This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
@ Feminism
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
"Dressing inappropriately" is, pardon my French, bull!@#$ really - it just reeks of #$%^-shaming.Just wait until you have a teenage daughter. Would you let her wear some trampy clothes and go to a drinking party with a bunch of irresponsible, unsupervised young men? Or do you think that would be something you wouldn't allow, and if not, why?Also, why should it be the responsibility of the victim to actively avoid a situation as horrifying as something like rape, and not the responsibility of perpetrators to, you know,
not perpetrate at all
.
It is the responsibility of people not to rape each other. Unfortunately, this is reality. People DO get raped. So, put some clothes on, and don't pass out drunk at a party full of irresponsible people.
This is like saying it is people's responsibility to NOT steal each others cars. But, ya know what, I'm still going to teach my kids to lock the car when in the seedy part of town. I'm not going to leave my car unlocked with the keys in the ignition, and a sign on the side that says "IT WOULD BE EASY AND FUN TO STEAL MY CAR", and then afterward whine about how irresponsible it was to steal my car, and how all the responsibility rests with the thief. Even though it is true that the burden of responsibility for the theft rests with the thief, I'm still going to take precautions to not put my car in a compromising situation.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
It think that there is a difference between saying that someone has a moral responsibility to do something, and so shares the blame if they are attacked, and saying that there are practical precautions one can take to protect yourself against someone else.
If I get hit by a drunk driver who runs a red light, and I die, it is 100% his fault that he chose to do something so reckless and disregard other people. However, if someone says that if I had been wearing a seatbelt I might have survived it, and so other people should wear seatbelts in the future to help the survive other people's negligence, I don't think that's offensive to the person who died, or diminishes the culpability of the drunk driver. I think it's an attempt to keep people safe in the future.
I think that the "What are you wearing," argument is bogus- being attractive, or dressing provocatively, has nothing to do with why a victim was raped beyond what having money has to do with being robbed. They targeted you because you had what they wanted, and it doesn't make sense to say "well if you didn't have what they wanted to take, they wouldn't have tried to take anything from you." People shouldn't have to give things up to avoid having them taken, and women shouldn't have to stop attracting the attention they want from potential partners just because other people will be attracted as well. And honestly, rape has more to do with control and anger than attraction in most cases anyway. So I agree that telling someone to dress down to avoid rape is garbage.
However, it is very sound advice to not drink enough to lose consciousness in general, and especially not in public. If you are unconscious on table, people could take your phone, your purse or your shoes, and you won't notice. You wouldn't be able to leave a building if it catches fire, or get to an archway if there is an earthquake. You might throw up in your own mouth and kill yourself. People might be able to sneak you out and do something horrible to you without you being able to call for help. None of these vulnerabilities mean that you asked for anything to happen, that you deserved it, or you share blame with someone who actively caused the event in which you were hurt (an arsonist, or a thief, for example). But telling people that they shouldn't drink so much that they can't take any precautions against anything happening to them, either because of an accident, a natural disaster, or a horrible person is good advice, and common sense.
Rape is an emotionally charged subject, as it should be, and there is nothing that a woman does that makes her deserve to get raped. But I don't think that telling young girls that to take precautions against being victimized- especially something basic like not drinking yourself into a coma in a public place- is something demeaning or means they are taking responsibility for a rape is at all fair, or a good idea. Locking my car makes it less likely that something will get stolen out of it. Locking my house does the same thing. Keeping an eye on my purse at the supermarket makes it less likely that it will get taken. And not losing consciousness in public allows me to respond to any emergencies or problems. I don't see why telling someone that is offensive. Even if you took rape out of the equation, it is a bad idea to drink yourself into unconsciousness because at a moment's notice there are a thousand bad things that could happen that you might not be able to react to if you are dead to the world.
There is a difference between saying it's your fault someone did something bad to you, and saying that there are a lot of bad people in the world and so it's smart to keep alert about yourself and your possessions so you can have as much defense against them as possible.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##ElhonnaDS##DELIM##
Post by
Skreeran
To be frank, I'd tentatively agree with MyTie here. I certainly don't think any person is ever at fault for being raped. But it must be said that we don't live in a perfect world, and it is wiser to avoid putting yourself into a situation where it is more likely. When discussing it, it is a very difficult opinion to hold, because it is so easy to come across as accusing the victim, and I would never bring it up
to
a victim.
