or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Slutwalks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Slutwalks

post #1 of 44
Thread Starter 
CTV

Quote:
Now a global phenomenon, Slutwalk started in Toronto with the comments of one police officer who, in January, told a group of university students that they should stop dressing like sluts in order to avoid being raped.

They reacted against the outlook that fuelled his remarks, as did Slutwalk Vancouver organizer Katie Raso.

"Everyone I know has been called a slut and yet we're all very different women and we all dress very differently. Being labeled as a slut is a way of having your value taken away," she told ctvbc.ca on Friday.

The walk aims to raise awareness about the dangers of looking at the victim of sexual assault and blaming them for the crime because of the way they dressed or acted. She said blaming victims could deter future victims from reporting sexual crimes.

I've always been puzzled by the reasoning of events and their organizers like the one listed above. Slutwalk protesters are upset because of a word. They are also upset because they were told to be proactive and defensive in their posture and attitudes towards those who would or could harm them.

To me nothing screams deluded, utopian and entitled than the belief that the world and certain parties in it are beyond measures we all have to take.

Everyone can be called a name and negative words and the associations of them can't be taken away by "reclaiming" them. The associations and thoughts will simply move on to different words.

If I created an assholewalk and declared I was going to act like more of an asshole until I've reclaimed the negativity away from the word asshole and disempowered all the parties using the word, it would be seen as ridiculous. Especially when I'd have to start jerkwalks and dickwadwalks in the following months.

Was the use of the word "slut" a poor one by the officer? Perhaps, I guess the officer could have taken the concept and muddled it as so many do by declaring women might be safer in certain circumstances if they don't dress in a provocative or attention grabbing manner, but I'm pretty sure the officer didn't have a speech writer or teleprompter to help out.

I also find it strange to believe that someone doesn't report a crime because someone would use a word about them. The deeper problem is the nature of the crime. Rape involves the concept of consent and if women feel attacked in defense of a crime it is because radical feminism has so muddled the concept of consent and only views consent as a one way street, which by the way these protests also reinforce. When only one party can grant consent, that party is always going to feel attacked in the defense of that crime because to disprove the crime is to call the person alleging it a liar. To solve this you have to have consent be both ways and also have actions and other mitigating factors be involved.

If you are male, laying on your back, and a female partner straddles, you kisses you, grabs your penis and guides it into her vagina, has she become a rapist? She didn't verbally ask for permission before doing this. Did you become a rapist because even though she initiated the action and engaged in the actual manipulation of physical body parts, you didn't ask her before she did it. If she feels remorse and accuses you a day later of rape, can she invalidate your entire defense declaring you are merely trying to label her a slut.

If a cop warned that I ought not walk through a park late at night, especially with flashy jewelry, watches or cellphone, is he merely blaming the victim and being an insensitive clod? Will I feel like I ought not report the crime due to being warned to being defensive or if someone called me a negative name for not being defensive?

Screaming that you are above reality and demanding everyone protect you from reality is a type of paternalism. Paternalism in the name of equality is much of what feminism and many other grievance groups have been practicing for decades. It becomes less about attitudes and beliefs and becomes about money and programs which over time have become unaffordable. There is also never any way to declare success and have them end. They become a permanent entitlement.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #2 of 44
Pictures or it didn't happen.
post #3 of 44
Is it a surprise to anyone that Trumpet is on the side of "the rape victims were asking for it?"

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #4 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Is it a surprise to anyone that Trumpet is on the side of "the rape victims were asking for it?"

Strawman. No one took that position. No surprise that is the premise of the entire event, however. If the facts don't fit, just make up the facts.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #5 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tulkas View Post

Strawman. No one took that position. No surprise that is the premise of the entire event, however. If the facts don't fit, just make up the facts.

Trumpt clearly missed the point of the protests. People who think that a woman who dresses in a micro-miniskirt, tube top and 5" heels have even 0.01% of the blame for a rape when they say "No!" clearly, should join the Taliban, because that's exactly who thinks the same way.
post #6 of 44
Damn straight, tonton.

