Results 1 to 96 of 96

Thread: CHED - sexual assault poll

  1. #1
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,315

    Default CHED - sexual assault poll

    The local twitterverse has just exploded over this:

    630CHED ‏@630CHED ·57m
    Poll: It's very controversial but do you think victims of sexual assaults share any blame for what happens?
    Vote: http://bit.ly/1mZsxml


    • NO - women should be able to dress, drink and walk as they choose without fear of being blamed
    • YES - if women drink too much, dress too little or walk in harms way they put themselves at risk
    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  2. #2
    C2E Long Term Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Downtown
    Posts
    32,315

    Default

    “You have to dream big. If we want to be a little city, we dream small. If we want to be a big city, we dream big, and this is a big idea.” - Mayor Stephen Mandel, 02/22/2012

  3. #3
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    NO - women should be able to dress, drink and walk as they choose without fear of being blamed
    YES - if women drink too much, dress too little or walk in harms way they put themselves at risk

    No one deserves to be sexually assaulted. It is flat out wrong. But when you ask should the person (not just woman) share blame if they put themselves in a position of disadvantage knowing the risk? I would say yes. I don't walk around at night flaunting a handful of 100 dollar bills in a bad neighborhood for same reason a young woman shouldn't dress overly provocative in a bar while chugging down her 10th beer mixed with hard liquor on an empty stomach.

  4. #4
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,421

    Default

    Higher risk yes, blame for what happens, no.

    Regarding their poll question, no different than walking down a dark street waving around a stack of cash, and getting robbed. Just because you should be able to do it, doesn't mean that there aren't predators who will strike given an opportunity.

    And just so this is clear, I'm not saying women ask for it. I'm saying there are sick people in the world, and will prey upon people regardless. Don't help them out by making yourself vulnerable.

  5. #5

    Default

    No, a rapist doesn't get to share his blame.

    Any sexual assault was the rapist's choice.

  6. #6
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Westmount
    Posts
    3,570

    Default

    To draw an analogy to civil litigation, assigning blame to the victim of a sexual assault would be akin to allowing a sex predator to plead contributory negligence on the part of his victim. "Yes, I assaulted her, but she was contributorily negligent in that she was drinking too much/walking alone at night/looking attractive and therefore liability should be apportioned between us." What a legal farce that would be!

  7. #7
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    So if you were driving with distraction, talk on the cell phone and another car runs a stop sign and hits you. You were talking on the phone but definitely not at fault. The car that hits you can say, "yes I failed to stop at the stop sign and hit that car, but the driver was on the phone so he contributed to the accident as well had he paid attention he would've seen I had no intention of stopping. "? Would this defense fly? Lets assume for argument sake this is prior to the distracted driving laws.

  8. #8

    Default

    Well an RCMP would gladly hand out tickets to the cell phone driver

  9. #9

    Default

    I like how it is reported this is highly controversial even though the polls are running at 35% to 65% hardly controversial in the polls in my opinion. The poll is worded horribly as most rational people will agree with both statements although key wording is accepting blame which of course not

  10. #10

    Default

    NO - women should be able to dress, drink and walk as they choose without fear of being blamed
    YES - if women drink too much, dress too little or walk in harms way they put themselves at risk


    In a perfect world these questions would not be asked. Of course, we are not living in a perfect world. Both those statements are putting the onus on the victim, that's not right.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  11. #11
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    I think it's a false dichotomy but so many of these polls are. From the point of view of prosecuting the rapist (or thief) it should not matter what sort of temptation is presented. If my wallet falls out of my pocket, a normal person wants to return it if possible, not steal it.

    A better analogy would be the teenagers who are routinely advised to hide their iPods or smartphones to prevent gang bangers from assaulting them for their stuff. The attackers are fully liable whether or not the electronics were visible. Temptation is no excuse. But still ... if you don't want to be a victim best you not flaunt your stuff.

    Eve

  12. #12
    highlander
    Guest

    Default

    Risk and Blame are very different things.

    Both explanitary statements are clearly true: these is risk in the real world, and in an ideal world ("should be") there would be no fear of blame.

  13. #13

    Default

    Sexual assault has a lot to do with power over the victim. If it were all about how people dress there would not be assaults in places where women wear burkas. Assaults are not about the age of the victim either. Unfortunately the very young and the very old have been victims.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  14. #14

    Default

    It's CHED, well known for their right wing politics so this doesn't surprise me at all.

  15. #15
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  16. #16
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,223

    Default

    It's been removed by 630 CHED.

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post

    Ha ha ha ha ha! This is brilliant!

  18. #18
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    6,027

    Default

    Thanks Komrade - excellent context.

    BTW, the poll has been taken down and replaced with a (brief) apology.

    (head still shaking)

    EDIT: Further info, YWCA (quite rightly) pulled their ads from CHED.
    Last edited by McBoo; 10-04-2014 at 03:34 PM.
    ... gobsmacked

  19. #19

    Default

    This topic evokes such strong emotion and tends to be hijacked by extreme opinions that it's almost impossible to have a sane discussion on it.

    Having said that, good job on keeping the peace on this thread! (so far at least).

  20. #20
    C2E Junkie *
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    14,199
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    ^agreed. The emotions here run high, and CHED made this a poorly worded poll question and a binary one at that. This issue is not binary.
    President and CEO - Airshow.

  21. #21
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    I don't think anyone would openly hold the victims responsible in any way and I totally agree that no one deserves it. But lets be honest, you will definitely be more sympathetic of the girl who was sexually assaulted when she's perfectly covered up in daylight at school versus the girl who was drunk on the streets after dark. If you agree with this then that means there a tiny part of you that would answer "Yes" on that poll.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    you will definitely be more sympathetic of the girl who was sexually assaulted when she's perfectly covered up in daylight at school versus the girl who was drunk on the streets after dark.
    Not at all. In fact, I'd probably feel a *tiny bit* more sympathetic for the drunk girl because she was probably more vulnerable at the time.

  23. #23

    Default

    I question some of the current thought on this and whether reactions to "blaming victim" hold only to cases of rape victimization or to other crimes.

    What I get from this thread and current thought is that no victim blame should occur in the instance of rape.

    Should it occur in instance of people leaving house doors unlocked, vehicles unlocked, walking with ipod on in dark places not aware of anyone around you?

    I think most people would blame a victim in the case of somebody leaving a car running at a 7 eleven and thereby contributing to a theft. Especially if said person had left a child in the running vehicle. Lets be clear here too. Precedents in this jurisdiction actually exist where people that left children in a running vehicle that got stolen were subsequently subject to child welfare investigations.

    So some wide range of differing standards appear to exist within the types of victimization. Although I get somewhat confused why.

    Judging from popular opinions and reactions there is ample inconsistency in whether "blame the victim" is considered an acceptable precept.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    you will definitely be more sympathetic of the girl who was sexually assaulted when she's perfectly covered up in daylight at school versus the girl who was drunk on the streets after dark.
    Not at all. In fact, I'd probably feel a *tiny bit* more sympathetic for the drunk girl because she was probably more vulnerable at the time.
    Isn't being drunk and vulnerable in the dark in such hypothetical instance a decision? Isn't it something the individual could choose to avoid?

    I'm obviously playing devils advocate here but denying the factor of risks that individuals CHOOSE to put themselves in is a disservice to protection of those individuals as well.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-04-2014 at 04:21 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  25. #25

    Default

    Is someone who lives in a wood house more liable of being struck by arson than someone who lives in a concrete condo? After all, they knew wood was flammable.

    Nobody who goes out for a night on the town is thinking "I think I'll get drunk so I can get raped later." What would you propose, a reduction in sentencing depending on the situation the victim was in when the attack occurred? Let's say that at most the rapist is responsible for 100% of the attack and at least 50%, i.e. - the victim is equally responsible. So, if she was over .08 alcohol, that's 1/3 of 50%, if she's dress provocatively (should we have a panel to determine how provocative is provocative) is another 1/3 of 50% and the perceived danger of the area counts for the final 1/3 of 50%. Score a 50/50 and let the rapist off because they were both equally to blame?

    How about we decide that the appropriate answer is always no, the victim is not responsible for the actions of the attacker. Makes more sense to me.

  26. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Is someone who lives in a wood house more liable of being struck by arson than someone who lives in a concrete condo? After all, they knew wood was flammable.

