This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
@ Feminism
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
MyTie
Here MyTie explains that he is completely sinless, and thus in a position to pass judgment on others.
I didn't say that at all. If you want to troll, you can do it alone, if you want to discuss the implications of public decency, then I'm game. You choose.
Post by
Nathanyal
Here MyTie explains that he is completely sinless, and thus in a position to pass judgment on others.
That's not what he's saying at all.
Post by
Skreeran
Didn't want to bog down this thread with a religious debate, so I made my post
here
.
Post by
Magician22773
The problem with defending victims in this manner is, that in an attempt to state the obvious, which is rape is wrong, you end up creating a bigger, much more heinous problem. You in fact put yourself, or other women, in a dangerous situation.
Yes, if our world were not occupied by sick and weak minded criminals, then dressing in a provocative manner would only be a personal issue. If you wanted to dress like a stripper, that would be of no concern to me. But our world IS occupied by these types of people, and that is not going to change.
So by arguing that "I should be able to dress any way I want!", you are putting yourself, and anyone that listens to you in danger. And considering how horrible of a crime that rape is, that is just not smart. I do not think there is a woman anywhere that thinks proving this point is worth getting raped for.
Everyone keeps using the money analogy here. This isn't analogous to just having money and getting robbed. This is the equivalent to walking down the streets of an inner city at night, with bags of cash in plain sight, with no security.
You "should" be able to that, but you wouldn't. Because you know that there is a very good chance you will be robbed. It does not justify the theft, but it is not a smart move either.
Post by
MyTie
Everyone keeps using the money analogy here. This isn't analogous to just having money and getting robbed. This is the equivalent to walking down the streets of an inner city at night, with bags of cash in plain sight, with no security.
You "should" be able to that, but you wouldn't. Because you know that there is a very good chance you will be robbed. It does not justify the theft, but it is not a smart move either.
We've already tried the logic approach. They are beyond logic. In their minds, you MUST agree that women not only
should
be able to wear @#$%ty clothing, but to even recommend otherwise, no matter how logical, is the equivalent of promoting rape. It doesn't even stop there, though. Hilariously, to think that women should wear modest clothing is unChristian.
Post by
Gone
I think that dressing so people will notice your "goods" is immoral and wrong.
That's the problem, you're being judgmental. People need to leave their personal judgments out of it when looking at a case like this.
Why?
Because what she was wearing has no bearing on the culpability of the rapist in the crime itself. So when you take your personal judgement of the person as being immoral into consideration at the same time as your deliberation of the crime itself, it has the chance of influencing you. I also wanna point out that not only have you equated women dressing provocatively to tramps and prostitutes, and you said in that other thread that you consider anything morally wrong to be evil. So to the unbiased observer she is a victim, but if somebody lets their personal judgments about a person effect their decision making she becomes an evil tramp.
There's a reason that they don't let people on criminal juries if they have some kind of personal bias against the victim or perpetrator.
Post by
MyTie
See what I mean, Magician? Because I think women shouldn't dress provocatively, I'm unable to hold rapists culpable for their actions, even though I've said I would numerous times.
I've played defensive enough. Time to try a different approach.There's a reason that they don't let people on criminal juries if they have some kind of personal bias against the victim or perpetrator.
Do you see how you are anti-Christian, and discriminate against Biblical viewpoints? You think that Christians are just rape promoters, and that we can't tell the difference between right and wrong. You can't seem to be able to respect Christians enough to be able to tell that their morality still allows them to hold the rapists culpable for their actions. This is why we have religious discrimination in the world. Do you also think Christians are partly responsible when they are brutally murdered by regimes?
Ok, seriously now, this is how your arguments look to me. Because you are holding me responsible for my views, you are NOT excusing every wrong ever done to me. Because you hold me to a moral standard, doesn't mean you think people like me are somehow to blame when they are hurt by others.
To summarize (once again):
I believe it is immoral when women, or anyone dresses in a publicly provocative manner, however, that doesn't mean people are excused to rape them, or they are somehow responsible for being raped.
I don't appreciate being accused of excusing rape, or blaming rape victims, just because I think women should dress modestly. I think that's a cowardly way to argue against me. RAPE IS THE FAULT OF THE RAPIST. That's the last I want to hear about it.