Those women have nothing to complain about if they are being *looked* at. But that's as far as it goes. Someone crosses that boundary and actually rapes the girl and that is 100% on the rapist.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #7 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Trumpt clearly missed the point of the protests. People who think that a woman who dresses in a micro-miniskirt, tube top and 5" heels have even 0.01% of the blame for a rape when they say "No!" clearly, should join the Taliban, because that's exactly who thinks the same way.

As Tulkas notes, it isn't about assigning blame. That is a total strawman. The real point is that the women are protesting having to think about being defensive or having to take actions to protect themselves from a crime.

No one else is above such measures. If an officer said to you that seriously if you don't want to be mugged, don't walk through a city park late at night wearing a gold watch, talking on a late model smartphone about how much you just withdrew from the local ATM. You can piss and moan about how unfair it is that you have to think about how criminals might react to you and how you have to be defensive in your own actions rather than free to do whatever you want. Since the world has never been devoid of crime or criminals, it's better to think about them and how not to be victimized rather than screaming that we should never be victimized no matter what actions we undertake. Being protective of your own person isn't assigning blame to someone nor is it judging them. It's called being smart and safe no matter if you are a man or woman.

These women aren't protesting being judged sexually because no one is doing that. They are protesting having to think about the outside world and protecting themselves from it. Does it suck that they have to ponder if their dress might make them more likely to be a victim of certain crimes? Sure it does. Does it suck that I have to lock my car, my house, punch in a pin code for my ATM card, carry my money in my front pocket, not go to certain ATM machines during certain hours, etc.

A decent percentage of our energy and actions are spent mitigating the actions of stupid or bad people. Wouldn't it be great if we didn't have to think about them? Yes. Is that a realistic expectation? No.

I'm organizing my "God does it suck that I have to ponder the rest of the world, especially the bad/stupid people" march next month.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Damn straight, tonton.

Those women have nothing to complain about if they are being *looked* at. But that's as far as it goes. Someone crosses that boundary and actually rapes the girl and that is 100% on the rapist.

Get up to date on your sexual harassment training you neanderthal. Ogling or staring at women, no matter their clothing is also considered a form of sexual harassment. Dig into this though and it is always a losing matter. Harassment is defined as unwanted. You never know if it is unwanted until you engage in it at which time you automatically lose.

I've got my claim in with the management. I think you lingered a little to long with your eyes on my last couple posts BR.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #8 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

No one else is above such measures. If an officer said to you that seriously if you don't want to be mugged, don't walk through a city park late at night wearing a gold watch, talking on a late model smartphone about how much you just withdrew from the local ATM. You can piss and moan about how unfair it is that you have to think about how criminals might react to you and how you have to be defensive in your own actions rather than free to do whatever you want. Since the world has never been devoid of crime or criminals, it's better to think about them and how not to be victimized rather than screaming that we should never be victimized no matter what actions we undertake. Being protective of your own person isn't assigning blame to someone nor is it judging them. It's called being smart and safe no matter if you are a man or woman.

Yes, but if you go to court because you've been mugged, there's no negative stigma attached to the label of being flashy. So you're not reluctant to go to court for fear of being labeled flashy. This is the point.
post #9 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yes, but if you go to court because you've been mugged, there's no negative stigma attached to the label of being flashy. So you're not reluctant to go to court for fear of being labeled flashy. This is the point.

There would be if the sole determination for the crime of mugging was the word of the person granting consent.

Consent isn't physical evidence. When someone mugs a person, and is caught, they can find the phone, money, gold watch, etc.

When someone declares they've been raped, the only thing that makes it rape is consent. Thus that is what has to be debated in court. I've already noted this and addressed it.

Any time the crime is about a person's state of mind, the only defense it to attack the state of mind. How does one defend themselves without doing that? If you can answer that question you'll have a point from which we can move forward.