    Nobody who goes out for a night on the town is thinking "I think I'll get drunk so I can get raped later." What would you propose, a reduction in sentencing depending on the situation the victim was in when the attack occurred? Let's say that at most the rapist is responsible for 100% of the attack and at least 50%, i.e. - the victim is equally responsible. So, if she was over .08 alcohol, that's 1/3 of 50%, if she's dress provocatively (should we have a panel to determine how provocative is provocative) is another 1/3 of 50% and the perceived danger of the area counts for the final 1/3 of 50%. Score a 50/50 and let the rapist off because they were both equally to blame?

    How about we decide that the appropriate answer is always no, the victim is not responsible for the actions of the attacker. Makes more sense to me.
    Not quite as simple as all that.

    Mainly due to a lot of sexual activity that would previously be thought of as consensual no longer being considered that legally or otherwise and with the definition and depiction of sexual assault ever changing. Hypothetically the possibility increases that todays "rapist" is some guy who got drunk, hooked up with some drunk lady, in what was thought to be consensual behavior but is now being classed as sexual assault or rape. With some jurisdictions clamoring for legislation that any sexual act not defined by clear verbal consent by both SOBER parties could be claimed as sexual assault.
    Lets also denote studies stating that as many as 61% of todays young people "hook up" while intoxicated, and with most jurisdictions stating that consent is not consent at all while intoxicated. That it isn't consent, even if verbal consensual dialogue was had that charges of sexual assault could still occur at a subsequent (any) point.
    This not even considering the obvious confusion that while consent can't be determined or granted during intoxication by the female intent on the part of the male perpetrator (virtually always males that are charged) should not be so easily inferred either. I'm confounded by a system of law that establishes in the case of two inebriated individuals who agreed to hook up that one is being subsequently determined to be a victim of sexual assault and the other a willful, intending perpetrator. With in many instances these just being perhaps confused young adults who would possibly do better to refrain.

    I'm not ftr trivializing in anyway more classical instances of rape that involve circumstances and violence that are more commonly thought of as rape. But some of todays legislation is increasingly blurring the lines and resulting in behavior that would not otherwise be thought of as rape or sexual assault being considered that now legally.

    This is a very contentious issue, again I'm only citing some concerns with what is a very evolving and confusing issue. I do think young people are being unfairly setup with the current confusion in mores and legalities that have been established in society and that greatly conflict.

    I'm happy to be older, married, and having intimate relations only with one partner and only when she consents. Verbally even.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-04-2014 at 07:00 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  27. #27
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,223

    Default

    ^No. It's as simple as that.

    If your partner is drunk he/she cant' give consent. Even if they said yes before hand, once they are drunk they can't actually give consent anymore.

    You can't take away a persons right to say no.

    Especially no matter what they wear.

  28. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    ^No. It's as simple as that.

    If your partner is drunk he/she cant' give consent. Even if they said yes before hand, once they are drunk they can't actually give consent anymore.

    You can't take away a persons right to say no.

    Especially no matter what they wear.
    So two young people are drunk, both verbally agree to have sex as young people often do while intoxicated. Both are equally informed/misinformed as to what they are doing. They could hypothetically be same age, same inebriated state. Except the male in the exchange is automatically viewed to be the perpetrator, the female as victim. Is that a double standard?
    Arguably it is.

    Again pay attention to studies that suggest that the majority of young people hooking up do so while they are intoxicated. With these people having sex. Which means a large proportion of such people engaging in grey area sex. With this even being suggested in many studies as modal sexual behavior in youth cohorts today. Therein lies the conflict. On one hand legally we are suggesting this is illegal behavior but at the same time our society is socializing this same behavior. That's a major problem.

    Of course a person can say no. I didn't even comment on that. Don't recall commenting on what people wear either. Given that your arrow pointed at my post I'm not sure why you invoked either of the unstated. If responding to my post why not respond to that which I actually write?
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-04-2014 at 09:08 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  29. #29
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    So too young people are drunk, both verbally agree to have sex as young people often do while intoxicated. Both are equally informed/misinformed as to what they are doing. They could hypothetically be same age, same inebriated state. Except the male in the exchange is automatically viewed to be the perpetrator, the female as victim. Is that a double standard?

    Arguably it is.

    Of course a person can say no. I didn't even comment on that. Don't recall commenting on what people wear either.
    In that situation either person could claim to be violated. Then it becomes a matter for a court of law. It's not always automatically assumed to be the female as the victim.

    If you're drunk, you can't say yes. That's what I mean about taking away the right to say no.
    Last edited by Channing; 10-04-2014 at 08:54 PM.

  30. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    So too young people are drunk, both verbally agree to have sex as young people often do while intoxicated. Both are equally informed/misinformed as to what they are doing. They could hypothetically be same age, same inebriated state. Except the male in the exchange is automatically viewed to be the perpetrator, the female as victim. Is that a double standard?

    Arguably it is.

    Of course a person can say no. I didn't even comment on that. Don't recall commenting on what people wear either.
    In that situation either person could claim to be violated. Then it becomes a matter for a court of law. It's not always automatically assumed to be the female as the victim.

    If you're drunk, you can't say yes. That's what I mean about taking away the right to say no.
    There are next to no instances in the legal record where a female has been convicted in such instances. Its extremely rare in situations involving inebriation and differing testimony. Yet countless males have been convicted in similar circumstance and without agreed statements of claim. The sexes are treated very differently in this regard. Males are also much less likely to suggest or report that they have been sexually victimized.
    Last edited by Replacement; 10-04-2014 at 09:16 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  31. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    you will definitely be more sympathetic of the girl who was sexually assaulted when she's perfectly covered up in daylight at school versus the girl who was drunk on the streets after dark.
    Not at all. In fact, I'd probably feel a *tiny bit* more sympathetic for the drunk girl because she was probably more vulnerable at the time.
    Isn't being drunk and vulnerable in the dark in such hypothetical instance a decision? Isn't it something the individual could choose to avoid?
    Of course it's a choice, but that still doesn't cause her to share the blame if someone decides to take advantage of the situation and rape her.

  32. #32
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    I just wish that we could see this issue from both sides of the equation like we do with, say, apartment breakins. Of course B&E artists are the scum of the earth. But the police are still free to give tenants and management advice about how to deter most burglars.

    The fact is that risk goes up if a woman looks vulnerable or is visibly too drunk to be aware of what is going on (or to properly report a crime later). There are perfectly sober men who make a trade of taking advantage of this. But if the police point this out they get disciplined and forced to apologize. Rapists are still scum of the earth though.

    Also, I do take Replacement's point about the pair of equally drunk people who make a bad decision. The ethics are murky there.

    Eve

  33. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    you will definitely be more sympathetic of the girl who was sexually assaulted when she's perfectly covered up in daylight at school versus the girl who was drunk on the streets after dark.
    Not at all. In fact, I'd probably feel a *tiny bit* more sympathetic for the drunk girl because she was probably more vulnerable at the time.
    Isn't being drunk and vulnerable in the dark in such hypothetical instance a decision? Isn't it something the individual could choose to avoid?
    Of course it's a choice, but that still doesn't cause her to share the blame if someone decides to take advantage of the situation and rape her.
    Except that its interesting given that the most common instance of such a situation of mutual hookups is two young people drunk, together, making a *decision*, and yet terms like rape get easily and automatically tossed about.

    One doesn't need share blame. Maybe there isn't so much blame in the case of apparent consenting beds in the context of young intoxicated people who in many instances haven't learned any better. Either sex.

    But how about each exercising autonomy over ones responsibility and ones own safety and well being and life?

    I fear that societally we've bought the "slutwalk" ethos hook, line, and sinker, but at what cost?

    The message seems to be I'll consume what I want, do what I want, where I want, wearing what I want, anywhere and full empowerment in doing that anywhere..

    That isn't an entirely helpful or productive message to be sending out to young people either.

    I keep repeating we have a significant societal problem here. We've socialized our young to the point that several reports suggest +60% of youth hook up and have sex while intoxicated, and we've made the same action null and devoid of any consent. How, logically speaking, does that go well? What are the mores and values around this then? How did they get so convoluted?
    Last edited by Replacement; 11-04-2014 at 11:41 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  34. #34
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Edmonton (Norwood)
    Posts
    4,491

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Channing View Post
    ...
    If your partner is drunk he/she cant' give consent. Even if they said yes before hand, once they are drunk they can't actually give consent anymore. ...
    So, a young woman goes to a bar and voluntarily consumes several drinks. If she chooses to drive herself home, she has committed a criminal offense. If she accepts a ride with a sober acquaintance, consents to sexual activity with that person, but then regrets her decision in the morning, she can claim to be a victim of sexual assault? Does anyone else see a huge inconsistency here? To be consistent, we should either always be responsible for our actions while voluntarily intoxicated or always not be responsible for our actions while voluntarily intoxicated. I think the former makes a lot more sense.

