Do women ask to be sexually harrassed/assaulted?

[Illithar]

There are plenty of things men can do to be attractive to women. However, most of them will be a waste of your time if you continue to ooze sexism and contempt for women (and especially women's sexuality) the way that you do. Women pick up on those attitudes very easily, you see, so it really won't matter how nicely you are dressed or how great your hair is...you'll still be rejected by most women because they simply aren't interested in fucking a guy who views them as a property he wishes to acquire.

Not necessarily. Bitterness and anger toward women certainly doesn't get anyone very far; a certain level of arrogance and treating her like a silly little kid do work well on a lot of women. It might vary by age of course, but the "chicks dig jerks" stereotype has its roots in reality.

I hear this a lot, but oddly enough I tend to hear it most often from guys who are dripping with bitterness toward women, and don't sound like they are having a lot of romantic success.

In my experience, the "chicks dig jerks" stereotype is mostly rooted in the (understandable) tendency to classify a guy as a jerk if he gets the girl and you don't.

While I really, really hate to agree with Tokos, I have to on this one. In my experiance, a lot of women tend to date jerks. Granted, not for the reasons Tokos thinks. As was explained to me, the girls who date jerks don't actually like the jerk, but he represents a 'dark side', 'rebellion', 'forbidden fruit' type deal and a lot of girls (especially teenagers) mistake chaos and danger for excitement, which they mistake for passion in the romance, which they then mistake for love.

So...chick's don't dig jerks, but a lot of them date jerks.

Yeah, again, I hear this a lot, and I just don't see it. If folks have any objective evidence that women typically date jerks, or that women are more likely to date jerks than men, then go ahead and present it, but I haven't seen much truth to the stereotype. EVERYONE, male or female, tends to go through a few "jerks" in the course of their dating life, but that's because everyone also tends to go through a period in which they themselves are the jerk.

Well, I did say "in my experiance". Also, it was explained to me by one of my friends who constantly seemed to be dating guys who either treated her badly or were just general assholes. Most of the girls I've dated never dated jerks. It could just be that I happen to know a larger number of girls who hook up with jerks than normal.

[Muravyets]

Obviously if they were "asking for it" they would have consented in the first place, and it wouldn't have been rape or harassment, and at a less literal level, it doesn't justify rape or harassment either...

Though for what it's worth, dressing all tantalizingly and then dismissing concerns about how guys may feel about it with the "I don't have to justify how I dress" mantra does seem to reflect poorly on either the morality or the kindness of girls who do so...

The objection I have to the second sentence (and, to some extent, to what Ry said above) is that "dressing tantalizingly" often looks precisely the same as "dressing comfortably."

For instance, I like wearing shorts and tank tops in summer, because it's hot out and I live in a fucking swamp (stupid DC weather). I don't wear "revealing clothing" because I want attention, I wear it because it's a fuckton more comfortable than covering up. But because I am female, my choice of clothing will ALWAYS be perceived as part of a display, and as a reflection of how much attention I want to get. Women are supposed to choose how we dress based on how we want (heterosexual male) people to respond to us, so that's how our choices get interpreted.

Personally, I think it's stupid to assume that somebody has dressed a certain way because they want your attention. Feel free to ASK them if you are curious, but never assume that anybody picked out their wardrobe because they want you to stare at them.

As I said before, we live in a world where there's nun porn. I am not going to waste my life trying to dress to anticipate how any random perv who might be out on the streets is going to interpret my wardrobe choices. I dress for the weather and the occasion, and NOT out of fear that someone who I don't even know exists might find my jeans "tantalizing," whether they're the tight ones or the baggy, paint-spattered ones.

[Geniasis]

I agree with the OP. Most of the time those kinds of girls are fine with unwanted advancements, because there skanks. But I believe those aren't the only kind of girls being raped.

So it's okay to rape skanks because, well, they're skanks and they really want it anyway? Just trying to be clear.

And how on Earth can does "fine with unwanted advances" equate to "skank"?

I'm still stuck on "fine with unwanted advances". Isn't that an oxymoron?

