So according to some feminists, this anti-rape ad campaign is sexist

Dastardly

Imaginary Friend
Apr 19, 2010
2,420
0
0
darkfox85 said:
My position:
1) The advert of the original poster will ultimately do more harm than good
2) Its never someone?s fault if they get raped. Ever. Not even slightly.
#2 is fine. #1 is completely untrue.

It is never a "harmful" thing to tell someone what they can do to prevent something bad happening to themsevles. Ever. Not even slightly. If I tell a friend, "Hey, when you're walking downtown, keep your hand in your pocket so you don't get your wallet picked!" I'm not telling that person it's his/her "fault" if they get robbed. I'm trying to help them not get robbed in the first place.

Why am I telling them instead of telling the pickpocket not to pick? Because I don't know the pickpocket. But I know my friend, and I can talk to them. We can only go after the pickpocket after the crime -- that is, after my friend has already been robbed. Wouldn't it be better if that didn't happen?

Well, I can't stop the pickpocket from picking pockets, but I can give my friend pointers that might keep them from being in that situation at all.

There are some rules and facts that need to be laid down first. Most have already been made but I feel they deserve reiteration:

1) The vast majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knew prior to the assault.
Very true. Has no bearing here. This particular ad campaign isn't aiming to prevent every type of rape ever. There's no single way to hit all of them. This campaign focuses on saying, "Hey, bad stuff happens -- why not watch out for each other, especially when you're drunk and more susceptible to all kinds of influence or coercion?" Other campaigns focus on date rape. Others focus on taking self-defense classes or carrying pepper spray.

2) The vast majority of rape crimes go unreported. This is confirmed by support groups whose members confess that they don?t report the violation.
Yes. And an ad campaign like this is focusing on prevention, not prosecution. That's a good idea exactly because so many go unreported. You won't be able to prosecute the rapist if no one steps forward... but if you make people aware of things they can do to help themselves and others avoid rape in the first place there wouldn't be anything to "not report."

3) The conviction rate is very low
With a lot of reason, too. Don't trivialize the justice system. Too often, when someone is accused of rape, we assume them guilty. There are mistaken accusations, or even false accusations. All people lie, not just the ones we can put Evil Mustaches on.

But all that aside: This is yet another brilliant reason to focus on prevention. Trying to fix the problem after the rape occurs doesn't seem to go well, because of unreported crimes and low conviction rates. Clearly that means we should try to catch it sooner.

Ads that remind us to wear seatbelts or helmets, or ads that remind us not to drink and drive are not comparable to this rape ad as presented by the OP.
No, it has nothing to do with accidental/intentional. It has to do with what is useful and what isn't. Which helps you more -- if I tell you what someone else could do to prevent something, or if I tell you what you could do? Obviously the latter. Is it true that the rapist could be told a thing or two also? Sure, but he's not listening.

No one disagrees that the rapist is bad (except perhaps the rapist), so putting that on a poster is wasted ink. Talk to the folks that might actually listen, and tell them the things they can do. If all you do is tell someone that it's entirely someone else's responsibility, they learn to be irresponsible. Whether it's "right" or "wrong," it makes them more vulnerable to the crimes if they believe anything preventative is someone "bad."

Directing anti-rape ads (like the one presented by the OP) at the victim (as opposed to the perpetrator) indirectly suggests the attack is largely the victims fault which is false and unfair. This point is indirectly presented to both potential victims and potential attackers.
No, it doesn't. Directing ads at the law-abiding public is the smart thing to do, because the law-breaking public is already obviously not listening. Ads like this don't shift blame or fault. They show potential victims what they could do to reduces their chances of becoming actual victims.

Other flawed (but admittedly more nuanced) comparisons of cautionary advertisements draw parallels between other crimes. Mugging seems to be a popular choice. These compare a person to walking down a dark street (perhaps in a bad neighbourhood and whilst drunk) and getting mugged and the result of the mugging being to a certain degree the fault of the person being mugged.
No, they don't. They simply suggest that, hey, when you have the choice, it's better not to walk through a high-crime area. Why? Because we can only catch the criminals AFTER they've robbed you. And while that is certainly the "right" thing to do, is that going to be any comfort to you after they've beaten most of your teeth out? No.

