Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: March 29, 2024, 10:49 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Objectifying women
RE: Objectifying women
(July 18, 2010 at 10:54 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: 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.
In itself, thinking about the many things that might make one more prone to the many types of crimes out there in the world is not bad. It's disturbing though when only one of the possible slight risks is wondered about seriously, and it's at the expense of discussing/wondering about the proven, much higher risks.

While you yourself would not tell women, as friendly advice, to consider never living or working with a man in case one of them turns out to be a rapist some day, there are many people who, with good intentions, actually advise women not to wear certain clothing in case somewhere out there is a stranger-rapist who would have not wanted to grab her if she was wearing a nice respectable dress instead of a lower cut one.

I consider it to be religiously rooted, the whole slut shaming, evil temptress bullshit. Mostly atheist men see through sexist crap way better than ordinary men, but I think a tiny bit remains with the sexy clothing thing being given more credibility than I would have expected. At least it is very clear that none of the atheists here, or most of the believers either, actually see anything past a certain risk level increase, in other words no beliefs that the victim deserves to have it happen or that her immodesty should be punished or something.
I'm really shitty at giving kudos and rep. That's because I would be inconsistent in remembering to do them, and also I don't really want it to show if any favouritism is happening. Even worse would be inconsistencies causing false favouritisms to show. So, fuck it. Just assume that I've given you some good rep and a number of kudos, and everyone should be happy...
RE: Objectifying women
(July 18, 2010 at 11:42 am)Paul the Human Wrote: 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.

Can you actually demonstrate any basis beyond 'well gosh golly gee I think it should be that way' for your claim that these 'conscious steps' actually lower the odds of becoming a victim of rape?

No?

So, what exactly is the purpose of your 'advice'? It obviously isn't to help, because you can't demonstrate with any validity that it does help. It's like telling someone that if they don't want to get burned, they shouldn't stand on ladders. So why are you insistent on making these claims? What is your motivation in claiming that not wearing sexy clothes will improve my odds of not being raped when you cannot back up that claim with anything remotely resembling evidence? Why are you so persisting in this obsession with the notion that wearing sexy clothes affects the chances of being raped when it has been proven repeatedly that it doesn't?

In short, why are you consistently lying under the guise of offering helpful advice?

Yes, you are victim blaming, and if you take an honest look at your own actions and answer the above questions, you'll figure it out.

One misogynist in this thread continued to use the example of 'a man in armani driving a nice car is more likely to get mugged'. Look at that statement. Then look at the actual odds. Is that statement correct? Does it even remotely resemble anything factual?

No?

It's pure victim blaming, and nothing more.


This is the definition of the word 'blame'

blame
   /bleɪm/ Show Spelled [bleym] Show IPA verb, blamed, blam·ing, noun
–verb (used with object)
1.to hold responsible; find fault with; censure
2.to place the responsibility for (a fault, error, etc.) (usually fol. by on )
3.Informal . blast; damn (used as a mild curse)
4.an act of attributing fault; censure; reproof
5.responsibility for anything deserving of censure:
6.to blame, at fault; censurable: I am to blame for his lateness.

See how the word 'responsibility' is present in the definition of the word 'blame'?

Now, explain to me how stating a woman should take responsibility for her own safety isn't placing blame on her? Look at the definition of the word blame. Please explain what definition you are using in which placing responsibility does not equal blame if that responsibility is not met.

You don't get to redefine the word to support your misogyny.
RE: Objectifying women
Okay then. Thank you for your answer.
RE: Objectifying women
(July 18, 2010 at 1:00 pm)Paul the Human Wrote: Okay then. Thank you for your answer.

Where is your answer? You asked a question, I answered it. I asked you questions. Your turn to answer.

Please answer the questions.

Here they are again:

What exactly is the purpose of your 'advice'? It obviously isn't to help, because you can't demonstrate with any validity that it does help. It's like telling someone that if they don't want to get burned, they shouldn't stand on ladders. So why are you insistent on making these claims? What is your motivation in claiming that not wearing sexy clothes will improve my odds of not being raped when you cannot back up that claim with anything remotely resembling evidence? Why are you so persisting in this obsession with the notion that wearing sexy clothes affects the chances of being raped when it has been proven repeatedly that it doesn't?
RE: Objectifying women
I think Paul's saying he is done with this thread. I'm also pretty sure all of this is going in circles, perhaps we should talk about puppies to calm down?

Everyone has at least said that blame goes entirely on the rapist, well, not everyone believes that's what people believe, (and some people have said stuff that to me suggests that maybe they don't, but oh, well.) but it has been said and I think maybe we should just agree that it's not the victim's fault and drop it? Of, course I could just avoid this thread from now on anyway.

so, carry on as you guys see fit.
[Image: siggy2_by_Cego_Colher.jpg]
RE: Objectifying women
Again, In this mind has chosen to be very selective, and bolded the bits where it says the word "responsibility" or "responsible", whilst completely missing the point that those words do not mean blame, rather they are used within a context, in order to describe what the word "blame" means. Classic strawman. The word which should have been bolded was "fault", which is precisely what blame is all about. Responsibility isn't about fault or blame, it is about something quite different, which has been covered by quite a few posters already. Perhaps we should see a definition of the word "responsibility", and see what that says.
RE: Objectifying women
You have already decided what my answers are and dismissed them, but I'll put them into my own words, I suppose.

1- What exactly is the purpose of your 'advice'?: In general, if I gave someone advice that I thought might lower their odds of being raped, the purpose would be to show my concern for their welfare. "Don't walk home alone, (insert name), you never know what kind of freaks are out there."... would be the type of advice I might give someone.

