The right to dress provocatively? - Page 4

It does mention clothing.....that rapists look for clothing that is easy to remove.

In my experience with victims of rape, one has to go with the survivor instinct. In many cases, fighting back and using some of the tactics mentioned may have led to the victim being beaten or murdered. Sometimes the rapists are excited by the fight and struggle.

Survivors of rape often have stories to tell about how they coped and survived. I knew a woman who was held hostage and raped repeatedly for hours. She survived by following her instincts on how to deal with the situation.

These are good tips, I think, and should be passed on to your loved ones.
They don't however, solve our ever-raging argument. It does imply that the ones that carry a pair of scissors might not go for a woman in "fitting jeans", he might go for a women in a skirt or dress, as previously mentioned.
Furthermore, the short hair part does say alot for the Femininity plot.

Boy did this thread ever get long. I had no idea...

Kooky, while I respect your experience in this subject and really appreciate that you help these women, some of what you say clashes with the very core of the point I wanted to get across (and debate). It is the fact that you do not seem to acknowledge that a person can take steps, such as dressing more conservatively, to be *safer* (though not completely safe). The disagreement with Decius' driving accident analogy really crystalized it for me, assuming you were serious in your response. While these things CAN happen anywhere, anytime, and to anyone, clearly there IS a correlation between a victim's appearance/behavior/location/time of day and their chances of being attacked (or getting into a car accident). That being the case, concentrating solely on the aggressors may actually be counter-productive in preventing more attacks, which is why I'm passionate about this issue.

Awesome post rollergirl! I'm curious, where did you get that information (source of the email)?

#2 pretty much says it. There's definitely a strong correlation between "provokative" and "easy to remove" clothing.

I think aside from the reasons mentioned, #10 also works because it interrupts the attacker psychologically. If he's psyching himself up, he loses momentum to respond to your question, and may now choose someone else. Also, I saw a show a while ago about this, and they mentioned that when you say something you become more personable and human to the attacker, and it can help diffuse the situation.

For #13-15, clawing or thumbing the eyes is also a very good way to take the guy out, but don't obsess about it too much. If you can't reach the face for whatever reason (guy's pushing you down maybe), go for something else. There's always something you can hit, and usually the groin or the eyes will be available.

Often the posts get taken to other levels of conversation in these forums and may shift from the point originally being made.

My posts simply stated that regardless of how people dress or drive, rapes and accidents still occur. Naturally one should take steps to keep safe....thought that was a given and not in need of restatement.

I am definately not into blaming the victim regardless of dress or other factors. Unfortunately, our society often does try to find fault in the victim. What she did that Provoked a rape.

I am also passionate about the points I am defending here.

An example is the young teen girl I work with. Yes, she made some bad choices getting into a car with boys she did not know well and accepting a drink......but the rapist is ultimately responsible for his actions. Regardless of her carelessness, she did NOT DESERVE IT! She used so poor judgement and learned a difficult lesson.

I also mentioned that women here locally have been attacked in broad daylight and in jeans and a t-shirt. So while you may take steps to dress less provacatively, there are many other factors involved such as those which Rollergirl posted.

I guess I believe that women should be able to celebrate their femininity and wear dresses if they choose.

"Awesome post rollergirl! I'm curious, where did you get that information (source of the email)?

#2 pretty much says it. There's definitely a strong correlation between "provokative" and "easy to remove" clothing. "

......~think4yourself....


WOW...

first I would like to say, that I am a bit concerned now, due to the fact...that I have VERY long hair...and wear it up in a Pony 90% of the time, simply because I don't like perms...and I am too lazy to stand in front of a mirror and curl it for 45 minutes....

not too mention, my casual "dress"...leads me to believe that my apparel would be "easily removed"...

YIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I think we all have different thoughts of "provacative". But, in the general senses of the "phrase"...I do not dress in such a manner unless I am out with my Husband...Who is a very large Man...and I can't imagine getting "assaulted" with Him at my side.

2) The second thing men look for is clothing. They will look for women who's clothing is easy to remove quickly. Many of them carry scissors around to cut clothing.

Where does this say there is a strong correlation with dressing provocatively? A correlation is a term used to describe a method of research and statistical relationships. How the study is conducted is very important as there may be confounding variables and various types of research bias. I did not say there is no correlation...but would like to see the study.

Does dressing provocatively equate to" easy to remove clothing? " I say you can be provocative wearing skin tight jeans, low cut tops and such. Does that make it easier for a rapist?

Often the posts get taken to other levels of conversation in these forums and may shift from the point originally being made.

Fair enough. I do think though that you and Decius were talking about 2 totally different things then, in your disagreement. I think he was trying to establish that you can be safER.

My posts simply stated that regardless of how people dress or drive, rapes and accidents still occur. Naturally one should take steps to keep safe....thought that was a given and not in need of restatement.

I thought the fact that rapes and accidents "still occur" under the safer conditions was a given. I believe no one can EVER be 100% safe, which is why I talk about ways of minimizing risk, rather than eliminating it. Same goes for blame. It goes without saying for me that the victim isn't to blame, but I do believe in many cases they could've taken steps to reduce their risk.

