The 'Provocative Clothing' Rape Defense

[sethisjimmy]

Who the hell uses it as a defense for rape? There is no defense for rape. As far as I know it goes like this:

Rape is inexcusable and it's a bad thing and it's the rapist's fault and they shouldn't have done it.
In the same way, theft is inexcusable (mostly, let's say for argument's sake it is) and it's a bad thing and it's the thief's fault and they shouldn't have done it.

I am aware that thieves exist and that if I leave my wallet lying on the sidewalk while I go off to do something else, it's likely to get stolen.
Likewise women are aware rapists exist and that wearing provocative clothing, getting drunk etc. can increase their risk of getting raped.

In an ideal world there should be no thieves and I could leave my wallet wherever I please.
In an ideal world women would be able to wear whatever they want with no fear of being raped.

But this isn't an ideal world. The point is not to blame them, the point is that they should, owing to the fact that this is not an ideal world, take reasonable precautions. It's still the rapist's fault, but women should keep in mind that wearing such clothing is a risk, just as I should keep in mind that leaving my wallet on the sidewalk is a risk.

Actually, if you read the thread you'll find that there's no evidence of correlation between provocative clothing and likelihood of rape, and as such, wearing conservative clothing isn't actually a precaution against rape. Also the thread is full of silly analogies like yours. You keeping your wallet in your pocket is likely to prevent it from getting stolen, but whether a women wears provocative clothing or not has no impact on her chances of being a victim of rape.

 

[Banana Cannon]

The provocative clothing excuse is when I take as my cue to laugh at & humiliate the person who said it across every spectrum of their lives.

 

[Proeliator]

I think people have already said this, but I think the clothing thing is meant as per this analogy:

Wearing dark clothing while running on the side of a residential road during a dark rainy night. An impaired driver sees the runner to late and kills them, or maims them for life. Yes, the driver shouldn't have been at the wheel anyway, but the dark clothing didn't help. It makes the unfortunate tragedy even more tragic. The runner has already paid the price with their live/body. Time for the driver to pay his.

If someone tried to defend the driver saying "the runner should have been wearing light clothing, so my client isn't at fault for not seeing and hitting them" shenanigans. Sure the runner should have been in lighter clothing, but the driver was drunk and should do time. I always thought the clothing thing as a suggestion for women to protect themselves in "bad neighborhoods." Maybe cover up until you get to where you're going. Legal defense for a rapist? Not on my watch. If I was on jury, wouldn't buy it for a second.

Moral of the story: Walk naked. Everywhere. Its the only way you'll survive.

 

[SidheKnight]

As far as I'm concerned, a person can walk in front of me, naked, with the words "F*CK ME" written on their buttcheeks, and I still should be legally responsible if I rape them.


P.S: Just a little nitpick: Don't use "the man" and "the woman" when describing the situation, because you make it look like the perpetrator is always male and the victim is always female, which is a widespread misconception.

 

[Adeptus Aspartem]

Ugh, yet another beating of this poor dead horsie (at least in this forum).

No, it's not an excuse, and if somebody claims it he/she has to back it up with evidence. Sofar i havent heard of any causality between the likelihood of rape and the clothes of the victim.
Also the "myriads of false accusations" are somewhere between 2-10% depending on the study, though i'd say if it's closer to the upper limit i would honestly feel uneasy as a man.

Anyway, there's no excuse of the crime, no defense for the criminal and every dumb woman who accuses someone out of spite/revenge/lulz.

So, what's the next topic? Abortion, weapons or religion?

 

[DrOswald]

Those "likely assumptions" aren't very likely at all. In fact The Duke Journal of Gender Law and Policy finds that provocative clothing is not at all an indicator of prey, but may actually be an indicator of confidence and assertiveness, where concealing clothing is a better indicator of viable, insecure prey.

Also rape is shown to have very little to do with "desirability of prey" and all to do with opportunity and power (according at least to the American Journal of Psychiatry).

http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=djglp
http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=155978

It isn't logical to analogize an individual situation to another situation just because they seem vaguely similar, and these "assumptions" are less educated guesses and more logic leaps with no base.

I get where you're coming from and I know you don't support victim blaming but I still feel the evidence points elsewhere.

"Research provides evidence that how a woman dresses may be interpreted as a cue to her character, vulnerability, willingness to have sex, and provocation of a male's behavior and, consequently, affects the likelihood of sexual assault, including date rape."

An Examination of Date Rape, Victim Dress, and Perceiver Variables Within the Context of Attribution Theory
Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, August, 1999 by Jane E. Workman, Elizabeth W. Freeburg

These researchers have come to the opposite conclusion, that clothing does in fact effect the probability of date rape.