  35. #35
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Red Deer
    Posts
    2,561

    Default

    This si the event that the poll was referring to:

    http://www.630ched.com/2014/04/09/21222/

  36. #36
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    When the issue is sexual assault/rape then there will always be certain level of bias and emotion regardless.

    Lets change the wording on the poll and you may have a different answer.

    Poll: It's very controversial but do you think victims of thief share any blame for what happens?
    Quote:
    NO - people should be able to leave valuable belongings unattended, leave doors unlocked, and walk in bad neighborhoods as they choose without fear of being blamed
    YES - if people leave valuables unattended, leave doors unlocked, walk in harms way they put themselves at risk

    How would you answer this?

  37. #37

    Default

    There's a difference between criminal liability, corrected in jail or something similar, and thoughtlessnessness and indifference to risk, to be corrected by care in thought and action.

    The first is present in every rape, the responsibility is the criminal's, and the correction is to be imposed immediately upon conviction.

    The second may not be present, but in those cases when it is -- and I won't speculate on irrelevant statistical frequency -- the responsibility is the victim's, and the correction should be acted upon as well.

    The two are different and incommensurate things. They should not be compared, but neither should one of them be dismissed in hysteria.

  38. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TerryH View Post
    This si the event that the poll was referring to:

    http://www.630ched.com/2014/04/09/21222/
    Just posting because I find it interesting topic but that event is talking a lot about education, and increased education.

    Do such facilitators give much thought that the act of Sex, and *consenting* to sex, and partners, etc. by young vulnerable people has little to do with reason, intellect, education? That its largely one of the most inate driven exhibited behaviors of **** sapiens. With even post secondary students being among the most vulnerable?

    All the education presented doesn't necessarily change behaviors (and its all presented to school age children in anycase).

    The type of education that might be impactful is learning more about emotional knowledge, emotional coping, impacts, self respect, autonomy, defining ones own values, valuing self.

    I don't think its public education that is lacking. Whats lacking is respect of self, of others, of live and thoughts of vulnerability and due consideration of that.

    The whole "just do it" generation is suffering somewhat with societal socialization and modeling that's been offered. With young males and females both being very vulnerable and susceptible to that. Indeed in present day young people are being bombarded with messages that sexual experience validates. With immense pressure to validate. That such validation equates to coming of age, acceptance, inclusion, etc. If anybody is doing the coercing..

    Whats going on is abject socialization fail and that's of course on society. How about some more PREVENTION of those impacts?
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  39. #39

    Default

    I don't believe for a minute there's any more forced and unwanted sex today than there was ever in the past. The proportion reported has likely increased.

    Please, let's keep generational bullpuck out of it (I detest my inability to curse when I feel it's justified).

  40. #40

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    I question some of the current thought on this and whether reactions to "blaming victim" hold only to cases of rape victimization or to other crimes.

    What I get from this thread and current thought is that no victim blame should occur in the instance of rape.

    Should it occur in instance of people leaving house doors unlocked, vehicles unlocked, walking with ipod on in dark places not aware of anyone around you?

    I think most people would blame a victim in the case of somebody leaving a car running at a 7 eleven and thereby contributing to a theft. Especially if said person had left a child in the running vehicle. Lets be clear here too. Precedents in this jurisdiction actually exist where people that left children in a running vehicle that got stolen were subsequently subject to child welfare investigations.

    So some wide range of differing standards appear to exist within the types of victimization. Although I get somewhat confused why.

    Judging from popular opinions and reactions there is ample inconsistency in whether "blame the victim" is considered an acceptable precept.
    That pretty much sums it up for me. Well said.

  41. #41
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    For once, I agree with AShetsen. I was a young woman in the 70s and it was nearly impossible to be out on the streets at all without being accosted to various degrees. I'm not talking clubbing (in fact, those situations were easier to deal with because I was in the zone). I'm talking sitting at a bus stop waiting for a bus at midday.

    As to more social situations, this was the era after birth control but before AIDS. In some circles it was as casual as a handshake. It was up to me to try to explain "why not". For instance, "we've known each other for six hours, isn't it time to take it to the next level?" <-- Actual quote.

    What has changed is the age at which young people are expected to be sexual is much younger. I feel sad for them because it's an age where true self respect is hard to come by.

    Eve

  42. #42

    Default

    If your mother/wife/sister/daughter/friend is raped your first thought should not be "Gee, I wonder what she did to provoke/encourage him?".

    Sorry, but "Boys will be boys" is not a reason to put the burden on women.

  43. #43

    Default

    who said "boys will be boys"?

  44. #44
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    If your mother/wife/sister/daughter/friend regularly dresses provocatively and walks home drunk at night would you as a father/husband/brother/friend warn her about the dangers doing so? If you would, I want to know why would you warn her if you truly believe that it's okay for her to do so?

    Again though, I agree that victims are NOT to blame. Period.

  45. #45
    I'd rather C2E than work!
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Edmonton, Canada
    Posts
    6,027

    Default

    They're different arguments.

    That's the problem someone at CHED had (or Ghod forbid continues to have).
    ... gobsmacked

  46. #46
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    When you mentioned mother this scene from modern family just popped into my head.
    http://youtu.be/AmTEgp6T_wA

  47. #47

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by McBoo View Post
    They're different arguments.

    Yes.

    However, by now the more important point is: you can't dismiss EITHER ONE.

  48. #48

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    If your mother/wife/sister/daughter/friend regularly dresses provocatively and walks home drunk at night would you as a father/husband/brother/friend warn her about the dangers doing so? If you would, I want to know why would you warn her if you truly believe that it's okay for her to do so?

    Again though, I agree that victims are NOT to blame. Period.
    What is dresses provocatively? Dress above the knee? Showing her face? Wearing pants?

    If she's been drinking then I'd offer to get her a cab or drive her myself. I don't drink so that's an option. It's more than just worrying about rape. What if she fell and injured herself?

    Attempting to shift some of the blame onto the victim is shifting some off of the rapist. Just because of what you wear or what you've been drinking does not give anyone the right to rape you, regardless.

    Do we hold people responsible for B&E's because they only have glass windows and not metal bars? Should we be required to have solid metal shutters? Could an insurance company refuse to pay a claim because you didn't take the necessary steps to not look like a likely target to a burglar? "It's your fault for having such a nice, expensive house"

  49. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Do we hold people responsible for B&E's because they only have glass windows and not metal bars? Should we be required to have solid metal shutters? Could an insurance company refuse to pay a claim because you didn't take the necessary steps to not look like a likely target to a burglar? "It's your fault for having such a nice, expensive house"
    Does the insurance company not charge extra if you live in a big city, and even more if you live in a bad neighbourhood? Of course they do, because you are more likely to be a victim compared to if you lived out in the country.

  50. #50
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    If your mother/wife/sister/daughter/friend regularly dresses provocatively and walks home drunk at night would you as a father/husband/brother/friend warn her about the dangers doing so? If you would, I want to know why would you warn her if you truly believe that it's okay for her to do so?

    Again though, I agree that victims are NOT to blame. Period.
    What is dresses provocatively? Dress above the knee? Showing her face? Wearing pants?

    If she's been drinking then I'd offer to get her a cab or drive her myself. I don't drink so that's an option. It's more than just worrying about rape. What if she fell and injured herself?

    Attempting to shift some of the blame onto the victim is shifting some off of the rapist. Just because of what you wear or what you've been drinking does not give anyone the right to rape you, regardless.

    Do we hold people responsible for B&E's because they only have glass windows and not metal bars? Should we be required to have solid metal shutters? Could an insurance company refuse to pay a claim because you didn't take the necessary steps to not look like a likely target to a burglar? "It's your fault for having such a nice, expensive house"
    They don't refuse to pay claim, but they do make you pay more premium if they deem your house to be a high risk.

  51. #51

    Default

    And risk management is what this is all about. Who in this thread has ever said the victim is to blame? Isn't everybody just basically saying "be careful"?

  52. #52
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    What is dresses provocatively? Dress above the knee? Showing her face? Wearing pants?
    Have you ever seen how girls dress at a club?

  53. #53

    Default

    It is absolute nonsense to think that "blaming the victim" somehow diminishes the blame attached to the criminal.

    Blame -- or, more properly, responsibility -- is in no way a zero-sum game.

  54. #54

    Default

    You ever hear of elderly women being raped? Are they dressing scantily too? Or are they just drunk?

    Perhaps women in poorer areas, with higher crime rates are more to blame if they're raped too. Of course, it also happens in higher end, more prosperous areas as well.

    maybe we'd be better off teaching our sons not to rape instead of telling our daughters that they're partially to blame because of what they're wearing or if they go out for a night on the town with friends.

