile takes an interest in them?

no I don't, and I wouldn't, it makes sense, but probably wouldn't be worth the effort... same as they have yet to stop me going a few ks over the speed limit. in fact I put the GPS in the glove box so people can't see it.

anyway, my point is, I would not throw a fucking parade berating the cop for suggesting any of these things!

which people damn near do EVERY time someone suggests this... by all means, don't do what he says, you are more than free to do that... you don't need to start a debate every time someone suggests it...

the fact that you have a POLICE OFFICER stating agreement with the 'I couldn't help myself your honour, she was asking for it with the way she was dressed' point of view

really? where did it say that in the article? I thought the cop just suggested that women would reduce their risk of being raped if they didn't dress like a slut.

obviously, this, and what you are suggesting, are two very different things...

There's no evidence whatsoever that proves how you dress affects the likelihood of being raped. If it were true don't you think more than one hick cop would be announcing it? As I said earlier what gets labelled common sense usually isn't sense at all.

There's also the point that whether he intended to or not the implications of his statement are that women are in some way to blame if they get raped because of how they dress I'm assuming that's what thegrimfandago's response means. That's what the uproar is about, some dumbass cop touting his dumbass opinions as fact.

 

[DTWolfwood]

I am reminded of Dave Chappelle's skit on a whore's uniform.

i don't mine them dressing to they way they do so long as they don't object to me treating them like a whore.

Meaning you walk up to them and ask how much for the night?

well you cant be that direct as soliciting is quite illegal, but yes more or less. Dont be mad if you get treated that way is all im saying.

Maybe for you but prostitution's perfectly legal here. And they will get mad no one likes to be insulted because of their choice of clothing.

Well than this isn't an issue where you are at. If your country is liberated enough to legalize prostitution, i don't see there being this kind of protest there ^-^ Plus, women who dress provocatively and not wanting that kind of attention is a paradox. Again its "confusing" in Dave Chappelle's own word XD

Funny you say that considering its Australia. Anyway there?s a difference between guys hitting on a girl and rape. Only one of those scenarios is affected by the way you dress.

im going to say its the guys hitting on a girl scenerio that is affected by the way these women dress, because a rapist is gonna rape, regardless, the law certainly isn't stopping them nor a few articles of clothing (or in this case lack thereof ). Its a simple problem of risk management. I don't wear a bicycle helmet when i'm biking because that is a risk i'm willing to take, and if a passerby looks at me funny for not wearing one to be safe, i respect that, i certainly wouldn't get mad about it.

If they want to provoke a reaction through the way they dress fine i am totally ok with that, just don't ***** about it when it gets you the wrong kind of attention.

Again dave chappelle made a good point with the Whore's uniform skit.

 

[Jimbo1212]

With all crimes, the events leading up to it can vary massively and thus shows how responsible the victim was, be it very or not at all.

And in rape, the blame is on the perp, not the victim. Always. Talking about crimes in general is a Composition Fallacy. If all crimes were equal, jaywalkers could get the death sentence.

And this is what I do not understand.
If someone walks into a lions den covered in meat and they get killed, then yes it is the lions fault, but how stupid was the person to do that in the first place? Some rape cases are the same as this and the victim took such stupid risks that I have little sympathy for them. However, I think the result of them being raped, although always terrible, will guarantee they will not make such a stupid mistake again. And this leads me back to my original point, that it is alarming that some people can be so void of common sense that they need something as horrible as rape to happen to teach them to be careful.

so if a drunk girl flirting with a guy can get raped, and a sober girl doing nothing at all can get raped, what makes one victim more or less responsible than the other?

Very true, but what good is it just to say that? These men still exist. They are still out there and still a danger, hence why the cop warned women as there is little he can do until it is too late. but of course these women did to stop to think about that before jumping into the feminist bandwagon.

he didn't say "don't get drunk and go home with drunk men", he said "don't dress like a slut". there's no good to saying that either, since how you dress has little to do with how likely you are to be raped.

Look at above example.
One person puts themselves in the position of danger through lack of thinking, and the other is just in the wrong place at the wrong time and only luck comes down to avoiding such a horrific crime.
From experience and examples I have read about, sluts are most likely the ones to take the risk of going home with a stranger after flirting with them all night. If the police can make women not dress as sluts, then this might have a domino effect and prevent other problems.