But it's hard to deny that maybe people shouldn't take dark alleys when they're walking home at night. Or the analogous equivalent.
I just want to say again that I am by no means defending the rapists, or accusing the victim like that %^&*!@# in Elura's link. Like I said, if he had gotten drunk and raped, I think he'd have a different opinion. But from a precautionary perspective, it's just wise to do what you can to reduce the likelihood.
Edit: Elhonna basically said what I meant, and in better terms.
I think that the "What are you wearing," argument is bogus- being attractive, or dressing provocatively, has nothing to do with why a victim was raped beyond what having money has to do with being robbed. They targeted you because you had what they wanted, and it doesn't make sense to say "well if you didn't have what they wanted to take, they wouldn't have tried to take anything from you." People shouldn't have to give things up to avoid having them taken, and women shouldn't have to stop attracting the attention they want from potential partners just because other people will be attracted as well. And honestly, rape has more to do with control and anger than attraction in most cases anyway. So I agree that telling someone to dress down to avoid rape is garbage.I agree with this 100%. Rape has nothing to do with attraction. It has almost nothing to do with sex. There are a number of reasons why people rape, depending on the individual, but they are related to power or anger, not sexual desire.
Post by
Gone
"Dressing inappropriately" is, pardon my French, bull!@#$ really - it just reeks of #$%^-shaming.Just wait until you have a teenage daughter. Would you let her wear some trampy clothes and go to a drinking party with a bunch of irresponsible, unsupervised young men? Or do you think that would be something you wouldn't allow, and if not, why?
Are you the woman in questions parent? The fact that you're bringing up your daughter is a clear bias. Everybody wants their daughter to stay a little girl forever, but once a woman reaches the legal age, she has the right to dress however the Hell she wants, and this in know way is an invitation to be attacked.
I reiterate, the ownness of the attack is 100% on the attacker. If a woman chooses to wear a revealing outfit that's her right, and exersizing this right does not put any responsibility of the incident on her.
Post by
MyTie
Are you the woman in questions parent? The fact that you're bringing up your daughter is a clear bias. Everybody wants their daughter to stay a little girl forever, but once a woman reaches the legal age, she has the right to dress however the Hell she wants, and this in know way is an invitation to be attacked.
I reiterate, the ownness of the attack is 100% on the attacker. If a woman chooses to wear a revealing outfit that's her right, and exersizing this right does not put any responsibility of the incident on her.
I have no way of being clearer than I was before, or rewording my point any better than I've said it. I think that I agree with what you are saying, but you are wording it in a different way.
I think that this may actually belong in a different discussion, not about rape. I think this may be settled in a discussion that is JUST about promiscuous dress. I think that women should be allowed to dress however they want, even if that means they want to walk around naked. There shouldn't be a law against it, and no one should treat them differently for it. However, I think that dressing so people will notice your "goods" is immoral and wrong.
Post by
Gone
I think that dressing so people will notice your "goods" is immoral and wrong.
That's the problem, you're being judgmental. People need to leave their personal judgments out of it when looking at a case like this.
Post by
MyTie
I think that dressing so people will notice your "goods" is immoral and wrong.
That's the problem, you're being judgmental. People need to leave their personal judgments out of it when looking at a case like this.
Why?
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I think that dressing so people will notice your "goods" is immoral and wrong.
That's the problem, you're being judgmental. People need to leave their personal judgments out of it when looking at a case like this.
Why?
Timing. If you agree that dressing provocatively isn't involved with the rape case, but is a separate moral issue, then discussing it at the same time we're discussing her rape, is like having a conversation about a child who just got molested, and you bring up, "You know, he always was a disrespectful little punk." You may not be saying that he deserved to be molested because of it, or that it related to the case we're discussing at all, and it's just another thing you believe about that person we're discussing. But to bring it into the discussion of something bad that happened to him causes confusion about why you'd mention it here, seems to associate it with the topic of discussion even if you didn't mean to, and appears to be trying to devalue the importance of the victim of a crime or implying some correlation or causation.(##RESPBREAK##)8##DELIM##ElhonnaDS##DELIM##
Post by
432158
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
MyTie
Timing. If you agree that dressing provocatively isn't involved with the rape case, but is a separate moral issue, then discussing it at the same time we're discussing her rape, is like having a conversation about a child who just got molested, and you bring up, "You know, he always was a disrespectful little punk." You may not be saying that he deserved to be molested because of it, or that it related to the case we're discussing at all, and it's just another thing you believe about that person we're discussing. But to bring it into the discussion of something bad that happened to him causes confusion about why you'd mention it here, seems to associate it with the topic of discussion even if you didn't mean to, and appears to be trying to devalue the importance of the victim of a crime or implying some correlation or causation.
