You're argument suggests that Indians in the Sunderbans should not take precautions against tigers, and that Americans travelling to Afghanistan should not take precautions against kidnap or IEDs

Individuals chose to commit crimes, they will commit them regardless so why does it seem that a lot of posters are still trying to somehow lay blame at the feet of the victim, based singularly on what she wears?

It's alot like saying that a gay man who gets attacked by homophobes was at fault for being gay near a homophobe, or a black man getting attacked by white supremacists is at fault for being black near a bigot.

We are not saying that. We are saying that, because white supremicists and violent homophobes exist, the black man and the gay man would be wise to give them a wide berth.

Because rapists exist, and SOME of them prey on slutty-looking women, then a woman's appearance CAN be a factor leading to her rape.

I reccomend that nobody wear a stars and stripes singlet while hiking in Kandahar.

I venture to say that if a hiker walking through Afghanistan wearing a red, white and blue stars and stripes singlet got kidnapped or decapitated, many people would say the hiker was foolish, albeit he was the innocent victim.

Thanks for that Harky, i've just cancelled my ticket.

As for the debate, young men and women dress to attract the opposite sex ( or they certainly did when I was young ). This attraction sadly also stretches to the perverts and rapists in society.

Asking young ladies to stop this process is just plain silly. It's also silly to try to say that the " attractive " form of dress wont attract the rape artists because it will....................That's life, these people exist. Young people want to attract each other................ night becomes day etc etc etc.

Well said in all your replies, Harcourt. It saved me the bother of saying the same thing. No need repeating any of it.

Nobody is condoning rape. All we are saying is for women to do whatever they can to protect themselves. If that means not wearing slutty clothing in certain areas then so be it. I believe that women should have the right to do anything they want, providing it's not hurting anyone else, but reality tells me that in the world we live in that it is just not possible. SOME men ARE animals that should be put down... permanently. I could quite easily put a bullet between the eyes of any brutal rapist and I wouldn't lose a minute of sleep over it.

Frankly, I kind of like looking at slutty outfits on women who suit them. It's one of the many reasons I go to Thailand each year.

Would I or any of my friends even CONSIDER raping a woman? The obvious answer is no, we wouldn't. But, we do know that there are many men who never think with the head on their shoulders and who don't seem to understand the consequences of their own brutal actions.

What I DO find confusing is women who advertise the "product" (their body) but turn out to be duds when you get them alone. I've experienced thousands of examples of that. I don't WANT a woman in my bed who is not interested in the same thing that I'm interested in. I"ve dropped more than a few potential marriage partners for just that reason.

SBK is correct that many rapes are NOT about sex at all. It is about power and control, and very often a form of revenge against ALL women. My younger sister in England deals with victims of rape all the time. She has a shelter for women who have been abused, and she provides psychological training for women to recover from the humiliating experience. Many of the women still carry the physical scars on their bodies, and their minds are twisted by the abject horror of the experience. Many of the women were raped by authorities in foreign countries, and very often they were the same authorities who were supposed to help the women escape from the Muslim countries in the first place where they were mistreated. During the terrible war in the former Yugoslavia, rape was a constant method of brutality by soldiers of all countries involved.

If the suggestion is that a female who dresses in a short skirt and boob tube is more likely to be raped than a modestly dressed woman in a maxi and cardigan in a sink estate of any region is a flawed statement of trying to disperse blame from a minority of men who have only just learned to walk without the aid of their hands.

Opportunist rape cares little for the sensibilities of dress and rapes in the home, or assaults that are known to the victim care even less, I would suggest.

I for one take delight in a well turned ankle or the hint of a curve and a stylish dress is far more alluring than a showy outfit that leaves little to the imagination, but everybody should have a choice and not be intimidated by the outrage of men, who's defence states 'she was gagging for it'.

This is compounded by fossils of establishment in out-dated wigs who have no sense of the outraged public and the morally bankrupt state that lends itself to breaches of trespass and theft against the powers of wealth than the destruction of person.

Dress woman in the khimar, burqa and the hijab, or even better, just throw a blanket over them, so men can no longer be persecuted for their lack of fiber, moral decency and backbone.

Oh yeah, I forgot, they still have to go home sometime, blanket or not.

+1 to Moss's post above.

I think one of the problems here is the constant usage of the term "slutty" - it conjures up images of someone looking like a hooker, which is not the intention of [most] girls when they get dressed up for a night out and want to appear attractive or sexy. Girls getting dolled up for a night out shouldn't have to think twice about doing so because of fear of being raped, and then accused of "asking for it" afterwards.

Someone getting raped is a horrific experience, and as much of a random occurrence as someone getting physically attacked or mugged for no other reason than they happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It's been asked several times in this thread what the definition of slutty is and who gets to decide. It just seems to have been ignored.