 

[agrajagthetesty]

From experience and examples I have read about, sluts are most likely the ones to take the risk of going home with a stranger after flirting with them all night. If the police can make women not dress as sluts, then this might have a domino effect and prevent other problems.

If the policeman wanted to advise women not to go home with strangers, he should have said that.

 

[Imp_Emissary]

AgentNein makes a good point. Just to add my two pennies, there was a rapist who targeted older women (60+) who didn't necessarily dress in a scantily clad way.

That is the thing people often don't get about rape. Its not about the sex, its about the rape itself. A person who wants to rape doesn't do it for the sex, but the act of forcing themselfs on another person. Yes they will probably go after someone they find "attractive", but they don't need to. Some even pick victims that most people would think are "safe" from being raped. Like the elderly.

 

[JonnWood]

And this is what I do not understand.

Clearly.

If someone walks into a lions den covered in meat and they get killed, then yes it is the lions fault, but how stupid was the person to do that in the first place?

Pretty dumb, since lions like meat, and will attempt to eat it whenever it's convenient. Rapists, in the overwhelming majority of cases, don't care what their target is wearing. Analogy fail.

Some rape cases are the same as this

Not enough to base a policy on. It's like the amount of people who get hit by cars despite walking on the sidewalks, not jaywalking, and waiting for all the crossing lights. It happens, but would you stay off the sidewalk because of it?

and the victim took such stupid risks that I have little sympathy for them. However, I think the result of them being raped, although always terrible, will guarantee they will not make such a stupid mistake again. And this leads me back to my original point, that it is alarming that some people can be so void of common sense that they need something as horrible as rape to happen to teach them to be careful.

Except that as you refuse to acknowledge, dressing "carefully" doesn't mean anything to a rapist. Most of them (89%) don't even remember what the victim was wearing, and say the victim didn't entice them in any way. If a woman wanted to be "careful", she would have to spend most of her time with complete strangers, since she's more likely to be raped by someone she knows. In fact, it's a lot more likely than being raped because she dressed sexily.

 

[DTWolfwood]

fine by me, remember "to each his own." Sorry if i like to follow societal norms instead of rebelling against it.

There is a distinct irony in you using posting that bearing the name and likeness of a gunslinging priest.

lol ah you caught me good sir! I follow societal norms in the outward appearance only

Lets just say i don't go getting the wrong kind of attention

I am reminded of Dave Chappelle's skit on a whore's uniform.

i don't mine them dressing to they way they do so long as they don't object to me treating them like a whore.

Meaning you walk up to them and ask how much for the night?

well you cant be that direct as soliciting is quite illegal, but yes more or less. Dont be mad if you get treated that way is all im saying.

Then you can't object to me treating you as I see fit based on what I think of you, no matter how insulting it might be.

if how im dress lets you think that, of course not. I was asking for it

Oh, that's not only what I'm going to judge you on.
Maybe I just don't like the way you walk. Or the sound of your voice. Maybe you have a lisp.
I love judging people for arbitrary reasons and taking a high road for it.

fine by me, remember "to each his own." Sorry if i like to follow societal norms instead of rebelling against it.

I know man! Aren't societal norms just the greatest?

Girl on the left is such a slut, right?

and exactly what is wrong with what the woman on the right is wearing compared to what the women on the left is wearing? Or the simple fact that they following their social norms has any bearing on how you live your life or your particular sensibilities?

you must live in a pretty idealized world if you think strangers don't pass judgement on you based solely on your outward appearance. Do you know what a first impression is?

You can dress as a skank if you want, and i'm all for it. But to believe any stranger will treat you as a classy lady doing so is pure naivete. I do believe in never judge a book by its cover, but if the cover is a naked woman, i'm going to expect it to have some naked women inside the book too.

watch the dave chappelle skit will ya?

 

[JonnWood]

You completely missed the point. The parade was to support rape victims and tear down the whole "she dressed like a slut, she was asking for it" stance.

"Just because I look hungry doesn't mean I want random people showing sausages down my throat".

but if dressing like a slut increases your chances of getting raped and you don't want to get raped, then it's pretty obvious to not dress like a slut right?

and if i were a homeless person and was very hungry, i wouldn't mind random people giving me food. the metaphor isn't really as applicable.