2- So why are you insisting on making these claims?: What claims? That there might be precautions a woman can take to lower her odds of being raped (or robbed or murdered, etc.)? I make these claims because I believe that, given a set of circumstances, there may be something that a person might choose to do that could lessen their risk of potential dangers. What I have never claimed is that anyone is to blame for what others do to them.

3- What is your motivation in claiming that not wearing sexy clothes will improve my odds of not being raped when you cannot back up that claim with anything remotely resembling evidence? Why are you so persisting in this obsession with the notion that wearing sexy clothes affects the chances of being raped when it has been proven repeatedly that it doesn't?

Umm. I do not have an obsession with the notion that wearing sexy clothes affects the chances of being raped. I have said that men are sexually aroused by visual stimuli and that a woman that intentionally dresses in a sexually attractive manner must be aware of that. It explains the stares and gawking she receives and the overly persistent drunk that's hoping to get into her pants. I do not believe it raises the odds of being raped... unless the rapist chooses his victim by her looks... which is not usually the case. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, of course, but I would never advise someone that they shouldn't wear that in hopes of avoiding a rape.

Now, if the woman that is dressed alluringly attracts the attention of someone in the bar and decides to leave with that person... I might whisper a "Careful, (insert name), I don't trust this guy." It's just advice. There is no underlying blame for something that has not and probably will not happen... only a voiced concern that the person be careful.

You have this way of making anyone that thinks this way out to be a bad person. As if giving well intentioned advice is somehow doing the recipient of said advice a disservice.
RE: Objectifying women
Compare:

Paul the Human Wrote: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.

In This Mind Wrote:Can you actually demonstrate any basis beyond 'well gosh golly gee I think it should be that way' for your claim that these 'conscious steps' actually lower the odds of becoming a victim of rape?

In This Mind,

Relevance?

It's irrelevant. Regardless of whether it's true or not that a woman can take a precaution, stating that she can is not victim blaming. Stating that she should or that she 'deserves it' or she is partly 'to blame' is victim blaming. Stating that she can take a precaution is merely making a factual statement that is either true or untrue, and you cannot go from facts to values. You are committing a logical fallacy. It is irrelevant to the victim-blaming matter whether it's true or not that a woman can take a precaution, it's only relevant if it is pushed and said that she also should. Clear?

EvF
RE: Objectifying women
I know, I said I was going away, but (I just keep coming back) just to add to the point about Paul made about...
Paul Wrote:I have said that men are sexually aroused by visual stimuli and that a woman that intentionally dresses in a sexually attractive manner must be aware of that.
I mean, I have said that the majority (yes, other people get raped too) of rapes happen to women in there teens and twenties, which is, in general, as I understand it, is when women are considered the most attractive.

Man, I get really uncomfortable when men gawk at me. I sometimes hope I'm not that attractive that I get gawked at a lot. But I wear sexy clothes more often when I have a boyfriend. I don't really know why, maybe if someone hits on me I don't feel as uncomfortable saying that I'm not interested, because I have a boyfriend and it's the truth.

oh and also Paul, I apologize for assuming that you were done with this thread.
[Image: siggy2_by_Cego_Colher.jpg]
RE: Objectifying women
(July 18, 2010 at 1:29 pm)Paul the Human Wrote: Now, if the woman that is dressed alluringly attracts the attention of someone in the bar and decides to leave with that person... I might whisper a "Careful, (insert name), I don't trust this guy." It's just advice. There is no underlying blame for something that has not and probably will not happen... only a voiced concern that the person be careful.

Would you tell a gay man to be careful if he leaves with another man at a bar? Does a man get any censure at all for wearing certain clothing, being out alone, etc... if he is raped? Is a man advised about this ad nauseum for being a man and having crosses to bear?

If you answer no, then that no points to an underlying sexism.


(July 18, 2010 at 1:29 pm)Paul the Human Wrote: You have this way of making anyone that thinks this way out to be a bad person. As if giving well intentioned advice is somehow doing the recipient of said advice a disservice.

I think, from interactions we have had here, that you're wonderful person, and I think everyone else here is a good person. Pointing out apparent sexism or flaws in thinking that, while good intentioned, cause harm does not mean we think people who have these thoughts are bad people. Being a good person doesn't mean you can't give bad advice, make bad choices, or do a disservice to someone unintentionally. No one's perfect. And calling people on their incorrect views, despite being well intentioned, in no way implies we think you are all bad people.
"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin

::Blogs:: Boston Atheism Examiner - Boston Atheists Blog | :Tongueodcast:: Boston Atheists Report



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Smart women Ahriman 41 3697 December 18, 2022 at 4:39 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  International Women and girls in Science Day! Divinity 9 921 February 11, 2019 at 7:59 pm
Last Post: Fireball
  porn and women Catholic_Lady 212 38366 June 19, 2018 at 5:58 am
Last Post: Mr.Obvious
  men and women with tattoos, hot or not? orthodox-man 110 20809 April 24, 2018 at 8:12 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Women: how do you define yourself? Foxaèr 11 1433 April 22, 2018 at 12:58 pm
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  Do Women Need Men? Rhondazvous 57 6167 July 26, 2017 at 11:04 am
Last Post: Shell B
  How do Men/Women Experience Love? ScienceAf 61 11582 July 18, 2017 at 8:42 pm
Last Post: Shell B
  Western women are being rejected larson 54 10633 May 25, 2017 at 10:05 am
Last Post: eggie
  Feeling inferior to pretty women (or women I like) Macoleco 68 8332 September 4, 2016 at 11:23 pm
Last Post: KevinM1
  Why are women such hard work? Expired 72 9260 August 7, 2016 at 7:22 pm
Last Post: Cyberman



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)