RE: Did She ASK for It?

RE: Did She ASK for It? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Morality & Ethics

[Poll]

Did She ASK for It?

Yes, but the assailant is entirely responsible for his actions.

9% (2)

Yes, she should know better & the case should be dropped.

4% (1)

No, a woman should be able to dress as she pleases, regardless!

52% (11)

No, but she should know that her behavior is irresponsible

33% (7)

Total Votes : 21

(last vote on : 11/21/2008 1:33:55 PM)
(Poll ended: 11/21/2008 2:00:00 AM)

Message

huangshan -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:17:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sideways Rape does involve a perversion of the sex act, but it had nothing to do with sex itself really. It is a way of punishing a women, hurting her, controlling her, violating her in the deepest way possible. Rape is used in war to demoralize whole families and communities, to rip them apart. Many women would prefer to get shot with a gun then raped, because of the terrible violation of the act. Uh, sex is sex, and it exists in a variety of ways pleasant and distinctly non-pleasant. If rape doesn't have anything to do with sex, why does it involve sex? And where does the "punishing" come from? Punishing women for what? I don't see a good case that the pain raped women feel, excruciating as it is, is anything more than a tragic byproduct of sex by coercion. There's a German study that compared 99 castrated sex offenders and 35 non-castrated sex offenders about a decade after their release from prison, and found that the recidivism rate of castrated offenders was 3%, while the rate for non-castrated offenders was 46%. This suggests to me that there's a pretty distinct sexual component involved in the crime.

CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:19:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Qtman Lioness I don't know how thorough it was but I addressed it from what I have seen and not what stats say. I never trust stats any way. I can show studies and stats that back up every opinion stated on this thread. Thats the problem with stats. It's numbers. Numbers can be manipulated to show what the statistician wants to show. They do not necessarily show the facts. That's exactly the problem, I agree.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:27:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon Excellent post! Thank you for addressing it more thoroughly, Qtman. QTman, Great post! CoerdeLeon, I am curious why you accepted this, but rejected many of the same things when I posted them? I didn't address all of these things in one post as QTman did, but I covered almost everything that was said in his post, and was in agreement with everything he stated.

Qtman -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:31:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan quote: ORIGINAL: Sideways Rape does involve a perversion of the sex act, but it had nothing to do with sex itself really. It is a way of punishing a women, hurting her, controlling her, violating her in the deepest way possible. Rape is used in war to demoralize whole families and communities, to rip them apart. Many women would prefer to get shot with a gun then raped, because of the terrible violation of the act. Uh, sex is sex, and it exists in a variety of ways pleasant and distinctly non-pleasant. If rape doesn't have anything to do with sex, why does it involve sex? And where does the "punishing" come from? Punishing women for what? I don't see a good case that the pain raped women feel, excruciating as it is, is anything more than a tragic byproduct of sex by coercion. There's a German study that compared 99 castrated sex offenders and 35 non-castrated sex offenders about a decade after their release from prison, and found that the recidivism rate of castrated offenders was 3%, while the rate for non-castrated offenders was 46%. This suggests to me that there's a pretty distinct sexual component involved in the crime. THis does not even make sense. It is like saying that we poked the eyes out of 100 people and only three of them continued to read the news paper. A properly castrated man can't commit rape according to the legal definition of rape. Of course the recidivism of non-castrated maen would be higher. This just shows how unreliable these studies can be. I can do a study that shows half of the married people in the U.S. are male. Does this prove anything. I can also produce a study that shows 100% od the deaths in this country was caused by respiratory failure. Can I convince you of that. Look at studies and stats with a grain of salt m friend.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:34:11 AM)
quote: THis does not even make sense. It is like saying that we poked the eyes out of 100 people and only three of them continued to read the news paper. A properly castrated man can't commit rape according to the legal definition of rape. Of course the recidivism of non-castrated maen would be higher. This just shows how unreliable these studies can be. I can do a study that shows half of the married people in the U.S. are male. Does this prove anything. I can also produce a study that shows 100% od the deaths in this country was caused by respiratory failure. Can I convince you of that. Look at studies and stats with a grain of salt m friend. My favorite: 85% of people who have died have consumed french fries in the week prior to their death.

