The 'Provocative Clothing' Rape Defense

[knight steel]

I always thought it was a helpful tip rather than an excuse, kinda like when you were a kid and were told don't talk to a stranger, in a perfect world you should be able to talk to strangers without fear. However that's not the case ,if you talk to a stranger and something bad happens it's not your fault but the offenders however if you listened to the advice you would have a better chance of avoiding the situation ^_-

 

[Therumancer]

...
Don't get the impression I'm defending rapists, that's not the point per se, it's simply that I feel handling this kind of thing fairly remains a great blind spot in our legal system. The very fact that someone can ask WHY a mode of dress matters to a case of this sort illustrates the problem in my mind. The same applies to things like a pattern of promiscious behavior, and similar things that have people going "W T F" when they shouldn't, if you were an innocent defendant all of this would matter to you.

I'll even go so far as to say that with some of the messed up things people get up to today, even physical trauma doesn't mean all that much. When people play bondage and S&M games, and awarness of that kind of stuff increases, the types of bruises and such rapidly matter. Today some girl comes in with two black eyes, rope burn, cigarette burns, and whip marks all over her, that doesn't nessicarly mean forced sex, it might come down to "how do I justify this to daddy/my boyfriend/co-workers, since I wasn't expecting to be so messed up afterwards" claiming you were raped gets sympathy, obvious signs you liked to be tied up and tortured during sex (or experimented with it) can get you labeled a freak or even fired for reasons of "company image".

There are all kinds of scenarios out there, and remember, Innocent until proven guilty is supposed to be the #1 rule of our law enforcement system. Any bit of reasonable doubt you can put on accusations of guilt is very important.

Dear god, this whole post. Seriously?

Your idea that rapists should only be convicted if there is physical evidence of forced sexual contact is demented. One of the first thing someone who has been raped often does is take a shower or try to clean themselves, and change their clothes. Rape is sometimes reported weeks or months or even years after it happens because of the psychological trauma involved- those people are just as entitled to justice. Coming forward and labelling yourself as a victim of rape is INCREDIBLY hard. The questions, procedures and medical exams involved are also invasive to someone who has gone through that and very traumatising. Victims of rape can go through a lot of feelings of shame and denial and even be made to think that they 'deserved' it or its their fault. Also what about people who have been drugged against their will? Just because their isn't physical trauma or evidence, even if the rape has occurred recently, doesn't mean someone wasn't raped?! There are a thousand scenarios where this could happen.

".

No offense, but by definition you are saying you disagree with the entire foundation of the criminal justice system in the US. For laws to work there can be no exceptions, otherwise it's not a principle or foundation. Your entire rant simply amounts to the fact that you do not like the answer to the question, and are turning that into personal attacks on me.

Like it or not, the US Justice System, and to be honest the Justice Systems of most of the civilized world, rely on evidence and a presumpsion of innocence. Nobody is to be convicted purely on the say so or testimony of someone else without anything else to reinforce the claim. Everyone gets a chance to defend themselves and create doubt against their accuser. What's more the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is placed on the accuser, the defendant does NOT have to prove themselves innocent.

It doesn't matter if a situation is likely, if people believe only 4% of rape victims or liars, or how warped someone feels the situation is because of how rape victims behave, it's how the law works universally, and in all cases where someone is accused of a crime (unless national security is involved, martial law has been declared, and a few other very rare exceptions, but even so they do not apply in cases of citizen vs. citizen).

I agree with you, as I've said myself, that this is not fair in every single case, indeed I also
believe that beyond the issue of just rape it's responsible for a lot of problems in society. On the other hand it is arguably the lesser of evils.

Yelling at me for telling you how it is is pretty stupid.

Likewise, some of the personal points I've made largely come down to the principle of the system, and the simple fact that in practice the system already fails here as people tend to be convicted of rape without sufficient evidence as things stand now. Whether you think that's right or wrong is a matter of opinion. Speaking personally, and as someone who was raped as a child (by an older kid, when I was like six, trauma I blocked out but know happened), while rape is horrible, there are actually far more situations where I personally think the system could benefit from such bias.

I'll also be honest in saying that rape is one of the crimes that I think would benefit from the legalization of profiling. If someone matching a profile could be used as evidence to reinforce a case, get warrents, dig for further information, you'd probably wind up with a far less ambigious situation on paper. As things stand now you pretty much have to ignore a creep, scumbag, or predator being what they are as a matter of principle.

