The 'Provocative Clothing' Rape Defense

[Therumancer]

[

Your argument here is a little flawed. Yes, what you're claiming is possible, but the entire point becomes a little questionable when you consider that Rape cases have notoriously low conviction rates. (roundabout 5% or less in most countries).

This kind of undermines the assertion that it's easy to claim you've been raped. It isn't, and compared to other crimes it's actually easy to get out of it if it even goes to trial in the first place. (which isn't necessarily that likely, because a lot of actual rape victims feel ashamed, or find the thought of the legal process too traumatic.)

It's an interesting idea, but reality shows otherwise.

Not really, because your also labouring under the assumption that most, or at least a lot of, the people who "get out of" a rape accusation were guilty. Something which of course goes back to the entire question of sympathy for those who claim to have been raped (mostly women) and how it loads the justice system.

Rape is one of those crimes where being found innocent isn't nessicarly the end of it, being an accused rapist is almost as bad as being a convicted one, and that can be the entire point of why someone might want to make a false accusation to begin with, and also helps bring into question quoted statistics in this arguement like how "only 4% of rape accusations are false" and so on.

Ask yourself, if it wasn't an accusation of rape, do you think people would be quite so picky about the results on average when someone is found innocent?

It is also very easy to claim you've been raped, and comes with a lot of positive aspects (sympathy) especially when it's not true. All you need to do is bring the charge, especially seeing as it's a crime you can accuse someone of where there is little expectation of physical evidence, and even if the guy gets off he's going to suffer a major stigma just from having been accused. Everyone shows up to white knight the alleged victim as we see in this case, and nobody wants to believe that someone claiming to have been raped is a liar. A society wide issue.

Which of course all gets back to my central point about the presumpsion of innocence and how our legal system works in all cases (not just rape). Whatever the actual statistics might be, or what are simply societal notions, become irrelevent, we can argue all of that and it's been rendered irrelevent by intent. At the end of the day the US Justice system as far as goverment mandated punishment goes works entirely based on evidence with the burden of proof being placed squarely on the shoulders of the accuser when it comes to criminal matters. In any case, whether it's as petty as Jaywalking or as extreme as Rape or Murder, the accused goes to trial under a persumpsion of innocence and the accuser whether it be the state, or the state representing a crime against a citizen, is forced to prove otherwise beyond an innocent doubt, facing a major disadvantage in court.

As I said, whether you think it's right or wrong, and what happens in society as a result, the crux of the US legal system is that it's better to let 1000 guilty men go free, than 1 innocent man be convicted. That's it's principle. How well it functions in practice, and as I said what it does to society, those are other questions. As are what changes you could in theory make to the system.

Also understand that in the US there is huge backlash towards any suggestion that the system be changed, as anything more assertive tends to create visions of police states and inevitably leads to Godwin's law coming up in a discussion sooner rather than later.

Case in point, let's say I suggest we legalize profiling and blank warrents. Something a lot of european countries have done, and actually comes close to how law enforcement worked (even if it wasn't formalized) back in the 1940s and 1950s in the US... you know the generation that actually went to war and STOPPED Hitler and represented freedom and all that good stuff. People would scream bloody murder. After all this would mean that by being a creep some guy going on trial for say rape could have his profile used as evidence to prove the likelyhood of guilt, and that profile would also have allowed the police to say search his house/crime scenes/etc... almost immediatly under a blank warrent system without needing to delay to get permission from a judge, making it far less likely the guy could conceal the signs of say raping someone in his bedroom and more evidence could be uncovered faster. Likewise it also means that you could do things like single out Muslims for airport security and the like and not harass tons of other people and create a lot of these problems we see making the news due to some symbolic gesture being nessicary to make liberals happy.

See, in the US Law Enforcement and things like it's presumsion of innocent and the game that we're turned search and seizure into is something that people have grown used to. We've basically trained ourselves to want relatively powerless police, and so that using common sense in law enforcement and count proceedings has become almost an anathema. The US has basically taken the approach that the privacy of some gang banger and not having the police check him out pre-emptively based on patterns of behavior, or consider things like religious affiliation when conducting searches, etc... is MORE important than things like murders, the proliferation of drugs, human traffiking, and other crimes, INCLUDING rape (understand profiles tend to include far more than just race and/or religion or whatever despite stereotypes).