For example as I mentioned sexual harassment can be ogling or staring. You have a co-worker declare you stared too long at her or that your gaze reflected ogling from her perspective. Please defend this without in any form or fashion questioning her judgment or state of mind.

You arrive home tonight and find the police at your home. Your wife has suddenly accused you of marital rape. How do you defend yourself while in no form impugning her state of mind or judgement?

In short, if the crime occurs in someone's mind, that is where you must go to defend yourself. For rape or sexual harassment, the crime isn't sex or attention, it is consent or unwanted attention. That is determined by the state of mind. There is no way to defend but to debate that state of mind.

Stare at your alarm clock for a minute. No crime. Have a woman declare you stared at her breasts for a minute. Now there's a crime because of how she felt related to your eyes. This can be true even if your eyes weren't on her breasts. Now defend yourself without dealing with her state of mind, feelings or anything related to her. How do you do it?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #10 of 44
In other words, women who dress provocatively contribute to their rapes. Gotcha.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #11 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

In other words, women who dress provocatively contribute to their rapes. Gotcha.

In other words, you would rather dismiss thought with a strawman than have a discussion. Gotcha.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #12 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

In other words, you would rather dismiss thought with a strawman than have a discussion. Gotcha.

Well, it is partially what is being said. However, it is not necessarily wrong. They don't deserve to be raped, but the signal being sent to one who is twisted enough to perpetrate such an act is there. However, to go a step further. If the person would do that to a woman at all, the way she is dressed may only be the final lure, it would not be the trigger. The person doing the despicable act is responsible for what he does, not the woman. She is the victim.
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #13 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

There would be if the sole determination for the crime of mugging was the word of the person granting consent.

Consent isn't physical evidence. When someone mugs a person, and is caught, they can find the phone, money, gold watch, etc.

When someone declares they've been raped, the only thing that makes it rape is consent. Thus that is what has to be debated in court. I've already noted this and addressed it.

Any time the crime is about a person's state of mind, the only defense it to attack the state of mind. How does one defend themselves without doing that? If you can answer that question you'll have a point from which we can move forward.

For example as I mentioned sexual harassment can be ogling or staring. You have a co-worker declare you stared too long at her or that your gaze reflected ogling from her perspective. Please defend this without in any form or fashion questioning her judgment or state of mind.

You arrive home tonight and find the police at your home. Your wife has suddenly accused you of marital rape. How do you defend yourself while in no form impugning her state of mind or judgement?

In short, if the crime occurs in someone's mind, that is where you must go to defend yourself. For rape or sexual harassment, the crime isn't sex or attention, it is consent or unwanted attention. That is determined by the state of mind. There is no way to defend but to debate that state of mind.

Stare at your alarm clock for a minute. No crime. Have a woman declare you stared at her breasts for a minute. Now there's a crime because of how she felt related to your eyes. This can be true even if your eyes weren't on her breasts. Now defend yourself without dealing with her state of mind, feelings or anything related to her. How do you do it?

You're the one always going on and on about straw men. Yet you are talking about something that has nothing to do with the point of the protests, which is to remove the stigma of being called a slut, so that women who are really raped (and may even have physical evidence to prove it) aren't afraid to report it and pursue legal action.

It sounds like you're saying there should be less prosecutions for rape because women might be lying about what happened!
post #14 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahJ View Post

Well, it is partially what is being said. However, it is not necessarily wrong. They don't deserve to be raped, but the signal being sent to one who is twisted enough to perpetrate such an act is there. However, to go a step further. If the person would do that to a woman at all, the way she is dressed may only be the final lure, it would not be the trigger. The person doing the despicable act is responsible for what he does, not the woman. She is the victim.

Does anyone deserve to be the victim of a crime? Your logic works, but the point is that it doesn't stop at women and rape. It is true of all crimes. Awareness and avoidance are part of the steps of not being a victim no matter the crime. Part of these protests declare, we deserve to not have to be aware and shouldn't have to avoid!

