- a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

So if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, does it matter if you are wearing a burqha, maxi and cardigan or a mini and boob tube?

I would suggest you read the %ages posted by sbk regardind who, where and when and no it is not their fault.

Which one of sbk's posts or statistics prove with absolute certainty that clothing has nothing to do with it? Yes, rapes unfortunately happen in homes and/or by people we know, but they also happen on the streets by unknown attackers.

Certain types of clothing attractions more attention than others (which is arguably the whole point of wearing it). Are people seriously trying to imply that although it may attract attention of an assailant it should not be considered a factor in an attack?

It's not bigoted, it's common bloody sense.

Not really. As mentioned, haven't really read through the previous posts in this debate, but what people wear is really up to them. What risks they take on for what they wear is their decision too. Frankly IMO these protests signify the biggest problem in all societies - a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

I assume these are the words of those men who choose to rape? Who lacks personal responsibility? A woman who chooses to wear the clothes she wants or a man who thinks that her choice of clothes gives him permission to rape her. Self justification writ large.

Thanks for your clarification of what a selfish and warped mentality this is. Other than that, I'm really not sure what point you're attempting to emphasise here?

- a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

So if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, does it matter if you are wearing a burqha, maxi and cardigan or a mini and boob tube?

I would suggest you read the %ages posted by sbk regardind who, where and when and no it is not their fault.

Never mind mossy, sometimes facts are overridden by one's own personal beliefs, and no amount of logic or facts will sway the closed mind. I gave up quite some time ago.

This attitude isn't doing justice to the thousands that marched, regardless of "my own personal beliefs". At least simply re-quote one of your previous posts that should silence mine.

(double post - soz)

Not really. As mentioned, haven't really read through the previous posts in this debate, but what people wear is really up to them. What risks they take on for what they wear is their decision too. Frankly IMO these protests signify the biggest problem in all societies - a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

I assume these are the words of those men who choose to rape? Who lacks personal responsibility? A woman who chooses to wear the clothes she wants or a man who thinks that her choice of clothes gives him permission to rape her. Self justification writ large.

Silly. Your suggestion that Insight is a rapist (and HB, Ian, and myself by extension) is offensive in the extreme.

The rapist does not think he's "been given permission", Whatever he thinks, in the case of loss of control or personal responsibility, he is still a rapist.

Why can't you get it through your head what 4 of us now are saying? Read the posts unemotively and see the logic, without resorting to grave insult.

What have you to say about the advice to tourists travelling in a favella in Brazil, ie, don't flaunt your wealth, wear a money belt, stay in crowded streets etc? Absolutely I agree with you that a tourist should be able to walk around without fear of mugging. But the reality is that he can't....because muggers exist. Does saying that make me "a man that chooses to mug"??????

- a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

So if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, does it matter if you are wearing a burqha, maxi and cardigan or a mini and boob tube?

I would suggest you read the %ages posted by sbk regardind who, where and when and no it is not their fault.

Never mind mossy, sometimes facts are overridden by one's own personal beliefs, and no amount of logic or facts will sway the closed mind. I gave up quite some time ago.

You provided facts, but not logic. Whatsmore, your facts were beside the point.

See my previous post.

A lot of these comparisons, such as flaunting wealth in favellas, going to a bikers' pub dressed in drag, etc. - whereas I'm sure they're well intentioned - are actually missing the point and are therefore bogus comparisons.

Someone deliberately going into a potentially hostile environment dressed in such a way as to provoke hostility isn't the same as a woman going outside wearing a skimpy outfit. A guy dressed in drag going into a room full of people who might attack such a person would be pretty silly. But there isn't any place where rapists tend to congregate, they could be pretty much anywhere, so that would rule out leaving the house at all. Aside from walking into a prison cell full of convicted rapists, there's nowhere a woman can go, dressed skimpily, to increase the chances of being raped.

A more accurate comparison would be to say that a black guy should go out wearing gloves and a balaclava so that no-one can see he's black, to prevent a random racist attack. An absurd idea, yes - but so much more ridiculous than these supposed rape-avoidance tactics, which are really nothing more than preventing a woman from just being a woman.

Belated thanks for your comments, Harcourt (getting all caught up in the debate ).

Not really. As mentioned, haven't really read through the previous posts in this debate, but what people wear is really up to them. What risks they take on for what they wear is their decision too. Frankly IMO these protests signify the biggest problem in all societies - a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

I assume these are the words of those men who choose to rape? Who lacks personal responsibility? A woman who chooses to wear the clothes she wants or a man who thinks that her choice of clothes gives him permission to rape her. Self justification writ large.

