Is it time women took some responsibility for sex?

:confused: I was referring to a criminal groper being sought by the police. It was clearly indicated in the article that I linked. The guy had groped ten different women and the neighborhood was very upset.

I think you were reading a followup post I made about the same article.

Re-read your comment I quoted and my response. By inserting a comma between groper and pervert, you have set pervert in apposition to groper, making it an appellation. I suspected that it might have been an accident, which is why I cautioned you on your typing rather than Warning you for insults.

I didn’t even think about the comma. I have no idea why its in the first sentence. The next sentence clearly indicates my intent that the groper is a perv. I was trying to make it clear that I wasn’t defending this guy’s deplorable actions against women.

Sorry for any misunderstanding.

In my neck of the woods, a man who notices a single woman walking towards him when it is dark out will often verve into the street before walking pass her. A way of saying “I am not going to do anything to mess with you, lady.”

And I don’t care if a person (male or female) is wear tight shorts and T-shirt. They don’t serve to be grouped.

Several people have asserted that women dressing provacatively will not increase their likelihood of being raped, or groped, and the converse. Is there any actual evidence that this is the case?

I myself incline to Der Trihs’ POV in this thread, i.e. that these crimes are primarily about sex, although there may frequently be other issues involved as well. But I don’t have any sources either. Although I’ve seen a graph showing the correlation between rape and (victim) age, and the likelihood of a woman being raped is highly correlated with the ages at which they are thought to be most attractive (although there obviously exceptions, as with all correlations).

That’s good advice in general, but the problem is, it’s the sort of advice that only ever comes up when the topic is sexual violence towards women. When we’re talking about someone being mugged, nobody ever asks, “Were you wearing an expensive shirt?” You never hear about cops in high crime areas stopping guys in suits, and telling them to dress down, so they don’t draw the attention of muggers.

Actually, in a recent thread about someone’s smartphone that got grabbed on the street, some people did ask why the holder was waving it around in public.

Well, I suppose it happens sometimes. I remember back in the 1990s, when people were warned about wearing Starter jackets or Nike shoes.

OP, I know where you’re going with this, and my advice to you is to quit while you’re ahead. I agree that women need to be responsible too; however, you won’t win an argument unless people want to listen.

This is why you only have sex with someone you trust, so this doesn’t happen.

The real truth is the exact opposite.

It would be obvious to most people that you need to dress down in a high crime neighborhood.

And is the police would warn people to do so it would be considered so unremarkable that it would not attract this type of attention.

A simple way of showing the ridiculousness of the “dress more modestly” argument is to ask this: when everyone follows your advice to the letter, what happens?

Mr. Mugger will at least sensibly say “everyone leaves their smartphones and wallets in the hotel safe. I can’t get what I want by mugging anymore.”

But if all women follow your advice, do you really think that Mr. Rapist and Mr. Groper are going to say “Oh, well, I guess since all the women are wearing long pants and bulky sweaters, I’ll just go home.”

In short, the “dress modestly” advice is pointless and harmful because doing so does not meaningfully impact the availability of that which the sexual criminal actually wants (as opposed to similar advice regarding smartphones–if you’re not waving it around, the mugger might decide there’s a lower percentage chance that you’re carrying one. However, covered breasts and vaginas still have a 100% chance of being breasts and vaginas.)

My problem with harping on how women need to protect themselves by doing X, Y, and Z is that this focus promotes the idea that curtailing the freedoms of women is necessary for keeping the peace.

I’ve noticed that men take certain freedoms for granted when in comes to themselves. They don’t call themselves wreckless for going out at night by themselves or flirting with strangers while buzzed. If they want to have a couple of drinks and get loud and boisterous at the bar, hey, that’s just a wild and crazy dude, amiright? If a guy wants to go jogging at dusk or take the dog for a walk at dawn or take the subway home late at night, it’s treated as his right to do this. And it’s not remarkable at all.

Men very well may be increasing their likelihood of being a crime victim by doing these things, but in spite of these risks, men are still encouraged to exercise their freedoms at all times from what I’ve noticed. Because that’s what manly men do. They aren’t supposed to give in to fear and let the bad guys rob them of a good time that they are entitled to. Risks schmisks. Only women and children should worry about risks.

This italicized attitude is bothersome to me because as long as it exists, it means women who have the audacity to live as freely as men will always suffer certain social penalties should they end up being the victim of crime. There will always be a burden of proof a woman must meet to prove that she is truly deserving of sympathy or condolences; if she can’t meet that burden, well then we’re all free to speculate on how she set up things to happen in a certain way.

In the meantime, men are encouraged to take risks, be fearless, and in many cases, be irreverent and aggressive.

The consequences of focusing on women’s role in rape prevention should also be obvious to men who actually like socially interacting with women. If women stop taking chances on strangers and acquaintaces out of fear of being raped, that means fewer make-out sessions at your place (or hers), fewer ladies willing to flirt and dance with you in the club, a lot more women dressing in shapeless frocks and Mom jeans, and more chaperoned dates. Raise your hands if you want any of this, yall.

Wait! What? Who? Men are encouraged to be reckless? Men are encouraged to be fearless?

I might be wrong, but I think the issue is that women seem to control consent. It’s never really the guy’s role to decide whether or not consent was established because it’s just assumed that the guy “got lucky” for having sex.

Yes they are, and are apparently inclined that way by nature as well. It’s a major reason why women live longer than men, especially these days; women seldom die from childbirth anymore, nor are they worn down by pregnancy after pregnancy, but men are just as prone to taking risks as ever.

I do this even in broad day light if there’s no one else around, and especially if I’m walking behind a woman I’ll even cross the street. I find it really sad that I feel I have to in order to make a woman feel safe from all of us rapists out there. I think a lot of women don’t realize how that fucks with a man how he views his role in society and relationships.

Woah, really? I’ve never worried about that and won’t start now.

I guess I missed the memo then. I’ve never felt that I had to be reckless.

With all due respect, I think you’re being just a little paranoid and feel just a bitt too sorry for yourself.

You understand your personal anecdote doesn’t invalidate statistical generalizations, right? I don’t know whether Der Trihs’s claim is supported, but your personal experience doesn’t count as contravening evidence.

He didn’t support his claim.

What statistics?