In a perfect world that would be true. In the real world though it isn't and that isn't just true of women and rape but all people and all crimes they wish to avoid having done to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You're the one always going on and on about straw men. Yet you are talking about something that has nothing to do with the point of the protests, which is to remove the stigma of being called a slut, so that women who are really raped (and may even have physical evidence to prove it) aren't afraid to report it and pursue legal action.

The walk aims to raise awareness about the dangers of looking at the victim of sexual assault and blaming them for the crime because of the way they dressed or acted. She said blaming victims could deter future victims from reporting sexual crimes.

That is called a quote. The claim is that being advice to be proactive is victim blaming.

The walk aims to raise awareness about the dangers of looking at the victim of sexual assault and blaming them for the crime because of the way they dressed or acted. She said blaming victims could deter future victims from reporting sexual crimes.

That is a strawman and that is the point of noting it in starting this thread. No one has blamed victims of rape for the crimes. The organizers are claiming this intentionally and that is why I noted how with any other crime it would easily be called a nonsense claim.

Quote:
It sounds like you're saying there should be less prosecutions for rape because women might be lying about what happened!

What I'm saying and what you should acknowledge is that the only way to defend against a rape charge is to declare that the woman is lying. Please tell me if there is another way to defend against a rape charge without declaring the accuser to be lying. You've stepped around this issue several times now.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #15 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The walk aims to raise awareness about the dangers of looking at the victim of sexual assault and blaming them for the crime because of the way they dressed or acted. She said blaming victims could deter future victims from reporting sexual crimes.

That is called a quote. The claim is that being advice to be proactive is victim blaming.

That quote is exactly what I'm saying. What you're saying is that that quote is a lie?
Quote:
What I'm saying and what you should acknowledge is that the only way to defend against a rape charge is to declare that the woman is lying. Please tell me if there is another way to defend against a rape charge without declaring the accuser to be lying. You've stepped around this issue several times now.

"She got raped because she was dressed like a slut."
and
"She wasn't raped. She is lying."
Are exactly the same to you?
In a trial, you have every right to say the second one. People actually do say the first one, which is bullshit, and which has nothing to do whatsoever with whether she's a liar or not, and which is the problem these protests are trying to address.
post #16 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

CTV



I've always been puzzled by the reasoning of events and their organizers like the one listed above. Slutwalk protesters are upset because of a word. They are also upset because they were told to be proactive and defensive in their posture and attitudes towards those who would or could harm them.

To me nothing screams deluded, utopian and entitled than the belief that the world and certain parties in it are beyond measures we all have to take.

Everyone can be called a name and negative words and the associations of them can't be taken away by "reclaiming" them. The associations and thoughts will simply move on to different words.

If I created an assholewalk and declared I was going to act like more of an asshole until I've reclaimed the negativity away from the word asshole and disempowered all the parties using the word, it would be seen as ridiculous. Especially when I'd have to start jerkwalks and dickwadwalks in the following months.

Was the use of the word "slut" a poor one by the officer? Perhaps, I guess the officer could have taken the concept and muddled it as so many do by declaring women might be safer in certain circumstances if they don't dress in a provocative or attention grabbing manner, but I'm pretty sure the officer didn't have a speech writer or teleprompter to help out.

I also find it strange to believe that someone doesn't report a crime because someone would use a word about them. The deeper problem is the nature of the crime. Rape involves the concept of consent and if women feel attacked in defense of a crime it is because radical feminism has so muddled the concept of consent and only views consent as a one way street, which by the way these protests also reinforce. When only one party can grant consent, that party is always going to feel attacked in the defense of that crime because to disprove the crime is to call the person alleging it a liar. To solve this you have to have consent be both ways and also have actions and other mitigating factors be involved.

If you are male, laying on your back, and a female partner straddles, you kisses you, grabs your penis and guides it into her vagina, has she become a rapist? She didn't verbally ask for permission before doing this. Did you become a rapist because even though she initiated the action and engaged in the actual manipulation of physical body parts, you didn't ask her before she did it. If she feels remorse and accuses you a day later of rape, can she invalidate your entire defense declaring you are merely trying to label her a slut.