Silly. Your suggestion that Insight is a rapist (and HB, Ian, and myself by extension) is offensive in the extreme.

The rapist does not think he's "been given permission", Whatever he thinks, in the case of loss of control or personal responsibility, he is still a rapist.

Why can't you get it through your head what 4 of us now are saying? Read the posts unemotively and see the logic, without resorting to grave insult.

What have you to say about the advice to tourists travelling in a favella in Brazil, ie, don't flaunt your wealth, wear a money belt, stay in crowded streets etc? Absolutely I agree with you that a tourist should be able to walk around without fear of mugging. But the reality is that he can't....because muggers exist. Does saying that make me "a man that chooses to mug"??????

While I'm unsure how endure has used my comments for justification of a rapists action actually benefits the argument against clothing being a factor which tempts rapists, I really don't think he was insinuating that I am... ahem.. a rapist.

Am sure endure will clarify when he gets a chance.

A lot of these comparisons, such as flaunting wealth in favellas, going to a bikers' pub dressed in drag, etc. - whereas I'm sure they're well intentioned - are actually missing the point and are therefore bogus comparisons.

Someone deliberately going into a potentially hostile environment dressed in such a way as to provoke hostility isn't the same as a woman going outside wearing a skimpy outfit. A guy dressed in drag going into a room full of people who might attack such a person would be pretty silly. But there isn't any place where rapists tend to congregate, they could be pretty much anywhere, so that would rule out leaving the house at all. Aside from walking into a prison cell full of convicted rapists, there's nowhere a woman can go, dressed skimpily, to increase the chances of being raped.

A more accurate comparison would be to say that a black guy should go out wearing gloves and a balaclava so that no-one can see he's black, to prevent a random racist attack. An absurd idea, yes - but so much more ridiculous than these supposed rape-avoidance tactics, which are really nothing more than preventing a woman from just being a woman.

Disagree entirely.

A lot of these comparisons, such as flaunting wealth in favellas, going to a bikers' pub dressed in drag, etc. - whereas I'm sure they're well intentioned - are actually missing the point and are therefore bogus comparisons.

This is not my argument at all. It would be utterly foolish to attempt what you described - like you mentioned, these are acts of provocation which have the intention of creating a textbook reaction.

However, it is unwise to knowingly place yourself in a risky environment and not take measures to minimise such risks. You mention a black guy covering up his skin to hide his race when in areas known for racists attacks is ridiculous - agree entirely. But if such a person has no option but to face this undesirable situation, will he/she do it without a "Plan B"? (Walk in a group, mace spray, other...?) Unlikely.

The point wasn't about walking around in an area prone to such attacks - the fact is that they could happen anywhere, and regardless of how the person's dressed.

^ Okay, if the cop said "If you don't want to get assaulted [while walking out on the street], don't dress like a slut [while walking out on the street]", would the comment still spark fierce (undeserved IMO) criticism? Of course it would.

Yes it would... which is pretty much what was said. Not quite sure what you're getting at there but it sounds like you agree with me, so thanks for changing your mind.

Yes it would... which is pretty much what was said. Not quite sure what you're getting at there but it sounds like you agree with me, so thanks for changing your mind.

Okay, for the sake of clarification what I'm saying is exactly this - how people present themselves on the street, in terms of clothing, jewelry, spirtual or cultural insignias or logos, flashing of expensive items - could ultimately serve to increase the probability of you being assulted, either physically, sexually or robbed.

Not quite as coarse as "don't dress like a slut [on the streets]", but a similar point nevertheless.

Which is a part of what we've been saying all along.

And what the copper got criticised for.

Basically it is the lack of understanding of the other gender by most of your own gender. The physical processes are different, the instincts are different, the thought processes are different.

And this in Western countries where the culture is NOT different.

If it was Africa or India (or France) this discussion wouldn't be taking place. It's just that for 95% of the time we look upon all our friends, acquaintances, workmates as equals, regardless of gender, race, religion or other differences, but suddenly there comes a point at which we diverge. This is one of those cross-roads. Some people are going down one branch, others another. And some of us are certain ours is the right road, while others are urging 'Come with me'.

so we are back to the question of what is considered suitable dress & who decides. Jumper & jeans? lumberjack boots? Granny in a house dress & cardi? teenager in a school uniform? grown woman in a vest top & jeans? who actually determines what sends a sicko off. so what? burkas all round just casue some bloke can't control himself... I dont think so.

so we are back to the question of what is considered suitable dress & who decides. Jumper & jeans? lumberjack boots? Granny in a house dress & cardi? teenager in a school uniform? grown woman in a vest top & jeans? who actually determines what sends a sicko off. so what? burkas all round just casue some bloke can't control himself... I dont think so.

