Rape blame

This has been a recurring issue in certain newspapers over the last few days.

Basically long story short can a woman be paritally to blame for being raped if she flirts and dress provockatively? (omg lol sp)

I say yes. Beleive me young girls nowayds dress like complete whores. Last Friday I saw a girl who looked about 15 with a skirt just barely covering her southeren region while wearing a top to draw attetnion to her breasts. She was going out 'to party on down' with another female friend dressed the same. Now I've seen these type of girls before. They are 14 year old whores who flirt with guys 3 times their age in hope alco pops will be bought for them.

If girls dress that slutty, and act that slutty, leading men on than yes some of the blame for being raped lies on their shoulders.

Here's an annaology. If I were in prision and it was shower time and I knocked the soap out of Bubba's hand, afterwads calling him a 'black faggot' am I not to partially blame for being raped? Afterall my behaviour and ignorent attidue has certainly let me to that somewhat sitcky situation.

You have a very good point. It's really sickening that girls try to act so slutty. I went to a huge Club one night where it was supposed to be a 17-21 club. However this 14 year old girl snuck in, hooked herself up with a 21 year old dude who knew how old she was, and well you can guess what happend. It's sickening. CHILD MOLESTERS!!! SLUTTY GIRLS! DRIVES ME INSANE!!! Makes me want to kill someone.

I am not condoning rape, but I'd have to agree. I've always seen promiscuous teenagers as "asking for it." I know there are lines to be drawn in the legal system (Judge: "Define 'slutty,' Mr. Lawyer") and loopholes to find. I'm a little on the fence with this, since there are exceptions to everything.

Eh, the blame lies on the whoever rapes the other person.

If someone says no, it most likely means no. No matter how they dress, or act, you can't just say "lol, she's a slut, she wanted it".

While that is true, I've seen scenarios where some chick would wear a low-cut top and get visibly upset when people look at her breasts falling out. What's up with that?

I've also heard of other scenarios where a girl would lead a guy to a bed to have sex, get the guy all worked up, and then tell him that she doesn't feel like doing anything after all. Maybe I'm lenient towards the guys that get upset because I'm a masochist. :)

Like I said, I think there are certainly some exceptions.

I agree that girls act like total retards nowadays, but I don't really see that as an excuse to rape them.

If the issue at hand is provocatively dressing gives incent to rape, then yes, it does.

If the issue at hand is that the woman is partially to blame because of how she dresses, then in a very roundabout way, yes it does, but in a more direct (and legal) manner, it doesn't.

No, it doesn't.

There's no excuse for someone to lose control and rape someone else. It's the raper's fault entirely. And to say otherwise, I think, is pretty stupid.

I just don't see how dressing like a slut means "oh wow, she must want to have sex with me!". It's a fasion that's everywhere in our society. So clearly, that's not what women mean at all by dressing down.

If they arent conscious, they cant say no.

I dont think that dressing a certain way makes you responsible in a legal sense. Also, you cant really say that "You dressed like a slut, so you got raped." Thats like telling the Jews that they deserved to be gassed to death for choosing to live in Germany during WW2.

No, you're not understanding. I'm not saying dressing like a slut means a female deserfves to get raped. I'm saying, like the girls I've seen, dressing like a real whore and flirting with men so they buy them a drink is leading them on. And by leading them on, they have some blame for that.

I'm just saying that dressing provocatively gives people more reason to rape them. I'm not saying "if they don't want to be raped they shouldn't dress that way," I'm just saying that if they dress that way, rapists have more incentive, or possibly more reason to choose them out of everyone else.

Rape is a crime, always.

Unless she's like, super hot. Then its ok.

Spam brings up a good point.

But sometimes saying no is sexy. :(

I think I speak with everyone here with the exception of BB when I say that the less we know about your sexual activities, the better. No offense, its just... damn, theres some things that we just dont need to know.

You guys should know when I'm kidding around. You guys suck. :(

If someone leaves money out in the open rather than keeping it hidden and it gets stolen, don't you think they aren't completely innocent? Temptation might be considered provocation.

Maybe a slightly lesser offense than unprovoked rape, but I don't see how it would be the victim's fault. They dress that way for attention, not a brutal rape.

Yes it would be worse. The intention would clearly be to taunt the starving man, plus food is a bit more neccessary to live than sex (I know this because I'm still alive, lol).

What's your point?

Placing something out in the open, knowing there are such people out there is not very intelligent, and not perfectly innocent. Someone is bound to notice and take it. I'm not saying that every woman who was raped is at fault, but the behavior of some of these idiotic, slutty girls need to be changed.

