Slut walk

B

burt-oh-my!

Your paragraph 1: None of your attempts to link my comment to various other issues brought up in your first sentence make any sense to me, and I don't think anyone has a great interest in going off in such a great many contentious tangents at the same time. But your last comment revealed your thinking: I am not saying fix the victim, I am saying don't be one.

Your paragraph 2: Where did I say anything about slutty dressing causing crime? Where did I say anything about anything to be banned? Maybe you can try hard not to ascribe comments to me that I didn't make. So you paragraph 2 has nothing to do with me.

Your paragraph 3: Another general plea to "fix the criminals'. Hmm, lets see, civilization has been around for thousands of years, and we have always had criminals. So forgive me if I take preventative measures to preotect myself from crime while I am awaiting that happy crime-free day to arrive. If you lock your doors, why not take steps to prevent yourself or a loved one from being raped? The two acts are fundamentally the same.

Good grief, in the same post you say "Fix the criminals, even if it means more taxes" at the same time you tell ME about how unrtealistic something is?
 

escortsxxx

Well-known member
Jul 15, 2004
3,553
962
113
Tdot
Unforunly in Canada there is no "rape" but sexual assault. is the reason some grade 4 kid got in troble for kising antoher kid in school a few years back. The Kiss was sexual assault ie. rape. that had nothing to do with power, just a kid trying to be romantic.
 

genintoronto

Retired
Feb 25, 2008
3,225
3
0
Downtown TO
renteddesign.com
Well that's all well and good: you are basically saying criminals shouldn't be criminals, and we need to stop them. But I operate on the assumption that criminals are going to be criminals, for the most part at least, so for instance when it comes to burgularies, I DO put ALL my emphasis on what I am going to do to stop them from burgularizing me.
According to the most detailed information on sexual assault available from the 1993 national Violence Against Women Survey (Statistics Canada, 1993), 39% of Canadian adult women reported having had at least one experience of sexual assault since the age of 16. The definition of sexual assault in this survey included violent sexual attacks and unwanted sexual touching, both of which are consistent with Criminal Code definitions of sexual assault. That is 2 in 5 women who has experienced at least one instance of sexual assault. Many studies show that a significant number of sexual assault take place in dating and aquaintance relationships (according to a study by the Ontario Women’s Directorate, the rapist was known to his victim in 1 of 3 cases of rape: Facts to Consider About Sexual Assault, Ontario Women’s Directorate, 1995).

The prevalence and pervasiveness of rape and sexual violence against women is systemic. Which means that it is not perpetrated only or mostly by deviant, pathological "criminals". Women get raped not because of the clothes they wear but because men rape them and get away with it.

According to an often cited study, eight percent of college men have either attempted or successfully raped. 30% percent say they would rape if they could get away with it. When the wording was changed to “force a woman to have sex,” the number jumped to 58%. Worse still, 83.5% argue that “some women look like they are just asking to be raped." M Koss and M Harvey, The Rape Victim: Clinical and Community Interventions, Sage, 1991.

Research conducted by Butt (1980), Holcomb, Holcomb, Sondag, and Williams (1991), and Dean and Malamuth (1997), shows that rape-tolerant attitudes are one of the most common contributors to the high prevalence of rape among college students [my emphasis]. People who accept rape stereotypes, adversarial sexual beliefs, and traditional sex role attitudes show a greater acceptance of rape, and appear to condemn victims more. The research further suggests that males consistently hold more rape-tolerant attitudes and that these attitudes may be related to actual involvement in sexual violence (Dean & Malamuth, 1997, Holcomb et al., 1991; Koss, 1988; Rapaport & Burkhart, 1984). According to Burt (1980), rape-tolerant attitudes are comprised of the following: (1). Adversarial sexual beliefs: beliefs such as women are responsible for rape. (2). Traditionality: women are viewed as passive, sweet, and gentle, unlike men who are seen as aggressors, initiators, and proud of their sexual ability. (3). Acceptance of rape stereotypes: attitudes that prostitutes cannot be raped, rape only occurs when the victim has a weapon, or it is not definitely rape if a woman is intoxicated or wearing revealing clothes.