Yeah, again, I hear this a lot, and I just don't see it. If folks have any objective evidence that women typically date jerks, or that women are more likely to date jerks than men, then go ahead and present it, but I haven't seen much truth to the stereotype. EVERYONE, male or female, tends to go through a few "jerks" in the course of their dating life, but that's because everyone also tends to go through a period in which they themselves are the jerk.

I got this one, Bottle.

See, the Nice Guy/Jerk debate isn't about good and evil. It's about assertiveness and self-confidence. The "nice guys" don't have it, and the "jerks" do. The reason I say that this must be the difference is because frequently those "nice guys" aren't all that different from the "jerks", but just passive-aggressive with it. This is what makes "nice guys" different from, y'know, nice guys--many of whom are "jerks".

Confused yet?

[Muravyets]

Obviously if they were "asking for it" they would have consented in the first place, and it wouldn't have been rape or harassment, and at a less literal level, it doesn't justify rape or harassment either...

Though for what it's worth, dressing all tantalizingly and then dismissing concerns about how guys may feel about it with the "I don't have to justify how I dress" mantra does seem to reflect poorly on either the morality or the kindness of girls who do so...

Do you consider the feelings of random passers-by when you choose your clothes? I don't. Why should women?

Because each one of us is answerable to every man on the planet. Apparently.

[Geniasis]

Because each one of us is answerable to every man on the planet. Apparently.

Less talky, more sammich.

*slaps Muravyets' ass*

[Farnhamia]

Because each one of us is answerable to every man on the planet. Apparently.

Less talky, more sammich.

*slaps Muravyets' ass*

I wonder how brightly bones burn?

[Illithar]

-snip-

I got this one, Bottle.

See, the Nice Guy/Jerk debate isn't about good and evil. It's about assertiveness and self-confidence. The "nice guys" don't have it, and the "jerks" do. The reason I say that this must be the difference is because frequently those "nice guys" aren't all that different from the "jerks", but just passive-aggressive with it. This is what makes "nice guys" different from, y'know, nice guys--many of whom are "jerks".

Confused yet?

No...when I say jerk, I mean "guy who treats the girl badly". It has nothing to do with self-confidence.

[Geniasis]

-snip-

I got this one, Bottle.

See, the Nice Guy/Jerk debate isn't about good and evil. It's about assertiveness and self-confidence. The "nice guys" don't have it, and the "jerks" do. The reason I say that this must be the difference is because frequently those "nice guys" aren't all that different from the "jerks", but just passive-aggressive with it. This is what makes "nice guys" different from, y'know, nice guys--many of whom are "jerks".

Confused yet?

No...when I say jerk, I mean "guy who treats the girl badly". It has nothing to do with self-confidence.

It always does.

[Crabcake Baba Ganoush]

For the billionth time:

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT DRESSING "SEXY" INCREASES A WOMAN'S ODDS OF BEING RAPED.

Did I say rape? no.

Though I may have been a bit vague, the intent was something far more general.

[Geniasis]

I wonder how brightly bones burn?

I can't market a system I haven't personally tested. That's just bad quality control.

[Muravyets]

What is this, I don't even... there are actually people that believe this? Now I've lost all faith in humanity.

Welcome to the club. Vest or jacket?

Vest please... or perhaps a jacket instead, since apparently not being covered from neck to ankle will get me raped.

Ah, very well then! Due to the nature of our club, we have many fine alcohols and the best cigars. Enjoy your stay!

What is this, I don't even... there are actually people that believe this? Now I've lost all faith in humanity.

Welcome to the club. Vest or jacket?

What a tragic conclusion, personally I retain great faith given the advances over the last 100 years alone.

Technological advances mean nothing to society if one can still commit a horrible crime against a fellow person and wonder if it's right or not.

I meant equal rights advantages.

I have to agree with LV here. Sure, equal rights, etc etc, but the fact that one can commit rape, blame the victim, and people will actually consider this a possible defense is just terrible, and a horrid backwards step in civilization.

No one is blamming the victim. I just sometimes wonder if people take responsibilty for themselves sometimes. If you weren't at that party with kids 5 years older than you doing drugs, do you think you would have been raped.