Given the political leanings on this site, you see outcries about rapes and such, but anyone who actually suggested changes to the laws (understand they have to be universal and apply to everyone) that could make a differance, would also be attacked as some kind of facist that wanted to turn the US into a police state. Even if ultimatly those changes simply borrowed ideas from law enforcement in the rest of the western world, or involved simply dialing policies back a few decades. Putting the genie back into the bottle so to speak.

While it's a side point, understand that this kind of thing that we're argueing about is the price being paid for a lot of those "civil liberties victories" of the past. What happens with rapists and such is one small part of it. An idealogy that was supposed to lead to a lot more peace, freedom, and safety, arguably had exactly the opposite effect. Sure the stereotypical "pig cop" might not be ruining your fun as much as he used to, but as a result we also have more rapes, murders, gang activity, human trafficking, and everything else because in many cases the police can't even begin to investigate despite common sense due to what is oftentimes a crazy criteria, and when they can, the time it takes to get permission to search (warrents, etc...) gives the criminals plenty of time to prepare. People talk about police corruption, in terms of empowering law enforcement being a problem, but the ironic thing is that dirty cops hide behind the same protections the criminals do, in reality IA and other protective watchdogs need to jump through the same kind of hoops. You can't weed out dirty cops effectively for the same reason someone can run a crack house and shoot rival dealers periodically with relative imputiny, it all comes down to playing the game and bureaucratic protection.

 

[Thaluikhain]

It is also very easy to claim you've been raped, and comes with a lot of positive aspects (sympathy) especially when it's not true. All you need to do is bring the charge, especially seeing as it's a crime you can accuse someone of where there is little expectation of physical evidence, and even if the guy gets off he's going to suffer a major stigma just from having been accused. Everyone shows up to white knight the alleged victim as we see in this case, and nobody wants to believe that someone claiming to have been raped is a liar. A society wide issue.

Not true. Society will often rally behind the rapist and demonise the victim. The 11 year old girl in Texas gangraped by 21 men and boys comes to mind, not only did the defence lawyer try to blame her, he (and members of the community) expressed the view that it was terrible that the rapists would have to live with the consequences.

Shortly before that, the cheerleader in Texas kicked off her cheerleading squad for refusing to cheer for her rapist, was harassed by her community because she brought them into disrepute.

Hell, look at people like Mike Tyson and Roman Polanski. There's no question that they are guilty, but they've got plenty of apologists and they've gone on with their film careers. That's exactly what would not happen if the mere accusation was enough to stigmatise a rapist.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

I like how the subject of the woman being flirtatous and leading the man on is not included. You think women only DRESS a certain way or do you think it follows that they also act a certain way when dressed (lets not pull any punches here) like a slut. Try to act like booty shorts at the club instead of the gym is somehow not slutty if you want to but then youre just being dishonest.

Yeah, you're being led on, still not a defense for rape.

Before you say (like a retard) that Im actually defending the rapist: False. I am not defending the rapist. Rape is so obviously wrong it is insulting you accuse me of thinking otherwise.

You're right, you're not defending the rapist, you're blaming the victim, which is just as bad. "Oh, did you hear? Bob got mugged!" "Well he was asking for it! I mean, he was wearing his fancy watch! He's leading muggers on!" Also, the bolded part, yeah, not cool. I would suggest you stop using ad hominems against people who disagree with you before you start attracting the wrong kind of attention yourself. We don't tolerate insults here.

Where I am going with this is that the victim is often the "victim" with a case of buyers remorse.

Right, because when I put my phone down on a table for a second while I grab something out of my bag, I'm obviously the one who should be remorseful when an asshole takes it and runs off.

That means that if you dress like a slut you deserve to hear for the millionth time "maybe you shouldnt dress like a slut" and that is all you deserve, not to be raped.[/b] And if you ever said that to another women, she will tell you and I believe she is in the right in this case that you should "Mind your own buisness." It is not your job to force moral standards or dress codes onto society. They're adults, they will make their own decisions.