In a survey of 11 to 14 year old boys and girls*:

  • 51% of the boys and 41% of the girls said forced sex was acceptable if the boy “spent a lot of money” on the girl
  • 31% of the boys and 32% of the girls said it was acceptable for a man to rape a woman with past sexual experiences
  • 65% of the boys and 47% of the girls said it was acceptable for a boy to rape a girl if they had been dating for more than six months
In a survey of 13-14 year old boys**:

  • 11% thought that if a girl said “no” to sex she really meant yes
  • More than 1 in 4 agreed that girls who get drunk at parties or on dates deserve whatever happens to them
  • Almost half felt that rape was sometimes the victim’s fault
  • 40% agreed that girls who wear sexy clothes are asking to be raped
  • More than 1 in 3 thought they would not be arrested if they forced a date to have sex 36% agreed that if a girl goes into the bedroom on a date, she wants to have sex
  • More than 15% agreed that forcing your date to have sex is sometimes acceptable
  • More than 7% thought that it was okay for a boy to force a girl to have sex if the girl got him sexually excited

Rape is NOT a inevitable fact of life. Men are NOT uncontrollable animals and most are NOT pathological deviants.

The only thing that all victims of rape have in common is bad fucking luck, and for the vast majority of them, the common denominator they share is that their attacker were men. The only way to stop rape is to stop men from raping. And it starts by changing attitutes toward rape. As long as society will keep on telling women and children that they should have better protected themselves against getting raped, men will keep on raping women and children with impunity.

--
* J White and JA Humphrey, 1991, “Young People’s Attitudes Toward Acquaintance Rape,” in Acquaintance Rape: The Hidden Crime, ed. Andrea Parrot, John Wiley & Sons.
** Facts About Sexual Assault, American Medical Association, 1997
 

Captain Fantastic

...Winning
Jun 28, 2008
3,273
0
36
Shit, and I thought this thread was about the "walk of shame" that so many (myself included, post-St. Paddy's) make after a night out turns out to be the morning after... ;)

All kidding aside, some of the posts in this thread just verify my belief that there are a lot of sick, stupid people out there. Or shit disturbing trolls. Either way, it re-confirms my choice to spend less time on this board. (Shaking head) I can't believe that anyone is having the "she dressed like a slut/she got drunk and flirty, so she asked for it... because guys can't control themselves" discussion anymore.

Walk on, ladies!
 
B

burt-oh-my!

Gen clearly selectively quotes from somewhat radical faminist literature that clearly belongs more in the camp of 'opinion' rather than fact. I have very little confidence in those statistics becasue the authors so clearly favour their own point of view and priorities: For instance:

There is increasing awareness of the problem of male victims of both aggression and rape (Macchieto, 1992) and the omission of this by Koss and Harvey may reflect their feminist bias.

Some recent literature raises questions about generalities and stereotypes in this book. Some rape victims do not want to be see themselves or be seen by others as victims, although Koss and Harvey defend their use of "victims" instead of the currently popular "survivors" by noting that this more adequately signifies the "outrage of rape."

The data on date rape on college carnpuses have been questioned by some writers (e.g., Gilbert, 1991, 1992; Jensen & Karpos, 1993; Roiphe, 1993; Sawyer, Desmond & Lucke, 1993). Overinclusive definitions of date rape may deflect attention from the very real and serious problem of rape in our society. Also, questions must be asked about reported data if those data are to become the basis for public policy (Formaini, 1990; Rothman, 1992; Rossi, 1987; Bennett & DiLorenzo, 1992).

The book has no mention of false allegations of rape, although these have been discussed in the media. Such false allegations of rape weaken the credibility of actual rape victims. Also, marital rape allegations, especially those that arise in custody situations, raise issues for professionals.

Little new information is presented in this book, although it does combine and synthesize a great amount of data. However it ignores some data that may further confuse this complex problem and some readers may see the book as just one more feminist presentation of rape or as an advocacy study.

"The relationship between attractiveness and the likelihood of being the victim of sexual coercion has never been directly examined," Felson claims, probably because of resistance to the idea that rape is sexually driven. But according to the latest National Crime Victimization Survey (published by the Bureau of Justice Statistics), almost all female rape victims are younger than 35, and numerous studies document a correlation between youthfulness and attractiveness. The theory is bolstered by rapists themselves. As far back as 1976, when the rape-as-power theory took hold, a study cited by Felson found that rapists said they preferred victims who were "nice, friendly, young, pretty and middle class."
 
B

burt-oh-my!

Some of Felson's critics grudgingly admit that there might be something to his contentions but insist that rapists must be sexual sadists, that their sexual satisfaction derives from the terror and physical pain they inflict on their victims. "I've seen too many examples, done too many interviews with rapists," says Gillman-Bruschi. "Rape is a crime of power. These are men who feel powerless, who want to gain power and control. If all they want is sex, why do they engage in torture?"