Unfortunately, our society often does try to find fault in the victim. What she did that Provoked a rape.

This is probably the source of our different viewpoints. I've never met anyone who thought the victim provoked a rape, thus for me it goes without saying that the victim isn't to blame. It CAN happen to anyone, but that it happens more if you don't take certain precautions.

An example is the young teen girl I work with. Yes, she made some bad choices getting into a car with boys she did not know well and accepting a drink......but the rapist is ultimately responsible for his actions. Regardless of her carelessness, she did NOT DESERVE IT! She used so poor judgement and learned a difficult lesson.

I agree, I'm sure she's a great girl and definitely did not deserve to have that happen to her. I hope she is doing better.

I guess I believe that women should be able to celebrate their femininity and wear dresses if they choose.

I believe they should be able to also, but it's important to distinguish between wishful thinking and reality. It is an inescapable consequence that if you CHOOSE TO express your femininity in a certain way, your chances of being attacked increase. If you are aware of this, and still proceed, that is your choice. I don't believe that by somehow standing up to the attackers in this way anything is to gain, but it is a trade-off between freedom of expression and safety. Ultimately the choice is yours. I just hope those who make it understand the factors involved.

MountainGirl, I think a really good investment for you would be some pepper spray. It's cheap as hell, and if it's easy to reach (don't keep it in your purse all the time), it should drastically improve your chances of deterring an attacker.

Kooky,
Where does this say there is a strong correlation with dressing provocatively?

As we both know, it doesn't say that anywhere in rollergirl's post. Rollergirl is not the sole "giver of truth" on this forum, and ultimately all knowledge comes from observation. I "observed" that provokative clothing is often revealing, and easy to remove.

A correlation is a term used to describe a method of research and statistical relationships. How the study is conducted is very important as there may be confounding variables and various types of research bias. I did not say there is no correlation...but would like to see the study.

A correlation is not a method of research, but it is a statistical relationship. There are correlations between things regardless of whether you know of them or not, or whether a study was done or not. Studies only FIND correlations. Those correlations were there before anyone found them. I do not have a study for you, but I AM a guy, and I DO stare at women for lengthy portions of my day. Ask other guys, and I think you'll get a good idea of what constitutes provokative clothing. The fact that you explicitly said you "did not say there is no correlation" indicates to me that you know what I am talking about, and that's good enough for me.

Does dressing provocatively equate to" easy to remove clothing? " I say you can be provocative wearing skin tight jeans, low cut tops and such. Does that make it easier for a rapist?

Dressing provokatively does not EQUATE to easy to remove, hence the correlation is not 100%, but there is a strong correlation.

In many instances victims are blamed which is why our local women's center provides legal advocates to support them through the court proceedings. For example, the questioning in court may address such things as how the victim was dressed, did she drink that night and so on.

In domestic violence cases...."what did she do that made him so angry?" These type of comments.

As a graduate of a Masters of Science program in Clinical Psychology some years ago, there is no need to tell me about research methods and designs. I will state again that there definately are Correlational research studys which are designed to examine the ways in which variables are related. You may continue to make assumptions that there is a strong correlation to prove a point, but the real evidence is presented in the numbers

I do not need a Guy to tell me anything. I am well aware of what provocative clothing is and I still say that a women could wear this style..... which is not easy to remove with out those scissors!

I think the differences in opinion stem from the point that a woman can wear a simple non provocative dress and still be selected because it is easier access, she is caught off guard etc. What he is looking for is there, provocative or not. Perhaps we are talking of different types of rapists? I know I am looking at the overall picture .

In many instances victims are blamed which is why our local women's center provides legal advocates to support them through the court proceedings. For example, the questioning in court may address such things as how the victim was dressed, did she drink that night and so on.

You are talking about a post-violence issues. I agree that people should be educated about things so lawyers can't take advantage of their ignorance on the subject, but this is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about preventing that violence in the first place. Minimizing risk. The idea that no matter how you dress you CAN get raped does not minimize anything, so I don't understand why you insist on pushing this point (after I already agreed to it).

As a graduate of a Masters of Science program in Clinical Psychology some years ago, there is no need to tell me about research methods and designs. I will state again that there definately are Correlational research studys which are designed to examine the ways in which variables are related.

*sigh*

I'll put my dictionary down and get right to the point. In your previous post you stated that "correlation is a term used to describe a method of research and statistical relationships". I have yet to realize the purpose of this statement. You are arguing semantics instead of ideas. Do you not realize that if there is a correlation between dressing provokatively and wearing easy to remove clothing, AND there is a correlation between easy to remove clothing and being sexually attacked, that there WILL be a correlation between dressing provokatively and being sexually attacked? Yes? Then why argue this tangent at all? If not, I'd be glad to clear it up for you.

I find your definitions pointless. You either agree or disagree that there is a correlation between easiness to remove clothing and dressing provokatively.

