Do women ask to be sexually harrassed/assaulted?

[Cqvjesse]

No. I think of it this way if you go out with a gold watch, rings, and chains are you just begging to be mugged.

[UNIverseVERSE]

Well they do want attention, but often not from those they want it from, so basically yes, they are throwing bait in the water

They might be wanting 'attention', yes. But only if you define the term quite carefully.

Attention is not the same as harassment.

Attention is not the same as being followed home and proposed to on your own doorstep.

Attention is not the same as being groped.

Attention is not the same as being raped.

[Tokos]

What qualifies as harassment?

[Greed and Death]

No they do not ask, with the exception of a few into those sort of things.

They may take steps that decrease or increase their risk, but no one asked for it.

[Geniasis]

No. I think of it this way if you go out with a gold watch, rings, and chains are you just begging to be mugged.

The fault is entirely with the muggers. Nobody forced their hand.

[Cqvjesse]

No. I think of it this way if you go out with a gold watch, rings, and chains are you just begging to be mugged.

The fault is entirely with the muggers. Nobody forced their hand.

Same with rapists.

[Overcooked Salmon]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" for women to not be "asking for it" be for them to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all, which is, to my knowledge, impossible?

[Grainne Ni Malley]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" to not be "asking for it" be for women to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all?

If we're going to go there, women better cut off their tits as well. Last I checked men liked those, too. Or long hair. Maybe we should just shave out heads. There's no telling for sure what length turns a guy on. No make-up, that's for sure. It makes us "prettier". Oh, and no hanging out at bars where men are present because we all know how we look to guys after they've had a few beers.

Better yet... let's build a wall. Men on one side and women on the other! Problem solved.

[Sdaeriji]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" to not be "asking for it" be for women to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all?

If we're going to go there, women better cut off their tits as well. Last I checked men liked those, too. Or long hair. Maybe we should just shave out heads. There's no telling for sure what length turns a guy on. No make-up, that's for sure. It makes us "prettier". Oh, and no hanging out at bars where men are present because we all know how we look to guys after they've had a few beers.

Better yet... let's build a wall. Men on one side and women on the other! Problem solved.

Shaved head can be pretty attractive on the right girl. I think you would be better off just chopping off women's entire heads, just to be safe.

[Bottle]

Now, if they dress like a skank and get raped in a church, then it's not their fault. If it happens in the wrong side of town, then yes, it is partially their own fault for dressing like a piece of meat.

You have to be kidding me.

What don't you understand about his poorly executed idea? If you walk into a bad neighborhood, you are asking for trouble, even if you aren't a woman that is dressed provocatively. You could just be a normal every day guy, walking through a town with a high crime rate, and you get mugged. Then your friends might say after the mugging "Damn bob, you should have known better. That town is full of muggers." Obviously he doesn't DESERVE the crime, but he set the conditions for having a crime committed against him. It's like saying It's not any fault of my own for knowingly walking into a lion's den and getting my face bit off.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that it is reasonable to hold women responsible for preventing rape to any degree. Just for kicks, let's play along.

Women are most likely to be raped in their own homes or the home of someone they know. So why is the "bad side of town" or "dark alley" always dragged out as an example of where women shouldn't go if they don't want to get raped? If you actually want to argue that women should be held responsible for avoiding situations where rape is most likely, then you should be arguing that women never permit any male (relatives, friends, coworkers, or otherwise) into their homes, and women should never visit the home of any male who is known to them.

Revealing clothing has never been statistically linked to rape. So why "advise" women to avoid dressing "too sexy", when there is no evidence that doing so will reduce their odds of being raped? Telling women to dress a certain way to protect themselves from rape is like telling them to drink a certain brand of cola to protect against rape. Who'd be that silly?

Women are most likely to be raped by a male friend or family member, so why is it that the (statistically unlikely) stranger rapes are the ones that women are supposed to tailor their behavior to avoid? If you actually think women should be held responsible for reducing their odds of being raped then you should be advising women to not date or befriend men, since those are the men who are overwhelmingly the most likely to rape a woman.

Why is it that all the magical rape prevention tips that are oh-so-helpfully provided to women boil down to, "Dress how we tell you, or else, go where we tell you, or else, act how we tell you, or else"? Why is it acceptable to use the threat of rape to keep women in line? How do people look themselves in the mirror after they tell blatant lies about rape, lies which actively hurt women and girls all over the world? And why are we, as a culture, expected to play along with these myths?

[Bottle]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" for women to not be "asking for it" be for them to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all, which is, to my knowledge, impossible?

Speaking from personal experience, I've been harassed while wearing a heavy winter coat. I've been harassed while wearing shorts and a t-shirt. I've been harassed while wearing sweats and blowing snot into a hanky while I staggered to the corner store for some Nyquil. I've been harassed while dressed up for a business meeting. I've been harassed while in a group, harassed while alone, harassed while drunk, harassed while sober. I've been harassed if I acknowledged a guy (like if I smiled or waved) and I've been harassed if I didn't (like if I just walked past without doing anything). I've been harassed if I was smiling, and harassed when I was crying.