While Felson agrees that a small number of rapists may be turned on by violence, his research has found that most are indifferent to it. The majority prefer compliant victims -- in fact, he found, most would have preferred to engage in consensual sex with their victims. (The latest studies of selfdefense and Justice Department statistics show that women who fight back verbally or physically hold a better chance of escaping rape and injury, a finding that lends support to the notion that rapists prefer compliance.)

Questioning the common tenets about rape has landed other social scientists in hot water. A few years ago, University of California at Berkeley Professor Neil Gilbert was targeted by date-rape groups when he questioned the most widely cited survey on the prevalence of rape, a 1985 study by Mary Koss commissioned by Ms. magazine.

Gilbert criticized Koss's methodology and found that her claim that "one in four women" were victims of rape was exaggerated -- and that women on college campuses did not, contrary to Koss's assertions, have to fear rape at every turn. But rather than being thanked for the good news, Gilbert found himself vilified at rape-awareness gatherings and honored with "anti-Gilbert" packages prepared by the National Clearinghouse on Marital and Date Rape.

A problem, says Felson, is that some researchers use the terms "coercive" or "assaultive" to describe any attempts at persuasion that they personally find objectionable. (Some feminists, for example, believe that any sexual activity not initiated by a woman is rape.) But value judgments can't replace scientific analysis: "False promises of love and badgering may be obnoxious or morally repugnant, but they are not coercive. Giving alcohol to someone is not coercive, although coercion may follow if sexual relations are forced on a person who is incapacitated or unconscious," writes Felson.

What it comes down to, Felson says, is "rape is a horrible crime -- it shouldn't matter what the rapist's motivation is." However, there's nothing new about the intrusion of ideology into science, he adds. "The scientific method itself is under attack. People feel so strongly about these issues; feelings are replacing science."

Even as he bemoans this intrusion, Felson seems already to be contemplating future forays into controversy. "Feminists describe rape as this social control thing, a way for all men to keep all women in their place. But when a woman assaults or kills a man, they like that; they call it self-defense. It makes you wonder, are male-female conflicts really that different from male-male conflicts or, for that matter, female-female conflicts? That would be something to look into."
 
B

burt-oh-my!

And by the way , I continue to not accept the definition of rapists as "men".. there are female rapists, female victims, male rapists, and male victinms. We need to train P E O P L E not to rape or for that matter act violently against others.

Instead of "Women get raped not because of the clothes they wear but because men rape them and get away with it." - 'individuals get raped because criminals, both men and women, think they can get away with it"
 
B

burt-oh-my!

Regarding the Ontario Women's Directorate quoted in the first paragraph, this from the National Post:

Now it may be that the Ontario Women's Directorate -- like all feminist groups I know of -- equates "domestic violence" with "violence against women." But in fact, of course, "domestic violence" has been unequivocally identified as a bilateral problem, statistically initiated by men and women partners in almost identical proportions, with women at higher risk to commit child abuse.

So where did the Ontario Women's Directorate's one-sided findings on domestic violence come from, which the board accepted for the pamphlet without demur? Not from peer-reviewed sociologists or StatsCan. No, the Peel Board simply downloaded information provided by Interim Place, the Salvation Army Family Life Resource Centre and Family Transition Place, women's shelters about whom the most charitable thing one can say regarding their bogus "research" is that it is uncredentialed, guilty of selection bias, ideologically driven, patently skewed and utterly unreliable.

Breaking the Silence encourages teachers to assume -- and in a trickledown way, communicate to children -- that females won't be held responsible for any violence they initiate, that males' characters are inherently worse than females', and that the pain of all children who witness abuse of their father by their mother, or who themselves suffer abuse by their mother, is socially inadmissable. Breaking the Silence is the misandric equivalent of racism: "We" are blameless; "they" cause trouble.

The Ontario Women's Directorate's grant was one more sortie in a radical feminist drive to (further) entrench anti-male bias amongst educators. But when dealing with such an important issue as gender bias (imagine the outcry if the pamphlet's implication of sole responsibility for domestic violence were gender-reversed), it was the school board's responsibility to verify that they had received credible information, after which they should have printed the whole truth -- half truths in this case are as good as lies -- or foregone the funding and dropped the project.

Breaking the Silence should be withdrawn from use, and teachers informed of the reason. Then the Peel Board and the Ontario Ministry of Education should apologize to the boys in their care for the gender bias they have been exposed to that we know about -- like this pamphlet -- and the myriad other "educational" anti-male strategies that we have yet to discover.
 
B

burt-oh-my!

Interestingly, research shows that between 59% and 80% of rapists and sex offenders have been abused by women as children, which could lead one to conclude that in fact to sove the problem of male on female rape, we first need to solve the problem of female on male sexual abuse.

