Feminism

[Ultimaja]

I could walk around friggin' naked if I wanted to and that still doesn't magically give me a sign with "I'm asking for it", please stop excusing disgusting men and women who use how others dress as an excuse for assault, it's really disgusting.

I have not once excused rapists on this thread. I am simply a realist, and have noted this already: what does blame do?
It doesn't protect anybody from anything, so what's the point of plainly hating rapists and yet doing nothing about it?

And to your statement.. yes.. yes it does. You are actively portraying yourself as a sheep in a wolf's land. One is doing this with full knowledge of it.
It is your goddamn fault. Should justice be served? Yes. But do you have no accountability? Meh- you put yourself in harm's way. What does one say about that, are we just going to condemn the perpetrator and not acknowledge it for what it is?

I realize that may sound insensitive, but there is more then enough sensitivity to go around- somebody has to just tell it. We do not live in a good world, and never will.

I'm sorry that I have to break reality and somehow be labeled a 'supporter of rapists', but it is the truth. You all go and hate conservatives for basically telling how the world works, but all I know is that if I was a female walking around promiscuous, I would be very careful and proactive about what I do and how to go about shit if some shit should go down.
That's what really needs to be preached, there is no middle ground unless you plan on martyrdom- and picture that- martyrdom for vanity and self-righteousness.

A wake up call is what feminists need.

 

[Ultimaja]

So what about 9 year old girls that are raped or molested? Was it their elmo teddy or their onesie that "put themselves in harm's way" and made it 'their fault' too when they were sexually abused? Guess that teaches that 9 year old right! Wearing that sexy onesie with her sexy dora the explorer toy.

Why! She was just asking for it!

I don't know, maybe we can just bitch and moan and eventually it'll just go away.

Because all the way from prehistoric mammals, rape has been part of life. It requires no weapon, no intelligence- nothing but a sexual drive. And all you homosexual supporters better damn well commit to that being a real thing that can't be controlled


Anyway, your point is basically shit. Doesn't even touch what I stated, it's just loudmouthed moral posturing that has nothing to do with the fact that the only way rape can be prevented is if you take ACTUAL measures to prevent it.
What I really think is that the sole reasoning for even having these discussions is so people can bleed all over it, something that society apparently has a thrill doing.
It's like a liberals play land.

And what do you know- because of that, it becomes mine to

 

[Toshiya]

And to your statement.. yes.. yes it does. You are actively portraying yourself as a sheep in a wolf's land. One is doing this with full knowledge of it.
It is your goddamn fault. Should justice be served? Yes. But do you have no accountability? Meh- you put yourself in harm's way. What does one say about that, are we just going to condemn the perpetrator and not acknowledge it for what it is?

Erm, no... I said earlier on that you're basically saying that men are unable to control themselves and will just rape whenever they see someone in revealing clothing. Which is definitely not the case and is insulting to men. Most men will just have a look, not jump on the woman immediately.
Kira got it spot on. It's not the victims fault. If a girl is walking along and gets raped its because somebody was waiting for someone to rape and she was in the right place for them at the right time, not because she has a short skirt
The only things you can do to 'prevent' rape are to try and walk in safer areas, and not alone... but it has nothing to do with the clothing.

 

[Ultimaja]

Erm, no... I said earlier on that you're basically saying that men are unable to control themselves and will just rape whenever they see someone in revealing clothing. Which is definitely not the case and is insulting to men. Most men will just have a look, not jump on the woman immediately.
Kira got it spot on. It's not the victims fault. If a girl is walking along and gets raped its because somebody was waiting for someone to rape and she was in the right place for them at the right time, not because she has a short skirt
The only things you can do to 'prevent' rape are to try and walk in safer areas, and not alone... but it has nothing to do with the clothing.

A person makes a life choice- they choose to be promiscuous, to carry themselves in a fashion commensurate to those who are open to sex and rebelling traditional virtue and standard. Going to questionable places, putting oneself in questionable relationships and environments.

You then therefore place yourself in a place that is not safe. Accountability needs to be taught, feeling sorry for the victims and condemning the perpetrators serves nothing. How many rapes have you prevented with that?