Not being pedantic in the slightest...

so we are back to the question of what is considered suitable dress & who decides. Jumper & jeans? lumberjack boots? Granny in a house dress & cardi? teenager in a school uniform? grown woman in a vest top & jeans? who actually determines what sends a sicko off. so what? burkas all round just casue some bloke can't control himself... I dont think so.

No, Boo, that was not the question, although it is a valid side issue.

not being pedantic, just trying to get my head around why a woman going out of doors wearing something that doesn't cover her from head to toe means she is up or it & leaving herself open to attack.

that is the argument you are putting across. you wont think so of course so there is no point getting into it.

basically what you & others are saying is that cause "man" can't control himself, then "woman" is responsible for it. hmm, not heard that view much over the course of history have we?

Boo, i see where you are coming from. But nowadays i actually dress in a more covered up mode. Not the full off burka but i wear my jeans, and a t shirt. And this is in Swissland. It pisses me off that i cannot dress as i wish.

Tomorrow, i shall put on my mini skirt and be proud to have good legs that need to get tanned.

And F the rest of them.

And I am not searching to get abused, i just want to be me.

If men want to goggle - that is their right too. But if they call me a slut because of the way i dress.... F Them, again. And it will hurt

- a complete lack of personal responsibility. "It's my right to do what the hell I want, when I want, and if anything happens to me while doing it, it's societies fault - not mine."

So if you are in the wrong place at the wrong time, does it matter if you are wearing a burqha, maxi and cardigan or a mini and boob tube?

I would suggest you read the %ages posted by sbk regardind who, where and when and no it is not their fault.

Which one of sbk's posts or statistics prove with absolute certainty that clothing has nothing to do with it? Yes, rapes unfortunately happen in homes and/or by people we know, but they also happen on the streets by unknown attackers.

Certain types of clothing attractions more attention than others (which is arguably the whole point of wearing it). Are people seriously trying to imply that although it may attract attention of an assailant it should not be considered a factor in an attack?

It's not bigoted, it's common bloody sense.

but they also happen on the streets by unknown attackers.

We agree on something, but do you think the oportunist rapist will discriminate between boob tube and mini and maxi and cardigan, or is he so consumed with passion that an additional piece of flesh is going to drive him over the edge?

Of course women and of course men dress to attract, but they do not dress to provoke, perhaps you will answer this as ian wont.

It's common sense to assess your risk, walking in an illuminated area reduces your risk no matter what you wear, walking in an isolated area with little lighting increases your risk, no matter what you wear, sack cloth or no flamin' ashes, that is not bigotry either, it's plain common sense.

Why can't you get it through your head what 4 of us now are saying?

What have you to say about the advice to tourists travelling in a favella in Brazil, ie, don't flaunt your wealth, wear a money belt, stay in crowded streets etc? Absolutely I agree with you that a tourist should be able to walk around without fear of mugging. But the reality is that he can't....because muggers exist. Does saying that make me "a man that chooses to mug"??????

We are listening to what you are saying and the consensus is that you are trying to justify your arguments.

Of course risk has to be assessed, flashing money and gold in the wrong place will get you into trouble, but this is not the same argument as what you dress is provoking men to 'misbehave', if that term makes you feel better.

Of course women dress to attract attention, so do men, but they do not dress to provoke attack, do you honestly think that a man intent on rape, outside of any other pre-requisites, will choose between women dressed differently, or will he choose vulnerability and access.

basically what you & others are saying is that cause "man" can't control himself, then "woman" is responsible for it. hmm, not heard that view much over the course of history have we?

I guess it's this interpretation of my point which causes the most reaction (misinterpretation imo). Of course the rapist is to blame - and punished - entirely. There is absolutely no question of that.

But if measures can be taken to minimize the risks, especially in risky environments, isn't it sound practice to minimise those risks?

Of course women dress to attract attention, so do men, but they do not dress to provoke attack, do you honestly think that a man intent on rape, outside of any other pre-requisites, will choose between women dressed differently, or will he choose vulnerability and access.