Perhaps, but it shouldn't be an excuse to rape. If that were the case, we'd have to blame stores for having window displays, and basically any other form of advertisement, when their product gets stolen. After all, their intent was to lure consumers.

wrong. No matter what she does, if she says no, it means no. You're trying to lighten the blame for something that is criminally wrong, in any sense of the word. What next? People who walk around slowly without guns are "asking" to be robbed? Gas stations that don't have bullet proof glass are "asking" to be robbed? It's rediculous. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. Girls that dress in such a way are asking to be hit on, or flirted with, or even ludely flirted with, but not raped. It's like if, suppose, a kid were walking along the sidewalk at midnight, and a drunk driver went off the road and hit that kid. WHAT WAS THE KID DOING OUT THERE AT MIDNIGHT!?!??! (many would say, as justification somehow for the driver's actions). WHO THE **** CARES!?!? I would say back, because that doesn't derive from the fact that someone else murdered that child. I cannot reinterate how stupid this "partial rape blame" concept really is. You can say they're asking for it all day, in a passing sense, but legally? Nigga please.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Bj Blaskowitz again.

:(

It's not an excuse to rape anyone. it's an excuse to call them retards, and to tell them to dress properly.

Society has a dess code?

No. It doesn't have a dress code, either. However, there's nothing stopping you from calling yourself a retard on the internet, but you still look stupid. It's then okay to tell them to act properly.

BJ stated that by Bebop's logic, to walk around without a gun is to ask to be robbed.

That's not necesarilly true, but we do take precautions to prevent robbery. We lock our doors, buy alarms, monitor who comes near our belongings.

If you don't dress oversexually, you won't be attractive to the average guy. When I see a super hot, oversexual woman, I think, 'dang, I'd like to plow that.' But when I see a woman dressed nicely, and looking beautiful (as opposed to hot or sexy), I think of her as a beautiful woman whom I'd like to get to know, but to 'plow' such a woman would be uncomfortable.

The problem is our STUPID FREAKING MTV-ESQUE CULTURE. Going to clubs, dressing sexy, taking off all your clothes because it's hot in here, drinking, making music videos where all the women are wearing next to nothing... It makes us think that we, as a culture, should do these things. It's ridiculous. It makes the younger generation look like retards, having unprotected sex with multiple partners, doing drugs and drinking recklessly. It just causes problems, but we idolize it. My 8 year old daughter wants to listen to 50 cent, Eminem, Akon, Nelly and others, but I think it's ridiculous. I don't allow her to, unless I'm familiar with the song and know that it's okay.

I seriously hate what this is doing to our society.

Women wouldn't dress this way if it wasn't made out to be so glamorous on TV. Well, non-slutty women wouldn't. The slutty ones still would, and it would still cause problems for them, but otherwise, yeah.

We seem to be assuming that sluttily dressed attractive women are the most likely to be raped. I'm not sure I buy this. I know someone is most likely to be raped by someone they know, and that rape is more an anger/violence/control thing than sexual gratification. So I'm not convinced that "she was dressed slutty" even CORRELATES with increased chances of rape, much less there being a CAUSAL link.

Someone come up with some **** data otherwise this entire argument is retarded.

a good example of "asking for it" is the episode of degrassi: the next generation where paige is being a slutty flirt with dean, a college guy. he rapes, she cries, she tells someone 6 months later, they go to court, he wins, she takes her boyfriends car, crashes into deans car, the end. (THIS TAKES PLACE OVER THE SPAN of 4 episodes)

... she wasn't asking for it.

not that I've seen the episode, but form what you've said, she wasn't asking for it.

I'm not talking too much about older women, in their 20s and so forth.

But when girls age 10-17 dress like that, they aren't necesarilly raped, but they are often tricked into thinking they ought to have sex with a guy. It's called statutory rape, more specifically, Sexual Conduct with a Minor, here in Arizona. It's a class 2 felony if the minor is 15 and under, and a class 6 felony if the minor is 16 or 17.

They aren't raped, as in "forced", but they dress like that, and guys trick them into having sex with them. If 11 year olds didn't wear mini-skirts and make up, weird 20 year old guys wouldn't look at them as someone you might have sex with. I knew a 10 year old girl who was "dating" a 26 year old man, and her 12 year old friend was dating the guy's 24 year old friend. Both of them listened to hip-hop music, and dressed like most girls in hip-hop videos. It's just frustrating because it really did ruin the two girls, for life. They'll never be the same again, thanks to what has happened to them. But I guess if it wasn't the awful music and such, it would've been something else.

probably violent video games, ya know

Have you said that before, or is someone deleting posts?

Oh ok.

Back on topic...

I AM RAPE MAN! I RAPE BAD WOMEN TO TEACH THEM A LESSON!

I think the ONLY exception to the rule would be some level of statutory rape. Now, follow me here. Say some dude is at a party. We'll call this guy Stan. You see, Stan......well, Stan is the man. A 29 year old man to be exact. Let's say he meets a girl there named Stacy. Stacy is a 16 year old girl who is into older guys. Guys just like Stan! Stacy also likes to dress like she's on vacation in the Caribbean all year around. Now, Stacy and Stan are engaged in conversation. Stan asks Stacy how old she is. Stacy lies to Stan and says she's 23. She even produces a fake ID to prove it. Poor Stan wouldn't know what a fake ID looks like if his life depended on it. So, he falls for it.

