Heddi
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Apr-18-06 09:46 PM
Original message |
Poll question: Simple Poll: Does a female ever have responsibility for being raped |
|
No maybe, no "depends on the situation"
yes or no
Does a female ever bear responsibility for being raped?
I say "female" because I do not want this narrowed by:
age socioeconomic status occupation sexual orientation relationship status
nothing.
There are no caveats to this answer. Simple yes or no.
Does a female ever bear responsibility for being raped?
I ask because there seems to be some disagreement within this progressive community as to whether or not females should be held responsible (in any way, no matter how minor or major)for her rape.
|
geniph
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-19-06 02:31 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Saying "yes" to this question would imply |
|
that a rapist is unable, for some reason caused by the victim, to control his wish to rape. That's just crap. Rape isn't an autonomous response. I don't care WHAT the victim is doing. An attacker still CHOOSES to attack.
There are things a victim can do to (somewhat) reduce their risk of being attacked. But it is still not the victim's responsibility to make sure they are not raped!
|
ismnotwasm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-19-06 02:57 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Those arguments were brought out by a well publicized rape accusation that involved an exotic dancer. There are brought out every time a women "places herself in jeopardy" from drinking to much to jogging early in the morning. They completely ignore decades of rape and sexual assault studies, rape prevention programs, including programs to reduce recidivism of the rapist. They propagate common rape myths, ignore the sexual history involving women and sexual rights. And like said above, they absolve the rapist, whose intent was rape in the first place, while women- or men- or children- or babies- do NOT choose to get raped, no matter what the circumstances, by definition.
These arguments are also a deadly insult to males, because the implication is that men cannot control themselves.
|
mrreowwr_kittty
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun May-28-06 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
11. Excellent point about being insulting to men |
|
The patriarchy does the real "male bashing" IMHO.
|
noamnety
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-19-06 07:19 PM
Response to Original message |
3. nobody bears responsibility for being a victim of violence |
|
only exception being if you attack someone and they react with violence in self-defense. Can't think of a scenario in which you'd rape a person in self-defense, though.
|
Lydia Leftcoast
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Apr-19-06 11:10 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Rapists use the "I was overcome with lust" excuse, |
|
even if the woman is wearing a burqa and has let her wrist show.
|
geniph
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-20-06 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. If we were to posit that rape is a result of the VICTIM's actions |
|
(rather than the rapist's mindset), then that ignores the fact that people are raped at home in their own beds by strangers who have never seen them before. People who did everything "right" still get raped. Infants get raped. And, as Lydia pointed out, even in cultures where women are required to be covered head to toe and never leave home without an escort, rape still happens.
And the rapists still use the "I was tempted" excuse. And it's still bullshit.
|
ThomCat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-01-06 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
17. And if the woman defends herself |
|
she can sometimes be convicted for it. :grr:
Because it would be a horrible shame if some rapist got hurt while trying to torture someone. :eyes:
|
bloom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Apr-20-06 06:57 PM
Response to Original message |
|
at that poll and see that nobody has voted "yes" yet. 31 for "no".
|
jukes
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-18-06 01:02 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
|
but the voter doesn't have the courage to defend his/her opinion.
prbly a witless troll tee-heeing at disruption of our discussion.
|
BlueIris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu May-18-06 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #7 |
8. Yeah, Mr./Ms. "Yes"? Feel free to defend your vote, there. |
|
If you can obey the rules, you're allowed to post. Notice, I wrote "if," though. We'd all like to read your justification for your position.
|
BlueIris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun May-28-06 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. Woah, and somehow another "yes" has arived. I'm still waiting |
|
for one of you to explain your views. I guess I shouldn't be shocked by your reticence, however. I'm sure it's hard for you to find the right words.
|
JI7
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun May-28-06 08:50 PM
Response to Original message |
10. who the fuck voted yet ? |
|
hoping it's a freeper or someone mistakenly voted for the wrong choice.
|
BlueIris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-29-06 02:55 AM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. Hey, J17. That's what we'd like to know. |
|
Go ahead and speak up, "Yes" votes.
|
mzteris
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-29-06 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #12 |
13. they're witless cowards. n/t |
WildClarySage
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon May-29-06 11:08 AM
Response to Original message |
14. I voted no but only because there was no box for |
|
abso-fucking-lutely not never no way uh-huh nope.
|
Marie26
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue May-30-06 09:43 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I'm not sure you'll find many yes votes in this forum.
|
benevolent dictator
(765 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed May-31-06 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. Not ones who'll admit to it anyway... nt. |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun Sep 28th 2025, 04:10 AM
Response to Original message |