Objectifying women

[Scented Nectar]

We know that walking on narrow high surfaces is a danger risk of getting hurt for sure. We don't know that sexy clothes induce any higher a number of stranger rapes at all.

One thing we do know for sure is that stranger rapes are a tiny percentage of the total. Why is no one warning women not to live with, or ever be alone with, men they personally know and who they trust to be normal people? That's the huge total of them.

Bolded above is a serious question. I really wonder why no one is warning women that they should consider living, working and travelling with women only, in order to prevent any possible future danger. It would be kind of unreasonable, wouldn't it? And that's even though the very real risk increase is huge in comparison to the potential sexy clothing stranger increase being talked about here.

[In This Mind]

Nothing but sheer emotion behind this. Address my actual points or I'm done here.

I have addressed every single one of your 'points', repeatedly.

You still have not backed up any of your points with actual facts. Unless your next post contains actual statistical proof of your claims, it will be taken as admission that you acknowledge your 'points' are flat out bullshit.

[Edwardo Piet]

If women want to take the precaution of leaving any men that they live with, it's their choice.

If women want to walk with a group of friends instead of on their own, it's their choice.

Ridiculous or paranoid or not, any precaution, whatever the precaution, is still a precaution - and my point is that to mention the fact that precautions to exist is not to blame the victim. That reminds me of people who don't simply treat different ethnicities equally fairly but they also pretend that there are no differences as if mentioning the differences is being racist. No, that's ignoring reality. For example, "Black people are black" is not racist it's a matter of fact and true by definition.

Likewise, "some actions the woman takes might make it more probable to be raped than others" is completely different to "The woman should take X precaution". I was pointing out this difference to in this mind and she pretended to know what I was thinking by claiming that she knew what I "really mean". No, I really am not saying "the woman should take X precaution" I am merely stating that precautions exist.

EvF

[In This Mind]

If women want to take the precaution of leaving any men that they live with, it's their choice.

If women want to walk with a group of friends instead of on their own, it's their choice.

Ridiculous or paranoid or not, any precaution, whatever the precaution, is still a precaution - and my point is that to mention the fact that precautions to exist is not to blame the victim. That reminds me of people who don't simply treat different ethnicities equally fairly but they also pretend that there are no differences as if mentioning the differences is being racist. No, that's ignoring reality. For example, "Black people are black" is not racist it's a matter of fact and true by definition.

Likewise, "some actions the woman takes might make it more probable to be raped than others" is completely different to "The woman should take X precaution". I was pointing out this difference to in this mind and she pretended to know what I was thinking by claiming that she knew what I "really mean". No, I really am not saying "the woman should take X precaution" I am merely stating that precautions exist.

EvF

So what you are saying is that you know you can't back up your claims and are just talking out of your ass. Good to know.

[Edwardo Piet]

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

[In This Mind]

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.

[Godhead]

In this mind and eilonnwy don't undersand what we're saying. They repeatedly misconstrue what we say, and claim that when we say one thing, we really mean something else, and then they argue against that something else which isn't even what we're saying. Nevertheless, when we say "responsibility", that's what we mean. Children do this aswell. When you tell them that they ought to be careful of something, they shift all focus onto others, claiming that it is only what others do that matters, when in fact what they do also matters. They see things in black and white, whereby everything is either/or, and they don't understand that if you are careless, then bad things will more likely happen to you. A good example where that mentality would lead to major problems is on the road. If motorists abandoned absolutely all focus away from their responsibility for their own safety and that of their passangers, and decided instead to put the focus completely on other drivers, and expecting not to have to do their bit to ensure that an accident doesn't occur, there would be many more road acidents. Fortunately, most drivers are adult enough to understand the simple equation : Be careless = accident. Cause/effect doesn't care who is to blame, as it is a simple matter of practicality. The difference between responsibility, which has a specific meaning, and blame, which has a different meaning, is unfortunately still misunderstood although really there's nothing to misunderstand. And that's where the strawman arguments begin.

[Edwardo Piet]

Keep on backtracking. It's funny.

Keep on ignoring my points, making non-sequiturs, (and not admitting the fact you've done so) and false accusations and arrogantly claiming to know what I 'really mean', it's funnier.

Basically, rather than responding to my points, just keep on arguing with that imaginary victim-blamer and rape supporter in your head.

EvF

[Paul the Human]

@In This Mind: I know that I opted out of this thread, but I want to try one more time. First, I want to make it clear that I never, ever think that the victim of a rape holds any blame for the rape. I believe that the blame lies entirely with the rapist and that all rapists should receive nothing less than severe punishment under the law. I consider rape to be one of the most heinous crimes in existence. I further believe that all rape victims should have access to rehabilitation (funded by the seized assets of convicted rapists, perhaps) and that rehabilitation should address the physical, emotional, and mental damage suffered by the (completely blameless) victim.

I also believe that a woman (or man, whatever) can, in certain circumstances, take conscious steps to lower their own odds of becoming a victim of rape. That is not to say that rape can be prevented, since there is no way to predict or prevent the actions of anyone other than oneself, but one can certainly lower the odds by being aware of potential danger. If one does not take the precautions that might have lowered those risks, that person is not to blame if a rape occurs. The rapist is solely to blame.

Am I 'victim blaming'?

If your answer is yes, then you and I will never agree on this topic. I know that I do not blame rape victims for being raped.

If your answer is no, then we finally have an understanding and there is no need to carry on.

[LastPoet]

Well this thread is going nowere, I'm not attacking anyone here, but regardless of opinions, we are miserably failing to show and understand eachothers points, even so, started to nitpick on the other party arguments for fallacies. I will go do something else, perhaps ban someone on the other thread.