Qtman -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:43:17 AM)
Hey Benelchi we could do a study on that and put McDonalds out of business.[:D]

stellaluna -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:53:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi quote: ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon Excellent post! Thank you for addressing it more thoroughly, Qtman. QTman, Great post! CoerdeLeon, I am curious why you accepted this, but rejected many of the same things when I posted them? I didn't address all of these things in one post as QTman did, but I covered almost everything that was said in his post, and was in agreement with everything he stated. Credibility. He's a police officer. Tone. Your posts, even if you agree with Qtman still appear to blame the victim. I've mostly stayed out of this conversation, but some of what I've read seems very uninformed. This is based on: living with a roommate for several years who was a psychologist studying rape; living with another roommate who worked at the local rape crisis center and currently having a friend who also works at rape crisis; long conversations with the dozen or so police officers I've been friends with over the years (and one brother who is an officer); and sitting through some 50+ hours of crisis and emergency training. All of these experiences, besides being a woman, I think gives a person a different perspective of a crime, minus statistics or media reports or anything else. You might find interesting...I was reading some of the statistics in question last night, and I personally think they're low. Several years ago I was at a birthday party with about 20 or so women. The question was posed: How many here have been raped or otherwise sexually assaulted. Only two had not. Think about the women you know--family, friends, co-workers, even your spouse. Chances are very good that they have been a victim of a sexual crime. It's almost like if you're a woman you just have to expect it. What you wear is completely irrelevant. Sorry.

huangshan -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 9:58:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Qtman quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan quote: ORIGINAL: Sideways Rape does involve a perversion of the sex act, but it had nothing to do with sex itself really. It is a way of punishing a women, hurting her, controlling her, violating her in the deepest way possible. Rape is used in war to demoralize whole families and communities, to rip them apart. Many women would prefer to get shot with a gun then raped, because of the terrible violation of the act. Uh, sex is sex, and it exists in a variety of ways pleasant and distinctly non-pleasant. If rape doesn't have anything to do with sex, why does it involve sex? And where does the "punishing" come from? Punishing women for what? I don't see a good case that the pain raped women feel, excruciating as it is, is anything more than a tragic byproduct of sex by coercion. There's a German study that compared 99 castrated sex offenders and 35 non-castrated sex offenders about a decade after their release from prison, and found that the recidivism rate of castrated offenders was 3%, while the rate for non-castrated offenders was 46%. This suggests to me that there's a pretty distinct sexual component involved in the crime. THis does not even make sense. It is like saying that we poked the eyes out of 100 people and only three of them continued to read the news paper. A properly castrated man can't commit rape according to the legal definition of rape. Of course the recidivism of non-castrated maen would be higher. Actually, that depends on the jurisdiction in question. Without going into detail, sexual penetration isn't as limited as one might imagine at first blush. In addition, the study involved pedophiles as well as violent sexual offenders. And I have yet to see a compelling reason to believe that rape has nothing to do with sex, particularly given the centrality of the act to the crime.

Sideways -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:00:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan Uh, sex is sex, and it exists in a variety of ways pleasant and distinctly non-pleasant. If rape doesn't have anything to do with sex, why does it involve sex? And where does the "punishing" come from? Punishing women for what? I don't see a good case that the pain raped women feel, excruciating as it is, is anything more than a tragic byproduct of sex by coercion. I'm sorry, but that just goes to show how little you understand about rape or sexual assault. There is a tremendous amount of physical pain in rape that is not present in consensual sex (unless the woman has a physical problem). Even the physical trauma on a woman's body in rape is very different then the physical trauma from rough, consensual sex. And of course, we're not even getting into the physiological harm. Rape involves sex because it is the single most humiliating, personal way to inflict harm and exert control over a woman. Think of it, if you can force a woman into the sex act, you can do anything to her. There's a reason why rape is used a tool of war, and it isn't so that the soldiers can get their jollies.

CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:07:01 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stellaluna quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi quote: ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon Excellent post! Thank you for addressing it more thoroughly, Qtman. QTman, Great post! CoerdeLeon, I am curious why you accepted this, but rejected many of the same things when I posted them? I didn't address all of these things in one post as QTman did, but I covered almost everything that was said in his post, and was in agreement with everything he stated. Credibility. He's a police officer. Tone. Your posts, even if you agree with Qtman still appear to blame the victim. Exactly what I would have answered. quote: I've mostly stayed out of this conversation, but some of what I've read seems very uninformed. This is based on: living with a roommate for several years who was a psychologist studying rape; living with another roommate who worked at the local rape crisis center and currently having a friend who also works at rape crisis; long conversations with the dozen or so police officers I've been friends with over the years (and one brother who is an officer); and sitting through some 50+ hours of crisis and emergency training. All of these experiences, besides being a woman, I think gives a person a different perspective of a crime, minus statistics or media reports or anything else. You might find interesting...I was reading some of the statistics in question last night, and I personally think they're low. Several years ago I was at a birthday party with about 20 or so women. The question was posed: How many here have been raped or otherwise sexually assaulted. Only two had not. Think about the women you know--family, friends, co-workers, even your spouse. Chances are very good that they have been a victim of a sexual crime. It's almost like if you're a woman you just have to expect it. What you wear is completely irrelevant. Sorry. Quite right. I was thinking of putting up a poll in Women Only about this. I don't think that most men realize how many women, as little girls, have been groped and slobbered on and inappropriately touched by relatives or family friends. Even if they are never really raped or molested they have still been subject to this type of thing. And it continues in different ways, with different people, from there throughout our lives. Most women know from childhood that it has nothing to do with their dress or their own behavior.