I hope it is clear the difference betweeen those 2 things because you are likely thinking with your emotions right now instead of actual thinking.

Actually its thinking with a Libertarian stance on life.

Perhaps women do have some actual amount of fault in dressing a certain way the same as I would have some actual amount of fault if I went to a gay bar dressed like the male version of a slut. Nevermind that I dont, nevermind that Im straight, it would be flat out dumb to do such a thing and then say "I can dress however I want".

They're free to dress however they wish and go wherever they wish. If it is not hurting another individual and if it is not illegal, then whether or not its a smart move is none of your concern. Also, you're stance that "You shouldn't dress like an X in Y setting" has several holes. Should I place fault on the transexual who dresses like a boy if they get bullied at school? Should I place fault on the jew who is assaulted by Anti-semetic's simply because he is wearing the star of David as a necklace? No. I shouldn't, because the victim should never be the found at vault.

Again not defending the rapist and its sad I have to repeat this for you to remember this far down the post that I already told you that. Posters are on what is so obviously a witch hunt here that unlikely would be a kind outlook on this group having actually thought about the post instead of just flaming like you're about to.

You're not defending them, but taking blame that should be aimed at them and transferring it to the victim is just as bad.

 

[Phasmal]

Ok, this is for real getting pretty disgusting in here, so I'll probably just post this and leave the thread.

Rapists are not boogeymen, they are people. People who look like everyone else. They do not come with a sign above their head, you could know one and never be the wiser.
So, when these conversations come up, and they do, what are we saying when we direct the conversation towards what the woman did?
And who is hearing it?
Who is hearing that aggressive and predatory behavior towards these women is justifiable by what they wear?
It's time to stop the fucking pointless derailment.
I could stand naked in a room full of people and not get raped, do you know how?
If the room had no fucking rapists in it.
And say you do believe that wearing more clothes leads to less rape.
You're not helping.
You aren't.
Let's say you tell someone not to wear a mini skirt and they don't get raped, but someone else does.
What the fuck have you changed?

Nobody asks to be raped.
There are no ifs and or buts.
Engaging in sexual behavior with someone without their expressed consent is wrong.
I don't care what they wore, or what they said. It does not matter.
If you feel you are incapable of respecting those boundaries, please follow these guidelines.

Spoiler: Just in case

 

[itsthesheppy]

Genius. I love that image.

I don't leave my car unlocked when I drive through the ghetto.

I don't leave the door to my house open while I'm sleeping.

I don't keep my money hanging out of my pockets.

I don't walk through dark alleys in the dead of night.

I avoid doing those things because if I did people would think I'm an easy mark, and I'd rather not have a gun shoved in my face again.

If you fail to take proper precautions against crime, the odds the crime will happen to you increases.

I don't think you don't quite get it. See the above image, it might help you. Also, if there is a statistical link to clothing and rape likelihood, you're welcome to provide it.

 

[Vegosiux]

Right, and I posted in a thread complaining about how R&P is full of vitriol just a little while ago.

Can we agree on one thing? Actually, two things.

One: Rape is not okay, rape is a heinous crime, and one that really needs no apologists.
Two: Since we agreed on "one", can we stop calling each other rape apologists and all, it brings nothing to the discussion.

Now then. The "she had it coming" argument is asinine. Rape, after all, is not about sex, it's about power. Rapists don't rape because they're horny (they still might be horny, but that's not the reason), but because they just have to get their way. And if they can't get what they want, they will take it by force. And they'll feel good along the way because, hey, they're demonstrating how nobody tells them they can't have something.

That is, of course, a rather fucked up line of thought, but whenever a rapist defends themselves with one of these lines that shift the blame onto the victim, chances are they really believe it. That's the scary bit, that they are incapable of considering that whoever their raped was anything more than an object of their desires. If you're just after sex and get told "no", then you go and try somewhere else, you don't stick around and go on a power trip instead.