It's also been asked how we can assume that women who are dressed in a slutty manner, whatever that may mean, are more likely to be raped. This too appears to be ignored.

yeah, who decides what is slutty & what is not. I'm pretty sure that plenty of normally dressed women get raped & that loads of women who dress in next to nothing don't.

maybe the 2 women in this article were considered "slutty" and therefore "asking for it"

My link

yeah, who decides what is slutty & what is not. I'm pretty sure that plenty of normally dressed women get raped & that loads of women who dress in next to nothing don't.

maybe the 2 women in this article were considered "slutty" and therefore "asking for it"

My link

That guy who committed those horrific assaults should be taken out and shot when he is eventually caught. There are already too many people on this planet to make room for an animal like him. Unfortunately, our psychologists give men like him a few treatments and send them back into society.

yeah, who decides what is slutty & what is not. I'm pretty sure that plenty of normally dressed women get raped & that loads of women who dress in next to nothing don't.

maybe the 2 women in this article were considered "slutty" and therefore "asking for it"

My link

That guy who committed those horrific assaults should be taken out and shot when he is eventually caught. There are already too many people on this planet to make room for an animal like him. Unfortunately, our psychologists give men like him a few treatments and send them back into society.

Agreed Ian

But straw man arguments aside.

What is 'slutty', who gets to define 'slutty' and is there any evidence to show that 'sluttily' dressed women are more likely to be raped?

and Ian, for once we are in agreement. I think anyone proven without doubt of committing violent sexual crimes against anyone (but esp old people & kids) should be killed. The cost to tax payers & the risks to society when they are eventually released are just to high to justify them being allowed to breath the same air as their victims.

Agreed Ian

But straw man arguments aside.

What is 'slutty', who gets to define 'slutty' and is there any evidence to show that 'sluttily' dressed women are more likely to be raped?

Now THAT is an entirely differnt subject that probably could never be decided. Everyone has a slightly different perspective, and the burkas that some Muslim women are forced to wear are a good example of one extreme. Some Christian religious fanatics would call any woman wearing a mini-dress as being "slutty".

I have no idea WHAT goes on in the demented brain of a rapist. But, I do know what goes on the brain of most heterosexual men who see an attractive women wearing sexy clothes. Their initial thought is I would like a piece of that. Then, the brain they SHOULD be using takes over the thought process and they just smile and appreciate the view..

Agreed Ian

But straw man arguments aside.

What is 'slutty', who gets to define 'slutty' and is there any evidence to show that 'sluttily' dressed women are more likely to be raped?

Now THAT is an entirely differnt subject that probably could never be decided.

It isn't though............

Nevermind.

The Courts are littered with damning indictments of the guilty, 'without doubt' who is willing to make that judgement?

It's been asked several times in this thread what the definition of slutty is and who gets to decide. It just seems to have been ignored.

I think, to answer your question, the definition of the 'term' sluttery is open to question, mine is certainly different to what I believe certain responses on here have been, and in my view, some of those views beggar belief.

However, if you asked me a specific definition of sluttery, I am not entirely sure I could answer, in fact I know I can't, so your question went un-answered.

It's also been asked how we can assume that women who are dressed in a slutty manner, whatever that may mean, are more likely to be raped. This too appears to be ignored.

I think sbk went some way in answering that question in a previous response, that dress sense has little orientation in the minds of those that deem it necessary to defile another.

OK, let's go back to my time working in Soho.

There was a Maltese sex-change girl working the strip clubs - known to everyone as 'man-Bridget'. It was the time of Mary Quant and the mini - end of the fifties, start of the sixties. She could wear the same dress as half-a-dozen other strippers out in the street. The other girls would get some admiring looks and the occasional whistle.

When man-Bridget walked down the streets she stopped all the traffic and drew the howls of male wolves from everyone - and loved it.

It was embarrassing to all who knew her, but fun as well - we were all young. She was a slut, she defined sluttishness, but she did it with panache. She was the first to wear short-shorts that exposed the lower glutea. She woke up the whole sad scene with a don't care attitude that made it fun to work twenty hours a day. (My coffee bar, not the strip clubs) And she is someone that I still remember now.

But if she had been out at the Hammersmith Palais doing her thing, I am sure she would have been attacked on a nightly basis. It was something you could get away with in Soho, being among many people who know you, that would provoke a different reaction in a different place.

And a Daily Telegraph columnist has this to say:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/jennymccartney/8514122/Are-Slut-Walks-a-backwards-step.html

The comments below the article are interesting as well.

And a Daily Telegraph columnist has this to say:

http://www.telegraph...wards-step.html

The comments below the article are interesting as well.

Very good article by Jenny McCartney. I agree with everything she said. Thanks for posting that, HB.

Which parts did you agree with? This one, which i already stated?

Rape, after all, is a crime perpetrated worldwide, not just on young, attractive women in crop-tops but also on grandmothers, pre-pubescent girls, even boys and men. It's about power, humiliation, hatred and control.

or this one?

This is the point, surely: that "slut" – or its global equivalents – is not a category that conforms to clothing choice: it is an insult that can be flung at any woman the moment she triggers desire, anger or disapproval.

He said:

I agree with everything she said.

So that must be a "yes" on both counts.