 

[awolflikeyou]

Equating robbery to rape is just stupid. Firstly people rob other people because they need or want money which is actually understandable and follows some sort of logic. Rapists don't rape because they want sex. Furthermore flashing around cash or a fancy phone is no the same as someone making the decision "hey I like how this looks. I think I'm going to wear this tonight". A women's body something that can be down-played or hidden like an object.

The amount of "slut-shaming" in this thread is kind of scary. Women should be able to dress however they want and sometimes women just want to look nice and like the way they look in a short skirt. Its also helluva hot in clubs and wearing skirts and short dresses is just more comfortable sometimes. The attitude that women dress in skimpy clothes to make other women "jealous" or to attract sexual attention is just not true in most cases. I'll say it again- women want to look nice. Why do you think fashion is such a huge industry? Its about more than saying "hey come have sex with me" its form of personal expression. Men give themselves waaaaay to much credit if they think that the reason most women love clothes and dressing up is to please or attract them.

Also guys aren't raging animals and should be able to control themselves even if a girl is a "tease" and leads them on. Yup its a low and bitchy thing to do but still- when it comes down to it "no" is "no". They can be angry and pissed, sure- but the idea that women who flirt with men somehow "owe" them something for it. ugh. Sex and women are not a commodity and women flirting or dressing a certain way is NOT "false advertising" or "asking for it".

Look, dressing a certain way might make you stand-out more. I know its not an ideal world but what are we suppose to do- dress in a berka? Become sex-less, and life-less, don't flirt, don't drink and stay indoors?

People should dress how the fuck they want. If you wanna go outside in your underwear- so be it?

I'd like to hear better suggestions for guarding against rape like carrying pepper-spray or only travelling groups.

 

[awolflikeyou]

No offense, but by definition you are saying you disagree with the entire foundation of the criminal justice system in the US. For laws to work there can be no exceptions, otherwise it's not a principle or foundation. Your entire rant simply amounts to the fact that you do not like the answer to the question, and are turning that into personal attacks on me.

Like it or not, the US Justice System, and to be honest the Justice Systems of most of the civilized world, rely on evidence and a presumpsion of innocence. Nobody is to be convicted purely on the say so or testimony of someone else without anything else to reinforce the claim. Everyone gets a chance to defend themselves and create doubt against their accuser. What's more the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is placed on the accuser, the defendant does NOT have to prove themselves innocent.

It doesn't matter if a situation is likely, if people believe only 4% of rape victims or liars, or how warped someone feels the situation is because of how rape victims behave, it's how the law works universally, and in all cases where someone is accused of a crime (unless national security is involved, martial law has been declared, and a few other very rare exceptions, but even so they do not apply in cases of citizen vs. citizen).

I agree with you, as I've said myself, that this is not fair in every single case, indeed I also
believe that beyond the issue of just rape it's responsible for a lot of problems in society. On the other hand it is arguably the lesser of evils.

Yelling at me for telling you how it is is pretty stupid.

Likewise, some of the personal points I've made largely come down to the principle of the system, and the simple fact that in practice the system already fails here as people tend to be convicted of rape without sufficient evidence as things stand now. Whether you think that's right or wrong is a matter of opinion. Speaking personally, and as someone who was raped as a child (by an older kid, when I was like six, trauma I blocked out but know happened), while rape is horrible, there are actually far more situations where I personally think the system could benefit from such bias.

I'll also be honest in saying that rape is one of the crimes that I think would benefit from the legalization of profiling. If someone matching a profile could be used as evidence to reinforce a case, get warrents, dig for further information, you'd probably wind up with a far less ambigious situation on paper. As things stand now you pretty much have to ignore a creep, scumbag, or predator being what they are as a matter of principle.

I didn't see your post earlier. I see the point you're trying to make but I prefer the way you expressed yourself this time. I felt like in your earlier post you were over-simplifying by saying rape is only provable by physical trauma and that the system is too lax and "sympathetic" to women. A lot of the time evidence of physical trauma is just not present because of a number of factors- such as rapes only being reported far after the fact. Honestly, though I would rather a few innocent people go to jail than having stricter or more enforced standards of investigating or proving rape. Sounds heartless, but yup. False rape accusation are tiny, tiny minority.