    What about the cases of women that are raped that aren't wearing something revealing or haven't been drinking? What shall we blame it on then?

    Stop trying to make excuses for the rapist. NOBODY has given them permission to rape. ANY actions they take are strictly their responsibility.

  55. #55
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    Again, kkozoriz, nobody is giving rapists a pass.

    Eve

  56. #56

    Default

    Yes, they are when they start questioning how much of the responsibility rests with the victims. "She shouldn't have done/worn/drunk that. She shouldn't have gone there. It's shifting blame from the perpetrator onto the victim. It's not coming right out and saying "she deserved it" but it subtly shifts the thinking that the victim was the one responsible.

  57. #57

    Default

    As with any crime, it's good to take precautions to try to minimize your risk of being a victim. Isn't this why police post signs at mall parking lots advising people to "lock valuables out of sight"? What do you think about that kkozoriz? Should we remove those signs?

  58. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    What is dresses provocatively? Dress above the knee? Showing her face? Wearing pants?
    Have you ever seen how girls dress at a club?
    Yeah, they're totally asking to be raped.

  59. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    As with any crime, it's good to take precautions to try to minimize your risk of being a victim.
    Of course.

    But if a crime happens I fail to see how the one doing the crime doesn't deserve all the blame. They are the one who is breaking the law.

    It's also ridiculous to compare a petty crime like a car break in to a violent personal crime like a rape.
    Last edited by MrOilers; 12-04-2014 at 09:36 AM.

  60. #60
    Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    744

    Default

    Never listened to CHEd...... don't even want to after all this

  61. #61

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    As with any crime, it's good to take precautions to try to minimize your risk of being a victim.
    Of course.

    But if a crime happens I fail to see how the one doing the crime doesn't deserve all the blame. They are the one who is breaking the law.

    It's also ridiculous to compare a petty crime like a car break in to a violent personal crime like a rape.
    I don't know that anybody in the thread is stating the victim "deserves all the blame".

    I think what has been stated repeatedly is that the potential victim be attentive, proactive, careful, so as to avoid predation.


    Lets establish some facts here as well while we're at it.

    -Studies suggest that anywhere from 75-92% of victims knew their perpetrator. Virtually every study on record is indicating this being the clear plurality, that the predators are previously known. Todays rape is largely not a function of strangers grabbing and overpowering victims.

    -Sexual assaults are largely initiated in social places, involving drugs, alcohol and involving acquiescing to going back to somebodies place.

    -Sexual predators frequent drinking establishments and carefully observe their potential prey with many taking time, grooming victims, being familiar with them, establishing some trust. The predator is often methodical, detects vulnerable individuals and carefully times their predation. The serial rapist uses techniques to increase chances of serial predation and to avoid accusation, detection, charges or incarceration. For instance will avoid any reference to weapons or violence but will at the same time frequently exhibit moderately aggressive physical and sexual behavior and will generate dominance in the exchange as a way of establishing control and in grooming. For instance with such individuals attempting to establish that frequent unsolicited touching(many cases groping) is acceptable.

    -Many studies suggest that women can be attracted to aggressive men and particularly sexually attracted. This potentially being hardwired mate selection that operates largely unconsciously. Countless studies have reported this, heres one of the easier reads;

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...aggressive-men

    -Further studies have suggested that such bar predators will engage in subtle, or not subtle physical and sexual aggressive acts while in bars and be known to do this. With witness reports often suggesting a pattern was in clear evidence and easily detected and observed by bystanders. Theres suggestion in this that the person drawn to the offender is less aware in the moment and is in a state of sometimes seduced confusion feeling conflicted and yet connected. Often times the victim can be made to feel attractive by the pursuit. That the aggressive pursuit is conflicting but also seems to be validating their sexual attraction. Several case reports of victims suggest obvious signs were there that something wasn't right. That the behavior wasn't acceptable. But was accepted anyway. This due to careful grooming.

    -Unfortunately in the vast majority of these predations, and in the college epidemic type predation victims acquiesce to going to a home with the predator. Cases of clear coercion in forcing the individual to go somewhere in this type of offense are rare. lets be clear here as well in denoting that the vast majority of todays sexual assaults occur in this way. Involving acquiescing to leaving a public space to a far less safe space.

    -Increasingly, todays victims are not raped while walking down the street, in broad daylight, and largely due to todays predators developing publicly sinister, and effective habits of predation that take advantage of copious consumption of alcohol/drugs by potential victims who arguably reinforce the behavioral methodology. i.e. the established, effective, serial predation does not get reinforced, re-perpetrated, easily, without such clear patterns and behavioral milieu. Indeed studies have found it disturbing how developed, clear, and defined tactics and predation have become. How easily they are perpetrated.

    -Todays concept of hooking up in bar facilities and while intoxicated has basically resulted in easy venues for todays rapist who need not operate in dark back alleys or at any great risk. Indeed acquiescing, intoxication, confusion greatly afford the serial rapist the opportunity to continue to rape with little consequence and with victims often offering foggy, conflicting, unclear testimony even when such situation results in them feeling confident enough to report. In many cases it is the victim themselves self blaming and doubting whether they have a case and whether or not they were accomplice in their own victimization and in retrospect with many victims clearly seeing the patterns, the signs, and with self reports of feeling "stupid, careless, dumb, and not listening to friends" being frequent.


    So what can people do to be safer?

    Go out with friends, make a contract with friends to safeguard with each other. Have one friend be the nights sober stakeout and driver. This person is the watcher and is to be believed in all instances. If they say an individual is suspicious this ought to be regarded by the individual consuming drugs/alcohol and exhibiting interest. Even make if visible that this is going on. That people are watching out for you. That they have your back.

    DON'T hook up and go home with the individual while inebriated. Find ways to get to know an individual much better. Likes and interests, see if you can find out more about an individual from a social network, what the vibes are, who knows them well, any family, friends, etc. Go to public places other than bars, Try a movie, restaurant, maybe public events, public squares, opt for more traditional dating and getting to know the individual. Any potential serial rapist is going to be potential dissuaded or weeded out by any of this process.

    If an individual absolutely feels an impulse to go home with somebody early in knowing them (and I caution against this choice at all costs) then at the very least openly safety plan in front of the individual giving friends names, addresses, telling them you will call, or they will call you at such a time and an agreed plan in place if there is any difficulties or you don't answer phone. In many reported instances a serial rapist will be deterred by such an approach either immediately and find an excuse to leave or they will simply resist their predation in this controlled instance knowing that a detection safety plan has been established. For most serial rapists the circumstance would be too high risk. They might continue to go along with the night and behave reasonably well but will often not be seen again to avoid detection. The serial rapist would detect such a safety plan to mean that the gig is up and that they need find another venue or target(s)

    I'm just touching the surface in the above and much information and resource is out there to avoid being a victim. I do fear its largely being ignored as instead a lot of todays empowerment involves pretending that predation and predators don't exist, or that they will in someway be persuaded to not be predators. Research however suggests that rapists are not cured, not often successfully treated, and that the urge to rape is very powerful in such individuals.
    Last edited by Replacement; 12-04-2014 at 10:51 AM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  62. #62

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    It's also ridiculous to compare a petty crime like a car break in to a violent personal crime like a rape.
    The point is, regardless of the crime, people have a responsibility to take precautions.

  63. #63

    Default

    So wait, in this thread im getting that people think its ok to hook up with drunk randoms? How about avoid that whole grey area of regret/consent by NOT hooking up with drunk random girls. Like do people not have that moral code?

    EDIT

    Sorry didnt read Replacement post.

    However, these are not 2 conversations to have side by side. You dont say "how can you dress to avoid being raped". Thats not a question. You dont say "what do you do in your day to day life to avoid getting murdered?" or "how can I avoid being murdered on a friday night"

    The moment we start questioning our own personal safety is the moment you give the perpetrators of this crime power. No victim of rape is ever responsible for the rape. Regardless if they are passed out unconscious naked on whyte ave. It is not their fault. They couldn’t have been "any safer" or dressed "less provocative" or "been in a safer area" or "traveled with a friend". That conversation is FULL STOP and its disgusting to have.
    Last edited by Komrade; 12-04-2014 at 12:36 PM.
    youtube.com/BrothersGrim
    facebook.com/BrothersGrimMusic

  64. #64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    As with any crime, it's good to take precautions to try to minimize your risk of being a victim.
    Of course.

    But if a crime happens I fail to see how the one doing the crime doesn't deserve all the blame. They are the one who is breaking the law.