You've twisted the metaphor. Being very hungry and looking hungry are completely different things. Just like dressing like a slut doesn't mean you want to get raped.

yes, i agree about the dressing part, in a perfect world everyone should be able to wear whatever they want. but if it actively increases your chances of getting raped by doing so, then it's a pretty small and easy step to wear something else instead. keep the sexy stuff at home for your partner.

How dare you. Rape is not about sex. Rape is about assault. How the woman dresses or does not dress has nothing to do with it. Fucking is not the fucking point. Don't you dare blame the victim of a crime for the actions of the criminal.

EDIT: suggesting that the manner of dress or the actions of the victim of a rape is the cause of the rape - even if only partially - is also to suggest that the rapist would be a fine, upstanding individual were it not for the woman's state of dress. It is to suggest that your house would not have been burglarized if not for your desire to have nice things. It is to suggest that the victim of murder would not have been murdered were it not for his desire to be alive.

ah internet, when will you ever learn to read?

if dressing like a slut increases your chances of getting raped

As people have told you, it doesn't. When will you learn to read?

 

[Grimlock Fett]

[http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/23/memesthelogicofsad.jpg/]

. [http://imageshack.us]


When I read this piece yesterday (Hipster) I immediately thought of this picture!!

Just felt the need to quote this from Break, as he/she put it pretty well:

...It's never worth saying. Not even once. It starts from the assumption that a woman's chastity is something to be guarded, whereas a man's ability to stick his dick in things is something to be lauded, and piles on the misogyny from there. Don't worry about making sure it's said. It only makes you look like a jackass.

I'd also like to add that basing your opinion on the acceptable frequency of sex by concentrating on the shape of a person's genitalia is deeply stupid.

The picture just made me laugh! I couldn't care less how often a person of either sex has intercourse! HOW EVER, it doesn't change the FACT that it is easier for a women to be an actual slut than a man to be a "stud"/(manslut) Why they feel the need to "own" the word is beyond me but as a straight white male I guess I don't know much about oppression!

 

[maninahat]

Someone's been reading their logical fallacy handbook a bit too much.

I post on JREF.

I didn't move the "goalposts"; Despite the fact that I was talking about the minority of cases regarding women being raped by strangers, taht doesn't change the original point that women in general are at greater risk when dressed slutty, as it increases the chances of them being targeted.

They're not. Most rapists don't give a hoot. Since most of the time women aren't dressed sexily, that would indicate that one is more likely to to be raped when wearing sober clothing, or there is no real connection between clothing and likelihood of rape.

Then you have critically misunderstood how statistics work. What you are saying is the equivalent of claiming that since statistically most people are killed by lightning aren't standing on top of an exposed hill holding a golfclub aloft, it doesn't make any difference if you do stand on a hill holding a club up in a storm. Whilst yes, outfits down't come into the majority of cases (where rapes are committed in a home by people who know the person personally), that doesn't change the fact that there are factors that increase the odds of a woman being attacked in those rarer situations. Wearing scanty clothes, getting drunk, and travelling alone in a night time social scene is the equivalent of waving a 9 iron at the heavens.

As for assumptions, you might notice I said a "it doesn't take a HUGE leap of logic", meaning it is not much of an assumption to think the following: that a rapist, in say a nightclub or a bar, is likely to target a woman he finds the most sexually attractive, which will probably the one dressed loosely.

Considering that most rapists already knew the victim, your analogy is a minority case.

Which I ackowledged. It changes nothing.

While it is "possible" that a woman may be targeted because she was wearing a miniskirt and kinky boots, it's not enough of a probability to be concerned about any more than it would be if she was wearing a burqa.

Well dress is only one factor, and probably more minor. Many women dress scantily on nights out and have never had a problem, but that is because they are usually taking other precautions, like travelling with friends and watching what they drink.

 

[Grimlock Fett]

[http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/23/memesthelogicofsad.jpg/]

. [http://imageshack.us]


When I read this piece yesterday (Hipster) I immediately thought of this picture!!

OT What is it with everyone wanting to take words back? Is it only straight white males who have no beef? Except *porch monkey! I'm taking that back!!!
(*Movie reference I'm not a racist)

...I'm confused, is the bottom qoute about the locks agreeing or mocking the top quote?

Its saying that it takes some kind of skill to have sex with alot of women but not alot to get f*cked by a lot of guys! Not 100% accurate but I found it pretty funny!