Plus, as I said earlier, if "But she was dressed like that!" is a legitimate defense, then that means that men are creatures who can't control their own sex drives. And I'm quite offended by that.

So, um if anyone who would use that line as a "rape defense" is reading this...do your gender a favor, guys, and don't paint us all like mindless sex-crazy maniacs just because you don't have the balls to man up to what you've done.

Better yet, don't go about raping people.

 

[Scrubiii]

I feel like people are misunderstanding this argument. It's not a case of people saying the woman "wanted to be raped" or that by wearing provocative clothing, she was so alluring that she caused a random man to rape her. It's an argument of "if there is a rapist, who goes out looking for women to rape, he is more likely to try and rape a woman wearing provocative clothing, so by wearing provocative clothing, you are putting yourself at risk" in the same way someone who lives in a particularly crime-filled neighbourhood is putting themselves at risk of burglary by leaving their house unlocked.

I'm not saying I support this argument, or that I think it is correct, because I don't. There just seem to be all too many people on this thread who misunderstand entirely what the argument is. No-one is suggesting that provocative clothing causes rape, they're suggesting it's a risk factor.

 

[lunavixen]

*sigh* here we go again...


Most people have a very poor understanding of sexual assault and rape, as well as the motivations behind it. Sure, the definition of rape has been legally defined (and socially defined) again and again and again, but motivation for rape rarely gets discussed. Most cases of rape are not about sex, it's about power over the victim (both male and female), also, stranger rape is not that common and only accounts for approximately 1% of all sexual assaults.

According to BoCSaR (Bureau of Crime, Statistics and Research) and the NSW Rape Crisis Centre there are several common misconceptions surrounding sexual assaults and their statistics. I'll put it in dot form for easier reading:

Myth: Rape is an uncontrollable act of lust.
~ No it's not, statistics and research show that most offenders plan their attacks.

Myth: Sexual assault is committed in dark alleys by strangers.
~In 70% of sexual assaults the offender is a family member, friend, work or school colleague. Of the remaining 30% the offender is usually someone the victim meets socially or dates. Most sexual assaults occur in the victim or
perpetrators home, car or workplace. Sexual assault by a stranger accounts for less than 1% of sexual violence and an attack by a stranger in a dark place is even less common.

Also, 1 in 5 women and 1 in 20 men will experience sexual assault at some point in their lives. Sexual assault only has about a 10% to 40% report rate making dealing with it very difficult.

Rape is not about sex in most cases (sex being the motivation for the rape is more typical of opportunistic rapists, who are much less likely to be strangers to the victim) it's about power over the victim. The power over the victim can stem from anger, feelings of inadequecy or sadism among other things and victim blaming is an excuse used (by rapists) to justify their actions, and as much as I hate to say this, in some countries, victim blaming can get the sentence reduced or result in the acquittal of the offender.

 

[verdant monkai]

People say that there's no evidence and that it is completely unrelated to rape. I disagree because that sort of clothing may set off something in men who have little self control. I'll admit it when I see a hot scantily clad girl in the street I think "ohh yeahssss" to my self and then my mind tends to elaborate, but I would never make a grotty comment or try to go over and grab her.

Take someone who is a bit mentally unstable and also very drunk. They may see the same girl I did, seeing her skimpy outfit they will think of the same things I did (her clothes would make the mind recall the things associated with the clothing, namely things of a sexual nature). Having little self control in the first place and being intoxicated, it is not surprising that they may make a remark to try and appear big in front of their friends (seen that happen a lot), or in more extreme ceases actually attempt sexual harrasment or rape.

You cant claim there is no evidence and then MAKE UP your own little fictional circumstance to use as evidence. Do you want me to find the state that show dress has no effect on the likelihood of rape? How about the interviews with actual rapists who aren't even aware of clothing and choose victims just out of opportunity?

What's worrying to me is that this whole conversation focusses only on "stranger inthe bushes" rape, and ignores the vastly higher acquaintance rape or date rape.

You try and belittle my point then come out with "find the state that show dress has no effect on the likelihood of rape?". Do you mean statistic or american state? and do you mean shows? I am a bit confused as to what you are trying to ask me.