 

[Toshiya]

A person makes a life choice- they choose to be promiscuous, to carry themselves in a fashion commensurate to those who are open to sex and rebelling traditional virtue and standard. Going to questionable places, putting oneself in questionable relationships and environments.

You then therefore place yourself in a place that is not safe. Accountability needs to be taught, feeling sorry for the victims and condemning the perpetrators serves nothing. How many rapes have you prevented with that?

A girl can still be promiscuous whilst still choosing who to be promiscuous with. Just because a girl may have a lot of partners or dress revealing, doesn't mean that its any mans right to force her
I'm not claiming to have prevented rapes... as I said in a post further back there are places where I live I wouldn't dream of walking through alone at night (or some in the day!) but at the same time, although women can take precautions such as not being alone or not walking through known dodgy areas, the overall fault if she is raped in a slightly dangerous area is still that of the person who chose to rape her, not the woman. Nobody walks along with a sign saying 'please rape me', and its not okay regardless of what shes wearing. I'm sure if a female family member of yours was raped, your first thought wouldn't be 'you were wearing a short skirt so its your own fault', it would be 'oh how terrible its not your fault'.

This thread kind of derailed from straight up feminism huh

 

[Ultimaja]

A girl can still be promiscuous whilst still choosing who to be promiscuous with. Just because a girl may have a lot of partners or dress revealing, doesn't mean that its any mans right to force her

An observation that has literally no value other then to have one observe it.

All I hear is constant conviction, but what does it have to do with feminism? When it comes down to it, it's just a tool to feel sorry for women and hate men. That's all it is, there is literally no other purpose. Unless one is trying to form a matriarchy, then it shouldn't even be discussed in light of feminism, plain and simple.

Rape is inevitable. One is better off speaking on murder. But then again, I suppose that doesn't suck at the tit of feminism..
Lol, why do I even waste my time on this subject. I conquered it a long time ago.

 

[Ultimaja]

what can a 9 year old girl do to 'take measures to prevent' being raped by her father/brother/uncle/grandpa/stranger/family friend/teacher/etc?

/third time asking this

Nothing.

Now go and pretend you have made some point.


In fact, fuck this thread, I'm done with it. I conquered it, and placed my flag on top. It's done. See you all on the flip side.

 

[Shaissa]

Nothing. In fact, fuck this thread, I'm done with it. I conquered it, and placed my flag on top. It's done. See you all on the flip side.

Yes you conquered it by pointing out that woman should just accept that they are going get raped and nothing should be done about it, in fact they should be blamed because of what they wear....

Great way to conquer it... Ohh and saying that we will never achieve equality so we should never try... two great points... Way to conquer this thread...

 

[Davey Gaga]

Suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure. Drama queen.

IT'S TRUE!

If that were the only aspect of the concept, I'd agree. But the larger sentiment is not just telling men not to rape. It's changing the entire culture by starting with teaching boys that women are not objects simply to be used for their sexual satisfaction, and to teach them from a young age not to rape, not to get sucked into the "women as bastions of purity" Madonna/Whore complex, and the whole nine.

And as far as the statistics, the overwhelming... no, OVERWHELMING majority of sexual assaults are perpetrated by men (whether it's against men or women), and it's not even close. 99% of sexual assaults are committed by men, according to the US Department of Justice's stats in 1997. So if we start by getting men to stop committing rape, we'll take care of virtually the entire problem.

There's a few things here I'd like to consider.

Firstly, I'm not on board with the idea of "teaching boys that women are not objects" - to me, this suggests that, inherently, boys will already believe this, and we need to re-educate people from the beginning. The ideas of gender are socially constructed so, to me, it's about NOT suggesting that women are objects, as opposed to going out of your way to teach boys that women are not objects. The difference between the two is that one method is telling boys they are wrong, bad or criminal before they do anything - the other doesn't create the negative image of women in the first place.

Secondly, the rape stats - while I'm not going to get into throwing exact numbers around, we also need to consider that rape, in the eyes of the law, has never included male victims until very recently. I'm not naive, and I appreciate that, regardless, women will account for most of the victims, but it'll be interesting to see how that statistic shifts in countries where male rape is being recognised. At the very least, some laws have changed to account for (I forget the exact wording) "involuntary insertion of the penis, digits or other objects into a person's mouth, vagina or anus" - so it's a lot more broad.