It's amazing how you blame the victim in the exact same post that you claim you're not blaming the victim. It's also amazing how you -- and other people who suggest that victims of sex crimes brought it on themselves somehow -- seem incapable of reading the thread you're posting in. If you had, you'd know that several people have posted the data that shows that likelihood of rape has fuck-all to do with how one is dressed or behaving. But no matter how many times such information is presented people who make arguments like yours will always simply ignore it. You all must be really invested in "not blaming" the victims by insisting they bring attacks on themselves by doing The Wrong Thing.

[Iron Chariots]

No, that's just stupid.

[Illithar]

-snip-

I got this one, Bottle.

See, the Nice Guy/Jerk debate isn't about good and evil. It's about assertiveness and self-confidence. The "nice guys" don't have it, and the "jerks" do. The reason I say that this must be the difference is because frequently those "nice guys" aren't all that different from the "jerks", but just passive-aggressive with it. This is what makes "nice guys" different from, y'know, nice guys--many of whom are "jerks".

Confused yet?

No...when I say jerk, I mean "guy who treats the girl badly". It has nothing to do with self-confidence.

It always does.

I've known 'passive-aggressive' guys who treated the girl like crap and 'assertive' guys who've treated the girl like crap. Admitedly, more 'guys who treat the girl like crap' tend to be 'assertive', but I think we're operating off different definitions of the word 'jerk'.

However, this isn't what the thread was about.

[Muravyets]

I agree with the OP. Most of the time those kinds of girls are fine with unwanted advancements, because there skanks. But I believe those aren't the only kind of girls being raped.

You must be some monk who's never made any form of alteration, from clothing to haircuts, in order to attract anyone.

If there is anything a man can do other than grooming, bathing, and excersize to be attractive, tell me. most of the men's sexy fashions make you look stupid, not attractive. it's all down to old fashion skill: I've seen women go for rather tame-seeming guys as well as the latest odd-hair look, after all. if she's gunning for action, what are her limits, really?

Women have the real estate, but guys must still be businessmen. If they are sleazy businessmen, expect them to pick up low-value property, thassall...

/tangent

Thank you for letting us know that in your world, women are property to be acquired, and that some aren't worth much at all.

[Tokos]

No...when I say jerk, I mean "guy who treats the girl badly". It has nothing to do with self-confidence.

I am not being facetious, but "treats the girl badly" could mean an awful lot of different things. A man who smacks his girlfriend about when drunk isn't really just a "jerk", though he's definitely treating her badly.

[Farnhamia]

What is this, I don't even... there are actually people that believe this? Now I've lost all faith in humanity.

Welcome to the club. Vest or jacket?

Vest please... or perhaps a jacket instead, since apparently not being covered from neck to ankle will get me raped.

Ah, very well then! Due to the nature of our club, we have many fine alcohols and the best cigars. Enjoy your stay!

What is this, I don't even... there are actually people that believe this? Now I've lost all faith in humanity.

Welcome to the club. Vest or jacket?

What a tragic conclusion, personally I retain great faith given the advances over the last 100 years alone.

Technological advances mean nothing to society if one can still commit a horrible crime against a fellow person and wonder if it's right or not.

I meant equal rights advantages.

I have to agree with LV here. Sure, equal rights, etc etc, but the fact that one can commit rape, blame the victim, and people will actually consider this a possible defense is just terrible, and a horrid backwards step in civilization.

No one is blamming the victim. I just sometimes wonder if people take responsibilty for themselves sometimes. If you weren't at that party with kids 5 years older than you doing drugs, do you think you would have been raped.

It's amazing how you blame the victim in the exact same post that you claim you're not blaming the victim. It's also amazing how you -- and other people who suggest that victims of sex crimes brought it on themselves somehow -- seem incapable of reading the thread you're posting in. If you had, you'd know that several people have posted the data that shows that likelihood of rape has fuck-all to do with how one is dressed or behaving. But no matter how many times such information is presented people who make arguments like yours will always simply ignore it. You all must be really invested in "not blaming" the victims by insisting they bring attacks on themselves by doing The Wrong Thing.

Or going to The Wrong Place. I haven't looked into it but I would venture a guess that most rapes are not perpetrated on scntily-clad women in dark alleys.