Many public ideas towards rape are misconceptions that are attempting to be corrected (and meeting with suspiciously overly-defensive hostility.)
There's your problem. If someone disagrees with your assessment, they are "suspiciously overly-defensive." It's not that someone is requesting clarification, is that they are now, in your eyes, a suspected rapist? Or maybe just a "rapist sympathizer?"

The details of the hypothetical mugging don?t particularly matter since we live in a society where we recognise that mugging is a dreadful thing.
And we recognize that rape is a dreadful thing. Some people disagree on things like "If both parties are slammed-drunk, the guy is still at fault if they both consent to sex," but no one is out there defending rape. If someone says, "It was probably a bad idea for her to walk naked through an unsupervised ally full of dangerous criminals," they're not saying, "She asked to get raped." They're saying, "It's awful that this thing happened. Wouldn't it be great if, in the future, we could find a way to keep it from happening at all, rather than having to wait until afterward to punish the guilty? Here is, perhaps, a suggestion."

Why don't those people condemn the rapist? Because they don't need to. He's condemned already. No one should have to spell out that he's clearly in the wrong for being a rapist. That part is not in our control or the victim's. So instead, we're focusing our efforts and attention on the things we can control.

I feel that this demonstrates that the details and circumstances surrounding the rape (the degree of promiscuity in the victim, the attire of the victim, the degree of drunkenness, etc) shouldn?t be taken into consideration. No one asks to be raped.
Again, it's not, "Because she wore that, it wasn't rape." It's "She was raped, and that's awful." And then as a separate consideration, "Here are some things that possibly could have contributed to the situation that made her susceptible to rape, even though these things did not cause the rape."

If I'm drunk in an ally full of strangers, and they rape me, they caused the rape. However, for my future reference, I could wisely store the information that me being drunk in an ally is probably a contributing factor as to how they got the opportunity. It's not me accepting the blame, it's recognizing that the situation could have been avoided entirely by making some of my own choices differently.

Why is that important? Because, as I've repeatedly said, it is better not to get raped than it is to catch and severely punish the person that raped me.

The circumstances that surround the rape that I mentioned are commonly used by defence lawyers to cast doubt on both the testimony and fault (to blame) of the victim, and are presented to gullible juries as ?evidence.?
False. First of all, you're misusing the word "evidence" -- a mistake that no court is going to make without the prosecution moving for a mistrial. Second, you're confusing support with evidence.

You're speaking about cases in which the defense is claiming the alleged victim did give consent, and is now claiming they did not for whatever reason. The claim here is that the defendant had consent at the time. Now, at this point, "character witnesses" may be provided to support the claim, but their support is not evidence in and of itself. How many of these claims are true or false? It doesn't matter, because justice isn't about "odds," it's about the truth of each individual situation.

But I defy you to find a single case in which a rapist was released because the jury said, "Well, she was totally dressed like a slut, so he was okay to take that alone as consent." By conflating several legal concepts (and misusing several others) you're building a case on false premises, and that undermines what truth your case has.

But in looking at the natural nature of rape, we also need to take an honest look at normal male sexuality. Yes, NORMAL MALE sexuality. Now I don?t believe that males (gay or straight ? by ?normal? I did not mean sexual orientation) are naturally more horny that female: I think this is an illusion brought on by societal pressures, but males are much less selective about who to chose as a viable mate for reproduction as opposed to females who can only bore one child per nine months.
Be very careful. If you start to use alleged biological/sociological differences as a measure by which we are allowed to pre-judge people of a certain gender, that can (and rightfully should, if we are fair) be applied right back to the other gender.

I sorry if I hurt the feelings of ?masculinists? (if you will) who are so very quick to remind everyone that women can rape (before wetting their lips)
Like this, for instance. Poor form, no excuse for it. You're insinuating that, for one, anyone who disagrees with you is a "masculinist." Actually probably you're insinuating they must be male. And that anyone who reminds you that rape can occur to either gender is, what, secretly hoping to get raped? Isn't that exactly the mental process you've gone to extremely verbose lengths to decry?

