[SebC]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You'll have to explain to me how what a woman wears makes her more or less vulnerable to rape. Otherwise I would think that a rapist would look for some other sign of vulnerability.

I pointed you to a study that says it's a factor in victim selection. Ergo, if clothing is not a matter of opportunity, but is a factor in victim selection, then victim selection is not 100% opportunity. It's still a risk factor.

Originally Posted by rubecube

It's not a should they, it's should we as a society accept a culture where they have to. I'm asking if you have some suggestions on what clothing women should wear if they want to avoid getting raped because, in my opinion, what constitutes provocative is probably pretty subjective. Honestly, your explanation makes about as much sense as telling women to stay out of the workplace because they'll face less risk of sexual harassment at home.

"A culture where they have to" is not acceptable. But it may also be impossible to eradicate anti-Sikh discrimination entirely, so whether or not we find it acceptable that's what we've got.

I assume loose-fitting clothing that doesn't show much skin mitigates the most risk. If you really want the answer, you should do an in-depth study. Good luck getting funding! People like you (and most of our government, apparently), will call you immoral simply for wanting the answer.

Originally Posted by rubecube

If provocative dress is such a big factor in rape, why are rape statistics virtually similar or in some cases more prominent in countries where women on the whole dress more modestly?

Because now you're not controlling for other variables. Who said it was a big factor? I just said it's a factor.

[quote=rubecube]Sure, if you want to be a heartless dick about it. "Hey, sucks that you got raped, but maybe if you had worn some slacks instead of that skirt you would've had 19% less chance of it happening. Keep that in mind for next time!"[/rubecube]Reality is a heartless dick. Facts are facts.

Originally Posted by rubecube

You're missing my point. I have no problem with people pointing out the methods that rapists use to attack their targets. Saying watch your drink at a club or try not to let someone isolate you is a lot different than saying "Well you're partially to blame because in my opinion, what you were wearing is pretty slutty."

Well, I've never said that. If what you wear is a risk factor, then saying "consider what you wear" is really quite similar to saying "watch your drink" (the difference is that not getting to wear revealing clothing is perceived as a higher cost than not leaving drinks unattended).

Originally Posted by rubecube

Ignoring the fact that the workplace, the home, etc., are all much riskier places for women than Forest Lawn at 1 AM, what are women who don't have a choice in the matter supposed to do? I'm thinking for instance of a woman who works a night shift, lives in Forest Lawn, and doesn't drive. Is she still partially to blame?

Here you go again with blame. What's she supposed to do? Make an educated decision between living her life and hoping for the best, or mitigate risk by trying to find a day job, moving, carpooling, etc. It's not blaming her to point out that she's at a higher risk if she doesn't mitigate. Blame implies moral responsibility. Contribution to risk is not blame.

Note: I'm not 100% convinced that clothing is a risk factor. For the most part, I'm assuming that it is, and using it as an example. Substitute alcohol for revealing clothing, and the general principles of what I'm saying still apply.