 

[Jimbo1212]

And this is what I do not understand.

Clearly.

If someone walks into a lions den covered in meat and they get killed, then yes it is the lions fault, but how stupid was the person to do that in the first place?

Pretty dumb, since lions like meat, and will attempt to eat it whenever it's convenient. Rapists, in the overwhelming majority of cases, don't care what their target is wearing. Analogy fail.

Some rape cases are the same as this

Not enough to base a policy on. It's like the amount of people who get hit by cars despite walking on the sidewalks, not jaywalking, and waiting for all the crossing lights. It happens, but would you stay off the sidewalk because of it?

and the victim took such stupid risks that I have little sympathy for them. However, I think the result of them being raped, although always terrible, will guarantee they will not make such a stupid mistake again. And this leads me back to my original point, that it is alarming that some people can be so void of common sense that they need something as horrible as rape to happen to teach them to be careful.

Except that as you refuse to acknowledge, dressing "carefully" doesn't mean anything to a rapist. Most of them (89%) don't even remember what the victim was wearing, and say the victim didn't entice them in any way. If a woman wanted to be "careful", she would have to spend most of her time with complete strangers, since she's more likely to be raped by someone she knows. In fact, it's a lot more likely than being raped because she dressed sexily.

No no, the cases that LEAD TO A CONVICTION do not involve the woman dressing like a slag, however how many cases fail to lead to a conviction.....
Again, cases that lead to a conviction are by people the person knows...because they can identify them etc.

From experience and examples I have read about, sluts are most likely the ones to take the risk of going home with a stranger after flirting with them all night. If the police can make women not dress as sluts, then this might have a domino effect and prevent other problems.

If the policeman wanted to advise women not to go home with strangers, he should have said that.

If a police man has to say that then those women are idiots and a lost cause (in my opinion of course).

 

[Trolldor]

fine by me, remember "to each his own." Sorry if i like to follow societal norms instead of rebelling against it.

There is a distinct irony in you using posting that bearing the name and likeness of a gunslinging priest.

lol ah you caught me good sir! I follow societal norms in the outward appearance only

Lets just say i don't go getting the wrong kind of attention

I am reminded of Dave Chappelle's skit on a whore's uniform.

i don't mine them dressing to they way they do so long as they don't object to me treating them like a whore.

Meaning you walk up to them and ask how much for the night?

well you cant be that direct as soliciting is quite illegal, but yes more or less. Dont be mad if you get treated that way is all im saying.

Then you can't object to me treating you as I see fit based on what I think of you, no matter how insulting it might be.

if how im dress lets you think that, of course not. I was asking for it

Oh, that's not only what I'm going to judge you on.
Maybe I just don't like the way you walk. Or the sound of your voice. Maybe you have a lisp.
I love judging people for arbitrary reasons and taking a high road for it.

fine by me, remember "to each his own." Sorry if i like to follow societal norms instead of rebelling against it.

I know man! Aren't societal norms just the greatest?

Girl on the left is such a slut, right?

and exactly what is wrong with what the woman on the right is wearing compared to what the women on the left is wearing? Or the simple fact that they following their social norms has any bearing on how you live your life or your particular sensibilities?

you must live in a pretty idealized world if you think strangers don't pass judgement on you based solely on your outward appearance. Do you know what a first impression is?

You can dress as a skank if you want, and i'm all for it. But to believe any stranger will treat you as a classy lady doing so is pure naivete. I do believe in never judge a book by its cover, but if the cover is a naked woman, i'm going to expect it to have some naked women inside the book too.

watch the dave chappelle skit will ya?

I've seen it,I was unimpressed when I was teenager and I'm unimpressed by it now.
I've seen funnier, more intelligent ideas expressed by wood rot.
You must live in a fairly narrow world if you presume that your personal opinion is a 'societal norm'. I disagree with you, so do many other people on this thread. How many other people might we find in your society who disagree with you?
I find it hilarious that you assume your judgement should just be accepted.

Oh, and you completely failed to understand the point of the image, which doesn't surprise me.

 

[JonnWood]

No no, the cases that LEAD TO A CONVICTION do not involve the woman dressing like a slag, however how many cases fail to lead to a conviction.....