Be honest gentleman, how many of you fear rape on a day-to-day basis? How many women do you think fear it on a day-to-day basis? They?re hardcore and don?t take this threat lightly.
Conjecture based on several gender prejudices you hold.

The potential victim shouldn?t need to hold a red light to stop a rape, but instead to consistently hold a green light to indicate acceptable intercourse. Anything apart from this proverbial ?green light? must be interpreted as a ?red light.? This is the ?education? that I, and many other who have posted in this thread, feel should be on anti-rape warnings rather than blaming the victim.
And I shouldn't "need" to lock my door. But I do, because it prevents bad things done by bad people, who probably don't listen to public service posters telling them not to commit crimes. The reason we can't properly educate people on what they can do to prevent rape is because people like you insist we're "blaming the victim."

So, instead, you're telling us to focus our efforts only on the prosecution of rapists, which you yourself told us doesn't work very often -- one, because many aren't reported, and two, because it can sometimes be hard to convict.

You also want us to focus our attention on reminding would-be rapists that what they're doing is bad, when you yourself told us that only a very, very few incidents are a result of the rapist being ignorant of that -- in other words, they already know it's wrong and do not care. Any such appeal would fall on deaf ears, and it would be futile, no matter how "right" it may be.

The precautionary measures as outlined by the ad in question should be directed at avoiding the small minority of the psychopathic variant of rapists who knows full well that what they?re doing is utterly evil (the advice on the OP?s ad needs to be much more specific.) This is the rapist the general public imagines. The prowler in the dark city.
No, it's directed at women who engage in risky behaviors with men they "don't know very well." The focus is on acquaintance rape, of which date rape is a subset. You're insisting that most such rapes are committed by someone the victim has known for a very, very long time... but that may not be the case most of the time. But again, this ad campaign is focusing on a particular kind of rape, and what of it?

Would you also complain that the March of Dimes is backwards or evil because they only support kids, rather than the elderly? Or that the American Cancer Society only puts out notices on preventing cancer and not meningitis?

These sub-humans will be with us forever and can only be deterred by more extreme measures. Stronger penalties, better security etc, but these creatures will always exist. The precautions you take as outlined in that ad will only shift the dreadful consequence to someone else.
Unless that person also takes the same preventative measures. In which case the rapist has no one to rape. But they'll always find someone, right? Okay, maybe. You can't stop that--but maybe you can stop it from being you, at least. I think that's a more worthwhile goal than, "Eh, let's just wait until they rape someone, and then start doing stuff." No comfort to the victim there, and by your own evidence it doesn't work.

But what if someone doesn?t take these precautionary measures and falls afoul? Is it their fault? No. Even if naked and smeared with a succulent juice whilst screaming and dancing down the most vicious street of the most lawless nation at the darkest hour of night in mating season.
Of course it's not their fault. But you're telling me that no one should tell that person, "Oh and for future reference -- don't do that. It didn't cause the rape, but it certainly didn't help you, now did it?" Hey, string up the rapist, that's fine and no one will fault you one bit, but someone should tell that person that a few adjustments to their behavior couldn't hurt. Taking control of what you can control doesn't mean taking the blame for what you can't, and this false dichotomy you're preaching is horribly destructive.

Let?s not be hypocrites. Let?s not be delusional. Let?s not oversimplify things.
Sounds like a plan.
 

Furioso

New member
Jun 16, 2009
7,981
0
0
I kind of see her point, when I read the add I think of it as an anti drinking add more than anything, they really should go on a different path other than "don't drink or you'll be raped" Not to mention it puts the blame entirely on the victim, which is absolutely ridiculous
 

orangeban

New member
Nov 27, 2009
1,442
0
0
Right, this thread title is just plain wrong, at no point does the femenist call the ad sexist. What they do accuse it of is victim blaming, which it's clearly doing. The ad implies that if she hadn't been drunk, she could of said no and presumably she would of been fine, but she was drunk so she got raped. Blatant victim blaming.

The femenist is right, we should be telling people to "not get raped" we should instead explain the importance of consent and respecting consent. Most rape isn't commited by someone jumping out the bushes onto someone else, it's commited by someone who doesn't quite appreciate that their partner said no.
 