Flash forward 2 hours:
Stan and Stacy have teh secks. Buttsecks even!

Flash forward 3 months:
Stacy ends up preggy and points her finger at Stan. The same finger, in fact, that she had in his rectum 3 months earlier! But, that's a different story. And if you want to read it, you'll have to buy the book "Stan does Stacy." Anyway, Stan is now on trial for statutory rape.

Wrong or right? In this instance, I'd say wrong. Stan was fooled. But, a story like that won't hold up in court.


I was at a museum in here in Chicago last Sunday. I went with my friend Julie, her boyfriend Joe, and Julie's 3 y.o. son, Josh. I noticed that there were many hot looking chicks at the museum that day. I remember commenting on a couple of them. Julie replied to my comments with "Bill, they're 15 years old for cryin' out loud!" I was all like "ORLY?!?" I honestly couldn't tell. 15 year old chicks didn't look that good or old when I was their age.

Conclusion: I should just move to Canada with Vampiro and listen to awesome metal while banging 14 year old chicks.....LEGALLY!!!

/fin

Wtfux, 14 year olds are legal in Canada?

Maybe I secretly want slutty-looking girls to get raped. Maybe that's why I see some people as "asking for it." :(

That or you're just like, not very nice.

Well wishing won't make it happen, if you want something done right you have to do it yourself.

I must take things in my own hands for great justice.

And I shall film.

I call director.

"Nonono, Money shot, Money shot! In the eye! God **** it...cut!"

at lest mr. rapist dean used a condom

huh!?

Wow, and people say I make no sense...

NOTHING HAS CHANGED

And uh, if you could prove that the girl had a fake I.D., you could probably get off on the statutory charge. Enjoy your 18 years of garnished wages though.

[quote=Bj Blaskowitz] WHO THE **** CARES!?!? I would say back, because that doesn't derive from the fact that someone else murdered that child.
[CENTER]De-rive
[/CENTER]


[CENTER][LIST=1]
[*] To obtain or receive from a source.
[*] To arrive at by reasoning; deduce or infer: derive a conclusion from facts.
[*]To trace the origin or development of (a word).
[*] Linguistics. To generate (a surface structure) from a deep structure.[/LIST][LEFT][SIZE=3][COLOR=Black]
Word abuse vexes me.

Anyway, for once I agree with Kodachi. The fact that someone has just violated a woman is inexcusable. However, it is a reasonable assumption that there are scumbags out there who will take advantage of a seemingly sexually charged woman [SIZE=1][COLOR=DimGray](Kodachi) [/COLOR][/SIZE][/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=3][COLOR=Black]and have a bit of skin-fun. You cannot change the behavior of the criminal element, only punish them; however, you can make women less prone to becoming targets. That is why it is in a woman's best interest not to dress like a slut.

That being said, I appreciate the body of a fine woman as much as the next man, and probably then some. But I really would enjoy seeing fewer girls my age dressing ten years older. It's just safer, and fewer people will be harassed.[/COLOR]
[/SIZE][/LEFT]
[/CENTER]

oh you can just suck my balls, kid

Am I asking for it? If I say no, does that make it your fault or mine for what transpires?

This just in:
I was reading the paper this morning when I saw the headline "Binge Drink Women to lose Rape Claim right".
I was going to read it, but my neighbor took it, so I picked up the Daily Telegraph. In it was the same story, under the headline 'Drunken consent "is still consent to sex". '
The story follows:
Young women were told yesterday that binge-drinking could cost them the right to complain of being raped. A jury in the trial of a man who had sexual intercourse with a drama student while she was unconscious in a public corridor was told "Drunken consent is still consent".
The warning came on the day Britain prepared for its 24-hour (pub) licensing laws.

Awesome, although that seems like it leads dangerously close to "she didnt say no, therefor it isnt rape" type logic being allowed.

Also, pub licensing? What do you mean?

I blame all rape on LoS.

[quote=Lord of Spam]Also, pub licensing? What do you mean?
Means public houses (bars) can stay open 24/7 now.

[quote=Opeth]
Flash forward 2 hours:
Stan and Stacy have teh secks. Buttsecks even!

Flash forward 3 months:
Stacy ends up preggy and points her finger at Stan.


What, from buttsex? What in the hemhorraging hell is going on?

More tonight at 10.

Let's take one scenario not discussed yet. How about women who will go back to a room, not say "yes or no" either way to the guy and let him have sex with her, and THEN claim rape afterwards, like the chick who tried it on Kobe Bryant? Or chicks who get wasted drunk and consent to sex, then claim date rape? Not only is it not entirely the guy's fault in that case, but it's almost completely the chick's fault. Hey morons, don't let yourself get in that situation and you won't be "raped".