    It's also ridiculous to compare a petty crime like a car break in to a violent personal crime like a rape.
    I don't know that anybody in the thread is stating the victim "deserves all the blame".

    I think what has been stated repeatedly is that the potential victim be attentive, proactive, careful, so as to avoid predation.


    Lets establish some facts here as well while we're at it.

    -Studies suggest that anywhere from 75-92% of victims knew their perpetrator. Virtually every study on record is indicating this being the clear plurality, that the predators are previously known. Todays rape is largely not a function of strangers grabbing and overpowering victims.

    -Sexual assaults are largely initiated in social places, involving drugs, alcohol and involving acquiescing to going back to somebodies place.

    -Sexual predators frequent drinking establishments and carefully observe their potential prey with many taking time, grooming victims, being familiar with them, establishing some trust. The predator is often methodical, detects vulnerable individuals and carefully times their predation. The serial rapist uses techniques to increase chances of serial predation and to avoid accusation, detection, charges or incarceration. For instance will avoid any reference to weapons or violence but will at the same time frequently exhibit moderately aggressive physical and sexual behavior and will generate dominance in the exchange as a way of establishing control and in grooming. For instance with such individuals attempting to establish that frequent unsolicited touching(many cases groping) is acceptable.

    -Many studies suggest that women can be attracted to aggressive men and particularly sexually attracted. This potentially being hardwired mate selection that operates largely unconsciously. Countless studies have reported this, heres one of the easier reads;

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...aggressive-men

    -Further studies have suggested that such bar predators will engage in subtle, or not subtle physical and sexual aggressive acts while in bars and be known to do this. With witness reports often suggesting a pattern was in clear evidence and easily detected and observed by bystanders. Theres suggestion in this that the person drawn to the offender is less aware in the moment and is in a state of sometimes seduced confusion feeling conflicted and yet connected. Often times the victim can be made to feel attractive by the pursuit. That the aggressive pursuit is conflicting but also seems to be validating their sexual attraction. Several case reports of victims suggest obvious signs were there that something wasn't right. That the behavior wasn't acceptable. But was accepted anyway. This due to careful grooming.

    -Unfortunately in the vast majority of these predations, and in the college epidemic type predation victims acquiesce to going to a home with the predator. Cases of clear coercion in forcing the individual to go somewhere in this type of offense are rare. lets be clear here as well in denoting that the vast majority of todays sexual assaults occur in this way. Involving acquiescing to leaving a public space to a far less safe space.

    -Increasingly, todays victims are not raped while walking down the street, in broad daylight, and largely due to todays predators developing publicly sinister, and effective habits of predation that take advantage of copious consumption of alcohol/drugs by potential victims who arguably reinforce the behavioral methodology. i.e. the established, effective, serial predation does not get reinforced, re-perpetrated, easily, without such clear patterns and behavioral milieu. Indeed studies have found it disturbing how developed, clear, and defined tactics and predation have become. How easily they are perpetrated.

    -Todays concept of hooking up in bar facilities and while intoxicated has basically resulted in easy venues for todays rapist who need not operate in dark back alleys or at any great risk. Indeed acquiescing, intoxication, confusion greatly afford the serial rapist the opportunity to continue to rape with little consequence and with victims often offering foggy, conflicting, unclear testimony even when such situation results in them feeling confident enough to report. In many cases it is the victim themselves self blaming and doubting whether they have a case and whether or not they were accomplice in their own victimization and in retrospect with many victims clearly seeing the patterns, the signs, and with self reports of feeling "stupid, careless, dumb, and not listening to friends" being frequent.


    So what can people do to be safer?

    Go out with friends, make a contract with friends to safeguard with each other. Have one friend be the nights sober stakeout and driver. This person is the watcher and is to be believed in all instances. If they say an individual is suspicious this ought to be regarded by the individual consuming drugs/alcohol and exhibiting interest. Even make if visible that this is going on. That people are watching out for you. That they have your back.

    DON'T hook up and go home with the individual while inebriated. Find ways to get to know an individual much better. Likes and interests, see if you can find out more about an individual from a social network, what the vibes are, who knows them well, any family, friends, etc. Go to public places other than bars, Try a movie, restaurant, maybe public events, public squares, opt for more traditional dating and getting to know the individual. Any potential serial rapist is going to be potential dissuaded or weeded out by any of this process.

    If an individual absolutely feels an impulse to go home with somebody early in knowing them (and I caution against this choice at all costs) then at the very least openly safety plan in front of the individual giving friends names, addresses, telling them you will call, or they will call you at such a time and an agreed plan in place if there is any difficulties or you don't answer phone. In many reported instances a serial rapist will be deterred by such an approach either immediately and find an excuse to leave or they will simply resist their predation in this controlled instance knowing that a detection safety plan has been established. For most serial rapists the circumstance would be too high risk. They might continue to go along with the night and behave reasonably well but will often not be seen again to avoid detection. The serial rapist would detect such a safety plan to mean that the gig is up and that they need find another venue or target(s)

    I'm just touching the surface in the above and much information and resource is out there to avoid being a victim. I do fear its largely being ignored as instead a lot of todays empowerment involves pretending that predation and predators don't exist, or that they will in someway be persuaded to not be predators. Research however suggests that rapists are not cured, not often successfully treated, and that the urge to rape is very powerful in such individuals.
    ZZZZZzzzzzz

  65. #65

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    The moment we start questioning our own personal safety is the moment you give the perpetrators of this crime power. No victim of rape is ever responsible for the rape. Regardless if they are passed out unconscious naked on whyte ave. It is not their fault. They couldn’t have been "any safer" or dressed "less provocative" or "been in a safer area" or "traveled with a friend". That conversation is FULL STOP and its disgusting to have.
    Thank you.

  66. #66

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    So wait, in this thread im getting that people think its ok to hook up with drunk randoms? How about avoid that whole grey area of regret/consent by NOT hooking up with drunk random girls. Like do people not have that moral code?

    EDIT

    Sorry didnt read Replacement post.

    However, these are not 2 conversations to have side by side. You dont say "how can you dress to avoid being raped". Thats not a question. You dont say "what do you do in your day to day life to avoid getting murdered?" or "how can I avoid being murdered on a friday night"

    The moment we start questioning our own personal safety is the moment you give the perpetrators of this crime power. No victim of rape is ever responsible for the rape. Regardless if they are passed out unconscious naked on whyte ave. It is not their fault. They couldn’t have been "any safer" or dressed "less provocative" or "been in a safer area" or "traveled with a friend". That conversation is FULL STOP and its disgusting to have.
    I think the problem sometimes in reading threads is people are reading a bunch of posts from different posters and kind of slopping it all together. Theres several different things being stated by different posters.

    For instance you referenced my posts but I didn't really state what you're questioning. Perhaps my post was too long but I wanted to put it out there for anybody reading that may want to give it a closer look. I think I outline quite a lot of why at least a modicum of personal vigilance is crucial.

    tbh I think the bolded as stated is nonsense. Something that sounds good but what does it really mean? How does that work? Rapists exist, will continue to exist, being susceptible and allowing one to be vulnerable to that is what "gives perpetrators of this crime power" as I clearly outlined.
    You're simply voicing the platitudes that are commonly voiced but far off the mark. Its good that you have conscientious values, honorable even and most people do, but the rapists don't share them and never will.

    Best to walk knowingly in such tracks. I'm stating that figuratively.

    Its unfortunate in that this debate so much rhetoric typically occurs where the dialog starts to get divisive. Not saying here and its been a good thread so far but when this type of thing gets discussed it can often get unpleasant and with factions, sides, etc. But I only engage to try to further topic and understanding and learn more.
    Last edited by Replacement; 12-04-2014 at 02:29 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  67. #67

    Default

    Is it remotely advisable that people crossing sidewalks look before they step on the road or someone that rides a bike, or works in road construction should wear high visibility clothing? Or for that matter, if you are a careful responsible driver should you wear a seat belt?

  68. #68

    Default

    ^ Of course. But none of these things are to avoid being victim of a violent crime.

    That's why these analogies work about as well as some fundamentalist Muslim saying that women need to be covered up in public to avoid rape for the same reason that you need to cover up food from cats.

  69. #69

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    It's also ridiculous to compare a petty crime like a car break in to a violent personal crime like a rape.
    The point is, regardless of the crime, people have a responsibility to take precautions.
    So, if a woman is raped in her home by someone that breaks in, she is less to blame than a woman who's dressed nicely for a night on the town who's raped in a parking lot? Is the rapist less to blame for raping her because she put herself out in the public where she was easier to get to? Or was it because she was attracting her attention because she was wearing a skin tight dress instead of a fleece jogging suit?