Also even if you have seen video's with rapists saying clothes don't matter, human beings are all different and react to things differently right? so it stands to reason different things would make different people want to commit rape. Keep in mind you haven't seen every rapist interview video just a few.

By all means respond and lets have a friendly CONVERSATION, as I'd like to avoid an argument.

 

[Therumancer]

It is also very easy to claim you've been raped, and comes with a lot of positive aspects (sympathy) especially when it's not true. All you need to do is bring the charge, especially seeing as it's a crime you can accuse someone of where there is little expectation of physical evidence, and even if the guy gets off he's going to suffer a major stigma just from having been accused. Everyone shows up to white knight the alleged victim as we see in this case, and nobody wants to believe that someone claiming to have been raped is a liar. A society wide issue.

Not true. Society will often rally behind the rapist and demonise the victim. The 11 year old girl in Texas gangraped by 21 men and boys comes to mind, not only did the defence lawyer try to blame her, he (and members of the community) expressed the view that it was terrible that the rapists would have to live with the consequences.

Shortly before that, the cheerleader in Texas kicked off her cheerleading squad for refusing to cheer for her rapist, was harassed by her community because she brought them into disrepute.

Hell, look at people like Mike Tyson and Roman Polanski. There's no question that they are guilty, but they've got plenty of apologists and they've gone on with their film careers. That's exactly what would not happen if the mere accusation was enough to stigmatise a rapist.

It DID Stigmatize both Tyson and Polanski, both are pretty much viewed as monsters. Polanski was pretty much forced into exile fleeing for his crimes. Tyson not only became a freak show, but arguably lost his entire career because he went soft (unable to train properly) in prison and was never the same fighter again, people kept watching to see if he'd get it back, but he never did.

In other cases though, you have to also consider when the accused rapists are just that, as opposed to convicted ones, and also when they do their time and get out. See if some girl accuses a guy of rape, but he's found innocent, at the end of the day refusing to do her job when he's around still puts her at fault from the perspective of an employer, etc...

At the end of the day the point is your still talking about it, innocent or guilty. If guilty you still attach a stigma after the person has done their time.

 

[BiscuitTrouser]

I don't leave my car unlocked when I drive through the ghetto.

I don't leave the door to my house open while I'm sleeping.

I don't keep my money hanging out of my pockets.

I don't walk through dark alleys in the dead of night.

I avoid doing those things because if I did people would think I'm an easy mark, and I'd rather not have a gun shoved in my face again.

If you fail to take proper precautions against crime, the odds the crime will happen to you increases.

See this doesnt hold up. Some of these things actively STOP people from doing bad things to you. A door is a PHYSICAL barrier keeping a thief away. Clothes are not fucking armor against a rapist. The idea isnt "If you wear clothes rapists are terrified of the unbreakable fortress that is: some jeans" its "If you wear clothes the rapist might try and pick an easier target, hopefully raping someone else instead of you" which is utter bullshit because no rape has been prevented, just shifted to another victim.

Your door stops the thief WITHOUT the need for someone else to take the fall for you. So do the locks on your car. They are physical barriers. Clothes are not. The whole idea is that its a distraction technique to try and draw attention to someone else so they can take the raping. Locks and doors do not function in the same way.

 

[OutsiderEX]

I don't leave my car unlocked when I drive through the ghetto.

I don't leave the door to my house open while I'm sleeping.

I don't keep my money hanging out of my pockets.

I don't walk through dark alleys in the dead of night.

I avoid doing those things because if I did people would think I'm an easy mark, and I'd rather not have a gun shoved in my face again.

If you fail to take proper precautions against crime, the odds the crime will happen to you increases.

See this doesnt hold up. Some of these things actively STOP people from doing bad things to you. A door is a PHYSICAL barrier keeping a thief away. Clothes are not fucking armor against a rapist. The idea isnt "If you wear clothes rapists are terrified of the unbreakable fortress that is: some jeans" its "If you wear clothes the rapist might try and pick an easier target, hopefully raping someone else instead of you" which is utter bullshit because no rape has been prevented, just shifted to another victim.