Micalas

New member
Mar 5, 2011
793
0
0
Vault101 said:
Matthew94 said:
So this ad says that if she gets shitfaced and fucks a guy but later regrets it it's his fault and he is a rapist?

That's fucking stupid
no, because that isnt rape...

they are refering to a guy taking advantage of somone in no state to give consent (probably physically forcing), a sitution where the normal guy would go "yeah, this isnt right"

of coause the situation you decribe is a very grey one
I'm pretty sure that in the US the guy would be prosecuted.

Remember kids, drinking and then driving is your fault but drinking and fucking 3 random dudes is their fault!
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
thaluikhain said:
Treblaine said:
The feminist article in question also fails to clearly delineate between "normal" men and men who would take advantage of vulnerable woman, they are all painted with one brush. If fails to mark rapists as outsiders, fails to champion men of virtue who would not succumb to temptation.

That - in some small way - contributes to a culture where rape is as likely as it is.
I disagree, somewhat. The difference between a rapist and everyone else is simply whether or not they have raped someone. Which is overlooked by some people who don't consider themselves rapists despite having committed rape because rapists are such terrible people, not like them.

Rapists aren't outsiders. Most people are raped by their friends or family, one of "us", not some "them".
I disagree, categorically. I am never going to rape anyone. And I think I can speak for most people in saying that.

I'm not sure what relevance it is to point out that a rapists must have merely raped someone and that alone is all that makes a rapist. A reasonable and normal person wouldn't murder and cannibalise their neighbour, but technically, all they'd need to do is murder and cannibalise them to be a cannibalistic murderer.

My distinction is the reasonable assumption that NORMAL and REASONABLE men (and women) are NOT to be liable to rape if given the mere opportunity.
Reasonable and normal people know that rape is terrible for the victim.
Reasonable and Normal people wouldn't do such a terrible thing.
Normal people WOULD think they are terrible if they did a terrible thing.

This is pervasive and consistent THROUGHOUT the media and almost everywhere in society, there is no conspiracy that trivialises rape as some 'minor trespass' (like drawing a willy on the face of your friend who has passed out drunk). Not for half a century has rape been shown as ANYTHING LESS THAN something a woman is deeply and profoundly hurt by. Normal people do not think it is right to hurt innocent women for nothing but their own sexual gratification.

Only the insane think that it is "right" to rape women and those people are (ideally) locked up in mental asylums.

The people who know this is wrong and do it anyway. They are bad people find themselves in prison.

(Tolerance of Male rape in prisons is a separate but serious issue. Right now we are looking from the feminist angle)

The claim that the "don't rape" message applies to ALL men seems to be on the assumption that ALL (or at least most) men think it is all right to rape women and the only reason they don't is fear of the law. The reality is the overwhelming majority of men know rape is so wrong, and wouldn't do it even if they could get away with it.

What kind of person would see this poster



...and seriously say: "Ah, so if a woman is left alone unconscious it's Okay for me to assault her." ???

Only an insane person. A very BAD person might say it only as a pathetic excuse for what they know is wrong.

Rapists aren't outsiders. Most people are raped by their friends or family, one of "us", not some "them".
I see this as a misrepresentation of the fact that perpetrators are unlikely to be complete strangers, to be that most perpetrators are trustworthy people who suddenly turn bad. Abusive ex-boyfriends, perverted uncles, exploitative step-fathers and a "friend of a friend" may be known but that doesn't make them necessarily good or trustworthy.

It is extremely abnormal for a previously good and reasonable person to suddenly hurt someone they previously loved and cared for, just for their own sexual gratification. Usually they had ill intentions from the start and simply hid them and feigned kindness out of convention.

The overwhelming majority of men are not rapists. The minority who are, justifies precaution but not assumption.

There is a difference between
"I can't be sure you don't have evil intentions"
and
"I assume you have evil intentions"

I feel I am struggling to make this point. Most PASSENGERS on a plane are not terrorists yet we all submit to security checks, but we are still treated with decency and consideration on the fact that most likely any one passenger is not a terrorist, there are no public service announcements not to hijack or blow up planes. But the danger of just one with a bomb is so great it justifies the precaution for all. Most men are not going to rape women, but the minority who would justify the precaution of not trusting men, nor allowing men to use women's changing rooms and so on.
 