Post by
Gone
First of all I wan't to point out that if you were in puritanical times, they would consider the way you dress pretty provocative if you wore a tee shirt and shorts down to your knees. Hell any woman would be considered trampy if she wore a sleeveless shirt in Biblical times.
Second, don't be calling me anti Christian. I'm a Christian too remember. And thinking women shouldn't dress provocatively is not unique to Christianity or even religion in general.
I'm not saying Christians are unable to hold rapists accountable for their crimes. I'm saying that nobody is capable of ever being 100% sure that a personal bias isn't in some way effecting their judgement. And you have the right to your ideas of morality, however it shouldn't be brought up right next to a discussion about a girl who was dressed provocatively and raped at a party.
You can say all you want that rape is inexcusable and the rapists should be punished, however as soon as you start to pass judgement on the way she was dressed, that's all anybody is going to focus on. The two should not be brought into conversation with each other, especially not on moral grounds, because the morality of the way she dressed especially has nothing to do with the crime itself.
Post by
MyTie
The two should not be brought into conversation with each other.
The problem is, whenever anyone is like "women should dress modestly", there is this obligatory barrage of nonsense meant to do nothing but intimidate. If you think women should dress modestly, you are too judgmental. If you think women should dress modestly, you want to disempower women. If you think w omen should dress modestly, you excuse rape. It's THIS nonsense that I'm arguing against. Basically, these three things are used to silence, through intimidation, the idea of modesty (extra points for bringing up puritans). No one wants to be seen as a rape promoter, too judgmental, or misogynistic, so as soon as one of these cards is played, Christians cower. So, people learn to play these cards, and it becomes the social norm.
Well, guess what! Not me. Women should dress modestly. AT THE EXACT SAME TIME, I insist that women should be in positions of power, not raped, and I have Biblical backing to make that judgment call. This isn't what people normally do. It's unusual.
It is unusual to hear someone say that a woman ISN'T responsible for being raped, but she should STILL not dress provocatively.
Therefore, my position is radical, and scary. Sometimes the truth is radical, and scary, though. (Take a second and examine that italicized sentance. What part of it is wrong?)
You can either take my words at face value, or decide for yourself that I'm lying about my beliefs. But, in the end, you'll never be able to quote anywhere that I've promoted rape or misogyny. The best that can be done is to blindly accuse me of it, which I've grown quite accustomed to. When those threats finally fall flat, can we get back to an honest debate?
Post by
Gone
The two should not be brought into conversation with each other.
The problem is, whenever anyone is like "women should dress modestly", there is this obligatory barrage of nonsense meant to do nothing but intimidate. If you think women should dress modestly, you are too judgmental. If you think women should dress modestly, you want to disempower women. If you think w omen should dress modestly, you excuse rape. It's THIS nonsense that I'm arguing against. Basically, these three things are used to silence, through intimidation, the idea of modesty (extra points for bringing up puritans). No one wants to be seen as a rape promoter, too judgmental, or misogynistic, so as soon as one of these cards is played, Christians cower. So, people learn to play these cards, and it becomes the social norm.
Well, guess what! Not me. Women should dress modestly. AT THE EXACT SAME TIME, I insist that women should be in positions of power, not raped, and I have Biblical backing to make that judgment call. This isn't what people normally do. It's unusual.
It is unusual to hear someone say that a woman ISN'T responsible for being raped, but she should STILL not dress provocatively.
Therefore, my position is radical, and scary. Sometimes the truth is radical, and scary, though. (Take a second and examine that italicized sentance. What part of it is wrong?)
You can either take my words at face value, or decide for yourself that I'm lying about my beliefs. But, in the end, you'll never be able to quote anywhere that I've promoted rape or misogyny. The best that can be done is to blindly accuse me of it, which I've grown quite accustomed to. When those threats finally fall flat, can we get back to an honest debate?
MyTie that's fine. I have no problem with you saying that women should dress modestly, and I agree with almost everything you just said.
The thing is though, I don't think you should be bringing it up in a discussion about a woman who was raped, and an incident in which some people have excused the perpetrators actions because of the way the victim was dressed and the way she acted.
There's a time and a place for everything, and even though I know that you weren't trying to excuse the crime, it still could be perceived as though you were in some small way making an excuse for it, even if you say "that doesn't mean she deserved to be raped". I know that's not what you meant, but I'm just saying that's how other people could see it.
