Objectifying women

[Violet]

Says a man who thinks it's a woman's fault if she gets raped while wearing sexy clothing. e_e

She is at fault, but to a lesser extent than the rapist themself. IE: the person who made the gun likely did not do so with the intent of murdering an individual who was murdered... but that is not to suggest that the gun used in the murder (and hence its maker as well) was not responsible in some way for the events that occurred. Indeed, it is quite reasonable to suggest that had the gun not been available, the murder victim would not have been shot.

So also is it true... that the woman who appears more vulnerable and attractive is more likely to be raped. It is a contributing factor to the rape... and your disbelief in such I find ridiculous. If attractiveness did not enter into the equation... then I should think a hole would be the most vulnerable target... I mean: why bother going after a moving hole, attached to a woman who will make the sex more difficult (or annoying, if she cries)... when one might obtain a simple hole of proper size quite easily? More to the point... why bother going for a hole at all: does one not have a hand or three?

Understand that sexual attractiveness is perhaps the single most important aspect of why a rape occurs... else why would the vulnerability matter? Vulnerable targets are all well and good... but they still do not warrant notice (or especially action) unless vulnerability would aid the action intended by the being with intent

[Shell B]

Understand that sexual attractiveness is perhaps the single most important aspect of why a rape occurs...

Sorry, no. It's not even close.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/...nd-rapists

[Violet]

No, there's not a difference. You are suggesting that some of the blame lies with the victim for a crime perpetrated against her.

It does.

It's the same victim blaming bile I have heard before. A man who raped a woman was let off because she was wearing skinny jeans!

Well isn't that silly? The jeans didn't rape her... though they might have contributed to the raping.

Blame is not a 100% thing. It is a thing spread between all contributing factors. One does not suggest that the cheese is solely responsible for making the pizza, because the pizza is created by a number of 'factors', from the breads to the sauce to the person who made the damn thing. Try not to involke arguments about where 'justice' is not served... that doesn't read as anything other than "people are stupid" to me

You know, I don't have a problem with women using their body as they wish. I support legal prostitution, I've been to strip joints. My point about objectifying women is the standard by which woman are judged pretty. Busty tall bombshells with vacant answers to political questions. I have a problem with the idea that to be pretty you need to be model thin.

And why should we not do this? No matter how you slice it... words are meant to distinguish ideas from one another. How do you define 'woman'? Perhaps as simple as 'adult human female'? If so: you just excluded "transexuals/transgendered individuals", other species, and children. There is no way to not objectify women... or indeed anything. Women are objects, insomuch as I am aware an object is defined (a material thing that can be seen and touched)... and as such, they have already been objectified.

Or are women not objects now? Different people define "beauty" in different ways... 'tis why I believe 'abstract philosophy' (if one cares to call it such) is ridiculous at its roots (though I once thought otherwise). There is no clear-cut definition of either 'woman' or 'beautiful' or really anything (as everything is defined by the individual, regardless of how similar that definition be to other individual's definitions).

You think woman are beautiful works of art that should have the right to show what they got? I don't disagree with you. But then don't go to on to say that woman who "show what they got" are partially to blame if they are raped.

I think women can be beautiful works of art, and that "have the right" is a confusing ideal. I will, however, go on to say that women who "who what they got" are fucking partially to blame for getting fucking raped. And there is really no good argument against it, lest a single cause (this might happen at times, I will discuss those if you should like) be responsible for the entirety of the space-time 'continuum' that surrounds it.

[binny]

This conversation is unbelievable.

[Paul the Human]

I'm going to throw my two cents into the ring. First of all... men are sexually aroused by visual stimuli. If a sexually attractive woman is dressed in suggestive, provocative, or just plain skimpy clothing, a heterosexual man is going to find himself turned on by nothing more than the sight of her. That is simply a fact.

There are people out there that will commit rape. That is also a fact.

Should a woman be able to walk around all the time in nothing more than a thong bikini without having to worry about being raped? Of course. Ideally. But there is a difference between 'ideally' and 'really'. The fact of the matter is, no matter how much right a woman has to look any way she may wish, there are people out there that might rape her. So then, if the woman in the thong bikini is raped, is it her fault? Of course not. Would dressing more conservatively have prevented the rape. Perhaps. Although the rapist would have ended raping someone, so not really.