Following on from that - when was the last time you saw a rape crisis poster targeting male victims? All of the campaigns, funding and attention is behind the female victims. I'm not saying that shouldn't continue, but you can't deny that there are probably more victims out there than are currently recorded on paper. This will still be true for females, but combining the complexity of gender constructs, masculinity vs homosexuality, and the stigmatisation/lack of attention on male victims, it's hard to deny that there's probably a large group of people who are going completely unnoticed.

I'd like to reiterate that I'm not naive and that I agree women will form the majority of the victims of rape, but I'm wary of using statistics like the ones you've quoted, and I'm equally concerned about accepting them - particularly ones from 17 years ago.

They're right. Why is the burden of not being raped more necessary than committing more resources to preventing the man from being able to commit rape? If there were a string of robberies on your campus, would they give people an I'm Being Robbed Whistle and say "Hey, don't get mugged?" Or would they increase foot patrols around the areas where the robberies were known to be committed?

You'd do both! If there was a burgler in your neighbourhood, are you telling me you wouldn't expect a generic "make sure doors and windows are locked, please be vigilant" announcement from the Police? Or would you dress your home up with unlocked doors and open windows while no one's open?

The burglar is a criminal and should be stopped. Police should be doing everything they can do find him to prevent this from happening again - however, the burglar is out there and has committed these crimes in the past. He's unlikely to stop. So, do you take reasonable measures to protect your home, or do you "grow some metaphorical balls" and leave your keys in your car outside your front door that night?

In an ideal world, you wouldn't have to worry about the safety of your home and car, but we're not in an ideal world, and there're always bad people, so my mind boggles when I consider that some people, who are in a high-risk, vulnerable group, such as the elderly, wouldn't lock their fucking door at night.

I'm sure I don't have to translate my metaphor. I appreciate burglary and rape are not the same but the principles aren't too different. On a more extreme scale, you set your password to something secure. If you set it to "password" or "123" and you were hacked - sure, we still hate the criminal, but why the hell would you risk such a simple password? One option would be not to have the account at all (i.e. not dressing in such a revealing way) but why the hell should someone else dictate what you can and can't do? What's the solution? Protection. Have a secure, cryptic password. Anti-virus protection. Log-out when you're done. Whatever.

It is not an unreasonable action to offer women rape alarms when a rapist is going uncaught in the area. We won't go any easier on the rapist when he's caught but, if you're raped and went down a dark alley, headphones in, alone at midnight, you're not doing yourself any favours. Perhaps one day, women won't have to worry about this but, for now, they do, so take some measures to protect yourself. Not doing it isn't empowering, it's a fucking stupid risk.

It's not fair that I should be jumped or worse walking through Compton for wearing red, but that's just reality.

Further to my point above, a great example of this in the UK is Glasgow, where I live. Glasgow has a reputation for, among other things, a historic rivalry between Celtic and Rangers football teams (traditionally the "catholic" team and the "protestant" team, respectively). To this day, and to a lesser extent across the country, there are towns/streets/areas that are more Celtic than Rangers and vice-versa. If I walked through Rangers territory in a Celtic top, I WILL be assaulted, either verbally or physically, or both.

As an extension to my point about rape and burglary, if I did this, I'd be an idiot. Of course, in an ideal world, the criminals in the area would be educated, progressive, fans of the sport and not criminal at all. Alas, they are so, until it changes, I have no intention of walking through Rangers territory in a Celtic top, because I'd rather not be assaulted. Yes, the criminals who kick fuck out of me would be prosecuted, but that's little consolation to the fact that I've still been beaten black and blue. It's not MY fault they're scum, but it's certainly my fault for not taking precautions when I knew what the risk would be.

I mean, should a gay man be raped by another gay man because he's wearing shorts and a tank top? And, if he is, is it his fault for wearing those clothes?

Nah, I don't think so.

That's a very niche kind of gay.

So you blame her rather than the rapist?

