I suspect women are wearing revealing clothes in most rape cases
I suspect that a man/woman will rape regardless of the victims clothing
I think some women are inviting dangerous attention when wearing revealing attire
I don't think clothes have anything to do with rape
All things in which there is no equivocation or "yeah, but..."
I am not saying this to make myself look good, shame on you for even making that assumption.
Sorry that you have to face hard truths.
Ich habe schon Pferde vor der Apotheke kotzen sehen.
I think the problem with attributing someone's clothing to personal responsibility, is that there's the cut-off between an acknowledged absolute, as in the case of rape being wrong, and the innumerable variations that clothing can take. If there's any correlation of responsibility, as this suggests, then we'd have an ambiguous scale of criminality. That, wearing one combination of clothing, a woman is somehow more to blame for her attack than if she were wearing another combination. That rape would be either more or less wrong in that regard. That if the more revealing is her clothing, the more culpable she is, then total nudity would be somehow more of a green light than if she were wearing a burka.
The fact that a man might react more strongly to one combination than another, is a matter purely of that man's self-control and morality. We don't hold others responsible for our moral choices. Rape is not self-defence, after all. To claim otherwise is to claim that men are mindless beasts.
It strikes me as being somewhat unlikely that there would be no warning signs ahead of time though.
Hell, just a few decades before the 1960s, it wasn't terribly uncommon for dates to actually require a chaperone.
Today's culture, on the other hand, is especially dangerous in this regard, as young people are encouraged to dress provocatively and go out and seek sex with random strangers. Most often, they do so under the influence of alcohol or other perception altering substances as well.
That's just a bad combination all the way around, and trying to temper that message of "sexual liberation" with talk of "moderation" and "responsibility" often strikes young and hormonal minds as simply being "mixed messages." This leads to a lot of young and foolish women getting themselves into trouble with the wrong kinds of men.
Last edited by Gathomas88; 02-18-14 at 11:56 PM.
Jurors are put in place to judge innocence or guilt. Everything that can be presented is necessary to given those jurors the most accurate picture of what occurred or what didn't. Every detail is potentially important. Without video, then descriptions are used to try to get the juror to visualize the scene and actions in their head. Every detail left out is a hindrance to their ability to do so. Any detail intentionally left out is a miscarriage of justice and any court officer doing so should be charged with obstruction of justice.
Jurors shouldn't judge the woman as giving consent because of the way she dresses. I can agree to that. But the court has the responsibility to give the jurors as accurate a picture as possible.
But it is not just about giving consent, it's about who is telling the truth. How someone presents themselves can speak to their character and is what people most often use as clues to make such judgments about strangers. In a he said/she said scenario, the jury must decide who is lying. If the jury judges the man is lying simply based upon the fact that he is a man accused of rape, isn't that as wrong and a miscarriage of justice as them judging the womans consent by her clothes? I would think more so, since he would then be put in jail and have to register the rest of his life as a sex offender. Which gives a more accurate picture, the staged environment of the court room or the persons dress and appearance at the time of the alleged crime?
Be sure to work hard and get lots of overtime. People on welfare want more steaks and free upgrades to smart phones with unlimited data packages.