I do agree it would be better for everyone if rape were treated differently but mostly I think its about the changing attitudes in society so that victims of rape should feel safe and unashamed coming forward immediately or as soon as possible. Not only would that make convicting actual rapists easier but the millions of people who don't report rape would also come forward too. In addition false-accusations of rape would probably be better handled. But unfortunately its not a perfect world and this is likely far-off.

As to me attacking you personally. I have my own experience with rape which I'd prefer not to get into...I don't know you, maybe your a nice person. I just really didn't like what you said in your first post.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

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?

The only non-rapists that promote this notion are the local wahhabi salafi crowd. Together with the feminist folks, they really bring the hate down on local H&M ads. It's a merry bunch.

It's especially bad on weekends, so we've already tried getting our weekends adapted so the new week wouldn't start on Mondays, but on Saturdays instead. So far, we've had no success.

I only had proper insight for about two years prior to and some years after 9/11, but a close friend of ours went through a crisis during uni, and instead of going for the 'traditional' therapist plus medication thing, he just went to hang with the hardcore bearded nightgown beards of war, which only seemed to complicate and degenerate things further. The beards of war have publicly been replaced with 'more moderate' teachers, instructors, speakers and 'clergymen' (I use the term loosely), but they still all go to the same mosques, so I doubt the general idea will disappear anytime soon, as it is obviously written in eternal rules and laws somewhere. Quite a bummer, that.

 

[wolfyrik]

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?

It's common fallacious logic called Fair World Syndrome. It's the polar opposite of Mean World but people often use the two side by side. It's basically lazy thinking.

"That person is rich, this must mean they work hard and are better people" - Except they could be criminals or have inherited wealth and never worked a day in their life. Or both.

"That person is poor, they must be lazy and a bad person/they probably drunk away their money" - Never mind that a good person can be poor, infact poor people are known to give more time and meager income to charity, may have lost their job, have never drunk a day in their lives etc.

"That child is being bullied, it's cos they have dyed hair/stand out too much/too different" - Or there's a bullying problem in the school, the bullies have problems at home or are just pricks.

"That woman has been raped, well she must have been dressed provacatively/drunk/flirty/said something to lead him on/slut" - ad Infinitum never mind that men have minds of their own and are not some kind of slave to their emotions.

What upsets me more is that women can be just as guilty of this as men. Gender doesn't seem to be much of a factor in it hardly at all. Of course you see entirely the opposite when people are talking about male rape. It's a rare occurrence (outside of public schools and prison) and so lazy thinkers can't quite get their heads around it. They just end up shocked, unthinking and then tend to forget about it.

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

Equating robbery to rape is just stupid. Firstly people rob other people because they need or want money which is actually understandable and follows some sort of logic. Rapists don't rape because they want sex. Furthermore flashing around cash or a fancy phone is no the same as someone making the decision "hey I like how this looks. I think I'm going to wear this tonight". A women's body something that can be down-played or hidden like an object.

Everything you said is right on spot with the thinking currently going on at our local mosques, and it's even taught to little kids.

And, yes, their solution to the problem is indeed burka ninja gear (amongst other measures).

To my knowledge, it is never mentioned in the original source material, but, somehow, the societies this culture is rooted in did, indeed, opt for the veil and the sword, for more severe cases of insubordination.

The males are indeed brought up to develop a very 'anything goes' self-service mindset, and it would be considered extremely racist and unfair to ask for the males to change their ways. It would, in fact, be considered blashpemy and worthy of some heavy-handed retribution.

It's cool if you haven't heard about all this before, bless you.

 

[Hagi]

It's especially bad on weekends, so we've already tried getting our weekends adapted so the new week wouldn't start on Mondays, but on Saturdays instead. So far, we've had no success.

I'm not quite sure what exactly you're talking about but I do very much approve of the solution of moving the weekends in order to solve bad things happening on weekends.

Pure brilliance!