If a cop warned that I ought not walk through a park late at night, especially with flashy jewelry, watches or cellphone, is he merely blaming the victim and being an insensitive clod? Will I feel like I ought not report the crime due to being warned to being defensive or if someone called me a negative name for not being defensive?

Screaming that you are above reality and demanding everyone protect you from reality is a type of paternalism. Paternalism in the name of equality is much of what feminism and many other grievance groups have been practicing for decades. It becomes less about attitudes and beliefs and becomes about money and programs which over time have become unaffordable. There is also never any way to declare success and have them end. They become a permanent entitlement.

what happened to morals of human beings? Do you know where to do this acts in private not in public.This is gross! Women today are to aggressive and so rude and not giving a dam how they dress or talk or behave in public especially the younger ones meaning teenagers.Sometimes older women will behave like this also in public.Disgraceful indeed.
post #17 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

That quote is exactly what I'm saying. What you're saying is that that quote is a lie?

I'm saying it is a strawman. Advice to be proactive is not the same as assigning blame.

Quote:
"She got raped because she was dressed like a slut."
and
"She wasn't raped. She is lying."
Are exactly the same to you?

They aren't the same but what the officer said wasn't number one.

Quote:
In a trial, you have every right to say the second one. People actually do say the first one, which is bullshit, and which has nothing to do whatsoever with whether she's a liar or not, and which is the problem these protests are trying to address.

You even fail to see how bad the reasoning is on this matter. If the first one truly existed, there wouldn't even be a trial. You see the first one shows an attitude where no one would prosecute because there wasn't a crime, it as just some "slut" acting out her nature. Obviously that isn't happening.

Quote:
Now a global phenomenon, Slutwalk started in Toronto with the comments of one police officer who, in January, told a group of university students that they should stop dressing like sluts in order to avoid being raped.

They reacted against the outlook that fuelled his remarks, as did Slutwalk Vancouver organizer Katie Raso.

The bold part. That is the reasoning strawman. The first example shows the cop saying be proactive. The second bolded part says, hmmmm.....let's ignore that and go to what we imagine the intent to be instead.

Quote:
I'm Katie Raso wearing a pair of pants and flat shoes," Raso said. "I have a great GPA. I have a great job. I have a family who loves me and I'm active in my community.

"When I put on a short skirt I'm still Katie Raso who's active in her community, who's loved by her family and is deserving of control over my own body.

"Just because my legs might be showing doesn't mean somebody's allowed to touch them."

Just because my gold watch, cell phone, and expensive shoes are showing in the park late at night, doesn't mean that somebodies allowed to take them.

Yes, no shit, but if someone were holding a protest saying they abhor the attitude that general society has that tells people they ought to be proactive walking through that park late at night, in the case of robbery, people would just tell them they are ridiculous.

Likewise if they hold a protest declaring that prosecutors are refusing to bring up charges on criminals because the gold watch, cell phone and expensive shows were viewable they are also being ridiculous and creating a straw man because that doesn't happen.

Again the strawman is there. There isn't any segment of society declaring that legs being shown means rape didn't occur. There's no one out there justifying the rapes using dress as a mitigating factor for rapists and refusing to prosecute.

Quote:
Raso has a theory about why people still resort to blaming victims of sexual assault for the crime, though she is quick to say it certainly doesn't justify the attitude.

"In my more optimistic moments, I like to believe people victim-blame because they are trying to come to terms with atrocious acts against other people of their community," she said.

"It's saying oh well She was one of those women.' What the hell does that mean?"

Who is out there saying what is claimed here? This statement makes it sound like rape victims have trouble getting prosecutors to take their case when that is no where near true. Not only do prosecutors readily take the case, but we have an array of rape shield laws, some of which go too far and infringe on the right to self-defense.