And the abstract of the second article you linked:

"Accounts from both offenders and victims of what occurs during a rape suggest that issues of power, anger, and sexuality are important in understanding the rapist's behavior. All three issues seem to operate in every rape, but the proportion varies and one issue seems to dominate in each instance. The authors ranked accounts from 133 offenders and 92 victims for the dominant issue and found that the offenses could be categorized as power rape (sexuality used primarily to express power) or anger rape (use of sexuality to express anger). There were no rapes in which sex was the dominant issue; sexuality was always in the service of other, nonsexual needs."

This states that sexuality is always a factor, even if it is not the dominant factor. This could just as easily be interpreted as vindication of the provocative clothing assumption. After all, the abstract plainly states that sexuality is a factor in every case.

And yet, the first article you linked claims strong evidence against the provocative clothing assumption.

This is why I say there is no substantial evidence either way. Because my research has show that even the seemingly reliable sources disagree.

Even if we were to prove the opposite true (as is suggested in your post and by many sources I have seen) that timid clothing resulted in increased probability of rape wouldn't it be just as bad? "She was too timid. If she had been more assertive, he wouldn't have bothered her. She just let him do it." This is equally bad victim blaming.

In addition, the "likely assumptions" I listed are not necessarily true, they are simply what most people are going to assume because it squares with their experience and knowledge.

Finally, trying to counter the provocative dress assumption with evidence is an ineffective method of dealing with the problem. Even if we could prove without a shadow of a doubt that clothing had absolutely no effect in any rape we will still have not dealt with the core problem of victim blaming.

All my posts in this thread have had exactly 3 points:


1. The suggestion of risk management is not victim blaming and to treat it as such is irresponsible.

2. Rather than trying to prove the unprovable (or at least extremely difficult to prove) we should approach the problem on a level of morality and emotion. If we can instill the principle that victim blaming is wrong we solve the problem at the root and gain an ally. Our objective should not be to defeat but to convert.

3. That we should treat those who are not yet on our side with respect, winning them over by being reasonable and amiable. The quickest way to drive someone away from your message is to act and speak with hostility, and yet that is the default mode of the anti rape movement.

 

[Cheesus Crust]

A woman wearing provocative clothing is only more likely to get raped if there was a rapist who was motivated by such things I guess. I mean like most posters have said before me, the motivations behind rape are many.

Can someone please clarify things for me since we're on the topic of provocative clothing. There used to be a time in my old university that there wasn't any dress code. Female students could wear any kind of clothing that they wished. Regarding this issue I remember one of my professors making an off hand comment that in the United States its actually okay for men to call women out on some sort of sexual harassment if they wear clothing that's too revealing, at least in the workplace. Is this a real thing or is this some sort of BS that the professor said in order to deliver a cautionary tail of things working both ways and that the female students should stop wearing clothes that are too revealing?

 

[ishist]

I just love these threads. (All the following is my opinion. If you don't like my opinion, quit reading mine and go form your own.)

Pretty much EVERYONE knows that rape is wrong. They don't need to be taught. There doesn't need to be campaigns of awareness. People who rape other people don't do it out of ignorance. The endless blathering on about how we need to make people aware of this problem is just....ignorant. Go into a public place and say the word "rape" in a slightly raised tone of voice and every head within hearing distance will turn.

As for the subject of women wearing revealing clothes/slutty clothes/just enough clothes pasted to themselves to avoid being arrested, they are almost certainly not asking to be raped. On the other hand, they are begging to be leered at, jeered at, propositioned, hit upon, judged, and possibly harassed. Those who say they aren't are delusional. As a humorously exaggerated example, someone who walks around in public wearing a neon sign saying "Look At Me!" should not claim that they don't want people staring at them.

That is all, carry on.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Rape is wrong.

There is no other argument about this. Say what you will about women being stupid for wearing provocative clothing or not (I honestly don't care either way), but rape is wrong.

Rape is ALWAYS wrong.

 

[The Material Sheep]

People still try to excuse rape with clothing choice? Aside from the occasional talking head saying something asinine I mean. Just seem so antiquated.

 

[Abomination]

From a meta perspective it would be best if women took more care with their choice of clothing.

This very dicussion alone encourages it due to the number of times the clothing excuse has been attempted by accused rapists.

It might or might not be a CAUSE for rape but it certainly seems to be a clutching at straws justification rapists use. If a woman is not dressed in such a manner then that's one less incentive for the rapist. It might not prevent every single rape but it might prevent a few. Call it a 5% less chance to be considered a target. Since everyone agrees that rape is a horrible thing I think a 5% chance to reduce it is well worth embracing.