 

[Hagi]

This is why we can't have nice things, so few people are able to think properly, and when they do they get shouted down by the unthinking majority.
In this case the robbery analogy is exactly valid, the robber wants items of monetary value, the rapist wants sex and the feeling of power that goes along with the rape.
The clothing issue is down to selection of targets, while I think that women should be able to walk around naked without fear of being raped because I am a civilised human being, it's obvious that a woman wearing less clothing will appear as an easier target for a rapist, she'll probably have been out drinking (assuming it's 3am) so she won't be in full command of herself, she probably won't be carrying anything that can be used as an effective weapon, and if she's walking home alone she may well be walking a long way through deserted areas at night.
All this adds up to a perfect target for the rapist, it's not that she is "asking for it" in the sense that dressing slutty is consent (of course it isn't!) she's "asking for it" in the sense that the guy loudly announcing his wealth is "asking to be robbed", she isn't inviting the rape IN ANY FORM WHATSOEVER! but she is advertising herself as an easy target.
Advising people not to appear as easy targets for rapists is not a bad thing! It doesn't change the abhorrent nature of rape, and it shouldn't be an issue to be discussed (as rape shouldn't happen).

It's like you were walking through a field and a landmine went off and obliterated your friend walking next to you.
You could remonstrate with the fact that there aren't supposed to be any mines here and carry on walking in a self-righteous huff about inappropriate minefield placement, but you're going to come to grief!
Doesn't make the whole thing your fault, because the mines shouldn't have been there.

Like minefields, rape should not exist, but given that it does we should all try to guard against it, and suggesting ways to avoid an unfortunate reality is in no way the same as condoning it.

I appreciate that most rapes are not this kind of "rapist follows random victim to secluded area" that I'm referring to, but why not try to guard yourself against that happening?

Indeed, this is why in countries like India where clothing like the Burqa and other conservative dresses are frequently worn by women rape is hardly a problem at all, none of these women are advertising themselves as easy targets. Because wearing extra clothing is a sure way to protect yourself from sexual predators.

Oh... Wait...

 

[runic knight]

for the love of...

ok, pretty simple here. First though.

NO SANE PERSON THINKS IT IS THE VICTIM'S FAULT!

Unfortunately, that's not remotely true. Or people often think that the victim wasn't a victim, if you prefer. Or you've got a definition of sane that excludes an awfully large number of people.

Victim blaming is a constant, it's one of the reasons the reporting rates for rape are tiny.

A memorable example from a few months back, an 11 year old girl who'd been gang-raped by 21 men and boys for four months was said to have lured them in "like a spider".

Well I probably define sane too narrowly then. Though I suppose in my defense I meant "No sane person who would post here". Though, you know what? No, gonna keep it the same and just say that yeah, if you are blaming the victim you are doing reasoning wrong and forfeit the right to claim sanity as there is no logical or rational justification for blaming a victim for the actions of someone they don't have a damn gun to the head of.

As for victim blaming and the rest of that though, I think I already went over how the idea of provocative clothes leads to rape came about in part and all that other crap. Though... what is the range of our classification and all? First world, third world, entire world? I recall a girl got raped on a train in the news over in india or something, not exactly sure I see a lot of point kicking the dead horse of "backwards, rural areas and countries without same standard of civil liberties as first world nations are backwards." Yes it still exist in first world nations and stuff, but someone says on the news that a rape victim (not alleged victim but one where there is no reason to question the validity of the claim) was to blame for her own rape and watch them get torn to pieces (see politicians and recent rape body defense crap). The main issue is the alleged ones where the occurrence is not as certain and then people start jumping all over with speculation, trying to lay blame or explain what happened or why and everything else.


But yeah, I stand by my statement, if you think a victim forced their attacker to rape them, you are not mentally fit to vote, own a gun or be able to wander around unsupervised because lack of rationality that bad will mean problems I am sure.

 

[Lieju]

EDIT 2: And no, if the girl is drunk and has consentual sex, accusing someone of rape afterwards is not an excuse either. You have to be averse to having sex for it to be rape, not just suffering a bout of poor decision making.

Lack of indicating they do not want to have sex =/= consent.

If someone has sex with an unconscious person, the person isn't saying 'no', but it's still rape.

Alcohol makes these kinds of things difficult, especially if the people were so drunk they don't remember, but if the other partner is not drunk, having sex with someone who is not thinking clearly is a bit iffy, and even rape, depending on if they pass out or something.

What upsets me more is that women can be just as guilty of this as men. Gender doesn't seem to be much of a factor in it hardly at all. Of course you see entirely the opposite when people are talking about male rape. It's a rare occurrence (outside of public schools and prison) and so lazy thinkers can't quite get their heads around it. They just end up shocked, unthinking and then tend to forget about it.