  70. #70

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Vincent View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    It's also ridiculous to compare a petty crime like a car break in to a violent personal crime like a rape.
    The point is, regardless of the crime, people have a responsibility to take precautions.
    So, if a woman is raped in her home by someone that breaks in, she is less to blame than a woman who's dressed nicely for a night on the town who's raped in a parking lot? Is the rapist less to blame for raping her because she put herself out in the public where she was easier to get to? Or was it because she was attracting her attention because she was wearing a skin tight dress instead of a fleece jogging suit?
    The outdated notions contained above make up a very small segment of sexual assault cases that occur today. Because primarily rapists these days have such easier access to potential victims.

    Why not talk about situations that more commonly occur and that lead to sexual assaults in this day and age in making examples?

    Is the lady out on a night on the town who is drinking copiously and who agrees to go to somebodies place alone, that she doesn't know well enough more at risk? Of course they are. Seriously, why do that?

    This is behavior that really needs to be more carefully considered given that todays rapist tends to hide under the veil of current hookup culture. Which gives such predators the easiest audience of susceptible prey they've ever had.

    Finally, lets lose the "blame" word that goes nowhere in discussing this or denoting preventative action.

    Nobody is blaming the victim. Theres suggestions people be more prudent and cautious and especially in situations and places where one is much more likely to encounter predators. Its not blaming to suggest somebody take preventative actions to be personally responsible for their safety. Indeed it should be the modicum advice taken away from discussions like this.
    Last edited by Replacement; 12-04-2014 at 03:36 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  71. #71

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post

    Nobody is blaming the victim. Theres suggestions people be more prudent and cautious and especially in situations and places where one is much more likely to encounter predators. Its not blaming to suggest somebody take preventative actions to be personally responsible for their safety. Indeed it should be the modicum advice taken away from discussions like this.
    Yes, yes you are. You are saying she's putting herself into a situation where she is likely or more likely to be raped. She is not doing anything wrong or illegal. You're looking for ways to say "If she hadn't done this or that. this would;t have happened." As it was said earlier, if a woman was walking naked down Whyte Avenue as the bars are letting out, that doesn't give anyone there the right to rape her. It doesn't excuse their decision to decide to rape her. Stop saying "If women would just stop looking so attractive and/or vulnerable then men wouldn't try to rape them." which is essentially what you are saying.

    The only person responsible when a woman gets raped is thaw rapist. PERIOD. FULL STOP.

    And as far as rape not happening during a break-in, look at this story. Remember this?

    Edmonton man admitted to attacking senior who later died from her injuries
    Joint submission filed for life sentence

    BY TONY BLAIS ,EDMONTON SUN
    FIRST POSTED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 08, 2013 05:15 PM MST | UPDATED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 08, 2013 08:30 PM MST

    According to an agreed statement of facts, Witzaney terrorized residents of the Edmonton Chinese Senior’s Lodge, 9525 102 A Ave., between 2000 and 2008 and was repeatedly charged with trespassing and indecent acts.

    Crown prosecutor Tania Holland said his photo had even been placed in the lodge to warn residents about him.

    On May 8, 2011, about 2:20 a.m., Witzaney tried to break in to two suites at the lodge through windows, but was stymied when a 77-year-old man punched him in the face and then the senior and a housekeeper scared him away.

    A police officer responded about 3 a.m. and noticed two smashed windows, but after the officer could not find a suspect, he cleared the investigation and left the lodge.

    Sometime after the officer left, Witzaney returned and broke into the suite of the 84-year-old victim by smashing a window and began sexually assaulting her.

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2013/02/0...m-her-injuries
    I guess in your world that woman must have done something to encourage him, either by her dress or manner or whatever.

    And I suppose that this woman was wearing something slinky and chugging from a bottle of Jägermeister on her way home.

    A 17-year-old male pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault and robbery in September, but details of the case weren't available until Thursday when a youth court judge granted a joint request by the CBC and Edmonton Journal to release the agreed statement of facts.

    According to the court document, the woman was walking home around 9:45 on that January evening after getting off the bus in downtown Edmonton. The temperature was –12C, with a windchill of –18C.

    A male approached and started attacking her without warning. He brutally raped and beat the Edmonton grandmother, and left her partially clothed on the frozen sidewalk.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11...n_2096373.html
    Last edited by kkozoriz; 12-04-2014 at 06:14 PM.

  72. #72

    Default

    ^For some reason you're obviously not able to discuss this rationally. Which is fine.

    I stated my post clearly, you didn't read it clearly, you seemingly don't comprehend what I stated clearly.

    For instance you didn't read this "above make up a very small segment of sexual assault cases that occur today"

    As stated this issue impacts people strongly.

    I'll stop posting on the subject.
    Last edited by Replacement; 12-04-2014 at 07:52 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  73. #73
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Iqaluit, Nunavut
    Posts
    2,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Komrade View Post
    The moment we start questioning our own personal safety is the moment you give the perpetrators of this crime power. No victim of rape is ever responsible for the rape. Regardless if they are passed out unconscious naked on whyte ave. It is not their fault. They couldn’t have been "any safer" or dressed "less provocative" or "been in a safer area" or "traveled with a friend". That conversation is FULL STOP and its disgusting to have.
    Thank you.
    Agreed. Thanks. I didn't want to continue discussing in this thread.

  74. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MrOilers View Post
    ^ Of course. But none of these things are to avoid being victim of a violent crime.

    That's why these analogies work about as well as some fundamentalist Muslim saying that women need to be covered up in public to avoid rape for the same reason that you need to cover up food from cats.
    Some of he thread discussions are trying to convert the statement of risk into a statement of blame when if anything it's an implied onus for self defence. The offending statement was about risk and people should go up to the first post and re-read it. I did. The problem was with stupid survey design.

    Fundamentalist religions institutionalize all kinds of rules for all kinds of reasons and then real life gets judged against these rules and assign blame. Much like law does. I see human interactions spread across a number of spectrums and dynamics between rights, responsibilities, onus, blame, nature, nurture, etc. where laws just try to draw lines through the spectrums.

    So, if you don't lock your home or vehicles doors, or leave your phone, wallet, purse unattended are you at risk of possessions being stolen? I'd say the risk is higher because there are people that will take advantage if the situation, but I shouldn't be blamed for say, not locking my doors. (Insurance companies might take this immoral route but I wouldn't.). Walking down the wrong streets at the wrong time of day in some cities increases risks too I'd say but those victimized should be considered at fault, maybe, sometimes, just oblivious to an unknown risk.

    Women are targeted for a huge number of reasons by stupid cruel people. Women that don't dress or act in "socially acceptable" ways are even targeted for abuse by other women! So the 'improperly dressed' women is at higher risk because the world is full of idiotic stupid people.


    I should add that restaurants and bars appear to consider looks when hiring for certain positions, studies have shown tall people earn more, obese people tend to get promoted less, and all sorts of other bizarre behaviours. So I wouldn't be surprised, I just assume so, that some small fraction of the male population tip certain configurations of women better and behave differently towards more scantily dressed or 'revealingly' dressed women. Just look at the media and public reactions to women that have apparel failures or school boards behaviour and dress codes aimed resulting from kids dressed a certain perceptually wrong ways. For some strange reason this matters to people. Since there is some sort of stigma towards 'scantily clad' women, a few violent men can be assumed to see this as sending a message to men and again I assume this can be a trigger to sick degenerate harmful behaviour. And as I said, in other environments it would be other women providing sick hurtful degenerate, but not physical, harm.

    The business world does the same in advising interviewees to dress up. It's all weird subjective stuff but people seem to have all kinds of underlying perceptual issues that impact their interactions.

    We also do it with language. This forum would be hostile towards me, maybe form a preconceived notion towards me, if I used socially improper words (swear words) even though they may not be hurtful in anyway to anyone and they are just different combinations of letters on the screen often with no discernible meaning. Yet #*%}% is acceptable.
    Last edited by KC; 12-04-2014 at 09:01 PM.

  75. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    ^For some reason you're obviously not able to discuss this rationally. Which is fine.

    I stated my post clearly, you didn't read it clearly, you seemingly don't comprehend what I stated clearly.

    For instance you didn't read this "above make up a very small segment of sexual assault cases that occur today"

    As stated this issue impacts people strongly.