I think I've indirectly answered this in the rest of my thread. What are your thoughts on what I've said?

I find affirmative action deeply problematic. It's contrary to the meritocratic principles on which our countries are supposed to run. In this case it's also anti-democratic, and I'm surprised that anyone thought such a shit idea was any good. Can't wait for scotch independence.

This kind of thing takes place across the world, though. Beyond quotas for female execs/senior managers etc, many countries have to meet quotas for race, sexual orientation, disability etc. For example, in Scotland (not sure about the rest of the UK), if you're disabled, you have the choice to tick a box which means you're automatically guaranteed an interview, regardless of any stages beforehand, because you're disabled. It's not a requirement, it's a candidate's choice, but the fact that choice exists upsets me.

Specifically addressing my student union elections, I was infuriated. Nominations are open for about a month, with constant advertising. If there were 100 candidates and only 2 were women, re-opening the nominations is still abhorent and, by default, I probably wouldn't vote for any women who ran at a later stage. If they couldn't be arsed to run in the month of opportunity they had, they clearly didn't have that much drive in the first place, and they're therefore not someone I want to represent me at top-level University committees.

Of course, there can be circumstances that prevent people from running in the first instance - rules about being in the country at the time of nomination, for example, prevented one of the best student council members I've ever seen from running one year. As a rule, though, disadvantaging anyone who's already made the effort just to get more women in the positions is a terrible idea. The same is true for any "minority". I'd prefer to see an approach where we encouraged more women to run, as opposed to giving them a free pass to the final stages without any effort.

The original debate came from a query which said only 23% of sabbatical, executive elected officers over X years had been female. People were outraged, and we had an hour-long group break-out session about why this might be. I was surprised that I was the only person to question how many females ran for elections. It turned out that more females than males tended to run for these positions. So, why weren't they getting in? The popular theory amongst the fellow feminist officers was that sexism meant men weren't voting for the women. However, closer inspection saw that the largest voting demographic was women, and 54% of students at the University were women. So did this mean women internalised that they were not good enough for these roles? Or were the women running just simply poorer candidates than the victors? That's debatable. Knowing most of the people who've won and lost, I'm certainly not erring on the side of sexism.

So what about 9 year old girls that are raped or molested? Was it their elmo teddy or their onesie that "put themselves in harm's way" and made it 'their fault' when they were sexually abused? Guess that teaches that 9 year old right! Wearing that sexy onesie with her sexy dora the explorer toy.

Why! She was just asking for it!

Doesn't she know that our bodies belong to men!

I think that this is an entirely different issue.

And all you homosexual supporters better damn well commit to that being a real thing that can't be controlled

Pardon?

but i do love me some gays

Perhaps my next controversial thread should be about homosexual allies and how they're hurting the movement.

 

[Paddy McGee]

Davey Gaga:

I literally said that because it shows roughly the same amount of skin as a short dress generally does. Just an example.

 

[Six]

Promiscuous does NOT = Asking for it.

 

[Davey Gaga]

Promiscuous does NOT = Asking for it.

What is this in response to?

 

[Sheechiibii]

@Ultimaja: I don't think you know what accountability means. What you are describing is not accountability or personal responsibility. It's blame. If a woman walks through a bad neighbourhood along and wearing very little then she is responsible for that, she is responsible for taking that risk and for putting herself in danger but that is all she is responsible for. Her own actions alone. She is not responsible for the actions of someone who chooses to rape her. That's what accountability is, it means being held responsible for what you do, not what other people do. Not what rapists do.

@Davey Gaga: I'd like to see how the LGBT community would have gotten any sort of change or any sort of equality without heterosexual allies help. You know, considering they make up less then 4% of the population. It's all well and good not to want help, but without it sometimes people wouldn't get anywhere. 4% of a country would not have gotten anywhere (or be getting anywhere) if people didn't listen to them didn't agree with them and didn't shout with them for change.

 

[Davey Gaga]

@Davey Gaga: I'd like to see how the LGBT community would have gotten any sort of change or any sort of equality without heterosexual allies help. You know, considering they make up less then 4% of the population. It's all well and good not to want help, but without it sometimes people wouldn't get anywhere. 4% of a country would not have gotten anywhere (or be getting anywhere) if people didn't listen to them didn't agree with them and didn't shout with them for change.