Your door stops the thief WITHOUT the need for someone else to take the fall for you. So do the locks on your car. They are physical barriers. Clothes are not. The whole idea is that its a distraction technique to try and draw attention to someone else so they can take the raping. Locks and doors do not function in the same way.

If it can stop just ONE rape, we should legislate to ban all forms of open clothing.

Also chastity belts for everyone.

 

[Smeatza]

It's strange how we encourage risk management in all aspects of life, until it comes to rape.
Then suddenly risk management doesn't matter/apply.

'Tis confusing.

 

[DkLnBr]

"I stole from them because they were rich! with all that stuff they just had it coming!"
"I murdered him because he looked to lively, I couldn't help myself! if he just looked more lethargic then it wouldn't have happened"
Ya, that excuse still sounds stupid.... the power of rationalization

 

[Terminal Blue]

This is probably one of the most depressing reoccurring topics I see on the Escapist, it comes up every few months and thus every few months I have to watch a significant proportion of the male population, who are probably otherwise perfectly nice guys, making themselves look like complete tools.

So with that in mind, I proudly present a guide to not looking like a tool on the internet.

Rape is not a crime of passion, stop treating it as such

Rape does not occur because some poor innocent dude is walking down the street, sees an attractive woman and is suddenly consumed with uncontrollable lust at the scandalous and terrible sight of her bewbs.

Rapists are not loners who can't get laid, they are as likely as any other segment of the male population to be in a relationship. In fact, their victims are often women they are in a relationship with. Men who rape, even the majority who do not consider themselves to have committed a crime, generally do so to feel powerful, in control or occasionally out of anger. It is almost never about satisfying an uncontrollable sexual urge.

Amazingly, male sexual urges are completely controllable and the vast majority of us control them perfectly well.

Stop fantasizing about strange men in dark alleys

Assault stranger rape is a comparatively rare phenomenon. There are not this strange class of sick men hanging out on street corners waiting to jump on anyone who comes by in a low cut top.

Even most stranger rapists behave in ways they can rationalize as "acceptable", contacting their victim normally and then attempting to coerce them into sex. This is premeditated behavior, it is not something men are driven to do, and neither is it something which only happens to attractive people. Stranger rapists will often carefully select victims who they believe they can successfully coerce or overpower, they are not suddenly driven into a berserk rape-frenzy at the sight of boobs.

As for acquaintance rape, an acquaintance rapist has already seen his victim in several different outfits. He may well have seem them naked and indeed had sex with them before.

Don't compare personal crimes with theft

Noone cares if you lock your car when parking it for fear it might get stolen.
Noone cares if you lock your house when going out for fear you might be burgled.
Noone cares if you don't flash your wallet or phone in public for fear someone might grab it.

These are all crimes in which a person steals an object. Amazingly, women are not objects, they are actually human beings very much like yourself. They are not at risk of being "stolen", however attractive the metaphor may be to you. Instead, they are at risk of assault. Assault is an attack on another human being, it is a different crime to theft. It has very different motivations and different prevention strategies (most of which the average woman is far, far more practiced in than the average man).

Just stop this whole line of thought

I don't particularly care what bullshit justification or weird myths you want to come up with to try and disguise the fact, if someone is fucked against their will by someone who knows (or even should know) they did not consent, there is one person responsible. You do not have the right to request that 50% of the population live in fear because bros just be needin' to get laid, yo!

Now grow up, don't rape people and learn to have a healthy and satisfying sex life without being a manipulative, controlling or violent piece of shit. If you don't think you're capable of doing that then just avoid having sex, because you're clearly not ready for it yet.

 

[omega 616]

My sister has been a victim of rape. Long story short : he got her drunk, brought her to his place and touched her in places and ways that made her feel uncomfortable. And that's nooo good.

Sister went to the police. Long story short : trial- guy is convicted.

Except that's not what realy happened.