This is from From the Health Canada report of 1996
The Invisible Boy: Revisioning the Victimization of Male Children and Teens

Finally, there is an alarmingly high rate of sexual abuse by females in the backgrounds of rapists, sex offenders and sexually aggressive men - 59% (Petrovich and Templer, 1984), 66% (Groth, 1979) and 80% (Briere and Smiljanich, 1993). A strong case for the need to identify female perpetrators can be found in Table 4, which presents the findings from a study of adolescent sex offenders by O'Brien (1989). Male adolescent sex offenders abused by "females only" chose female victims almost exclusively.

***

So to say that the problem of rape is a problem of men's attitudes is biased and clearly not factual.
 

Art Mann

sapiosexual
May 10, 2010
2,898
3
0
Gen clearly selectively quotes from somewhat radical faminist literature that clearly belongs more in the camp of 'opinion' rather than fact. I have very little confidence in those statistics...
Which in itself is an opinion.

Not interested in debating statistics or the parameters of academic studies here ... but I do feel Gen's insightful final comment needs to be echoed, perhaps even a little louder:


Rape is NOT a inevitable fact of life. Men are NOT uncontrollable animals and most are NOT pathological deviants.

The only thing that all victims of rape have in common is bad fucking luck, and for the vast majority of them, the common denominator they share is that their attacker were men. The only way to stop rape is to stop men from raping. And it starts by changing attitutes toward rape. As long as society will keep on telling women and children that they should have better protected themselves against getting raped, men will keep on raping women and children with impunity.
 
B

burt-oh-my!

Well I think I pretty clearly just pointed out that in fact that comment, constantantly pepperred with the word "men", is in fact not really factual, and therefore quite the opposite of insightful. I would call it bigotted and misandrogynistic. If you are saying we can substitute the term "sexual predators" for the word men, then I suppose it is sort of OK - although what's so insightful about saying 'The only way to stop rape is to stop men from raping'? I guess about as insightful as saying that the only way to stop murder is to stop murderers from murdering. If that is your idea of insightful, the you must be constantly marvelling at the wisdom of virtually everyone around you...
 
B

burt-oh-my!

Which in itself is an opinion.
No, its a FACT that I have very little confidence in those satistics. And with good reason if you read the quotes.

When you say you are not interested in debating statistics or the paramteres of scientific studies, you are basically rejecting fact, evidence, and reason as the basis of debate.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
79,957
8
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
According to the most detailed information on sexual assault available from the 1993 national Violence Against Women Survey (Statistics Canada, 1993), 39% of Canadian adult women reported having had at least one experience of sexual assault since the age of 16. The definition of sexual assault in this survey included violent sexual attacks and unwanted sexual touching, both of which are consistent with Criminal Code definitions of sexual assault.
It's unhelpful to fail to distinguish "unwanted sexual touching" from "violent sexual attacks". Although both fit the Criminal Code definition my guess is that the average woman can brush off most "unwanted sexual touching" without giving it a second thought whereas I doubt that very many are capable of experiencing a "violent sexual attack" without being traumatized by it.

Are you really asserting that someone grabbing your ass in a night club is just like someone physically attacking you and forcibly performing some sort of sex act?

It really distorts the debate when people glue those two very different things together and pretend that they are really the same thing, when they are REALLY different.

Not only are they different in their impact (or lack of impact) on the victim, but they are likely quite different in their motivation by the perpetrator. Most "unwanted sexual touching" is likely just someone taking flirting one step too far, and it probably stops there, because the perpetrator likely has no interest in inflicting any harm. To the contrary, "violent sexual attack" is, as you have so often pointed out, likely more motivated by feelings of inadequacy and a desire to feel powerful.

We really ought to never quote any statistic that fails to differentiate these two very, very different acts.
 

Rockslinger

Banned
Apr 24, 2005
32,773
0
0
Are you really asserting that someone grabbing your ass in a night club is just like someone physically attacking you and forcibly performing some sort of sex act?
There was some debate about "tiering" sexual assaults. Someone accidentally touching your bum in a night club would be classified as 3rd degree sexual assault. Someone forcibly penetrating your anus with a broom would be classified as 1st degree sexual assault.
 

afterhours

New member
Jul 14, 2009
6,319
4
0
In a survey of 11 to 14 year old boys and girls*:

  • 51% of the boys and 41% of the girls said forced sex was acceptable if the boy “spent a lot of money” on the girl
    ....
  • 65% of the boys and 47% of the girls said it was acceptable for a boy to rape a girl if they had been dating for more than six months
who would have thought that our kids are so smart
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts