Originally posted by overlord
Wow, you must one frustrated teenager or something that you just won't let me contribute to a thread.And if you really feel so much hatred towards girls who are naive enough to dress like the mass and act like the crowd then I feel very sorry for you.. 🙁
A) I'm not a teenager.
B) You just nailed your own coffin shut with the "naive" comment. Why? Because you admit that it's an act of stupidity yet refuse to acknowledge that people like that are putting themselves in harm's way.
-AC
And if you really feel so much hatred towards girls who are naive enough to dress like the mass and act like the crowd then I feel very sorry for you.. sad
I kinda like this comment because with ALL the media and ALL the attention drawn to sex appeal..........which fluctuates constantly and is risque at the moment you gotta be kidding me...........16 year old girls know what they are doing when they dress risque is you will or are those tummy shirts with low cut fronts used to just make sure they stay cool outside🙂
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriYour frustrated insults and attempts to break down every little input I have in this thread certainly indicates that you are a child.
A) I'm not a teenager.B) You just nailed your own coffin shut with the "naive" comment. Why? Because you admit that it's an act of stupidity yet refuse to acknowledge that people like that are putting themselves in harm's way.
-AC
So you have my attention now, what is your exact point?
Wait, is that your gimmick? Call people children, ignore their points whilst continuing to make your own (proven wrong many times over by many people) and then ask them what their point is?
My point, for the last time, is this:
If you act irresponsible and do something in the knowledge that it might have negative response, you are responsible in some way for inviting said response. To deny this is stupid and, to use your word, naive.
Your point is that blaming the female to any degree, in any circumstance, is shocking. Right? What exactly would your parental advice be then? "Go out dressed like that, get drunk, it's your right. If you get raped, isn't your fault at all.", hmm?
-AC
-AC
well, i see his point...in a sense
if i go to the ghetto and wander around aimlessly in an 800$ suit with a fat wad of cash in my pocket, then get mugged and shot...am i not partially responsible?
but that logic is reasonable only when thinking in black and white.
but by your logic AC, if i walk around ANYWHERE in an 800$ suit and a fat wad of cash, if i get shot its partially my fault. whether it be brooklyn or the hamptons.
your basically saying a woman is irresponsible for drinking outside her home and mingling with others.
Originally posted by PVS
well, i see his point...in a senseif i go to the ghetto and wander around aimlessly in an 800$ suit with a fat wad of cash in my pocket, then get mugged and shot...am i not partially responsible?
but that logic is reasonable only when thinking in black and white.
but by your logic AC, if i walk around ANYWHERE in an 800$ suit and a fat wad of cash, if i get shot its partially my fault. whether it be brooklyn or the hamptons.
your basically saying a woman is irresponsible for drinking outside her home and mingling with others.
I think it's more he's saying if they do this they must recognise the added risk, and the reduced likelyhood of a conviction if they are raped. A good Barrister would make a drunk woman look pretty slutty in the UK. Nasty but true and what he would be being paid for.
Originally posted by PVS
well, i see his point...in a senseif i go to the ghetto and wander around aimlessly in an 800$ suit with a fat wad of cash in my pocket, then get mugged and shot...am i not partially responsible?
but that logic is reasonable only when thinking in black and white.
but by your logic AC, if i walk around ANYWHERE in an 800$ suit and a fat wad of cash, if i get shot its partially my fault. whether it be brooklyn or the hamptons.
your basically saying a woman is irresponsible for drinking outside her home and mingling with others.
It would depend on how ostentious it is (the suit and money).
If though, to return to a practical context, I leave my car unlocked, and it is stolen/items are stolen from it, I wouldn't think it is my personal fault that someone committed a crime, but I would think that I could have acted in a different way to reduce the likelihood of that consequence.
Originally posted by Alpha CentauriYour adrenaline must be pumping or something. Don't worry though, I am not the evil villain.
Wait, is that your gimmick? Call people children, ignore their points whilst continuing to make your own (proven wrong many times over by many people) and then ask them what their point is?My point, for the last time, is this:
If you act irresponsible and do something in the knowledge that it might have negative response, you are responsible in some way for inviting said response. To deny this is stupid and, to use your word, naive.
Your point is that blaming the female to any degree, in any circumstance, is shocking. Right? What exactly would your parental advice be then? "Go out dressed like that, get drunk, it's your right. If you get raped, isn't your fault at all.", hmm?
-AC
-AC
I'll go along with your 'battle' if you want to; you respond too heavily to my opinion, as if I'm threatening your whole view of the world or something.
Did it ever occur to you that people still have learning to do and that most teens are indeed 'naive'? I say that we shouldn't blame them for going along with the crowd because they don't fully grasp how men respond to their so called 'provocative clothing' and they can't know about every slight danger in the world.
You expect way too much of these teenagers but why are you trying to go in to some battle with me? I said that people shouldn't blame the girls in the case of getting penetrated by some oversexed idiot and you act like I'm incredibly stupid.
If you desperately want me to view it as you do, then relax and try to be more convincing.
Are you saying that women who are drunk leave their vagina unlocked? And if said vagina is "stolen" they have some responsibility in the matter?
Seriously though, I agree with AC and VVD. A woman should recognize their inherent vulnerability when they're drunk and know their capabilities and reasoning power. If they're actually raped because they drank to much and passed out, then yes, they should assume some responability for being so stupid.
i understand that.
but i fail to see how once victimised, a woman is automatically partially blamable. it can be acknowledged that she took a risk by simply having a drink outside her home, just as i take a risk of dying every time i get behind the wheel. in other words: shit happens. but how is it that the worst possible outcome should be viewed as the fault of the victim, even partially. that would be like passing a car wreck, seeing a dead body, and saying "oh well, he shouldn't have driven his car. he knew the risk after all"
i understand the objective point on how the courts view such a situation of rape, especially with the unfortunate lack of evidence in most cases. but i'm catching the whiff of an opinion that a woman 'has it coming' just for getting drunk.
Originally posted by BackFire
Are you saying that women who are drunk leave their vagina unlocked? And if said vagina is "stolen" they have some responsibility in the matter?Seriously though, I agree with AC and VVD. A woman should recognize their inherent vulnerability when they're drunk and know their capabilities and reasoning power. If they're actually raped because they drank to much and passed out, then yes, they should assume some responability for being so stupid.
it's true they should.