How many? What's the percentage? How much would be a representative sample? What's the margin of error on rape cases? You need all of those facts, otherwise you're just making stuff up.

Again, cases that lead to a conviction are by people the person knows.

Which doesn't explain all the convictions where the rapist was a complete stranger. Until they committed rape, of course.

If a police man has to say that then those women are idiots and a lost cause (in my opinion of course).

ah, yes, the "MY OPINION" gambit. Just working your way down the passive-aggressive jerk checklist, aren't you?

 

[Jimbo1212]

No no, the cases that LEAD TO A CONVICTION do not involve the woman dressing like a slag, however how many cases fail to lead to a conviction.....

How many? What's the percentage? How much would be a representative sample? What's the margin of error on rape cases? You need all of those facts, otherwise you're just making stuff up.

Again, cases that lead to a conviction are by people the person knows.

Which doesn't explain all the convictions where the rapist was a complete stranger. Until they committed rape, of course.

If a police man has to say that then those women are idiots and a lost cause (in my opinion of course).

ah, yes, the "MY OPINION" gambit. Just working your way down the passive-aggressive jerk checklist, aren't you?

If I recall, the stats and links were early on in this post and I can not be bothered fishing though the pages. Though if in doubt just google it.

As I have said, some rapists are strangers, some are not. The circumstances can vary greatly so there is no point in labelling every case the same.

And I think that common sense is something that everyone should have and if you do not have it then there is something seriously wrong either with the person or society.

 

[JonnWood]

Then you have critically misunderstood how statistics work. What you are saying is the equivalent of claiming that since statistically most people are killed by lightning aren't standing on top of an exposed hill holding a golfclub aloft, it doesn't make any difference if you do stand on a hill holding a club up in a storm.

Most people who get struck by lightning are out in the open, which includes your hypothetical person standing on a hill. Therefore, someone standing on a hill is already at higher risk of getting struck by lightning than someone indoors. All you had to do is make the conditions specific enough for your straw man.

http://www.strikealert.com/LightningFacts.htm

Most lightning deaths involve people working outdoors and outdoor recreationists

Now, I believe you were criticizing my logic?

Whilst yes, outfits down't come into the majority of cases (where rapes are committed in a home by people who know the person personally), that doesn't change the fact that there are factors that increase the odds of a woman being attacked in those rarer situations.

Statistics, please.

Wearing scanty clothes, getting drunk, and travelling alone in a night time social scene is the equivalent of waving a 9 iron at the heavens.

Yet many people do it all the time, without injury. Weird.

Well dress is only one factor, and probably more minor. Many women dress scantily on nights out and have never had a problem, but that is because they are usually taking other precautions, like travelling with friends and watching what they drink.

Statistics please. Cause you keep making assertions, but I see no backing for them.

 

[Caiti Voltaire]

Speaking as a woman: Simple fact of the matter is that if you dress in provocative and "slutty" ways, you encourage people to act in lewd and untoward matter towards you. Does it excuse rape? No, it doesn't. But on the other hand, you don't do yourself any favours by encouraging these kinds or people, either.

 

[JonnWood]

As I have said, some rapists are strangers, some are not. The circumstances can vary greatly so there is no point in labelling every case the same.

I'm not the one saying women dressing sexily increases their odds of being raped. It doesn't. There's no way to soft-shoe around this.

And I think that common sense is something that everyone should have and if you do not have it then there is something seriously wrong either with the person or society.

Problem is, a lot of people think they have common sense when they're just holding onto their own convictions.

 

[Dags90]

Whilst yes, outfits down't come into the majority of cases (where rapes are committed in a home by people who know the person personally), that doesn't change the fact that there are factors that increase the odds of a woman being attacked in those rarer situations. Wearing scanty clothes, getting drunk, and travelling alone in a night time social scene is the equivalent of waving a 9 iron at the heavens.

In those minority of stranger rapes, being alone is probably the biggest factor. But it's extremely offensive to suggest that women not go out on their own "for their own protection". Especially when they're more likely to be abused by someone they know anyway. It's cherry picking. Only around 20% of all rapes in the U.S. are even stranger rapes to begin with, and there's no data specifically linking stranger rapes to provocative dress, so it's just a massive assumption.

I don't think it's safe to make massive assumptions in a topic so plagued by "false facts" and incorrect "common wisdom" as rape.