DiMono

New member
Mar 18, 2010
837
0
0
I just signed up and left this comment on that article:

I disagree with your evaluation of this ad campaign. Rape is obviously the fault of the rapist - that goes without saying. However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with teaching people how to keep themselves safe. By your logic, a campaign for people to lock their doors at night would be placing the blame for a burglary on the homeowner.

Campaigns like this are not about assigning blame, they're about creating awareness to the fact that there is a problem, and recommending ways to minimize the odds that something like it could happen to you. No ad campaign is ever going to get rapists to stop raping (it's not about sex, it's about power), but you can make sure that the victim isn't you or your friends by being a little more careful.
I'll be writing about this on my own website later today. People need to know that telling people to be prepared is not the same thing as blaming them.
 

IceStar100

New member
Jan 5, 2009
1,172
0
0
usmarine4160 said:
PhantomEcho said:
Hey, I'm a guy... so I'm the last guy to be talking... but let's pretend this was my sister.


The first thing I would do is sit her down and tell her how ridiculously stupid she was to get plastered to the point of incomprehension. Anything that happens after that, she's responsible for... I don't care how terrible it is.


The second thing I'd do is find the sonovabitch who took advantage of her and un-man him with my .38 Detective Special.


I like to make that abundantly clear to all of my friends who ogle her, too.

Most of them laughed until they saw the gun.
Then you get un-manned in a cage by a guy named Chin Painter :)
Lets see her assult with a deadly weapon. So now he raped your sister. You will be raped and most likly sued. Plus since your actions prove a violent unstable mind. Dude not trolling you but think. This is the stuff that gets gun owner in troble. If your going to do it do it but don't flaunt or brag.
 

D0WNT0WN

New member
Sep 28, 2008
808
0
0
Here is a story for you that may give you some insight, she wasnt exactly a close friend and I didnt have that much sympathy for her but still. I will give it in bullet points to save time.

? Girl liked to go out to clubs and get very drunk
? She didnt have any money and flirted with guys to get them to buy her drinks
? I warned her that her method of getting drinks will get her into trouble (eg. Raped or Sexually Assualted)
? She told me to "Fuck off and not treat her like a child!"
? I stopped talking to her
? A few weeks later I heard from a mutual friend that she was raped and badly beaten by a guy who she had really flirted with.

I did not give a shit because it was her fault, I told her that this would happen. It is like leaving all your doors open when you go on holiday and being surprised when you do get robbed.
 

Fwee

New member
Sep 23, 2009
806
0
0
Why not teach both? Teach those who are vulnerable to make sure they're keeping themselves safe, and teach others not to prey on the vulnerable. Those who aren't complete monsters don't have to view these messages as an accusation, while those who are will be reminded of their own horrible nature and the steps we as a people will take to stop them.
 

DrOswald

New member
Apr 22, 2011
1,443
0
0
darkfox85 said:
Said a lot of good stuff.
I agree with a lot of what you said. Particularly I agree with this statement: "It's never someone's fault if they get raped. Ever. Not even slightly." However, I disagree that these kinds of ads will cause more damage than they prevent. These particular ads were poorly planned, but these types of campaigns are important. I believe that we as a society have a responsibility to teach rape prevention and that it is morally reprehensible not to.

I personally know 2 people who were raped. One of them was a 12 year old. I will not go into details, but it has caused terrible emotional damage. It was not her fault. But I cannot ignore the fact that with a few precautionary measures this person would not have been raped. If only she had been properly educated she may have avoided this life shattering experience.

It was not her fault. The blame lies with the rapist, but I cannot help but think that we as a society failed when she was never taught how to protect herself. It could have and should have been prevented. We have a responsibility as a society to teach women and girls how they can protect themselves.

I believe that victim blaming is more often a problem of perception these days. It is very rare anyone actually blames a girl when she is raped but we pussy foot around the issue so much that they might think we do. And once again that is our fault. We are far too timid. Education at a young age is the answer. We need to be clear and we need to reinforce our message with repetition. Girls should be getting the message from every side. Parents need to be involved, public education need to be involved, and it certainly wouldn't hurt to have a ads campaign or two so they can hear it again and again in their daily life. But sacrificing rape prevention is not the answer. These two ideas need to work side by side, each strengthening the other.