4 years later my sister started feeling guilt over "a little lie". Apparently, she dressed provocatively because she wanted to get laid, she drank with the guy and told him she just had to get fucked by him. They went tohis place and had a good time. A few weeks later he was accused of rape, tried, and convicted. Guy losteverything and probably won't be able to work as a teacher ever again although his name is technically cleared.

What happened to my sister? Nothing, and this disgusts me to no end. My family decided to forgive and forget, but I can't. I could have been that guy.

Nice anecdote, bro. So how exactly is that at all relevant to a discussion about the "provocative clothing" rape defence? Do you think that if your sister had been raped whilst wearing "provocative" clothing, she would have deserved it and the guy would have been blameless? Because that's the only possible connection that I'm seeing.

False accusations for rape are at the same level as false accusations for any other crime. Sometimes people falsely report crimes. It happens. Trying to connect that with the provocative clothing argument just makes you one of the "It's not really rape if..." crowd.

People don't say it as a defence, they say it as a contributing factor for the rape occurring.

Despite there being precisely zero evidence to back this up.

I take this view point only cos I belive its a contributing factor to rape. It's still the guys fault, undoubtedly! I just think women should be more cautious and try not to bring so much attention to themselves.

"Make sure he rapes the other girl!"

I'm 23 and for the first time I went out on a Saturday night, never drank alcohol though. I saw girls and women dressed up like cheap hookers, so drunk they couldn't walk straight, grinding there ass into guys crotches but refusing to kiss them

Those bitches.

and all I could think is "you're sexually teasing drunk men (so there not in there right mind), then turning them down. You're dressed provocatively and are in a vulnerable state" . These girls are so easy to rape its scary, I actually was nervous for the girls and didn't even know them.

Oh look, it's our old friend Mr Some Girls Rape Easy [http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/state-legislator-criticized-for-comments-on-rape-hj76f4k-173587961.html].

The way I see it is if you leave your house empty and the door wide open, don't be surprised when you get robbed,

Women are not houses. Look, I know this is hard to get your head around, but women aren't objects. Period.

to put it another way, don't run red lights and expect not to get in a car crash.

Running red lights is illegal. Wearing skirts that stop above the knee is not illegal.

don't be a dick tease

Spoiler

dress sexy but not like hooker (slutty sexy) but more like Helen Mirron (classy sexy).

Thanks for dictating the precise subset of "sexy" that women are allowed to dress as! Oh and please call us sluts and hookers one more time, it gets more charming every time you do it.

Like I said it's still down to the guy but depending on the situation, 0.5% of the responsibility could be pointed at the woman. That's just my opinion though.

Yup. Opinion. Not backed up by any kind of evidence whatsoever.

We're all responsible for our actions, so if you act/dress a certain way and negative things come from that you have to take a little responsibility. If I act like a twat and insult people on the street, then I will get beat up... Should I be assaulted for doing that? No, it's illegal for a reason same thing applies.

I would love to pick apart your witty one liners and that jpg that made me feel oh so humiliated, unfortunately I am doing this on my phone and it doesn't like this site.

I also don't appreciate words being put into my mouth, I didn't say women are objects... It's an analogy, there's a million in could use. I don't think women who do get raped deserved to be raped no matter how they act or dress, I just think there are ways to reduce the risk of it happening to you.

Opinion doesn't always need evidence to back it up, gun control, health service and gay marriage are all things that have no evidence to support them and are just opinion. Sure, collect as many numbers and polls as you like but the other side will do the same.

 

[Ken Sapp]

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

It would be great if all humans would learn that rape is wrong. By explicitly stating men you are falling prey to, or at least implying, the stereotype of it always being men forcing themselves on women. Having known several rape victims I know it is not a matter to be trivialized in any way and by focusing only on women who are raped we do ourselves and the ignored victims a great disservice.

On the original topic question: Wearing provocative clothing is akin to leaving your windows down and doors unlocked in a bad neighborhood. It is more likely to draw crimes of opportunity, but it does not excuse the criminal in any way or measure from their crime. Could the victim have taken better preventive measures? Sure, but the fault still lies entirely on the criminal. And I agree, the victim should not have to worry about being assaulted when planning their wardrobe.