But they aren't mutually exclusive. You shouldn't dress provocatively in a situation in which you don't want to have sex. If you do, that's wrong. I'm making that judgement. Nothing about that excuses rape. On the other hand, the fact that some people are rapists doesn't excuse dressing like a %^&* either. I don't really care if bringing it up during a discussion about rape makes people uncomfortable. It's still the truth. I already made clear that there is no shift in blame, and I feel like the people who are trying to indicate that I'm shifting blame are setting up a straw man.Why?
Because justice exists to right wrongs. Going back to the car analogy, if your car gets stolen, you deserve to get your car back and the thief deserves to be punished (debatable but let's assume it is so). The state your car was in (unlocked, key in the ignition, etc.) does not matter because the thief still stole the car. The amount of effort the thief put into perpetrating the crime should not decide how much he (or you) is to blame, in the end, he stole your car.
I don't understand how this answers my question. Someone told me that I'm not allowed to be judgmental about what women wear. Why not? Women should dress in a manner that is respectful of themselves and the people around them.
Post by
Patty
I don't understand how this answers my question. Someone told me that I'm not allowed to be judgmental about what women wear. Why not? Women should dress in a manner that is respectful of themselves and the people around them.
And what if what they find most respectful of themselves, or that they feel good in, is a low-cut dress? I agree that there is a degree of public decency that should be acknowledged, and I think part of that does depend on an individual level, but that should go for both genders and it feels like women, again, bear the brunt of that judgement. Your posts reek of it, really. On top of that, %^&*-shaming is
just another way of policing gender roles
.
Circumventing the filter to make sure the link works.
Post by
MyTie
I don't understand how this answers my question. Someone told me that I'm not allowed to be judgmental about what women wear. Why not? Women should dress in a manner that is respectful of themselves and the people around them.
And what if what they find most respectful of themselves, or that they feel good in, is a low-cut dress? I agree that there is a degree of public decency that should be acknowledged, and I think part of that does depend on an individual level, but that should go for both genders and it feels like women, again, bear the brunt of that judgement. Your posts reek of it, really. On top of that, %^&*-shaming is
just another way of policing gender roles
.
Circumventing the filter to make sure the link works.
I can understand where we may not agree on where that line sits, but don't try to bully me around with that misogynist label to get me to be more tolerant of something I think is wrong. That simply doesn't work on me. Perhaps you can find someone with a weaker will to push around.
Dude, for the most part I agree with you, that the line is arbitrary and it should apply to both. But, I decline to accept that women bear the "brunt" of the standard unfairly. I understand that society places a lot of importance on the appearance of women. That's a shame. But really, my post "reeks" of pointing out the problem with women dressing inappropriately, because, surprise surprise, women have a larger problem with this than men do. Go out and count the number of women you see who are crossing the line of "appropriate", and count how many men do the same. I'm not saying men don't ever cross it, or that men shouldn't have standards, but women have a big problem with hanging their cleavage out for the world to see, and wearing tight clothes, etc etc etc. You aren't going to shame me into being "fair" on an issue that women have a larger problem with just because of "oh victims" and "oh equality". No no. The truth is there is a problem with the way women dress in society.
Edit: your link doesn't work
Post by
Skreeran
Why? What's wrong with women showing their cleavage or wearing short skirts?
I would understand if you were arguing that fashion trends tend to objectify women and force them to demean themselves to stay popular. The problem there is women being forced to choose between being popular and showing off their body in a way they
don't want to.
But I just don't agree that there's something morally wrong about a woman dressing the way she likes. If showing cleavage makes a woman more confident, I don't see anything wrong with that. It's when women have to engage in an arms race to be more risque than their peers that I don't like it. I think a woman--or a man!--should dress however makes them feel best, independent of what other people say.
Post by
MyTie
It's prideful, encourages lust, and is often done to manipulate those around them.I think a woman--or a man!--should dress however makes them feel best, independent of what other people say.
That's very trendy.
Post by
Skreeran
Trendy? I'm not trying to be trendy. I believe in minding my own business and not judging others unless they are hurting someone.
Post by
MyTie
Trendy? I'm not trying to be trendy. I believe in minding my own business and not judging others unless they are hurting someone.