Sorry if I got a little hot headed there. This issue is very important to me.
 

Iron Mal

New member
Jun 4, 2008
2,749
0
0
SuperMse said:
I fail to see why you guys are responding so vehemently against this.
It could have something to do with the arguement overall being soul-crushingly stupid but I'll elaborate on that.

Is it because someone said the magic f word?
Fat?

No, not that one, the other one.
Oh! You meant Feminism! I don't think this is a knee jerk reaction to feminism (although radical feminism does often make some claims and statements that are fairly face-palm worthy) as much as the arguement overall seems to be out of touch with reality and to have it's priorities wrong.

Because this ad campaign is victim blaming at its best.
No, it isn't. Blaming the victim would be persecuting the victim the morning after and yelling at them that it's their fault and they're just a dirty, dirty whore.

That isn't what's being done here.

These ads (from what I've seen anyway) remind people that you have to be responsable and take steps to ensure your own safety because it isn't too hard for you to inadvertantly end up in a bad situation where you can't do anything to prevent the crime in question (alchohol and poor decisions probably help rapists succeed on many occasions).

The advert isn't intended for victims, it's for those who don't want to become victims (very large difference there).

It's telling women to avoid getting raped as opposed to telling men not to rape.
Again, there's a good reason for this. We all know rape is bad (even the rapists, I'm fairly certain that they know what they are doing is wrong and that they are hurting someone), it ins't something that we casually forget or overlook, many of us consider rape to be the worse thing you can possibly do to another human being and for it to be a fate worse than death.

This isn't just a narrowly held view, most people think this. The problem with telling potential rapists not to rape is that their issue isn't that they don't know rape is bad, they do, they just don't care.

It's making them the problem, not the rapists.
It's not the women who are the problem, it's often careless behavior that puts yourself at risk that is.

Again, this is a very large difference.

That's wrong.
No, we need a stronger word than that, stronger than bad or wrong.

Rape is badong.

Why make this ad as opposed to making ads saying "Don't get drunk and take advantage of women, ya prick."
As stated above it's more than likely that the problem most would-be rapists have isn't that they don't know rape is bad so much as they don't care that it is and don't care about their victim.

An advert like that not only wouldn't actually help anyone (besides reminding those of us who wouldn't have raped anyone that we shouldn't because it's badong) but if you got rid of the inforation pertaining to personal safety during a night out you'd actualy be denying people what could be useful information putting more people in danger (we all know rape is bad but not everyone has the common sense to know accepting drinks from strangers isn't a good idea or that it's wise to let someone know where you're going).

I mean, imagine if you were raped while drunk and then someone said it was your fault. How would you respond?
I'd be upset, I know people who've been raped and they had a hard time getting over it.

In fact, I went and asked one of them (my mother to be precise) and she said that while she'd be uneased by seeing adverts like that she puts more value on preventing other people from suffering through that.

All you were doing was having a typical fun night out. It's the rapists fault for raping you, not the other way around.
That is true, and that is why rape is considered a crime and upon discovery the rapist will be the one charged and sentenced, not the victim.

However, this doesn't mean that during your typical fun night out you can't have some common sense and take precautions to avoid tragic events like this from happening (again, this isn't blaming the victim so much as preventing more people from being victimised).

Yes, you should always take precautions to protect yourself, but isn't always walking around in fear of rape counterproductive to having a fun night out? Should you not party on the grounds that you might be raped, just like you shouldn't drive a car in case a drunk driver hits you? Of course not.
Taking precautions doesn't mean you have to be paranoid and trust no-one and I think it could just as easily be argued that it's a lot easier to have a good time when you have the extra peace of mind of knowing that you don't have to worry about anything bad happening to you because you didn't do anything foolish or unwise.