 

[CaptainKarma]

People say that there's no evidence and that it is completely unrelated to rape. I disagree because that sort of clothing may set off something in men who have little self control. I'll admit it when I see a hot scantily clad girl in the street I think "ohh yeahssss" to my self and then my mind tends to elaborate, but I would never make a grotty comment or try to go over and grab her.

Take someone who is a bit mentally unstable and also very drunk. They may see the same girl I did, seeing her skimpy outfit they will think of the same things I did (her clothes would make the mind recall the things associated with the clothing, namely things of a sexual nature). Having little self control in the first place and being intoxicated, it is not surprising that they may make a remark to try and appear big in front of their friends (seen that happen a lot), or in more extreme ceases actually attempt sexual harrasment or rape.

You cant claim there is no evidence and then MAKE UP your own little fictional circumstance to use as evidence. Do you want me to find the state that show dress has no effect on the likelihood of rape? How about the interviews with actual rapists who aren't even aware of clothing and choose victims just out of opportunity?

What's worrying to me is that this whole conversation focusses only on "stranger inthe bushes" rape, and ignores the vastly higher acquaintance rape or date rape.

You try and belittle my point then come out with "find the state that show dress has no effect on the likelihood of rape?". Do you mean statistic or american state? and do you mean shows? I am a bit confused as to what you are trying to ask me.

Also even if you have seen video's with rapists saying clothes don't matter, human beings are all different and react to things differently right? so it stands to reason different things would make different people want to commit rape. Keep in mind you haven't seen every rapist interview video just a few.

By all means respond and lets have a friendly CONVERSATION, as I'd like to avoid an argument.

I meant stats (was on a tablet, can't handle predictive). I can't find the source I was thinking of, it's understandably hard to google. If you can find a book called The Rapist File I think it's in there.

And the whole "different rapists may act differently" applies to your hypothetical too. I admit my argument isn't going to be very compelling as I can't find the data to back me up, but it's still better than a scenario that you concocted out of thin air.

It's strange how we encourage risk management in all aspects of life, until it comes to rape.
Then suddenly risk management doesn't matter/apply.

'Tis confusing.

It's not a matter of risk management. If it could be proved conclusively that wearing a miniskirt gave you a 50% higher chance of being raped then, yes, I would advise against miniskirts. But it hasn't. And as has been pointed out, "stranger in the bushes" rape is a vanishingly small proportion of rapes, so they whole argument about not making yourself a target is a fucking waste of time and distracts from the actual issues.

Worse than that, attempts at victim blaming (and most advcie about how to dress IS victim blaming) is demonstrable harmful to both the victim and the legal process. Rape victims sexual habits, sexual fantasies, dress, flirtatiousness and behaviour have all been used in court as evidence that it "wasn't really rape". Numerous victims have comitted suicide after having their sexual history dragged out in court, with the implication that they were asking for it. It is NOT and never has been just risk management.

 

[Baneat]

It's just a very poor application of logic. It doesn't just apply to rape, people think if someone's being flamboyant then they're "asking" to get attacked and if they do then it's their fault. Obviously that's bonkers, you can't be at fault for being a victim of a crime.

 

[Calibanbutcher]

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

It would be great if all humans would learn that rape is wrong. By explicitly stating men you are falling prey to, or at least implying, the stereotype of it always being men forcing themselves on women. Having known several rape victims I know it is not a matter to be trivialized in any way and by focusing only on women who are raped we do ourselves and the ignored victims a great disservice.

On the original topic question: Wearing provocative clothing is akin to leaving your windows down and doors unlocked in a bad neighborhood. It is more likely to draw crimes of opportunity, but it does not excuse the criminal in any way or measure from their crime. Could the victim have taken better preventive measures? Sure, but the fault still lies entirely on the criminal. And I agree, the victim should not have to worry about being assaulted when planning their wardrobe.

Oh gee wiz, let me just help you out there:

WITH A QUOTE FROM THE POST YOU DELIBERATELY SNIPPED!

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

There we go, now isn't that EXACTLY WHAT YOU COMPLAINED ABOUT WAS MISSING FROM MY POST?