You may continue to make assumptions that there is a strong correlation to prove a point, but the real evidence is presented in the numbers

Believe it or not, the human brain functioned quite well before the development of formal statistics. You don't need a study to tell you you need to take your pants off before you sit on the toilet. The idea that I and virtually every guy I talk to are all wrong about what constitutes provokative clothing is rediculous, the odds of this are extremely low. People come to conclusions very unscientifically, and for the most part, they are right. I don't understand why you insist on mathematical proofs to confirm everyday things, but if you like, you may create a poll on here and see what people say.

...and I still say that a women could wear this style..... which is not easy to remove with out those scissors!

Again with the word "COULD". This in no way invalidates what I've said, and I've explained this point before.

...I know I am looking at the overall picture

I think you are only looking at the small portion of the picture that disagrees with me.

That Decius Is about the most ignorant thing I have seen posted anywhere ! Please point it out where I have stated such things. There is definately a correlation between lack of education and those who blame victims. Shouldn't someone who is an administrator be a better example of how to behave in a forum?

I am confused...why it is so threatening to you two that not everyone agrees with what you believe? So much so that you become angered and attack others for these differences? I would think a forum would be to examine a question from all angles and form your own conclusions rather determine who is wrong and right for believing as they do. I don't think I have been disrespectful to you. I certainly have not been angry and hostile to the point of picking your character apart.

Having a dictionary is fine but I was required to take research methods at both the undergraduate and in graduate school. There are research designs and methods which examine relationships of variables.

Why do I speak of numbers and research? I guess because of my background in the sciences. I don't just believe everything that is thrown out there And I like to have proof before I make an assumption. Can't help it that is what we are trained to do. And there are a good deal of faulty research methods and designs out there.

I have never condoned provocative clothing in terms of body parts being exposed to the public eye or skin tight clothing leaving nothing to the imagination. There is no doubt that such clothing calls attention to the person, in fact many are totally turned off by that and refer to such women in a negative way.

I am not convinced however, that such outfits lead someone to be more likely raped......more likely the rapist chooses for a number of reasons such as the easy to remove clothing. Now....a mini skirt could be considered provocative and easy access.....combine that with being distracted and unaware in a fairly deserted area......that may lead to rape.

I have never stated that there was anything wrong with wanting to be safer and prevent rape.....rather I have choosen to respond to statements that I have a differing opinion about, just as others have done in this thread.

Ok..

-"all you keep saying is that women have the right to wear what they want, and that they should not be blamed for being raped.

Well, that is not the subject of the thread."-

But... the name of the thread... it is called... nevermind... I won't ask.

I felt like stating something so that I don't have to read you two fighting/arguing, something to break the tension and give the debate a new flavor.

Decius, are you stating that you think that if a woman dresses provacativly and gets raped, it is her fault? I not sure if that is what you are saying because you never state it clearly, that and the fact I don't want to think you are saying that.

If you are, then that is like saying that if you were murdered, it was your fault. That is wrong. You might of been able to prevent being killed, but the fact that someones mind is corupt to a point where they can't judge what is right and what is wrong can't be decided by the victim. It might of raised their risk, but it isn't someones fault that they are in the wrong place at the wrong time with someone whos mind is cruel.

(If you didn't think it was their fault then just ignore the above statment.)

That doesn't matter, it might of been a stupid move, but it doesn't mean it is your fault. Think of this:

A man stands in front of the judge while being charged with rape and the man pleads his case and he say to the judge. I couldn't help myself, she had clevage.

There is a difference between being stupid and being at fault. It might of been stupid for them to do it, but that doesn't mean they are the ones that caused it. You are saying that anyone who is in the wrong place at the wrong time deserves it.

I see what you are trying to say, and I agree that that is a great excuse to consider them(not to be blunt) stupid but it doesn't mean it was their fault.

And to find fault to your theroy. That is like saying that the civilians in Iraq should remain silent and get bombed because they know that they are in the dropping zone, they should get out of the way. Or that people that live in kansas shouldn't say anything when a tornado rams into their house.

Both are situations that could easily be avoided by moving. Yet, rape and natural disasters are hard to predict. You don't know who is the one that wants to rape you, you don't know which mind. And it doesn't matter where you go, yes the risks are higher in the bad part of town, but I am sure that even a co-worker might have that thought in their mind. A corrupt mind could be anywhere, so to say to remove the risk it would mean giving up your privacy because you always have to have your friend walk with you, or give up your freedom of being able to do what you want because you always have to dress normal.

If not being at fault means you could've done NOTHING to avoid whatever tragedy you endured, then I don't think it applies here. If you can lower your chances of getting beated or raped, and didn't, clearly there WAS something you could've done, and you may have single-handedly changed a miss into a hit for the aggressor. You may not know it, you will never relive the experience and make the other choice, but you really may have made the difference between being a victim and not. Obviously the attacker was also/especially to blame, but more than one person contribute to the equation, thus there is more than one person who is at fault. It is not a case of the victim, OR the attacker. Thus the attacker should be jailed, and the victim should be taught about safety.