    I'll stop posting on the subject.
    And you cannot seem to wrap your heard around the concept of not blaming the victim, not even a little bit. For some reason, some people insist on holding the victims of rape and other sexual assaults to a different standard that other victims of crime. Who is responsible? The criminal, that's who. A woman could be a stone cold sober teetotaller who's dressed in a burqua and she could still be raped. It's not about sex. It's about power. That's the concept you seem to be missing. It's wrong regardless of what she's wearing, what she's been drinking, where she is.

    Rape is very common in war zones and refugee camps. SHould women be held responsible for being there? It doesn't matter what the woman is doing or where she is, nothing excuses or explains or nullifies rape.

  76. #76
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    He's not blaming the victim. But I know you'll never see that.

    Eve

  77. #77

    Default

    He's saying that their manner of dress or their state of inebriation or their location lends itself to being raped. In a roundabout way, using various nuanced phrases and weasel words, he is. NOTHING they do leads to or lends itself to being assaulted. As I said you could have a group of women covered head to toe holding a temperance meeting in a private home with the doors and windows locked and they could still be assaulted. That's;s the thing you keep missing. It's what the rapist does, not the victims.

    Stop looking for, "if they didn't" or "If they weren't wearing" or If she wan't in that place". All that does is attempt to shift some of the blame, no matter how little from the perpetrator onto the victim.

  78. #78
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    Except he's still not saying that. You are just too emotionally involved. And why I hate it is that it is your type of over-emotionalizing that makes it impossible to even *attempt* to give young women good advice that will reduce their risks. There are predators out there. They were there in my day and I remember them practicing their arts on me. They didn't work on me but that didn't prevent me from studying them.

    Back then there was lots of advice about lessening the risk (not eliminating it, you can't do that). This advice was allowed. Now, descriptions of how predators operate is not allowed because people who think they're doing the right thing lash out. And you don't have to tell a woman of my age who has always lived life out in public what "blame the victim" means because I lived in the era when it was official policy.

    Eve

  79. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post

    Nobody is blaming the victim. Theres suggestions people be more prudent and cautious and especially in situations and places where one is much more likely to encounter predators. Its not blaming to suggest somebody take preventative actions to be personally responsible for their safety. Indeed it should be the modicum advice taken away from discussions like this.
    Yes, yes you are. You are saying she's putting herself into a situation where she is likely or more likely to be raped. She is not doing anything wrong or illegal. You're looking for ways to say "If she hadn't done this or that. this would;t have happened." As it was said earlier, if a woman was walking naked down Whyte Avenue as the bars are letting out, that doesn't give anyone there the right to rape her. It doesn't excuse their decision to decide to rape her. Stop saying "If women would just stop looking so attractive and/or vulnerable then men wouldn't try to rape them." which is essentially what you are saying.

    The only person responsible when a woman gets raped is thaw rapist. PERIOD. FULL STOP.

    And as far as rape not happening during a break-in, look at this story. Remember this?

    Edmonton man admitted to attacking senior who later died from her injuries
    Joint submission filed for life sentence

    BY TONY BLAIS ,EDMONTON SUN
    FIRST POSTED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 08, 2013 05:15 PM MST | UPDATED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 08, 2013 08:30 PM MST

    According to an agreed statement of facts, Witzaney terrorized residents of the Edmonton Chinese Senior’s Lodge, 9525 102 A Ave., between 2000 and 2008 and was repeatedly charged with trespassing and indecent acts.

    Crown prosecutor Tania Holland said his photo had even been placed in the lodge to warn residents about him.

    On May 8, 2011, about 2:20 a.m., Witzaney tried to break in to two suites at the lodge through windows, but was stymied when a 77-year-old man punched him in the face and then the senior and a housekeeper scared him away.

    A police officer responded about 3 a.m. and noticed two smashed windows, but after the officer could not find a suspect, he cleared the investigation and left the lodge.

    Sometime after the officer left, Witzaney returned and broke into the suite of the 84-year-old victim by smashing a window and began sexually assaulting her.

    http://www.edmontonsun.com/2013/02/0...m-her-injuries
    I guess in your world that woman must have done something to encourage him, either by her dress or manner or whatever.

    And I suppose that this woman was wearing something slinky and chugging from a bottle of Jägermeister on her way home.

    A 17-year-old male pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual assault and robbery in September, but details of the case weren't available until Thursday when a youth court judge granted a joint request by the CBC and Edmonton Journal to release the agreed statement of facts.

    According to the court document, the woman was walking home around 9:45 on that January evening after getting off the bus in downtown Edmonton. The temperature was –12C, with a windchill of –18C.

    A male approached and started attacking her without warning. He brutally raped and beat the Edmonton grandmother, and left her partially clothed on the frozen sidewalk.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/11...n_2096373.html
    I'd say that these are evidence that sick, twisted, demented, unethical and other such minds can do you great harm if you give them any opportunity, reason or excuse and so you defend yourself when you can but that will never be enough as predators sometimes win. Ever go to a restaurant with anyone that was accidentally under-billed? I have, and I've known people that have taken advantage of the error by not paying up the proper amount. Many people are simply predatory.

  80. #80

    Default

    ^^ Thanks Eve, it is appreciated.

    You definitely get it, and it is unfortunate the rhetoric and black and white thinking gets ratched up to the degree nothing else gets heard.

    Sometimes emotion just takes over and people read or hear what they want to.

    It is an emotional topic.
    Last edited by Replacement; 12-04-2014 at 09:18 PM.
    "if god exists and he allowed that to happen, then its better that he doesn't exist"

  81. #81

    Default

    I have a number of friends who have been sexually assaulted. Two were raped, at least three had an attempt made that was unsuccessful for a number of different reasons. What I am telling you is what they have told me. They've been there. They now what the coded suggestions of "don't dress like that" and "Don't have too much to drink" mean. They heard it all and they know how it feels. People claim that they're telling them this "for their own good" but what it comes down to is they were being told "If only your dress wasn't so short…." or "If you hand had one too many…" It was putting the emphasis on what they did as opposed to their attackers.

    Is it an emotional issue? Of course it is. Am I emotional about it? goddamn right I am. Friends of mine were violated in the most debasing, horrific ways. One was severely beaten and she was actually told that she shouldn't have fought back, as if someone that would do that to another human being would care if they fought back or not. That sort of attitude leads to crap like this *****


    Texas Candidate's Comment About Rape Causes a Furor
    AP
    Published: March 26, 1990
    EMAIL
    PRINT

    The Republican gubernatorial nominee apologized today for an off-the-cuff remark suggesting that some victims of rape should ''relax and enjoy it.''

    The candidate, Clayton Williams, had initially played down the remark as being a joke.

    Women's groups and political opponents of Mr. Williams strongly criticized the candidate for the comment.

    It ''questions his ability to understand the kinds of problems faced by the people of Texas,'' said Ann Richards, the State Treasurer and a runoff candidate for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination. ''Rape is a crime of violence.''

    http://www.nytimes.com/1990/03/26/us...s-a-furor.html
    That happened years ago and yet such attitudes still continue today.

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/07...ould-remember/

    Republican lawmaker very sorry he said men should be able to rape women if abortion is legal

    http://www.salon.com/2014/02/27/repu...tion_is_legal/
    1. Todd Akin: “If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways of shutting that whole thing down” - mid 2012 Senate Campaign

    2. Clayton Williams: “If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it” - mid 1990 Gubernatorial race in Texas

    3. Chuck Winder: "I would hope that when a woman goes in to a physician with a rape issue, that physician will indeed ask her about perhaps her marriage, was this pregnancy caused by normal relations in a marriage or was it truly caused by a rape. I assume that’s part of the counseling that goes on." - March 2012

    4. Ken Buck: “A jury could very well conclude that this is a case of buyer’s remorse … It appears to me … you invited him over… the appearance is of consent.” - October 2010

    5. Rick Santorum: “I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created — in the sense of rape — but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you… rape victims should make the best of a bad situation.” - January, 2012
    And the harper Government claims to be against rape but don't you dare think of having an abortion if you get pregnant because of it. They know they couldn't pull this crap in Canada so they decide to take it out on victims in war zones and refugees.

    “Once again, we see the government of Canada exporting its conservative ideology internationally, to the detriment of millions of survivors of sexual violence who need access to these essential services,” said Sandeep Prasad, the Executive Director of Action Canada for Population and Development, who is at the HRC following negotiations. “We need only look to the exclusion of funding for safe abortion services, even where legal, from Canada’s international aid under the Muskoka Initiative for another example. This time Canada is standing in the way of ensuring survivors of sexual violence have access to services they need, including access to safe abortion.”

    http://www.canadianprogressiveworld..../#.U0oM78boaX0
    So an I emotional? I say again, damn right I am. My question ism why the hell aren't you?