Yeah, there is the unfortunate implication that men who get raped deserve it. I have heard men/boys say countless times 'I would never let myself be raped', which indicates that people who do get raped were weak. A lot of men want to think rape is only something that happens to women and weak men.
Furthermore, men being raped is also assosiated with prison, and the idea is that people in prison are bad people, and even that prison-rape is okay because it's one more reason not to do illegal things...

 

[Nieroshai]

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 men 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.

There's an inherent problem with point #1. They DO know rape is wrong. Burglars know theft is wrong. Vandals know vandalism is wrong. Gang thugs know murder is wrong. From childhood, most if not all of us are given a picture of right and wrong. Crime and injustice happen when we do those things anyway. We do those things despite their wrongness, because we want the benefit from the action more than we want to do the right thing. Say I want money the easy way, or I think I deserve to mark my own territory, or defend said territory from other assholes by busting a cap. Hell, say I want an orgasm and I've got no self-control and no charisma with which to get tail the normal way. And before the argument cracks out, masturbation does not suffice as a counter-argument. Imagine your friend orders a pizza, and you really want it. Say you have an overwhelming desire for it, the smell's driving you nuts, and you have no money to get your own. A good, normal person would just go away or deal with it, or even be adventurous enough to go up and ask for a slice, but there will always be the one who decides "fuck him, fuck the rules, I'm gonna go over there and take that pizza." Smelling the pizza doesn't satisfy the craving, it only makes you think about it more. The whole point of restraint is that it is a struggle against our own nature in an attempt to be civil, courteous, and a productive member of society. Somebody is always going to want some tail so bad they're willing to risk the law and physical harm to get it.

 

[Screamarie]

Well I've actually heard it's the exact opposite which can mean your more likely to get raped, IF were talking about just walking down a dark alley and getting jumped kind of stuff. If your shy and meek, which probably means your not wearing very provocative clothing, you are more like to get raped because you are less likely to fight back and more likely to fulfill the desire for power that your attacker has.

In fact, I've heard of studies that say that women who have been raped and traumatized by them and therefore become more afraid and less confident are likely to be raped again because they're shining beacons of a target.

So...I guess every woman should be wearing mini skirts if they don't want to be raped.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Yeah, I don't get that either. That one of the biggest loads of bullshit I have ever heard. This "defence" is still a blatant admission of guilt, but tries to imply that the person in question shouldn't be punished because the victim was apparently "asking for it." Fuck that! If he did it he should still face prosecution to the fullest extent of the law regardless of whether or not she was "asking for it." *sarcastic air quotes*

 

[runic knight]

There's an inherent problem with point #1. They DO know rape is wrong. Burglars know theft is wrong. Vandals know vandalism is wrong. Gang thugs know murder is wrong. From childhood, most if not all of us are given a picture of right and wrong. Crime and injustice happen when we do those things anyway. We do those things despite their wrongness, because we want the benefit from the action more than we want to do the right thing. Say I want money the easy way, or I think I deserve to mark my own territory, or defend said territory from other assholes by busting a cap. Hell, say I want an orgasm and I've got no self-control and no charisma with which to get tail the normal way. And before the argument cracks out, masturbation does not suffice as a counter-argument. Imagine your friend orders a pizza, and you really want it. Say you have an overwhelming desire for it, the smell's driving you nuts, and you have no money to get your own. A good, normal person would just go away or deal with it, or even be adventurous enough to go up and ask for a slice, but there will always be the one who decides "fuck him, fuck the rules, I'm gonna go over there and take that pizza." Smelling the pizza doesn't satisfy the craving, it only makes you think about it more. The whole point of restraint is that it is a struggle against our own nature in an attempt to be civil, courteous, and a productive member of society. Somebody is always going to want some tail so bad they're willing to risk the law and physical harm to get it.

problem, most cases of violent rape are not about sex. Sounds dumb I know, but it is something with power or control or whatever and has even been done in cases where the attack has no sexual attraction to the victim and just does it to meet the other requirements. Hell, there is weird psychological aspects involved with how the attacker views and justifies what they have done, such as cases where homophobes who rapes other men justified it as not gay because it wasn't about sex or because they were not being penetrated or whatever other mental acrobatics.