Where is this broad swath of society that the protests are addressing that believe a woman who wears an above the knee skirt didn't actually get raped? It doesn't exist. It's a strawman.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #18 of 44
Women could walk around in G-strings and pasties where it's legal, and it's nowhere near as immoral as the act committed when they are raped. Where have our morals gone indeed!

When the problem of a society where rape occurs is that women are dressed too provocatively, and not that men can't control themselves or tgink they have any right whatsoever to touch a woman who doesn't want to be touched, that's when we've lost our morals.
post #19 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

...what the officer said wasn't number one.

Bull shit.
post #20 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Bull shit.

Find the quote.

"I've been told I'm not supposed to say this," said Michael Sanguinetti, "however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #21 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Find the quote.

"I've been told I'm not supposed to say this," said Michael Sanguinetti, "however, women should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."

Yep. That's where he says it.

They should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.
is no different from
If they didn't dress like sluts then they might not have been victimized.
is no different than
It's partly their fault they were victimized because they dress like sluts.
post #22 of 44
And this is the point isn't it.

Here's the generic statement:

"X should avoid Y in order not to be victimized."

Granted, this is a bit sloppy and should have been worded more carefully by saying to "reduce the chances of being victimized ." Be that as it may, I think we understand what was meant. Well...some do.

Let's take the exact statements and translate into something different but similar:

X = any person
Y = walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently

"Any person should avoid walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently in order not to be victimized."

Now let's try the others:

If they avoided walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently then they might not have been victimized.

It's partly their fault they were victimized because they were walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #23 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

And this is the point isn't it.

Here's the generic statement:

"X should avoid Y in order not to be victimized."

Granted, this is a bit sloppy and should have been worded more carefully by saying to "reduce the chances of being victimized ." Be that as it may, I think we understand what was meant. Well...some do.

Let's take the exact statements and translate into something different but similar:

X = any person
Y = walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently

"Any person should avoid walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently in order not to be victimized."

Now let's try the others:

If they avoided walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently then they might not have been victimized.

It's partly their fault they were victimized because they were walking in a dangerous part of town and displaying their valuables prominently.

Exactly. So there's no difference there.

But...

Everyone who is mugged will report it. Whether they think the perp will get caught or not. For one thing it tells the authorities that that part of town needs to be patrolled better.

If the perp scratched their arm when mugging them, and they believe they have DNA, they will go to the authorities with that information.

But a woman who is raped may have plenty of DNA evidence. She may have physical evidence of the rape. But she is afraid of going to court and being called a slut and a liar, so she doesn't report it.

Take away the fear of being called a slut, and the situation improves, even if just slightly.
post #24 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Exactly. So there's no difference there.

But...

Everyone who is mugged will report it. Whether they think the perp will get caught or not. For one thing it tells the authorities that that part of town needs to be patrolled better.

If the perp scratched their arm when mugging them, and they believe they have DNA, they will go to the authorities with that information.

But a woman who is raped may have plenty of DNA evidence. She may have physical evidence of the rape. But she is afraid of going to court and being called a slut and a liar, so she doesn't report it.

Take away the fear of being called a slut, and the situation improves, even if just slightly.

Well, you have another unintended possibility too. Take away the stigma of the word slut and it makes it easier for young woman to be one for real instead of imagined. \
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
NoahJ
"It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err." - Mahatma Gandhi
Reply
post #25 of 44
I agree that women dressing provocatively could attract the attention of a rapist and lead him to target her.

But I also agree that the moment the rapist initiates aggression against the woman, he is 100% responsible for his own actions.

It's like the Giffords shooting. Regardless of any external triggers that may have caused him to flip out, Jared Laughner is 100% responsible for his own actions. He initiated the aggression. Yet so many were (and are) so willing to accuse Sarah Palin of being an accessory to murder for publishing a political map with crosshairs on it, claiming that's what he acted on.

Are people 100% responsible for their own actions, or aren't they?

