The 'Provocative Clothing' Rape Defense

[Froggy Slayer]

I don't get why people still use this as a defense for rape. Why do people try to shift the blame onto the women in a situation where the man is still entirely at fault for, you know, having such little self-control that he has to fuck a woman the second that he gets a boner. This is a defense that's still used, and yet, it's one that already assumes that the man is guilty of rape; it simply tries to shift the blame for the crime onto the victim. How do people still believe in this?

 

[King Billi]

Do you actually mean to say that people can honestly get away with raping someone just by using this excuse?

 

[Froggy Slayer]

Do you actually mean to say that people can honestly get away with raping someone just by using this excuse?

I haven't heard of anyone getting away with it because of this excuse (thank god), but I mean to ask how people can rationalise this in their heads.

 

[King Billi]

Do you actually mean to say that people can honestly get away with raping someone just by using this excuse?

I haven't heard of anyone getting away with it because of this excuse (thank god), but I mean to ask how people can rationalise this in their heads.

Well then I guess it's quite simply the fact that people will say whatever they can to try and absolve themselves of blame once they realise they're well and truly up s**t creek reagrdless of what that kind of excuse actually says about them as an individual in their mind it's still a reassurance to tell them that they actually aren't the pathetic, depraved rapist everyone else now thinks they are.

 

[Froggy Slayer]

Do you actually mean to say that people can honestly get away with raping someone just by using this excuse?

I haven't heard of anyone getting away with it because of this excuse (thank god), but I mean to ask how people can rationalise this in their heads.

Well then I guess it's quite simply the fact that people will say whatever they can to try and absolve themselves of blame once they realise they're well and truly up s**t creek reagrdless of what that kind of excuse actually says about them as an individual in their mind it's still a reassurance to tell them that they actually aren't the pathetic, depraved rapist everyone else now thinks they are.

I understand that rapists are desperate, but here's the thing; people who have no relation to a rape case will still parrot this opinion. Why?

 

[hazabaza1]

It's a fucking retarded excuse.
"Oh man, I sprung a boner, and as we all know if we have boners for too long we die so I had to un-boner myself and she wasn't wearing much so yeah."

 

[Vegosiux]

You know as a man I am just as offended because it somehow implies men are some kind of primal creatures with no higher cognitive function, and can't control our libido. By shoving the blame on the way a woman is dressed, it's basically said that men are rapists by nature, and I simply will not stand for that.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Missing the point a bit, I think.

The defence is not that skimpy clothes caused the person to lose control and rape the victim. It is used to blame the victim for the attack, however, but that's a seperate-ish issue.

The defence is that skimpy clothes are proof that the victim is a slut, and therefore consented, so it wasn't rape. There might be a bit of "dirty slut deserves what she gets" in there as well.

When people defend rapists, they almost always first deny the rape took place.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Sigh, it's not a defence. You've misread what they've said and just completely corrupted their words. And... egh... just... let's just say that a rape is going to happen one night. There is a man out with the intention of raping a girl. Wearing provocative clothes is just bringing attention to you, wearing unprovocative clothes isn't going to make you invisible, but you may put yourself higher on the list of potential targets if you wear clothes that provoke.

Doesn't work like that. Firstly, most (90%+) rapes are committed by someone the victim knows. Secondly, the ones that aren't tend to be opportunistic, not based on clothing.

Third, yes, it is used as a defense, to the extent that certain jurisdictions ban lawyers mentioning what the victim was wearing to avoid this.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

Sigh, it's not a defence. You've misread what they've said and just completely corrupted their words. And... egh... just... let's just say that a rape is going to happen one night. There is a man out with the intention of raping a girl. Wearing provocative clothes is just bringing attention to you, wearing unprovocative clothes isn't going to make you invisible, but you may put yourself higher on the list of potential targets if you wear clothes that provoke.

And then there's the hoo-haa about slut walks, yeah, ladies should be able to wear whatever they want. I agree. Let's tell young men not to rape. I also agree. But don't act like you can't understand that Canadian police officer who suggested to make yourself less of a target.

... huh. I didn't notice it was unpopular opinion time already.

I agree with this.

It would be great if women could wear whatever they want to whenever they want to and it would be great if all rapists would learn that rape is fucking wrong.
Fact of the matter is though, that everyone already knows rape is wrong, it's just that rapists don't care about it being wrong, nor do they care about the law or the victims for that matter, which is a big fucking problem.
This means that there are a few things that need be done:

1. Rapists need to be taught that rape is FUCKING WRONG.

2. Society needs to learn that rape can NEVER be the victims fault. There is no "he/she wanted to get raped"

3-9. See above



10. Maybe, just maybe, women should consider not to dress provocatively when they are going somewhere they know might be dangerous. As written by the gentleman I quoted, revealing clothes do make a woman more of a target, since they do increase her visibility.
This is not to say that they are to blame in any way or at fault or anything even remotely close to that if they get raped, but wearing provocative clothing in a potentially dangerous environment might not be a sensible thing to do at times.

Edited because I am sick and tired of getting quoted on the very same sentence.

 

[Froggy Slayer]

Rapists need to be taught that rape is FUCKING WRONG.