[Lyassa and Nairoa]

I´d normally say that a person who chooses a topic such as this one doesn´t understand much about girls/women. You should go out more.

Of course they don´t ask to be sexually harrassed/assaulted!
Girls/women, they tease. It´s a look-but-don´t-touch game of female sexuality.

[Geniasis]

I've known 'passive-aggressive' guys who treated the girl like crap and 'assertive' guys who've treated the girl like crap. Admitedly, more 'guys who treat the girl like crap' tend to be 'assertive', but I think we're operating off different definitions of the word 'jerk'.

However, this isn't what the thread was about.

I'm working off of what I interpret "jerk" to actually mean in the context of most "nice guy" protests that I've observed and indulged in. Most of the time, the "jerk" is not that bad of a guy, but he's not me so he might as well be the spawn of the devil. This particular case may be different, but as a general rule I've seen my theory hold true.

[Illithar]

No...when I say jerk, I mean "guy who treats the girl badly". It has nothing to do with self-confidence.

I am not being facetious, but "treats the girl badly" could mean an awful lot of different things. A man who smacks his girlfriend about when drunk isn't really just a "jerk", though he's definitely treating her badly.

All 'guys who treat the girl badly' are 'jerks'. Not all 'jerks' 'treat the girl badly', which ranges from the mild to the extreme. Some 'jerks' are just general assholes.

For example, I went to high school with a guy who got a girl pregnant. He didn't 'treat her badly' but he dumped her the moment he found out and has been skipping out on child support. His parents have been paying it so he doesn't go to jail. Now, this is pretty typical behavior from him; he treats everyone this way.

He is an example of a 'jerk'.

[Tokos]

I'm working off of what I interpret "jerk" to actually mean in the context of most "nice guy" protests that I've observed and indulged in. Most of the time, the "jerk" is not that bad of a guy, but he's not me so he might as well be the spawn of the devil. This particular case may be different, but as a general rule I've seen my theory hold true.

So… this

http://xkcd.com/513/

[Muravyets]

Because each one of us is answerable to every man on the planet. Apparently.

Less talky, more sammich.

*slaps Muravyets' ass*

*punches Geniasis' balls*

Yep, works like a charm.

[Knowlandia]

No one is blamming the victim. I just sometimes wonder if people take responsibilty for themselves sometimes. If you weren't at that party with kids 5 years older than you doing drugs, do you think you would have been raped.

Wait. Who's to say their at parties, doing drugs, etc? I happen to know several young women, and men in some cases, who, in many people's moral values, dress like "skanks", yet they don't party with druggies, nor do they partake themselves. Does this mean they would be held responsible for their CLOTHES if they were raped?

I'm not sure about the question. I guess I'll make another comparison: You lock your doors at night, right? Why do you do that? So you don't get robbed, of course! If you leave your doors unlocked at night, and then you wake up with an empty house, are you not at fault? Sure, it's bad that people broke into your house, but you could have stopped it!

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

What I do not get is why this topic is still being debated. The answer is simple, and has been given by more than one poster already: no, women do not ask to be sexually harassed or assaulted. That some people still argue that they do because of their choice of clothing is incredibly backwards.

[Muravyets]

Because each one of us is answerable to every man on the planet. Apparently.

Less talky, more sammich.

*slaps Muravyets' ass*

I wonder how brightly bones burn?

Very brightly indeed. You can read by them.

....

Or so I'm told...

[Illithar]

I've known 'passive-aggressive' guys who treated the girl like crap and 'assertive' guys who've treated the girl like crap. Admitedly, more 'guys who treat the girl like crap' tend to be 'assertive', but I think we're operating off different definitions of the word 'jerk'.

However, this isn't what the thread was about.

I'm working off of what I interpret "jerk" to actually mean in the context of most "nice guy" protests that I've observed and indulged in. Most of the time, the "jerk" is not that bad of a guy, but he's not me so he might as well be the spawn of the devil. This particular case may be different, but as a general rule I've seen my theory hold true.

I've engaged in the same protests, so I know what you mean and I've been accused of being a jerk for the same reason. However, in this case, I am observing that I personally know a lot of women who date assholes/jerks for the reasons that I described before. (a page ago?)