"access" - isn't that a key word? Just to be clear, this is *not* my interpretation, but I'm sure you won't argue against it being the interpretation of other more warped individuals in the world - that if a woman decides to dress in a provocative manor they are advertising their availability?

One of the purposes of dressing "sexy" is arouse sexual feelings in others. It may not be the only purpose, but it's a very significant one. Yet (in the interests of "rights") we're supposed to ignore this blatant fact when it comes to the what attracts the attention of sexual predators...? Please show me one conclusive statistic or bit of logic that absolutely contradicts this clearly blatant fact.

And yet when somebody hands this sort of advice out in the interests of other people they are painted is being the bastard - on an international scale.

Yeah, society is f*cking sick.

/double post again.

Why can't you get it through your head what 4 of us now are saying?

What have you to say about the advice to tourists travelling in a favella in Brazil, ie, don't flaunt your wealth, wear a money belt, stay in crowded streets etc? Absolutely I agree with you that a tourist should be able to walk around without fear of mugging. But the reality is that he can't....because muggers exist. Does saying that make me "a man that chooses to mug"??????

We are listening to what you are saying and the consensus is that you are trying to justify your arguments.

Of course risk has to be assessed, flashing money and gold in the wrong place will get you into trouble, but this is not the same argument as what you dress is provoking men to 'misbehave', if that term makes you feel better.

Of course women dress to attract attention, so do men, but they do not dress to provoke attack, do you honestly think that a man intent on rape, outside of any other pre-requisites, will choose between women dressed differently, or will he choose vulnerability and access.

I am not trying to justify anything. Nobody is saying that any woman dresses to provoke an attack ("provocative attire" has been taken completely out of context by some people here). I do not think that a man intent on rape will choose his victim based on her attire.

There are two parts to the argument that have to be considered together.

1.The flashing wealth in a dodgy neighbourhood is a very good analogy; If risk exists, then try to minimise it.

2. SOME men see a scantily dressed woman as a woman asking for it......and often they are wrong but by the time they find out that they are wrong, they do not have the self-control to resist their urges.

I can easily imagine that the women that are raped because of their attire are not grabbed violently from behind and violated....they would be approached and propositioned first.....(on top of that is the dreadful "no means yes" myth that is rarely true but is a common "piece of advice" offered in some circles)

Thus...There could be a situation whereby a man will rape because he went to far, and he went to far because he initially thought he was "in with a chance"....and he thought he was in with a chance because of the way the victim dressed.

And with drink taken, control lessens, and the conversation previous to any attack may have been provocative, and ..., and ...,

No one on this thread is trying to justify rape, in any form.

But several of us are critical of the women's attitude to the Canadian policeman, who was trying to help reduce the possibility of rape.

Listen to common sense, please.

They don't WANT to listen to common sense, HB. They just want to argue about any issue they can somehow turn into a reference about their own personal agenda. And they don't care who they stomp on in doing so... even if it means someone who is on their side.

And with drink taken, control lessens, and the conversation previous to any attack may have been provocative, and ..., and ...,

No one on this thread is trying to justify rape, in any form.

But several of us are critical of the women's attitude to the Canadian policeman, who was trying to help reduce the possibility of rape.

Listen to common sense, please.

Nobody is trying to justify any form of rape. Nobody is saying that women don't have a right to wear what they want, where they want, when they want. Nobody is saying women have to wear a burqa. Nobody is saying that the rapists aren't guilty. Nobody is saying that it is not a shameful indictment on males and nobody is denying that it is despicable that rapists exist, or that there are many types of rape/rapist.

We are saying rapists exist. Sad fact.

We are saying muggers exist. Another sad fact.

We are, in a sense saying that if it is right and proper to minimise risk against muggers, even if it means impinging on a person's right to self expression in dress, then it is also proper to advise caution in self-expression in dress if that self expression may be a risk factor for rape.

We are also saying that location, the type of people around you, and the situation can have a bearing.....obviously there are completely safe environments....noody is saying NEVER wear what you want.

They don't WANT to listen to common sense, HB. They just want to argue about any issue they can somehow turn into a reference about their own personal agenda. And they don't care who they stomp on in doing so... even if it means someone who is on their side.

Thats an extremely rude and very closed minded comment.

They don't WANT to listen to common sense, HB. They just want to argue about any issue they can somehow turn into a reference about their own personal agenda. And they don't care who they stomp on in doing so... even if it means someone who is on their side.

Thats an extremely rude and very closed minded comment.

But unfortunately extremely true.