I find it bad that some people still apparently need to be taught that rape is bad, and that rapers should feel bad.

 

[JimB]

Sigh, it's not a defense.

Yes, it is. It assigns part of the blame to the victim of a violent attack, which thereby removes some of the blame from the attacker, on whom it should rest entirely. If it removes blame from the attacker, then it's a defense.

This is a statement I only ever hear made about rape victims, incidentally. I have never in my life heard anyone say, "Well it's your fault burglars broke into your home, because if you didn't make it look so nice they wouldn't have wanted to steal from it. You were asking for it."

 

[Froggy Slayer]

This is a statement I only ever hear made about rape victims, incidentally. I have never in my life heard anyone say, "Well it's your fault burglars broke into your home, because if you didn't make it look so nice they wouldn't have wanted to steal from it. You were asking for it."

Actually, if you leave valuables out in open view, burglars are more likely to break in. This isn't ever used as a defence though, it's only ever used as advice. It's never used by someone trying to shift the blame onto the victims like they deserved to be robbed.

 

[Thaluikhain]

10. Maybe, just maybe, women should consider not to dress provocatively when they are going somewhere they know might be dangerous. As written by the gentleman I quoted, revealing clothes do make a woman more of a target, since they do increase her visibility.
This is not to say that they are to blame in any way or at fault or anything even remotely close to that if they get raped, but wearing provocative clothing in a potentially dangerous environment might not be a sensible thing to do at times.

Firstly, revealing clothes don't make a difference. There'd be lots of women raped at nude beaches and so on, where that the case.

Secondly, that they know might be dangerous? Women are raped everywhere. There's no place that doesn't fall under that category.

Third, unfortunately you cannot say women should be doing something without implying they are at fault if they do not.

This is not my favourite topic to talk about.

1) Yep, I know, but I was referring to the rarer stranger rape. Hence the 'let's just say' situation.
2) Aware of this as well, but I presume in this scenario there's a very patient fellow sitting in the bushes in a park somewhere and he has more of a choice. Skimpy clothes with heels may swing it, never know.

That's an extremely rare occurence, and it's presented as the norm, which is a big problem. It also cannot be seperated from victim blaming.

3) You're kidding me. In any case, I thought this was referring to comments that originated from the Canadian police guy who made a fairly stupid assessment that you could still see his logic behind. You probably remember that incident, I'm failing spectatularly to find it, though. The guy was just giving advice and got torn to shreds.

I do remember it, yes, and IMHO, he was quite deserving of the response he got. He's a person in a position of authority, telling people how they should deal with a problem he isn't faced with, in a way that reinforces why it's such a big problem and the failure of the authorities to deal with it. Sure, probably he didn't mean anything by it, but he shouldn't have been talking about a serious issue like that if he's not going to think about what he's saying.

If the legal system/society as a whole didn't blame victims for what they were wearing, maybe a law enforcement officer could have advised women on what to wear without it being a massive issue. Not sure though.

 

[Relish in Chaos]

Lawyers can and will try to use anything to get their accused client off of a crime. The ?provocative clothing? rape defence isn?t exempt from this.

But yeah, it?s not only offensive to women; it?s offensive to men too, implying that we?re all nothing more than primitive sex machines who will jump on a woman the first chance we get. Not to mention that rape is more about power than sex anyway. A woman could be wearing a tracksuit from top to bottom in the winter, and still get raped if a man wants to exert authority over her. Rapists primarily get off on power, not how little clothing a woman is wearing. And that?s also ignoring the fact that men get raped too.

I don?t get how anyone can ?want? to be raped either, considering that goes against the very definition of rape being ?against your will?. Unless it?s part of a fantasy and you got a partner/sex buddy to do it, but then, that wouldn?t be rape, would it? It would be more akin to consensual rough sex.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

Do you actually mean to say that people can honestly get away with raping someone just by using this excuse?

I haven't heard of anyone getting away with it because of this excuse (thank god), but I mean to ask how people can rationalise this in their heads.

It's usually used when somebody can't or won't either acknowledge or man up about their self-control issues. If someone can't help themselves because a girl was wearing provocative clothing or "asking for it" due to their chosen attire, chances are it's the rapist's fault because their ability to control their carnal desires is nil.

I think it also forces the notion that women shouldn't wear provocative or sexy clothing because, apparently we men are mindless sex drones that care about little more than taking a good time where we can find it, forcefully or otherwise. As if we're incapable of self-control.

 

[Quaxar]

it would be great if all men would learn that rape is fucking wrong.

Probably not meant to be but the double meaning kind of cracked me up there...

 

[thesilentman]

I don't get why people still use this as a defense for rape. Why do people try to shift the blame onto the women in a situation where the man is still entirely at fault for, you know, having such little self-control that he has to fuck a woman the second that he gets a boner. This is a defense that's still used, and yet, it's one that already assumes that the man is guilty of rape; it simply tries to shift the blame for the crime onto the victim. How do people still believe in this?

Why? Cause people can't control their own sexual attraction, those twats. There's also the problem of not being able to define provocative. I can call a medium length skirt provocative just as I can call a bikini provocative. It's a bullshit excuse that people need to stop using. Freedom of expression has its wonders...