As far as the guys who force themselves upon a woman even if she says no, and force her to have sex with them by threat of physical violence, that one is entirely the guy's fault. There's no excuse for that one.

Not really, because she's asking for it. She's a girl and shouldn't get ****faced by herself, anyways. If she doesn't decline, then it's not really rape.

Uh, women have jsut as much right to get ****ed by themselves as men...

As for having sex while drunk, they should have the responsibility to take care of herself. But to say that a drunk woman deserves to be raped crosses a line.

If you act willing and don't say no and are of legal age it isn't rape. DONE'd

This is true.

Rape is a subject that you can't really just make conclusions based on scenarios, because each case if different. Really, the woman can say no anytime before and during sex. If the act proceeds or continues, regardless of resistence, etc, it's rape. What shouldn't be allowed is rape claims post ex facto, y'know, like, where she does it for revenge, or out of regret to try and regain some dignity ("I'm not a slut, he's a rapist! Woe is me!") This is abosolutely the lowest thing anyone can do. The rape laws being as pro-women as they are seem to do a decent job of damning both the guilty, and the not-so-guilty. It's too easy just to say rape without any really hard evidence months after and get someone put away for years.

It's disturbing. But, as for provocitive dressers, underage or not, it's not fine to rape them just because. If someone steals my BMW after I leave it unlocked in a back alley of a bad neighbourhood, they're still a theif, period. Sure, I may have been asking for it to get stolen, but a crime is a crime.

Great way to end a thread.

It's the same concept as skydiving with a blanket instead of a parachute.

Uh..... I dont see how the two things are similar at all. Please explain.

While very, very slimly possible to successfully land with a blanket, it's best not to put yourself in such a position, even if you are a professional at skydiving. You put yourself in between a rock and a hard place, so it's half your fault. The other half goes to the pilot of the plane for allowing such stupidity on his watch, or the television staff responsible for daring the skydiver to do something so stupid.

....I dont know how many cartoons you've watched, but a towel isnt going to provide enough force to save you.

Like I said, very, very slim chances. (If the blanket was large and polyester or something...) That's not the point.

...It kinda is... The amount of drag that is need to slow a human to safe speeds is not able to be generated by a towel.

And besides, even if it were, the still arent that similar. If you jump out of a plane with a towel, theres (I'd bet) somewhere around a 99.99etc% chance of you getting VERY badly hurt. But Ive seen plenty of women that get smashed with out getting raped.

I (kinda) get what you're trying to get at, but its not a very good way to go about it.

Edit: Besides, wasnt it already pointed out that most rape is a power issue, not a "zomg hawt must have" type thing? If thats true (which the vast majority of evidence seems to back up) then it wouldnt really matter how the woman dressed, as the guy only cares that he's forcing himself on a woman, not that her skirt is too short etc.

Girls can get smashed by themselves at a guy-filled party if they want and not come out of it a rape victim, but that should be cosidered luck on her part or tact on the guys' part. It's just a matter of placing yourself in a harmful position intentionally.

That's why there are two faults. In my opinion, anyways. :/

I was trying to point out that you cant assign blame to a female for placing herself in a situation in which she gets raped. Unless she grew a penis and some how raped herself, its not her fault. Its the guys fault for not having the self control to keep it to himself.

By your logic, if I were to have, say, traced the phone the time you called me, then driven to your house and killed you, it would have been (partially) your own fault. You should have obviously known that there are psychos everywhere, and been more precautious.

For the record, this wasnt meant to be a threat, subtle or other wise. I only even thought that it might be interpreted as such as I was finishing it, so I thought that I had better specify.

Actually, you're right. I should take more precautions and shouldn't be so trusting, considering I do know better and have a general knack for finding the wrong guys at all the wrong times.

My sister is thirteen, and has just recently joined my school.
The general opinion of her for the past years is that she is rather attractive, and so, being the good older brother that I am, we discussed different ways of preventing her from being harassed. I mean, she's been whistled at in the streets, guys leer etc. In fact, when we were in a train down to canterbury a truly creepy man came over, sat in our coach, and just started talking and giggling as he looked her up and down.
After all this, she's really smart about floating around; she doesn't do anything overly provocative (but in this day and age, does that mean much?).
However, we live in an environment of mindless self indulgence; kids destroying themselves for the sheer unholy delight of it. I've never had anything against partying, because its a person's right to do what they want (within reason). My little sister has been invited to parties that go beyond reason, which is doubly worrying considering the fact that she is dating a guy old enough to count as statutory rape in the worst case scenario.
All one can hope for is that she will be sensible and not 'ask' for trouble.
But, given a worst case scenario, is it her fault?