Please believe me, this is not because I am some kind of beautiful siren who men cannot resist. I'm probably a solid 5 on a scale of 1-10; nothing glaringly wrong with me, but nothing outrageously appealing either. I am a very ordinary female human being, and I live in cities. This is what life is like.

Nothing in my experience has ever indicated that it is possible for me to even REDUCE the amount of harassment I will receive by changing my clothing. Let alone prevent harassment.

When I was assaulted, I was in my own room, with somebody I knew, wearing sweats and a t-shirt. I was stone sober. There have been countless times when I dressed crazy or slutty, even times when I was half-naked in public. There have been times I got plastered, and times I walked home alone while plastered, and I've lived in shitty neighborhoods off and on for years. Never got raped any of those times, because you know what was missing? A rapist. Being drunk or scantily clad never "got me raped," and being sober and modestly dressed sure as fuck didn't protect me from rape.

Rapists benefit from victim-blaming, of course, but the people who really benefit are the people who like to use fear to restrict where women can go and what they can do. Victims don't benefit at all, and neither do men who like women and want women to be happy and active members of society. So, far as I can tell, the only people who profit from victim-blaming are jackasses...and really, why help them out?

[Galloism]

I've been harassed while dressed up for a business meeting. I've been harassed while in a group, harassed while alone, harassed while drunk, harassed while sober.

Harassment from the voices in your head after smoking a cigarette a stranger gave you on the street doesn't count as "harassment".

[Waterlow]

God damn it. I leave this thread for a few hours and return to find I'm a nowt but a toaster covered in bacon spit. The rape apologists have got a lot to answer for...

[Muravyets]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" for women to not be "asking for it" be for them to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all, which is, to my knowledge, impossible?

We live in a world where there's nun porn. "Provocative" is definitely in the eye of the beholder -- and if that beholder is a rapist, all bets are off.

[Galloism]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" for women to not be "asking for it" be for them to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all, which is, to my knowledge, impossible?

We live in a world where there's nun porn. "Provocative" is definitely in the eye of the beholder -- and if that beholder is a rapist, all bets are off.

Murv, rule 34.

Damnit. This is why we can't have nice things.

[Norstal]

Aside from the false assumption hat men have no self-control, what I want to know is, who defines "provocative"? Aside from the obvious choices, such as tank tops, some men might be aroused by tights, school uniforms, and I've seen those who say they are aroused by something as simple as jeans and a T-shirt. If a woman walking down the street in her daily clothes, whether it be formal (for work) or causal, and is harassed by a man who is aroused by her unintentionally "provocative" clothes, is it the woman's fault? If it is, wouldn't that mean whatever women wear, men could claim that they were simply aroused by her clothes, and couldn't help it? And if that is the case, as women will not be able to wear anything without being "provocative", and as walking down the street naked is not an option, wouldn't the only "solution" for women to not be "asking for it" be for them to spontaneously evolve into higher life forms who do not need clothes at all, which is, to my knowledge, impossible?

We live in a world where there's nun porn.

Yeeeah...that was all you ever needed to end this thread.

[Ishkaebibble]

Ok, I am sick of this alley crap.
Approximately 38% of victims are raped by a friend or acquaintance;
28% of victims by an intimate partner;
26% of victims by a stranger;
7% of victims by another relative;
and in 2% of cases the relationship is unknown.

Also:
What else do we know about rapists? According to the 1997 Sex Offenses and Offenders study, just more than half of rapists are white, and close to one-quarter of rapists are married. Most rape their victims in the victims’ own home, or in the home of a friend, neighbor or relative. Only around one out of every ten rapes happens away from home and outside. Only around 6% of rapes involve the use of a weapon: most rapists rape via the physical force or their own bodies or by verbal and emotional force and/or coercion. Around one out of every three rapists is intoxicated when he rapes. Overall, rapists rape younger people more often than they do older people: in the United States alone, around 44% of victims are under the age of 18, 15% are under the age of 12 and 80% are under the age of 30 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, February 1997).


source:
http://www.scarleteen.com/who_are_rapis ... _come_from
------------------------------------

Now form arguments.

[Ryadn]

Oooooh, I can't WAIT for Murv, Bottle, and Rydan to find this thread...

No, of course not. NO ONE wants to be so assaulted anymore than a guy in a muscle shirt and tight pants is obviously being asked to be raped by someone who is gay (Note, analogy people, don't read too much into it). It's insulting to even think so.

I WILL say that by dressing provocatively, she is asking for attention, but she is not asking for more than glances and needs nothing more than that without HER permission.

Too many sexist threads... need moar troops... *sigh*

Someone say troops?

Shameful, Farn. Look at the skirts on those soldiers. They're just ASKING to be stuck with someone's bayonet.

[Ryadn]

No, these have no merit whatsoever. The idea of blaming the victim is idiotic.

1. Woman dresses provocatively (but she doesn't want to arouse men!)
2. Man can't help himself, decides to get verbal or touchy
3. IT'S THE MAN'S FAULT! ARREST HIM!