It isn't that people see a skimpy outfit and act on impulse like a hungry man attacking a pie. Bit more complicated then that. Oh! and then there is the counter-argument that if they lacked such self control, why do they not all murder their bosses as well instead of, say, being religious figureheads of community for decades as they fiddle kids or whatever else?
Just not as simple as you describe I am afraid.

 

[freaper]

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 men 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.

Pretty much this.

If you'll allow me to use theft as a metaphor; as much as I'd like to leave my door unlocked when I'm out of the house, it's just not sensible. Yes, the robber that strolls through my apartment is at fault for stealing my stuff, but if I had taken more precautions I would not have gotten robbed in the first place, unless, of course, that thief was planning to rob me anyhow.

If a lady's walking out at night, by herself, in provocative clothing, it makes it so much easier for any Tom, Dick and Harry to jump her, given that he's a rapist, of course. As much as any sensible person would love to see women walk around at night, by themselves, in the clothes they wish to wear, it is simply not possible to do so anywhere they please. I'm afraid to say this might, in fact, never be the case.

 

[runic knight]

Had a thought. How much of this argument stems on the very notion of sexual repression in the first place about what is or is not provocative in society today?

to put it another way, lets take topless beaches and stuff in europe or something, where nudity is far less forbidden and therefore far less taboo. Would they be more likely to be raped by the logic of less dressed being first target? Would their lack of clothing be taken into consideration at being attacked? So much of this stinks of culture's repressed sexual desires and enforced morality about sex...

 

[Thaluikhain]

There's an inherent problem with point #1. They DO know rape is wrong. Burglars know theft is wrong. Vandals know vandalism is wrong. Gang thugs know murder is wrong. From childhood, most if not all of us are given a picture of right and wrong. Crime and injustice happen when we do those things anyway. We do those things despite their wrongness, because we want the benefit from the action more than we want to do the right thing. Say I want money the easy way, or I think I deserve to mark my own territory, or defend said territory from other assholes by busting a cap. Hell, say I want an orgasm and I've got no self-control and no charisma with which to get tail the normal way. And before the argument cracks out, masturbation does not suffice as a counter-argument. Imagine your friend orders a pizza, and you really want it. Say you have an overwhelming desire for it, the smell's driving you nuts, and you have no money to get your own. A good, normal person would just go away or deal with it, or even be adventurous enough to go up and ask for a slice, but there will always be the one who decides "fuck him, fuck the rules, I'm gonna go over there and take that pizza." Smelling the pizza doesn't satisfy the craving, it only makes you think about it more. The whole point of restraint is that it is a struggle against our own nature in an attempt to be civil, courteous, and a productive member of society. Somebody is always going to want some tail so bad they're willing to risk the law and physical harm to get it.

Doesn't hold true. Many people are against rape in the abstract, but don't consider what they do to be rape. A lot of people just assume that a woman automatically will or should consent to sex under certain circumstances. It was only very recently (1992 in the US) that men could be charged with raping their wives, until then consent was assumed, and a lot of people still lean towards that view. A large amount of rapes are committed by previous sexual partners, for example.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

EDIT 2: And no, if the girl is drunk and has consentual sex, accusing someone of rape afterwards is not an excuse either. You have to be averse to having sex for it to be rape, not just suffering a bout of poor decision making.

Lack of indicating they do not want to have sex =/= consent.

If someone has sex with an unconscious person, the person isn't saying 'no', but it's still rape.

Alcohol makes these kinds of things difficult, especially if the people were so drunk they don't remember, but if the other partner is not drunk, having sex with someone who is not thinking clearly is a bit iffy, and even rape, depending on if they pass out or something.

Although I didn't say so, I was not referring to being unconscious or so drunk they don't know what's going on. Sorry 'bout that. As far as I'm concerned you shouldn't have to accomodate other people being drunk, because a lot of the time people get drunk specifically so they're uninhibited.

 

[Saika Renegade]

The basis of the supposed defense mentioned by the OP feels something along the lines of a person justifying an attempt to shoot IndyCar champ Scott Dixon on the basis of seeing him in his racing uniform (as he is sponsored by Target, he sports a literal bullseye on his chest) and saying he was just asking to be shot.

Brought into a new yet still criminal context, it sounds all the more ludicrous, and as a defense would be a subject of media mockery in no time.