Rape is the rapist's fault. Target your ads at them, not the victims.
Rapists we can't really do anything about, the behavior that puts people in harm's way we can do a lot about by better educating and informing people.
 

rutger5000

New member
Oct 19, 2010
1,052
0
0
First of I'm a guy, which makes me not a feminst?
I agree with feminist here. This add indeed put too much blame to the victims. You don't want to campaing against being raped, you want to campaing against rape. Sure you can do some prevention campaings, but it's a whole different thing to tell woman not to get raped.
I also don't really care for the argument that normal men do not rape, and that those that do are not affected by campaings. I disagree on both terms, I've seen plently of my friends being harrased by 'normal' guys, and I fear that under the wrong circumstance (he being drunk, them being alone, and she being to timid/scared to fight)that harrasement could turn to rape. Also just because people aren't 'normal' doesn't mean you can't reach them. Just research your adience and fight out what works for them!
 

balanovich

New member
Jan 25, 2010
235
0
0
Brawndo said:
1-but in no circumstances is it ever the victim?s fault.
2-Again we see our culture continuing to teach ?Don?t get raped!? instead of ?Don?t rape.?
3-our society perpetuates a mindset that makes women feel guilty for a crime committed against them.
1-Yeah,ok
2-Of course! I agree with everything the OP said about that! Think for a second you demented feminists!
3-NO! Psychological trauma causes the victims to fell shame! The vast majority of sexual victims, male or female fell a huge amount of undeserved shame. It's part of the damage. It's so typically feminist to blame society for something over witch a woman has no control!

"Women are super-duper powerful! We can do a bunch of stuff! ... but for everything that's out of our control, it's society's fault! Society's bad and evil and run by misogynist men!"

That kind of irrational partisanry for a cause hurts it more than anything else!
 

ms_sunlight

New member
Jun 6, 2011
606
0
0
Pearwood said:
The phrase "rape culture" disturbs me greatly.
I think that there is an amount of debate about what constitutes "rape culture". In the simplest way of looking at it, it's those things in mainstream culture that glamourise or trivialise rape and sexual violence.

I think most of us have to admit that these things exist - from sexified scenes in slasher films all the way to simulated rape pornography.
 

CRRPGMykael

New member
Mar 6, 2011
311
0
0
All this campaign seems to be doing is making people go "Oh, I never even considered that an option." before grinning, picking up a few roofies and going off to a bar.

I am one of those peop-ANYWAY, why don't you guys concentrate on making something that actually WILL prevent rape (or atleast date rape)? Did you know that there's this thing being worked on which basically analyzes your drink and sends you a discreet SMS telling you if there's a roofie in it? THAT IS SOME USEFUL SHIT, NOT YOUR "STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM 'EM" ADS.
 

Jennacide

New member
Dec 6, 2007
1,019
0
0
8 pages in. I hope by now someone has educated the OP about how misguided his anger is. The campaign is less about being sexist, and more of just fucking stupid. It's redirecting the blame from the source, which is the problem.
 

rutger5000

New member
Oct 19, 2010
1,052
0
0
IceStar100 said:
usmarine4160 said:
PhantomEcho said:
Hey, I'm a guy... so I'm the last guy to be talking... but let's pretend this was my sister.


The first thing I would do is sit her down and tell her how ridiculously stupid she was to get plastered to the point of incomprehension. Anything that happens after that, she's responsible for... I don't care how terrible it is.


The second thing I'd do is find the sonovabitch who took advantage of her and un-man him with my .38 Detective Special.


I like to make that abundantly clear to all of my friends who ogle her, too.

Most of them laughed until they saw the gun.
Then you get un-manned in a cage by a guy named Chin Painter :)
Lets see her assult with a deadly weapon. So now he raped your sister. You will be raped and most likly sued. Plus since your actions prove a violent unstable mind. Dude not trolling you but think. This is the stuff that gets gun owner in troble. If your going to do it do it but don't flaunt or brag.
I don't see how this put's gun ownership in trouble. If you ask me scenario's like these are among the extremly few examples of morally-correct gun usage. It is not necessarily a sign of a violent and unstable mind. It could just as well be a sign of a brother that cares for his sister and feels responsible for her wellbeing, and want to make her feel safe. Perhaps it is not the best way to react, perhaps you can mean more for your sister in such a scenario, but I do truly think the described method is the best reaction if someone you're resposponsible for gets raped.
Also if going to prison = getting raped then something is wrong with your prisons.