huangshan -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:13:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sideways quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan Uh, sex is sex, and it exists in a variety of ways pleasant and distinctly non-pleasant. If rape doesn't have anything to do with sex, why does it involve sex? And where does the "punishing" come from? Punishing women for what? I don't see a good case that the pain raped women feel, excruciating as it is, is anything more than a tragic byproduct of sex by coercion. I'm sorry, but that just goes to show how little you understand about rape or sexual assault. There is a tremendous amount of physical pain in rape that is not present in consensual sex (unless the woman has a physical problem). Even the physical trauma on a woman's body in rape is very different then the physical trauma from rough, consensual sex. And of course, we're not even getting into the physiological harm. Rape involves sex because it is the single most humiliating, personal way to inflict harm and exert control over a woman. Think of it, if you can force a woman into the sex act, you can do anything to her. There's a reason why rape is used a tool of war, and it isn't so that the soldiers can get their jollies. You answered essentially none of my questions, and apparently misread me completely in the bolded portion, as it has nothing to do with what I said. I don't see how the pain that you're writing about isn't simply a tragic byproduct of coerced sex. I'll ask again: Punishing women for what? How is sex not a motivating factor? How is it not the principal factor? Another thought: Date rape seems particularly problematic to this not-sex theory. Most people will agree that women have a right to say no at any point during sexual activity, and that if a man persists, he is a rapist. But should we also believe that his motivation has instantly changed from wanting sex to oppressing women? Come on.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:25:42 AM)
quote: Credibility. He's a police officer. There is nothing I can do about that one. I am not a policeman, and if it requires becoming a policeman to be credible then I guess I am out of luck. quote: Tone. Your posts, even if you agree with Qtman still appear to blame the victim. Tone is something that doesn't get conveyed well in a written medium, whatever "tone" you believe you heard was certainly not what I was trying to convey. Here are the parts of my posts that directly convey the intentions of what I was trying to say, and contradict the "tone" you believe you heard in my posts. Ironically, you have attacked me using the same argument that date rapists so often use i.e. She said "No", but by her "tone" I know she meant "Yes" the question isn't about what influences all rapes. Rape is committed for many different reasons and many different groups of women are affected by rape. I don't know how many times I must agree with this point before you accept the fact that I am not condoning rape because someone dresses provocatively! Yes, there are women and (especially) children who are innocent of any wrong doing who still get raped I don't believe a woman should ever be raped regardless of her choice of clothing, or even her choice to get drunk. we should never defend the rapist for the crime they committed (there is no excuse for rape) No one said that the perpetrator should be excused for their lack of self control Yes, there are many woman who have been raped who are innocent before God for any participation in the circumstances that allowed for their rape I believe that both men and woman should take ownership of their own failures to the degree that they themselves have failed. a woman choosing to immodestly and sinfully adorn herself SHOULD NOT ever be used as an excuse for rape not even the OP said that a woman who dressed provocatively was "asking for the sin of rape to be perpetuated" on her many woman who are raped were not doing anything at all to bring this upon themselves I don't believe [provocative dress] is the cause of any rapes, but I do believe it is a factor in many (not all) rapes, and the evidence does seem to support than conclusion. While I would agree that the higher rate of rape of women in the sex trade is a result of many factors including environment, drugs and alcohol, etc... I do not believe the evidence would allow one to simply dismiss provocative dress as a risk factor for becoming a target of rape. While control and violence are a large part of rape, men understand that rape is not only about control and violence.