And a Daily Telegraph columnist has this to say:

http://www.telegraph...wards-step.html

The comments below the article are interesting as well.

Very good article by Jenny McCartney. I agree with everything she said. Thanks for posting that, HB.

Did you read the comments?

Some of them are quite thoughtful, but many should have been moderated off the page.

Which parts did you agree with? This one, which i already stated?

Rape, after all, is a crime perpetrated worldwide, not just on young, attractive women in crop-tops but also on grandmothers, pre-pubescent girls, even boys and men. It's about power, humiliation, hatred and control.

or this one?

This is the point, surely: that "slut" – or its global equivalents – is not a category that conforms to clothing choice: it is an insult that can be flung at any woman the moment she triggers desire, anger or disapproval.

I agree with both... just as I said. The use of the word slut is an insult in any shape or form. And, rape can be perpetrated on anyone.

As I already said, I agree with you in that rape is all about power and dominance, and quite possibly anger towards whomever it is perpetrated on.

I also said that putting yourself in harms way just to prove a point is not a wise decision. Unfair as it may seem, men CAN get away with things that might put a woman in danger.

Did you read the comments?

Some of them are quite thoughtful, but many should have been moderated off the page.

No, I didn't read the comments, but since you mentioned it, I have. Like people everywhere they don't read the whole thing and don't understand what the writer is saying. They skim read and then jump to false conclusions using their own biases on the subject. I see it happen a lot on Thaivisa.

Jenny McCartney wrote a sensible, unbiased report dealing with various aspects of society and the mixed messages sent out through the media.

Any comment on DSK?

The man has a history, this episode should stop him for good.

And this is only about dominance and contempt for the victim. No drugs, no drink, no consensual foreplay. (As the story stands right now)

Any comment on DSK?

The man has a history, this episode should stop him for good.

And this is only about dominance and contempt for the victim. No drugs, no drink, no consensual foreplay. (As the story stands right now)

He has a history, yes.....but something is not right in the case. His alibi is as compelling as the evidence against him. In ruling on his bail hearing, the judge made a point of stressing that she is not considering the case evidence, only his flight risk. She denied bail.

To consider a man of his standing as a flight risk, I think reeks of political interferance.

Back to the debate at hand....

Again, I reiterate my reccommendation that nobody go wandering alone around Kandahar wearing a stars n' stripes singlet.

Where are the howls of condemnation against me for saying that? Surely an American tourist can wear what he likes? The Taliban attack and kill foreigners dressed in fatigues or business suits, so what has what one wears got to do with it?

Back to the debate at hand....

Again, I reiterate my reccommendation that nobody go wandering alone around Kandahar wearing a stars n' stripes singlet.

Where are the howls of condemnation against me for saying that? Surely an American tourist can wear what he likes? The Taliban attack and kill foreigners dressed in fatigues or business suits, so what has what one wears got to do with it?

That is because there is no self righteous group with a specific agenda looking for anything that promotes their cause. Anyone with half a brain can see through the agenda. It is similar to the black civil liberties groups. Their basic premise is right, but they go off on a tangent looking for something that remotely helps their cause. And, in doing so they lose support from rational thinking people. It is similar to the animal rights groups and the tree hugger groups. .

Back to the debate at hand....

Again, I reiterate my reccommendation that nobody go wandering alone around Kandahar wearing a stars n' stripes singlet.

Where are the howls of condemnation against me for saying that? Surely an American tourist can wear what he likes? The Taliban attack and kill foreigners dressed in fatigues or business suits, so what has what one wears got to do with it?

That's in an extreme environment isn't it though?

This is a discussion about the Western world where people have rights to do as they please. Two utterly different environments which are incomparable with each other, you are not making a point.

Ian

Who are the "people with half a brain" and "the self righteous" that you are referring to here?

And, wearing the stars and stripes is a specific style of dress and one that will be deliberately provocative in such a scenario.

Do you think that women wearing slutty clothes (whatever the rapist might deem slutty is), are knowingly deliberately provoking a rape?

Bad example dude.

It's been asked several times in this thread what the definition of slutty is and who gets to decide. It just seems to have been ignored.

I think, to answer your question, the definition of the 'term' sluttery is open to question, mine is certainly different to what I believe certain responses on here have been, and in my view, some of those views beggar belief.

However, if you asked me a specific definition of sluttery, I am not entirely sure I could answer, in fact I know I can't, so your question went un-answered.

It's also been asked how we can assume that women who are dressed in a slutty manner, whatever that may mean, are more likely to be raped. This too appears to be ignored.

I think sbk went some way in answering that question in a previous response, that dress sense has little orientation in the minds of those that deem it necessary to defile another.

I agree Moss

I should have said it has been ignored by the people who are championing this policeman.

+1 rakers. totally different scenarios that have nothing to do with the other. to some rapist an old women wearing a brown home knitted cardy would be fair game or a teenager wearing a school uniform. deliberately wearing a stars & stripes tshirt in iraq would be making a political statement. me leaving my house wearing a pair of skinny jeans, tank top & high heels, showing my arms & a bit of cleavage would not.