Let's be clear here. It's not my business to go out and tell someone that they are wrong. I wouldn't be in favor of a law that agreed with me on decency. I'm not setting up a lifeguard tower in the center of town so I can loudspeaker my condemnation onto people. I'm here to say that a certain action and style of dress is inappropriate. That is what my opinion is. Therefore, I'm not out hurting anyone with my ostensibly harmful opinion that they should dress modestly. That's just what my opinion is, and that's what we are here to discuss.
This whole "not judging" crap only goes one way. The only opinions that are tolerated by this judgmental "not judging" mentality are the ones that tolerate what is decided
must
be tolerated. Any judgement that doesn't tolerate, will be judged intolerable. The problem is that people that subscribe to that messy garbage are completely blind to their own hypocrisy.
Post by
Skreeran
This whole "not judging" crap only goes one way.
"not judging" crap
"Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven."
"Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you."
Post by
MyTie
I'm so glad you brought that up. The single Bible verse taken out of context more than any other. Go ahead and read more of Ch 7 of Matt. You'll see that you need to make sure you live up to the same measure, and that you remove the plank from your eye, then the speck from your brothers. It doesn't say remove the plank and then leave the speck in your brothers. It is a word of caution against hypocritical judging, not against judging entirely. You need to make sure you live up to the measure you apply to other people, use Christ's measure, not your own, and finally, don't throw your pearls to swine. Don't be so non-judgmental that you let people walk on what is holy.
So go ahead and read that Bible verse, but this time put it in context.
I checked in the mirror. I'm dressed appropriately, and modestly. Therefore, I'm going to go ahead and use that modest dress judgment and tell people to cover up, since it would not be hypocritical of me.
Post by
Skreeran
I'm so glad you brought that up. The single Bible verse taken out of context more than any other. Go ahead and read more of Ch 7 of Matt. You'll see that you need to make sure you live up to the same measure, and that you remove the plank from your eye, then the speck from your brothers. It doesn't say remove the plank and then leave the speck in your brothers. It is a word of caution against hypocritical judging, not against judging entirely. You need to make sure you live up to the measure you apply to other people, use Christ's measure, not your own, and finally, don't throw your pearls to swine. Don't be so non-judgmental that you let people walk on what is holy.
So go ahead and read that Bible verse, but this time put it in context.
I checked in the mirror. I'm dressed appropriately, and modestly. Therefore, I'm going to go ahead and use that modest dress judgment and tell people to cover up, since it would not be hypocritical of me.Here MyTie explains that he is completely sinless, and thus in a position to pass judgment on others.
Post by
Patty
I don't understand how this answers my question. Someone told me that I'm not allowed to be judgmental about what women wear. Why not? Women should dress in a manner that is respectful of themselves and the people around them.
And what if what they find most respectful of themselves, or that they feel good in, is a low-cut dress? I agree that there is a degree of public decency that should be acknowledged, and I think part of that does depend on an individual level, but that should go for both genders and it feels like women, again, bear the brunt of that judgement. Your posts reek of it, really. On top of that, %^&*-shaming is
just another way of policing gender roles
.
Circumventing the filter to make sure the link works.
I can understand where we may not agree on where that line sits, but don't try to bully me around with that misogynist label to get me to be more tolerant of something I think is wrong. That simply doesn't work on me. Perhaps you can find someone with a weaker will to push around.
Dude, for the most part I agree with you, that the line is arbitrary and it should apply to both. But, I decline to accept that women bear the "brunt" of the standard unfairly. I understand that society places a lot of importance on the appearance of women. That's a shame. But really, my post "reeks" of pointing out the problem with women dressing inappropriately, because, surprise surprise, women have a larger problem with this than men do. Go out and count the number of women you see who are crossing the line of "appropriate", and count how many men do the same. I'm not saying men don't ever cross it, or that men shouldn't have standards, but women have a big problem with hanging their cleavage out for the world to see, and wearing tight clothes, etc etc etc. You aren't going to shame me into being "fair" on an issue that women have a larger problem with just because of "oh victims" and "oh equality". No no. The truth is there is a problem with the way women dress in society.
Edit: your link doesn't work
First censorship: f*g, second one: sl*t.
And about your point of less men crossing the inappropriate line - that's because the line is drawn with men getting the better deal, again. Think about the sexualisation of breasts vs. the male chest, for example. This wasn't always the case.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.