Qtman -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:33:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan quote: ORIGINAL: Sideways quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan Uh, sex is sex, and it exists in a variety of ways pleasant and distinctly non-pleasant. If rape doesn't have anything to do with sex, why does it involve sex? And where does the "punishing" come from? Punishing women for what? I don't see a good case that the pain raped women feel, excruciating as it is, is anything more than a tragic byproduct of sex by coercion. I'm sorry, but that just goes to show how little you understand about rape or sexual assault. There is a tremendous amount of physical pain in rape that is not present in consensual sex (unless the woman has a physical problem). Even the physical trauma on a woman's body in rape is very different then the physical trauma from rough, consensual sex. And of course, we're not even getting into the physiological harm. Rape involves sex because it is the single most humiliating, personal way to inflict harm and exert control over a woman. Think of it, if you can force a woman into the sex act, you can do anything to her. There's a reason why rape is used a tool of war, and it isn't so that the soldiers can get their jollies. You answered essentially none of my questions, and apparently misread me completely in the bolded portion, as it has nothing to do with what I said. I don't see how the pain that you're writing about isn't simply a tragic byproduct of coerced sex. I'll ask again: Punishing women for what? How is sex not a motivating factor? How is it not the principal factor? Another thought: Date rape seems particularly problematic to this not-sex theory. Most people will agree that women have a right to say no at any point during sexual activity, and that if a man persists, he is a rapist. But should we also believe that his motivation has instantly changed from wanting sex to oppressing women? Come on. I don't think anyone is arguing this point. I myself made an exception for date rape. It is admittedly a product of raging testosterone and most definitely involves and is most likely motivated by sex. But date rape is the exception not the rule.

CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:34:04 AM)
But, Benelchi, you also said things like this (I'm not going back and finding all of them, sorry[&:]) quote: ...And they have the best opportunity because the women there have chosen to compromise godly standards both in dress and in behavior. Which puts the "cause" firmly on the woman.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:40:43 AM)
quote: Exactly what I would have answered. Here is exactly how I have responded to that answer. quote: Most women know from childhood that it has nothing to do with their dress or their own behavior. I certainly hope that most woman are smarter than this. This is an example of bad logic. The classic demonstration of logic is often given in the following examples: All dogs are brown. Fido is a dog. Therefore Fido is brown. (This is a valid and reasonable conclusion based on the prior facts) All dogs are brown. Fido is brown. Therefore Fido is a dog. (This is an unreasonable and logically deducible conclusion, there could because their could be many other brown animals) To put it in terms of this debate. In some rapes, provocative dress is not a factor. Mary was not dressed provocatively. Immodest dress was not a factor in Mary's rape. (This is a valid) In some rapes, provocative dress is not a factor. Mary was raped. Provocative dress was not a factor in Mary's rape. (This is a conclusion that cannot be derived from the facts) While I can accept that provocative dress is not a factor in many rapes, it goes against all of the evidence to assume it is never a factor in any rape. The idea that "provocative dress" is NEVER a factor in ANY rape is a "politically correct" conclusion that is not supported by the evidence. And by the way, not supported by QTman's post either.

BugLady -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:44:32 AM)
benelichi, I'm curious. Why does making that point seem to be so important to you?

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:47:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon But, Benelchi, you also said things like this (I'm not going back and finding all of them, sorry[&:]) quote: ...And they have the best opportunity because the women there have chosen to compromise godly standards both in dress and in behavior. Which puts the "cause" firmly on the woman. No it does not! In the context from which you took this post we were discussing why venues like college parties and the sex trade have higher incidents of rape. And it was you who had said that rapist choose these venues because they have better opportunity. I simply pointed out that they have better opportunity because of the dress and behavior of the women in these venues. I was not advocating the idea that these women caused a rape or even deserved being raped, but only that their dress and behavior increased their risk of being raped. (something that the statistics on rape support)

huangshan -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:47:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Qtman quote: ORIGINAL: huangshan I'll ask again: Punishing women for what? How is sex not a motivating factor? How is it not the principal factor? Another thought: Date rape seems particularly problematic to this not-sex theory. Most people will agree that women have a right to say no at any point during sexual activity, and that if a man persists, he is a rapist. But should we also believe that his motivation has instantly changed from wanting sex to oppressing women? Come on. I don't think anyone is arguing this point. I myself made an exception for date rape. It is admittedly a product of raging testosterone and most definitely involves and is most likely motivated by sex. But date rape is the exception not the rule. Regardless, I'm not seeing any answers to any of my other questions, and I'm not seeing the jump away from sex being the motivating factor in other circumstances. Men want sex, and they get it in a variety of ways, some less noble than others. There are a large number of risk factors that can influence the likelihood of rape: the man could be a psychopath, for example (and as such, insensitive to the suffering of others), an outcast (and hence immune to ostracism), a loser (with no other means to get it), or a soldier or ethnic rioter who has dehumanized the victim and thinks he or she can get away with it. Edited out a mistake. Misread BugLady.