  82. #82

    Default

    ^ "And the harper Government claims to be against rape but don't you dare think of having an abortion if you get pregnant because of it."

    Hmm. Life is never just black and white is it. At one week, one month, 5 months, 9 months? Maybe after the baby is born. I don't think there are always right answers to some problems, only coping and compromise in trying to limit the damage, so in some circumstances society victimizes others when it has to.

  83. #83

    Default

    Nobody is talking about late term abortions. It's about forcing women who get raped in war zones or refugee camps to bear the child of their rapist. Some, not all, of these women would choose to end the pregnancy as soon as they found out they were pregnant. Don't tell me you're part of the "rape babies are a gift from god" crowd.

    Next you'll be joining up with the "Rapists have paternal rights" crowd I suppose.

    http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/01/us/rapist-child-custody/

  84. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kkozoriz View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Replacement View Post
    ^For some reason you're obviously not able to discuss this rationally. Which is fine.

    I stated my post clearly, you didn't read it clearly, you seemingly don't comprehend what I stated clearly.

    For instance you didn't read this "above make up a very small segment of sexual assault cases that occur today"

    As stated this issue impacts people strongly.

    I'll stop posting on the subject.
    And you cannot seem to wrap your heard around the concept of not blaming the victim, not even a little bit. For some reason, some people insist on holding the victims of rape and other sexual assaults to a different standard that other victims of crime. Who is responsible? The criminal, that's who. A woman could be a stone cold sober teetotaller who's dressed in a burqua and she could still be raped. It's not about sex. It's about power. That's the concept you seem to be missing. It's wrong regardless of what she's wearing, what she's been drinking, where she is.

    Rape is very common in war zones and refugee camps. SHould women be held responsible for being there? It doesn't matter what the woman is doing or where she is, nothing excuses or explains or nullifies rape.
    You're arguing with no one.

  85. #85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KC View Post
    I should add that restaurants and bars appear to consider looks when hiring for certain positions, studies have shown tall people earn more, obese people tend to get promoted less, and all sorts of other bizarre behaviours. So I wouldn't be surprised, I just assume so, that some small fraction of the male population tip certain configurations of women better and behave differently towards more scantily dressed or 'revealingly' dressed women. Just look at the media and public reactions to women that have apparel failures or school boards behaviour and dress codes aimed resulting from kids dressed a certain perceptually wrong ways. For some strange reason this matters to people.
    Exactly. The way we look does matter. The evidence of that is everywhere and it's foolish to pretend otherwise.

  86. #86
    Partially Addicted to C2E
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    204

    Default

    Looks definitely does matter. I've worked in a restaurant for many years. The pretty ones always get more tips on average.

    I think "blame" is probably an inappropriate word to use as it does imply the victim is responsible in some ways and I can see why that will **** kkozoriz off.

    But here's the thing, how can anyone make any suggestions for people so that they can avoid being a victim of crime without accidentally "blaming" the victims? It is important not to empower the rapist, but at the same time you want to provide the public with some advice to avoid becoming the next victim. How would you go about it?

  87. #87
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Grandin 2014--, Garneau 2012-2014, North Downtown 2006-2012
    Posts
    3,243

    Default

    ^ Indeed.

    Eve

  88. #88
    C2E Continued Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Edmonton
    Posts
    1,438

    Default

    Agreed. It is irresponsible for us to lay blame on any victim of any crime but there are always steps one can take to mitigate becoming a target. An analogy might be the advice we would give to people looking to deter car thieves such as parking in a well lit area, hiding your valuables, buying a steering wheel lock, displaying "All Valuables Removed" stickers in your window, and locking your car doors can be useful advice. Someone doing these things is less likely to become a victim of vehicle crime. I don't think anybody would suggest that someone not taking this advice "deserved" to get their car broken into or stolen. That person could have done things differently that may have changed what happened but nobody deserves to be a victim of crime.

    The same can be said for sexual assault survivors. Following advice like walking on major we'll lit streets, not walking by yourself, etc etc.. May help you become less of a target it doesn't guarantee your safety and by no means does it suggest that someone who doesn't follow these steps deserved to be a victim of crime.

  89. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lazymonkeygod View Post
    But here's the thing, how can anyone make any suggestions for people so that they can avoid being a victim of crime without accidentally "blaming" the victims?
    You can't. But what kkororiz and others like him/her fail to realize is that a victim's share in the responsibility for what happened (1) does not diminish the severity of the crime and the need for punishing the criminal and also (2) does not in any way mean that the victim is to be punished in any way further. All it means is that certain behaviors are in certain cases best avoided. What "certain" and "best" mean is, of course, the responsibility (that word again) of every one of us.

    A side note: I think simplistic questions about clothing and makeup miss the point. It's just like obscenity -- it's not that hard to agree something is obscene, it's just hard to put the definition in words.

  90. #90

    Default

    Great poster!!!



    "A collective of journalists posted a satirical image of citizens donning devil's horns, ..."

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36403909


    Also interesting:

    Twitter abuse - '50% of misogynistic tweets from women'
    26 May 2016


    The Demos study also looked at international tweets and found more than 200,000 aggressive tweets using the words, "slut" and "whore", were sent to 80,000 people over the same three weeks.


    ...

    Abuse on social networks is not new and neither is the revelation that women contribute to the problem.

    A 2014 study from cosmetics firm Dove found that over five million negative tweets were posted about beauty and body image. Four out of five were sent by women.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-36380247

    It's also VERY interesting that slut and whore don't get **** out on c2e. But ***** ( i diot) does.




    ~
    Last edited by KC; 27-05-2016 at 09:39 PM.

  91. #91
    C2E Hard Core Contributor
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Crawford Plains, Millwoods since 1985
    Posts
    2,737

    Default

    And the best part is the feminists will still say its all men's fault, even though it's quite clear women can be pretty fuking nasty to each other.

    Whoever believes modern day feminism is about equality needs a swift kick to the head.

  92. #92

    Default

    Although a kick to the head may be a tad harsh, I do agree with the basic point you're trying to make.

  93. #93

    Default

    I sense some hostility here. Reality not aligning with expectations maybe?

  94. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kitlope View Post
    And the best part is the feminists will still say its all men's fault, even though it's quite clear women can be pretty fuking nasty to each other.

    Whoever believes modern day feminism is about equality needs a swift kick to the head.
    Feminists only see life as black and white. Sure it would be great if all over the world women are treated as equals to men but feminists seem to want us to be androgynous. Most women do want equal work for equal pay, more advancement opportunities etc. but most women still want men to be men and not carbon copies of females. Yes women can be nasty to each other, it's not right but it happens but women do have the ability to take it with a pinch of salt. Feminists seem to think they don't.
    Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

  95. #95

    Default

    I imagine that over the last 150 years or so there's been a considerable evolution or change of what women want in terms of rights, and then change by women themselves as they age and go through different phases of life. So I would wonder who and when you could label any women a feminist or non-feminist. Only a few women attain positions where they professionally act as feminists and create a party-line if you will. Culture and perceptions change and the objectives of people change.




    Charles Fourier, a Utopian Socialist and French philosopher, is credited with having coined the word "féminisme" in 1837.[9] The words "féminisme" ("feminisme") and "féminist" ("feminist") first appeared in France and the Netherlands in 1872,[10] Great Britain in the 1890s, and the United States in 1910,[11][12] and the Oxford English Dictionary lists 1852 as the year of the first appearance of "feminist"[13] and 1895 for "feminism".[14] Depending on historical moment, culture and country, feminists around the world have had different causes and goals. Most western feminist historians assert that all movements working to obtain women's rights should be considered feminist movements, even when they did not (or do not) apply the term to themselves.[15][16][17][18][19][20] Other historians assert that the term should be limited to the modern feminist movement and its descendants. Those historians use the label "protofeminist" to describe earlier movements.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism
    Last edited by KC; 28-05-2016 at 06:23 PM.

  96. #96

    Default

    Here's the poster I mentioned above.



    http://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cps...rapetweet3.jpg




    Brazil 'mass rape' video: President calls crisis talks

    "...The girl, 16, believes she was doped after going to her boyfriend's house last Saturday and says she woke up in a different house, surrounded by 30 men."


    "A collective of journalists has posted a satirical image of citizens donning devil's horns, condemning a rape victim for having provoked the attack.

    The inscription reads "No to sexism", and the images, clockwise from top right: "But look at her clothes…"; "She deserved it!"; "16 years old and already has a son…"; "Apparently she was on drugs".

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36404325
    Last edited by KC; 28-05-2016 at 10:46 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •