Not to troll but....

It's more of a boys will be boys mentality for us. Boys really just have to be afraid of in assult is the law. It's kind of sad for them because they're taught that that they have no control over themselves like children or animals.

I want Sean Whalen! I want him bad!

>>>If a woman is alone with a man, and he rapes her, she is slightly to blame.

Excrement. Do you attribute blame, to any degree, to victims of other crimes? Do you feel that a person who is mugged because they are carrying money, or walking alone, is 'slightly to blame'? The idea that women are to blame for violence committed against them is inherently misogynist.

If we were having this discussion face-to-face, and I was a considerably less pleasant individual, and decided to punch you in the face for saying something I didn't care for, how much of 100% of the blame would be mine, and how much would be yours?


>>>There's a reason why millions of females (and males) have been sexually abused.

That's called a non sequitur - you say that as if it means something, but it doesn't. Sure, there is a reason - there are likely MANY reasons, just as there reasons why millions of people have been murdered, or millions of emails have been sent or millions of TV programmes have been watched. The existence of causality is not under discussion - attempt to define the causation, but don't hint vaguely at it, as if that says everything.


>>>No, all males are not pedophiles/rapists, but every female should be suspicious of every male.
>>>Why? Because we can't look at a male and (automatically) know whether or not he's dangerous.

My problem with this is that you phrase it in such a way as it paints an extremely ugly version of human interaction. I have to concede that if I had a daughter I would definitely want her to not go through life assuming that every man was benevolent and decent. On the other hand - a good proportion of men are, either in the sense of never doing such things, or at least never crossing certain abusive lines even if they aren't especially respectful of women. I don't think it will do women much good if they have to spend their lives in fear of male company - and I don't think you need to spend your life jumping at shadows to simply be wise or cautious.

The particular problem with the line of reasoning you espouse is that it suggests that a woman can't be alone with a man for ANY reason for fear of physical abuse - when surely it's a matter of context. I think you'd recognise that going to a man's bedroom is a very different scenario to going to a man's office, for example.

>>>How many males are/were "peeping toms" but never raped anyone?

How is this relevant?

>>>Peeping (or voyeurism) doesn't always lead to rape, but it's a serious violation/crime.

Indeed. But not as serious as rape, and not inherently related. But do you think more harm is done to women by peeping toms, or by the general populace saying that it's even slightly a woman's fault if a man rapes her?

It is precisely the fact that people are willing to blame the victim in the case of this crime that makes it so difficult to prosecute, and something so many victims are unable to talk about or admit to anybody. If you think that people - people like yourself - will think 'it was partly her fault for giving her attacker the opportunity', why on earth should somebody who's been raped bother making it worse for themselves by telling other people so they can reinforce any sense of self-blame they almost certainly already have?

The whole point of Speak, surely, is that Melinda is unable to tell anybody what happened. Do you think the picture of society that it paints would be improved if her female friends and her mother turn around and say "yeah, but it was kind of your fault too, wasn't it?".

Hell, wasn't it Melinda's fault she got attacked again at the end? She let herself be alone with a guy she knew was dangerous, but hell she probably wanted his attention, the whole over-reaction to being 'raped' was probably just her freaking out at the realisation of what a slut she really was.

I obviously don't believe that last paragraph - but plenty of people see things that way. I don't believe you are one of them, but believe me when I say your views facilitate people who do think that way, and do nothing to combat them.

Besides, what kind of message do you think it gives to men in society if you say that a) women are partly to blame when they are raped, and b) men should be expected to be rapists? Cos to me it paints a picture of rape as something normal for men, for which the women are partly responsible.

If that is a society's attitude, do you think that will encourage or discourage people from thinking its okay to sexually violate a girl? Do think such a society is apologising for the rapist, or to the rape victim with that attitude?


>>>A bit off-topic but I just saw a video of a male carpet cleaner going through a woman's home, sniffing her undergarments, watching porn on her computer, and pleasuring himself at her computer.
>>>Is he a rapist? I don't know, but could he be a rapist? Definitely.