That situation is equal to the following:

1. Offer cookie to dog (but you don't want the dog to eat the cookie!)
2. Dog can't help himself, decides to eat the cookie
3. IT'S THE DOG'S FAULT! ARREST HIM!

Sure it is, except that people have what we like to call "self control" and women are not biscuits.

No indeed. I believe it was determined on the old Jolt boards that we're bacon and/or toasters.

No, no, men are toasters. I think the logic (to the extent you can call it that) was "when you push the button on a toaster, it automatically gets hot, ergo, when you look sexy to a man, he automatically rapes you."

It was women = bacon, men = dogs who cannot resist bacon, sexy clothes = pushing button on toaster, men = appliances who are also dogs and who automatically rape bacon. How could you forget such a clear and sensible argument?

Ah, dammit, you're right! Men are the toasters. Although I thought the lesson was more about sticking your hand in a toaster and getting burned... maybe that's just what I learned at breakfast...

[Ifreann]

Oooooh, I can't WAIT for Murv, Bottle, and Rydan to find this thread...

No, of course not. NO ONE wants to be so assaulted anymore than a guy in a muscle shirt and tight pants is obviously being asked to be raped by someone who is gay (Note, analogy people, don't read too much into it). It's insulting to even think so.

I WILL say that by dressing provocatively, she is asking for attention, but she is not asking for more than glances and needs nothing more than that without HER permission.

Too many sexist threads... need moar troops... *sigh*

Someone say troops?

Shameful, Farn. Look at the skirts on those soldiers. They're just ASKING to be stuck with someone's bayonet.

Indeed. Haven't they heard of armour?

[NERVUN]

Oooooh, I can't WAIT for Murv, Bottle, and Rydan to find this thread...

No, of course not. NO ONE wants to be so assaulted anymore than a guy in a muscle shirt and tight pants is obviously being asked to be raped by someone who is gay (Note, analogy people, don't read too much into it). It's insulting to even think so.

I WILL say that by dressing provocatively, she is asking for attention, but she is not asking for more than glances and needs nothing more than that without HER permission.

Too many sexist threads... need moar troops... *sigh*

Someone say troops?

Shameful, Farn. Look at the skirts on those soldiers. They're just ASKING to be stuck with someone's bayonet.

Indeed. Haven't they heard of armour?

It's the less is more theory of armor. Each of those ladies is currently wearing what ammounts to 3 foot thick battleship plate.

[Tokos]

I WILL say that by dressing provocatively, she is asking for attention, but she is not asking for more than glances and needs nothing more than that without HER permission.

Well, going over and saying hi wouldn't be harassment. JUST glances is a bit muc.

[Ifreann]

Oooooh, I can't WAIT for Murv, Bottle, and Rydan to find this thread...

No, of course not. NO ONE wants to be so assaulted anymore than a guy in a muscle shirt and tight pants is obviously being asked to be raped by someone who is gay (Note, analogy people, don't read too much into it). It's insulting to even think so.

I WILL say that by dressing provocatively, she is asking for attention, but she is not asking for more than glances and needs nothing more than that without HER permission.

Too many sexist threads... need moar troops... *sigh*

Someone say troops?

Shameful, Farn. Look at the skirts on those soldiers. They're just ASKING to be stuck with someone's bayonet.

Indeed. Haven't they heard of armour?

It's the less is more theory of armor. Each of those ladies is currently wearing what ammounts to 3 foot thick battleship plate.

There must be a thousand different relevant tropes I could link to, but I don't have 12 hours to spend clicking.

[NERVUN]

I'm leaving this thread because, frankly, nobody is even TRYING to refute my points. Instead, they put their fingers in their ears and shout "LALALALALALA LULZ MEN ARE DOGS LOLOLOL!!!111!!!1" If anyone wishes to continue this discussion on an intellectual level, you know, the way grown-ups do it, then by all means, don't hesitate to send me a telegram. Now, I know several of you are going to reply to this post and say something among the lines of "SEE WE WERE RIGHT HE RAN OFF LOLOLOLOL POWER TO THE WIMMINZ", and by all means, if this makes you happy, do so. Just know that you still have a lot to learn when it comes to debating, critical thinking, and respecting one another.

Love and kisses

Having read your posts now, it seems obvious to me that the previous warnings we have given you for flamebaiting and trolling have not taken. So, we will tap a little harder, *** One day ban for flamebaiting/trolling ***.

[Sdaeriji]

Speaking from personal experience, I've been harassed while wearing a heavy winter coat. I've been harassed while wearing shorts and a t-shirt. I've been harassed while wearing sweats and blowing snot into a hanky while I staggered to the corner store for some Nyquil. I've been harassed while dressed up for a business meeting. I've been harassed while in a group, harassed while alone, harassed while drunk, harassed while sober. I've been harassed if I acknowledged a guy (like if I smiled or waved) and I've been harassed if I didn't (like if I just walked past without doing anything). I've been harassed if I was smiling, and harassed when I was crying.

Very Dr. Seuss.