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #26 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

I agree that women dressing provocatively could attract the attention of a rapist and lead him to target her.

But I also agree that the moment the rapist initiates aggression against the woman, he is 100% responsible for his own actions.

It's like the Giffords shooting. Regardless of any external triggers that may have caused him to flip out, Jared Laughner is 100% responsible for his own actions. He initiated the aggression. Yet so many were (and are) so willing to accuse Sarah Palin of being an accessory to murder for publishing a political map with crosshairs on it, claiming that's what he acted on.

Are people 100% responsible for their own actions, or aren't they?

I don't think anyone is claiming that the rapist is not responsible for their own actions. But there does seem to be an effort to eliminate any responsibility on the part of the victim for making less-wise and less-safe actions that may have increased their probability of victimization.

It's sorta like a person who smokes...falls asleep smoking in bed (or someone who regularly burns lots of candles in their home)...burns down the house not accepting any responsibility at all and merely blaming the cigarette companies for making a flammable product and for the house builder for building a house that burns...etc.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #27 of 44
Thread Starter 
Are you seriously high?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Yep. That's where he says it.

They should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized.
is no different from
If they didn't dress like sluts then they might not have been victimized.
is no different than
It's partly their fault they were victimized because they dress like sluts.

Those are straight up logical leaps. It is pure non sequitur. Each time you slightly alter the statement and declare they are all the same. They do not follow at all.

Quote:
Exactly. So there's no difference there.

But...

Everyone who is mugged will report it. Whether they think the perp will get caught or not. For one thing it tells the authorities that that part of town needs to be patrolled better.

This is a presumption on your part. There has been no proof that all other crime types are reported 100% of the time. Please support this claim.

Quote:
If the perp scratched their arm when mugging them, and they believe they have DNA, they will go to the authorities with that information.

Yes and the authorities will not go all CSI for a mugging.

Quote:
But a woman who is raped may have plenty of DNA evidence. She may have physical evidence of the rape. But she is afraid of going to court and being called a slut and a liar, so she doesn't report it.

Who are you claiming will call her these names? The nurses? The D.A.? The police? Who? You've avoided answering this several times now.

Quote:
Take away the fear of being called a slut, and the situation improves, even if just slightly.

Take away who calling them this? If you won't say who is alleging it, then how can it possibly be prevented?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #28 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I don't think anyone is claiming that the rapist is not responsible for their own actions. But there does seem to be an effort to eliminate any responsibility on the part of the victim for making less-wise and less-safe actions that may have increased their probability of victimization.

It's sorta like a person who smokes...falls asleep smoking in bed (or someone who regularly burns lots of candles in their home)...burns down the house not accepting any responsibility at all and merely blaming the cigarette companies for making a flammable product and for the house builder for building a house that burns...etc.

The part about which I'll say that your analogy is less clear is that a rapist is going to rape. At best the clothing amounts to painting a target on your back rather than making the rapist look harder for their victim. It in no form excuses the rapist but good defense is just that, attempting to limit the chances something will happen to you.

Just like if you don't want to be mugged, don't travel alone, don't look like a tourist, don't wander into dark areas, etc.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #29 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The part about which I'll say that your analogy is less clear is that a rapist is going to rape. At best the clothing amounts to painting a target on your back rather than making the rapist look harder for their victim. It in no form excuses the rapist but good defense is just that, attempting to limit the chances something will happen to you.

Just like if you don't want to be mugged, don't travel alone, don't look like a tourist, don't wander into dark areas, etc.

Agreed...or locking your doors on your house, turning on the outside lights and getting a loud dog.

There seems to be this bizarre idea that we can take certain actions but not take any of the risks or dangers associated with them. This is particularly prevalent in the area of sexual conduct. If I sleep around and get an STD...well it's not really my fault. If I sleep around and get pregnant...well it's not really my fault. If I walk, dress, talk and act like I want sexual attention from others and I get raped...well none of this is really my fault.