Again, what are you trying to say here? Rapists exist? I don't think that's in doubt. Perhaps you're trying to say that creepy men with no respect for women will behave in creepy, disrespectful ways? Again, self-evident.

What you ARE doing, seemingly, is citing this intrusive and offensive behaviour as if its normal and therefore attempting to reinforce a claim that rapists are everywhere. You could get broader than that and point out, very accurately, that possession of a penis qualifies a person as a potential rapist. But frankly, if I am a potential rapist - which logically I am - then I must point out that you are too (if you're female, don't think that disqualifies you - a female friend of mine has been the subject of attempted rape by a group of women in a toilet - if it's less frequent it still happens). And a potential murderer, and a potential thief, and a potential anti-semite. Do you think it's useful for me to assess you on the terms of those possibilities?

>>>Any (functional) male could be a rapist.

There, see - what an incredibly useless statement. Any male could be a murderer, and I think we can agree that murder is worse than rape. Your slippery slope implications about minor sex offences existing on the same continuum as rape would just as easily apply to rapists, because rape absolutely can lead to murder. So maybe you should take this into account and change your statement to 'any functional male could be a murderer'. Women should see men that way, and be aware that any man could want to murder them.

No? If not, why not?

Similarly, any male could be a paedophile - but it's unlikely. What USE is your statement, what GOOD does it do?

As a male who's heard many dismissive attitudes to rape from both men and women over the years, I do not believe any good is done either by telling women to treat every man as a rapist, or by telling men that it's also a woman's fault if they decide to assault her. Taking rape seriously means not taking refuge in extreme characterisations of social interaction, and it certainly doesn't mean blaming the victim in any way, shape or form - those are the fundaments of social misogyny which FEEDS the mindset that helps to normalise and trivialise rape, which I would suggest in turn feeds the mindset of a rapist. We don't tell every homeowner to treat every stranger as an arsonist, or every shopkeeper to treat every customer as a potential thief. Sure, it's wise to keep a baseball bat behind the counter perhaps, but those that do aren't going to pick it up every time a customer comes into the store - and if they did, what a miserable, frightened life they would lead, and how few customers they would have.

"If a woman is alone with a man, and he rapes her, she is slightly to blame."


That's one of the dumbest and most ignorant things I've ever read.

>>>False equivalence.

How? Rape is a crime of violence, by definition and by etymology. If I choose to rape another human being I am just as much physically abusing them as if I choose to strike them - assault and abuse being defined by the act, not the damage.


>>>Also, keep in mind that 'slightly blaming' doesn't mean deserving of the horrid consequence.

Well perhaps you should keep in mind that 'blame' means 'blame' - as in 'assignment of responsibility'. You have effectively implied a special pleading on behalf of rapists to the effect that their victims can sometimes share a part of the blame - and therefore the responsibility. You entirely dismiss the idea that this could be the same for other violent crimes, making it clear that you define rape differently.

Note that I was able to define the effects of alcohol on a person with respect to their increased vulnerability without having to resort to the word 'blame'. You specifically chose to use it, and insist on the correctness of doing so, despite the ease with which it can be avoided. The implication is clear, you believe that it's partially the fault of a victim of crime when a crime is perpetrated against them - but only for rape, because comparison with other violent crime is 'false'.


>>>Given your responses to this thread I see this discussion will be going nowhere besides your bullheaded tone aiding in your own self-righteousness.

Consider your own response here. You begin with a 'LOL', to make it clear that an opinion different to your own is not worth consideration, least of all on such a trivial subject. You follow that by calling me names in order, presumably, to morally discredit me in your favour. Note that I confined myself to the discreditation of your views, not your character - despite my 'self-righteousness'.

You do not, however, say anything at all of any substance, and precisely nothing to meaningfully counter anything that I said.

Instead you explain how you're too big and clever to have to substantiate your view when challenged. Forgive me if I consider that convincing only as a mark of your cowardice.

Perhaps I am indeed self-righteous - but I think there are worse things to be self-righteous about, and I'd consider blaming somebody for a violent crime committed against them as one of them.