 

[Abomination]

It might or might not be a CAUSE for rape but it certainly seems to be a clutching at straws justification rapists use.

1) Is it? Do you have evidence that rapists do use the way women dress as justification? After all, most of the objection in this thread has not come from 1st-hand rapist accounts, but second-hand accounts of people on the side-lines trying to prevent rapes despite not knowing much at all about how and why most rapes take place.

2) Does it matter? Is there any evidence whatsoever that gives us reason to believe an opportunistic rapist would ever not rape someone who was seen to be vulnerable simply because of the way the victim was dressed?

1. Considering how often it is used in court as an attempt at defence or excuse BY those accused of rape? Yes. THEY seem to think it is. Of course obtaining evidence of this is difficult going either way to prove it has an effect or to prove it has NO effect on the decision making process of a rapist.

2. If a rapist considers it a possible defence to rape then it does matter. If it's something he can remember about the event then he must have taken it into consideration. It's strange that during the court case he can remember what the victim was wearing before the rape - often with significant specifics.

It might not prevent every single rape but it might prevent a few. Call it a 5% less chance to be considered a target.

No, I'm not going to call it any percent until that percent is justified through rigorous research. Otherwise, we may as well advocate people wear turnips tied into their hair because there's a... let's call it 5% less chance they'll be raped because it just seems too weird.

Without evidence, you're just making things up. And if you care enough about rape to try and stop it, you should care enough to do some research to try and stop it using information that has been shown to be accurate. You should care enough not to just make things up that feel right to you.

I think a turnip would prevent a few rapes, it would certainly give a rapist pause and I haven't heard of a single rape where a victim was wearing a turnip on their head before, during or after the attack. Statistically then turnips on heads prevent rape.

Of course we can't actually prove that because it would require unethical testing by encouraging rape scenarios to be studied.

The evidence is actually quite plain - rapists attempt to use the skimpiness of clothing as a defence for rape. It is often quite publicized that this excuse is employed by rapists. Of course we can not be certain as to the percentage chance of it reducing rape, nobody would be willing to conduct a study of that... you would have to set up rapes to study in order to have scientific findings to remove outside influences and be certain of your results. Demanding evidence of this is essentially demanding unethical scientific trials.

Better to at least employ a precaution that at least has some potential grounds of being effective than? not employing it? Again, the crime of rape seems to be agreed upon as being just as bad if not worse than murder so we should at least employ whatever methods we can to prevent it. Appropriate attire awareness could prevent some rapes.

As difficult as it is to prove that it could have prevent A rape it?s just as difficult to prove that it wouldn?t prevent A rape.

 

[MrBrightside919]

Just once i'd like to come onto this website and NOT see the most commented thread being about RAPE...

Just once...

 

[Superbeast]

You know, if clothing had any bearing on rape, you would think that something would be mentioned about it, yet there is absolutely nothing at all regarding clothing on Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factors_associated_with_being_a_victim_of_sexual_violence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_violence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiatives_to_prevent_sexual_violence

If it really were a logical and/or well-documented occurrence then something should be mentioned. Yes, it is only Wikipedia, but it is a good jumping-off point thanks to the sourcing of the articles.

Although it is somewhat facetious, I am partial to the argument that, if rape was influenced by how provocative a woman's clothing was, then there would be greatly reduced frequency of rape in countries which legally enforce conservative clothing on women (be it a burqa or something else). Yet they do not. Also, one never sees the argument of "but they were wearing skimpy/provocative clothing" wheeled out when it comes to male victims of rape, which surely would still apply if clothing were indeed a factor in determining someone's visibility and/or vulnerability to a rapist.

 

[scw55]

Usually rape threads get locked quite quickly due to the internet can't help rape discussions.

Anyone who rapes is evil.
However, dressing in a seductive manner does not help things.

With regards to paedophiles, individuals who dress more maturely than their age (if they're under-aged) is very unwise.

These are two separate issues which happen to overlap. However, my experience of being on the internet is that as a man, I have no right to have an opinion how women dress.

 

[AuronFtw]

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

Because men are the only rapists on earth.

Fact.

 

[repeating integers]

Just once i'd like to come onto this website and NOT see the most commented thread being about RAPE...

Just once...

"Which is why I decided click on it, add my own comment, and bump it back up to the top of the forum!"

At this point a single additional post isn't going to make any difference. It's like throwing a bucket of water into an overflowing river.