Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
If going out on Saturday is considered as risky for a woman as a black person attending a KKK party, what does that say about us as a society?
|
I never said they were equal. If they were, it would say bad things about us as a society. Still, if you were black (and somehow rather ignorant), you might want to know that attending a KKK party is a risky activity.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
|
Speaking of bad science, how does surveying men about their attitudes towards consentual sex invalidate data from actual rapes? For instance: men will be more persistent with women who are sober. That's because if she were sloshed, it would be rape. That doesn't mean women who are sloshed are less likely to be raped whatsoever. Honestly, if you want to critique methodology, you need to look at your supporting evidence with the same critical eye that you use for mine.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
So baseless speculation then?
|
Nope. Informed speculation. Do I know with 100% certainty that rapes would decrease in a hypothetical situation where all women were to dress more modestly and never drink? I don't. Perhaps rapists would not be deterred. It's possible, although rather implausible, that women who at higher risk merely shift that risk away from other women, but I think that's unlikely.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
Dude, this is victim-blaming plain and simple. Do Sikhs contribute to the racism against them by wearing traditional cultural attire? What exactly should women wear to keep men from raping them?
|
Sikhs would suffer less anti-Sikh discrimination if they don't wear traditional attire. Should they make that trade? That's not for me to decide. So what should women wear? Whatever they want. But they should be aware of the risks.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
See flameswin's picture.
|
Entirely useless as an explanation of what you meant, so thanks!
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
Again, prove the mitigation. With regards to the original study you posted there's this:
|
19% is 19%. If you can reduce your odds of a heart attack by 19%, that's mitigation. I never claimed 100% mitigation.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
Actually that is better analogy because rape, like burglary is a crime of opportunity, which proves that the provocative attire thing is a load of crap.
|
If it's a crime of opportunity, then it stands to reason that there are risk factors you control - you can determine whether or not you are an easy opportunity.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rubecube
Not really. I'm saying what you're doing does more than harm the good because too many people use it as an excuse not to get involved in advocating for broader societal changes. If men are the problem then why are women the ones who have to adjust their behaviour?
|
If burglars are the problem why are homeowners the ones who have to adjust their behaviour? They don't have to... but they should be aware of the risk factors, not kept in the dark because those who would educate them are labelled as apologists for criminals.