In a perfect (Utopian) world all men would refrain from violently assaulting women, no one would steal or destroy other people's property, no one would kill or assault others...etc. But until we have this Utopian world we take reasonable actions to guard against these risks and when we don't we should accept responsibility for putting ourselves at greater risk.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #30 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I don't think anyone is claiming that the rapist is not responsible for their own actions. But there does seem to be an effort to eliminate any responsibility on the part of the victim for making less-wise and less-safe actions that may have increased their probability of victimization.

It's sorta like a person who smokes...falls asleep smoking in bed (or someone who regularly burns lots of candles in their home)...burns down the house not accepting any responsibility at all and merely blaming the cigarette companies for making a flammable product and for the house builder for building a house that burns...etc.

Well yes, dressing provocatively is unwise and potentially dangerous, as is smoking in bed.

But where the 2 cases differ is that the smoker burned down his own house through his stupidity - there was no aggression from another person involved.

Her poor choices may have made her a target, but the rape victim did not initiate aggression against anyone. She did not rape herself.

But I think we both ultimately agree, here: the victim and rapist should both be held responsible for their own actions...the rape victim for poor choice in attire, and the rapist for committing the rape.

Just like the smoker should be held responsible for his actions: falling asleep with a friggin' lit cigarette in his mouth.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #31 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

Well yes, dressing provocatively is unwise and potentially dangerous, as is smoking in bed.

But where the 2 cases differ is that the smoker burned down his own house through his stupidity - there was no aggression from another person involved.

Her poor choices may have made her a target, but the rape victim did not initiate aggression against anyone. She did not rape herself.

I get it, understand and agree 100%. But you need to be aware when you increase your risks by your own actions and choices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzguru View Post

But I think we both ultimately agree, here: the victim and rapist should both be held responsible for their own actions...the rape victim for poor choice in attire, and the rapist for committing the rape.

Exactly.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #32 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Take away who calling them this? If you won't say who is alleging it, then how can it possibly be prevented?

What? I said take away the stigma.
post #33 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

What? I said take away the stigma.

Who is pinning the stigma on them?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #34 of 44
Anyone and everyone who uses the word 'slut' in the same statement as the word rape.
post #35 of 44
What does 'slut' mean to you? A woman who dresses in a sexy way, or a woman who is sexually promiscuous? Which one?
post #36 of 44
One wonders if Strauss-Kahn is going to claim the chambermaid uniforms are too sexy...
post #37 of 44
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Those are straight up logical leaps. It is pure non sequitur. Each time you slightly alter the statement and declare they are all the same. They do not follow at all.

You've never shown much proficiency at logic. I'm not surprised that you still don't. My statements are true and logical. To say that if women dressed more conservatively they might not get raped is placing at least part of the blame on the women. Period.
post #38 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You've never shown much proficiency at logic. I'm not surprised that you still don't. My statements are true and logical. To say that if women dressed more conservatively they might not get raped is placing at least part of the blame on the women. Period.

Logic is consistent across circumstances. Your statements as you typed them literally follow the example of a logical fallacy. They are textbook examples.

Are you blaming people when you tell them to lock the door to their house if they get robbed?

Are you blaming people when you tell them to monitor their credit so they don't suffer identity theft?

Your statement is farce on it's face. Telling someone to be proactive or defensive is not assigning them blame or guilt.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #39 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Anyone and everyone who uses the word 'slut' in the same statement as the word rape.

So you won't name who they are protesting against or worried about. Sad. It's just an imagined person I suppose.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #40 of 44
How about let's post proof of our proficiency in logic, shall we? The easiest A's in my entire college career were consistently Logic and Drafting. I got a 98% on my final exam in Logic 101. How about any of you?

To say that a person should lock their door if they don't want to be robbed is indeed placing some of the blame of future robberies on people who don't lock their door. This is not a logical fallacy. It is fact.

I suggest certain posters on these boards brush up a little on what is and is not logical.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Slutwalks