(July 18, 2010 at 11:03 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: There's nothing to back up. I'm merely pointing out that it's not victim blaming to suggest that precautions are available whether they exist or not. That's going from a factual matter to a matter of values, it's a non-sequitur.
Whether it's true or not that clothing makes a difference, for example, is irrelevant to the matter of victim blaming. It's only victim blaming if I were to say "the woman should/shouldn't wear X clothing(s)". For you to claim that I 'really mean' "should", is just your emotionally charge and I think it's pretty arrogant to claim to know what I 'really' think despite my best efforts repeatedly to put into words that I'm not saying (or meaning) 'should'.
EvF
Keep on backtracking. It's funny.