Think about it this way. If somebody you cared about were raped at a party, and afterwards you heard somebody say "It doesn't excuse the rape, but she really shouldn't have been dressed like such a tramp." How would that make you feel reading that?
Post by
MyTie
Let's say my 13 year old daughter got raped. She went to an unsupervised alcoholic party wearing a mid-riff, tight pants, and a g string, got drunk, passed out, and got raped. Now let's say that someone were like "I'm not excusing rape, but why the hell was she dressed like that at that party", they would be ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT, that that was a horrible judgment call on my part, as a parent. It's because of rape that I don't let my daughter go out and do that stuff (among other reasons). So, the topic of rape, and the topic of girls dressing appropriately are not mutually exclusive, even though rape is exclusively the fault of the rapist. Instead of insisting that the two aren't mentioned in the same conversation, wouldn't it be a
more responsible
thing to do to suggest that young girls take precautions against rapists? It truly scares me that we have reached a point where we cannot suggest that women dress less provocatively, and not be in compromising places, to hinder the possibility of being raped. I mean, that's
true
. But, we aren't going to say it because it isn't socially polite to bring it up at the same time? You agree that I'm correct, but think I shouldn't speak the truth because someone might perceive something that I didn't say at all?
Post by
Adamsm
Things Not to Say to a Rape Victim
.Can't believe I have to link this again.
It matters not what the women wears but don't be an ass and blame the rape on that. I don't care how you feel, because to the victim, all she hears is 'well obviously she was asking for it'.
Post by
MyTie
Things Not to Say to a Rape Victim
.Can't believe I have to link this again.
It matters not what the women wears but don't be an ass and blame the rape on that. I don't care how you feel, because to the victim, all she hears is 'well obviously she was asking for it'.
Lol. Don't talk about ways to avoid rape?
/headasplodes
This is where we are, people.
Post by
Adamsm
No, we're at a point where a few people seem to think it's fine to blame a rape on what the women is wearing, or that she 'should have known better' then to go out like that. Really? Really? You are going to tout something like that? So tell me what the woman who was wearing long skirts and a turtle neck did to get the attention of a rapist?
Rape is not about attraction: It's about power and force. What the women was wearing is not important to what happened to her.
Jesus tap dancing Christ, comments like that make me sick.
Edit: Also, you should probably read through that entire link there MyTie, then think nice and hard about how your daughter would react to people making comments like that if she ever did experience the horror of a rape.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Gone
Let's say my 13 year old daughter got raped. She went to an unsupervised alcoholic party wearing a mid-riff, tight pants, and a g string, got drunk, passed out, and got raped. Now let's say that someone were like "I'm not excusing rape, but why the hell was she dressed like that at that party", they would be ABSOLUTELY 100% CORRECT
What if your daughter was 19, and what the person said was "I'm not excusing rape, but I find the way she was dressed morally offensive"
Rape is not about attraction: It's about power and force. What the women was wearing is not
Not to defend what MyTie's been saying, but this is like the third time somebody has said this, and it's just not true. That's a pretty common misconception that people get from watching too much SVU or something.
Yes the rapist who waits in the bushes with a ski mask and jumps a woman is having more of a power trip than acting on pure sexual attraction. But the kind of rapes we've been talking about, a guy at a party who takes advantage of a woman who passed out, or date rapes in general, are about getting laid, plain and simple.
Post by
MyTie
a few people seem to think it's fine to blame a rape on what the women is wearing
Who? Anyone in this thread?What if your daughter was 19, and what the person said was "I'm not excusing rape, but I find the way she was dressed morally offensive"
Take that up with her. She's a grown up.
Post by
Gone
Take that up with her. She's a grown up.
I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to think that you would find the timing and venue of the statement offensive.
Post by
MyTie
Take that up with her. She's a grown up.
I don't think it's a stretch of the imagination to think that you would find the timing and venue of the statement offensive.
I think I'd be pissed that someone raped my daughter, but I hold my daughter to a high standard of dress. I'd be really concerned that she had been dressing inappropriately, and would work really really hard to ensure that she didn't dress that way in the future, because I love my daughter more than I care about the timing of somone's words.
Post by
240140
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.