If I were a woman, I'd want to look sexy sometimes and dress provocatively on occasion, but I know that there are rapists out there, so... I'd have to be very aware of that. Still, in the end, it is the rapist that is at fault. At most, the woman may have made herself an attractive target for the rapist, but she did not make him cross that line. He did that.

[Meatball]

Something being voluntary(ie Playboy models, strippers) doesn't neccessarily make it OK.

A lot of women voluntarily objectify themselves. A lot of people also voluntarily kill other people for money or fun. Fred Phelps voluntarily protests the funerals of dead soldiers.

These people might be posing in Playboy and they might feel great about it, but that doesn't mean it has a positve effect of the rest of the world's view of women. I'm not neccessarily arguing one way or the other, just throwing it out there.

[Paul the Human]

Something being voluntary(ie Playboy models, strippers) doesn't neccessarily make it OK.

A lot of women voluntarily objectify themselves. A lot of people also voluntarily kill other people for money or fun. Fred Phelps voluntarily protests the funerals of dead soldiers.

These people might be posing in Playboy and they might feel great about it, but that doesn't mean it has a positve effect of the rest of the world's view of women. I'm not neccessarily arguing one way or the other, just throwing it out there.

I certainly agree that being voluntary doesn't make something okay. That's obvious. And perhaps women that objectify themselves do nothing positive for the world's view of women... but I don't think their right to objectify themselves should be taken from them. Perhaps that's because I am a heterosexual man that enjoys looking at scantily clad women, or perhaps it's because I think people should be allowed to do anything they wish to their own image. Both, I think.

[Scented Nectar]

A lot of women voluntarily objectify themselves. A lot of people also voluntarily kill other people for money or fun. Fred Phelps voluntarily protests the funerals of dead soldiers.

There is a big difference though. Voluntary 'objectification' harms no one. Murder does harm, as the victim is not consenting. Phelps also harms in that the people who are holding the event are being bullied.

[Dotard]

That includes going topless. Get used to it world. My body comes with tits. ....I had no reason or desire to wear a bra, so I don't.
...we have the legal right to go topless now. ...soon as it's not seen as any weirder than a male going topless, I'm there!!! .

Kudo'ed for the above statements. for some reason everytime I read & reread the post these were the only things that registered.

Go figure.....

[Dotard]

Whole buncha psyco-babble

---

What is Victim Blaming? It's when you hold the person who had a crime perpetrated against that responsible, or at least partially responsible for the crime. As Wikipedia says:

Victim blaming (or blaming the victim) is holding the victims of a crime, an accident, or any type of abusive maltreatment to be entirely or partially responsible for the unfortunate incident that has occurred in their life. Historically victim-blaming is the trait most often exhibited by the criminally insane and has traditionally emerged in racist and sexist forms.[1] It is also about blaming individuals for their personal distress or for social difficulties, rather than the other parties involved or the overarching social system in place

It's interesting to get behind why people blame victims to understand why it is wrong and should not be done to rape victims. There are two theories that feed into victim blaming is the Just World Theory and Assumptive World Theory.

The just-world phenomenon, also called the just-world theory, just-world fallacy, just-world effect, or just-world hypothesis, refers to the tendency for people to want to believe that the world is just so strongly that when they witness an otherwise inexplicable injustice they will rationalize it by searching for things that the victim might have done to deserve it. This deflects their anxiety, and lets them continue to believe the world is a just place, but often at the expense of blaming victims for things that were not, objectively, their fault.

Essentially, it's the idea common belief that good things happen to good people, and bad things happen to bad people, so a rape victim must have done something to get raped. This also feeds into the idea that people can do "common sense" things to avoid bad things happen to them. They can lock their doors, dress appropriately, etc... to avoid having crimes perpetrated against them. This feeds into the Assumptive World Theory.

Rape victims are a glaring reminder of our own vulnerability. No one likes to think they could lose control over their own body or life. By deciding a rape victim did something concrete to deserve the assault the observer creates a false sense of safety. If they can avoid doing that particular thing or action then they create the illusion of invulnerability for themselves. Creating a firm boundary between ourselves and accussers or rape victims (us v/s them) also creates the illusion of invulnerability.

---