If that's in response to my last point about straight allies, I was making a joke, and my original post says exactly this point - it was a joke at the expense of some of the radical feminists I'm discussing.

 

[Sheechiibii]

If that's in response to my last point about straight allies, I was making a joke, and my original post says exactly this point - it was a joke at the expense of some of the radical feminists I'm discussing.

Wow, I feel like an idiot now sorry lol needless to say that joke went waaay over my head lol

 

[Ultimaja]

@Ultimaja: I don't think you know what accountability means. What you are describing is not accountability or personal responsibility. It's blame.

It's not blame, it's a girl dressed like a slut downtown with drunk people and thugs.

If she gets jacked and raped, then she should have used better judgement.

I don't give a shit- you make yourself a victim, I'm not going to tell you that you did nothing wrong. That's why rapes are at all an all time high, you talking about how evil the rapist is means exactly nothing. It does nothing and is worth nothing.

So what is it? Cradle the victim or prevent the GODDAMN victimization in the first place?

You all are ridiculous when it comes to this subject. Don't ever try to tell me I don't know what something means, when you all apparently struggle with basic logic.
You all have gotten on my nerves to th epoint where I'm about to just quite the Sleeping Forest altogether. Damn.

 

[Sheechiibii]

It's not blame, it's a girl dressed like a slut downtown with drunk people and thugs.

If she gets jacked and raped, then she should have used better judgement.

I don't give a shit- you make yourself a victim, I'm not going to tell you that you did nothing wrong. That's why rapes are at all an all time high, you talking about how evil the rapist is means exactly nothing. It does nothing and is worth nothing.

So what is it? Cradle the victim or prevent the GODDAMN victimization in the first place?

You all are ridiculous when it comes to this subject. Don't ever try to tell me I don't know what something means, when you all apparently struggle with basic logic.
You all have gotten on my nerves to th epoint where I'm about to just quite the Sleeping Forest altogether. Damn.

Nobody 'makes themselves a victim' an attacker makes someone a victim. We're talking personal responsibility here. Yes, she's responsible for putting herself in danger, but her attacker is the one solely responsible for their actions, just as she is responsible for hers. That's what it comes down to. Accountability for our own personal choices. We're not responsible for anybody elses choices. If I leave an expensive car unlocked in a bad area, I am responsible for doing something so risky, but if someone steals it they are 100% responsible for that action. Same with a rapist, they are 100% responsible for their actions in choosing to rape someone.

You keep sayins 'accountablility' but the you say it's her fault she got raped. That is not accountability. It's her fault she was in that risky position, it is not her fault she was raped. You are putting blame on someone who is not accountable for someone else's actions.

 

[Ultimaja]

The day rape gets deterred will be the day women stop thinking the world is some playground.

Don't like it? Too bad. I've seen a lot of women do a lot of stupid shit that a man would think twice about any day of the week.
So, yeah, accountability. It's about time some learned it instead of feminists telling them what they want to hear.

 

[Sheechiibii]

The day rape gets deterred will be the day women stop thinking the world is some playground.

Don't like it? Too bad. I've seen a lot of women do a lot of stupid shit that a man would think twice about any day of the week.
So, yeah, accountability. It's about time some learned it instead of feminists telling them what they want to hear.

*sigh* I get the feeling you're not really taking in what people are telling you. Personal accountability =/= fault. It's nobodies fault they was raped, no matter where they were or what they were wearing, since to rape is an action made by the rapist. The victim is, however, accountable for what they chose to wear, where they chose to go and who they chose to trust. Their own actions. That is all.

True, I also dislike how feminism says that women should wear whatever they want and go wherever they want. I did mention this pages and pages ago when the rape topic first came up. A lot of the time I feel like Feminism encourages women to be reckless. You wouldn't tell people not to lock their doors in an unsafe neighbourhood, or go waving your cash about in front of thugs, because even if they should have the right to do those things, doesn't mean it's safe or sensible to do them.

 

[Six]

Lets keep personal insults at a minimum, people, thank you.