Sennadar Forums

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-a ... 1em6n.html


This one actually got me to thinking. whilst its true that there is freedom of expression, on the other hand , you don't wave a flag in front of a red bull either. By no means am I Gd forbid condoning any act of violence , that's BS, but you cant deny that your drawing attention to yourself as well. modesty has it virtues as well.that said , i do understand where these people are coming from as well.

I'm about to sound disgustingly Zen, but sometimes it rings true: There is balance in everything. There is a balance between a woman's freedom to dress as she pleases and the known dangers of inciting a man to passion. Is the man still responsible? Yes. But, does the woman share in that responsibility? Oftentimes, Yes.

Some women dress to look nice, some to look cute, some to look lascivious and incite sexual thoughts. Those that fall into the latter category should not be surprised that out of 6-7 billion people, someone decided to take the thoughts incited by her manner of dress and make them a reality.

Am I defending rapists? Hell no. Am I advocating wisdom and restraint in the manner of dress worn in public? YES.

-DM

I read elsewhere that the aim is to highlight that only about 1-in-20 reported rapes results in a conviction and often the police or courts suggest that if a woman incites sexual thoughts then she should shoulder some of the blame.

Whilst there is something to be said about being appropriate, many of these women are dressed the same as their peers at nightclubs or parties etc. Being horny doesn't give anyone the right to receive satisfaction, so I fail to see how dressing provocatively might somehow translate into implicit consent for sex.

Our "civilization" accepts this as a kind of diminished responsibility and therefore a mitigating excuse for rape. I don't see that changing anytime soon. Recognizing real consent is something most people master before puberty. As many courts recognize; if a person is in no condition to give consent then having sex with them should leave you open to rape charges, no matter how slutty they might seem.

Is this the solution? No. It might start some conversations about these issues though.

The apologist argument of 'they instigated it' is a classic fallacy of blaming the victim. If an action has been taken, the responsibility of the action must be on the behalf of the agent, regardless of circumstance or motive. If such action is deemed to be a crime by a particular law system, as rape is, then no circumstances or motive should excuse them from it. Dressing in a provocative manner is not against the law, and does not in any circumstance justifies rape. Just as a murderer cannot use inflammatory language on part of his victim as his defense, dress standard of anyone does not at all legitimize sexual assault.

Fundamentally, this is also regarding the issue of women's rights and their ability to control their own bodies. They have the freedom to dress as they see fit, and this right should be defended regardless of how offensive or unsavioury the fashion is to personal tastes. I'm certainly not a big fan of Lady Gaga or Marilyn Manson, but their dress is part of their statement regarding society and personal identity, and it is important such rights are not eroded.

If you don't understand that when someone isn't consenting you must stop - you deserve to be held accountable for your actions.

Let me put it bluntly (Kiddies, time to find another thread): If you can't keep your dick in your pants, you deserve to have it cut off. (Metaphorically speaking)

Edit: Err, oops, missed a few words

That's it, Spec, I'm telling on you!

Oh wait....

DigitalMaestro wrote:There is a balance between a woman's freedom to dress as she pleases and the known dangers of inciting a man to passion. Is the man still responsible? Yes. But, does the woman share in that responsibility? Oftentimes, Yes.

Some women dress to look nice, some to look cute, some to look lascivious and incite sexual thoughts. Those that fall into the latter category should not be surprised that out of 6-7 billion people, someone decided to take the thoughts incited by her manner of dress and make them a reality.

Am I defending rapists? Hell no. Am I advocating wisdom and restraint in the manner of dress worn in public? YES.

-DM

Actually, what you're doing is giving an apologist argument.
Just because someone does something that makes you feel something - doesn't mean they're responsible for you acting upon them.
It's the same argument used to excuse people who go beat up gay/lesbian for holding hands or kissing. "Oh, they didn't have to be so blatent about it. I think that {X} is still responsible for beating up {Y}. But {Y} shares some responsibility for going and inciting that by doing {A/B/C}"

Women should not need to "show wisdom and restraint in the manner of dress worn in public" just because some idiots don't understand the word "No".
Seriously, if you can't appreciate the beauty of a women (or, if you're so inclined: a man) without needing to act upon those desires, you need to get your head checked.


(Did I mention that I've been sick and starting to feel a bit better...?)