stellaluna -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:54:01 AM)
quote: quote: Most women know from childhood that it has nothing to do with their dress or their own behavior. I certainly hope that most woman are smarter than this. This is an example of bad logic. The classic demonstration of logic is often given in the following examples: When most women I know admit they have been sexually assaulted, I don't care what color the dog is.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 10:56:24 AM)
quote: benelichi, I'm curious. Why does making that point seem to be so important to you? Because I believe it is part of the much broader cultural lie that says that the overt sexual expression and exploitation of men and woman is not a moral problem, and it is a lie that has in many ways invaded the church.

CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 11:00:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stellaluna quote: quote: Most women know from childhood that it has nothing to do with their dress or their own behavior. I certainly hope that most woman are smarter than this. This is an example of bad logic. The classic demonstration of logic is often given in the following examples: When most women I know admit they have been sexually assaulted, I don't care what color the dog is. Exactly. Neither the logic nor the "evidence" addresses what most women have experienced and know to be fact. The evidence is completely skewed and unreliable because SO MUCH goes on that is unreported.

hnt -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 11:04:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi quote: A rapist generally doesn't rape because he is sexually tempted. He rapes because he wants to victimize someone. This is one example of those things that are commonly repeated by organizations supporting rape victims, but not supported by any of the studies on rape. One of the most common and growing forms of rape today is "date rape" especially with the aid of "date rape drugs". These rapes are almost always sexually motivated. Think about what you just said here. The person brings with them 'date rape drugs', and you don't think that shows wanting to 'victimize'? The fact they are even in poscession of them show intent! Does poscession of this drug not show intent to you? Just curious! The only problem I have with the dress being this huge issue is when I ready about different countries. In the middle east we have all read how women are covered from head to toe. They feel if they see an ankle that 'asking for it'. Are we saying they have different types of rapist's there?

CoeurdeLeon_ -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 11:04:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: benelchi quote: ORIGINAL: CoeurdeLeon But, Benelchi, you also said things like this (I'm not going back and finding all of them, sorry[&:]) quote: ...And they have the best opportunity because the women there have chosen to compromise godly standards both in dress and in behavior. Which puts the "cause" firmly on the woman. No it does not! In the context from which you took this post we were discussing why venues like college parties and the sex trade have higher incidents of rape. And it was you who had said that rapist choose these venues because they have better opportunity. I simply pointed out that they have better opportunity because of the dress and behavior of the women in these venues. I was not advocating the idea that these women caused a rape or even deserved being raped, but only that their dress and behavior increased their risk of being raped. (something that the statistics on rape support) Hey, don't use that bold tone of type with me.[;)][8D] We're coming at it from completely different viewpoints. I assert that the increased opportunity is there because there is a concentration of women on their own, away from family and friends, circumstances necessitating that they are frequently alone and very accessible to a predator. In my view, that is what makes those venues more appealing to predators not the garb of the victims.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 11:07:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: stellaluna quote: quote: Most women know from childhood that it has nothing to do with their dress or their own behavior. I certainly hope that most woman are smarter than this. This is an example of bad logic. The classic demonstration of logic is often given in the following examples: When most women I know admit they have been sexually assaulted, I don't care what color the dog is. Almost all of the divorced men that I personally know, are divorced because their wives chose to involve themselves in affairs with other men and leave the marriage. Is it valid for me to conclude that most married woman are unfaithful to their faithful husbands based on my very limited sample? Doesn't it seem more reasonable for me to look at samples that are far larger than my personal experience allows? Or do you believe that it would be OK for me to conclude that all woman have a natural an inherent need to cheat on their spouses without caring to validate the legitimacy of the sample on which I based that conclusion. Inspite of my personal experience, I know that women do not inherently cheat more often them men because "I do care what color the dog is". I validate my personal experience and feelings with the facts, before making conclusions based on them.

benelchi -> RE: Did She ASK for It? (11/16/2008 11:10:39 AM)
quote: We're coming at it from completely different viewpoints. I assert that the increased opportunity is there because there is a concentration of women on their own, away from family and friends, circumstances necessitating that they are frequently alone and very accessible to a predator. In my view, that is what makes those venues more appealing to predators not the garb of the victims. Why do you then believe that some women choose to dress so provocatively if you believe it has no effect on the men who see them?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>