Women blamed ....for rape - Page 5

Doug · 23-11-2005, 01:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Women should be able to do what they like. The days of covering piano legs are long gone, as are the days when women had to cover up to be 'decent'.

It’s not just woman who are victims of rape. I would agree with you within reason that a woman should be able to do what she wants. But she should also act responsibly and take regard for her own welfare and safety, as should we all.

SPUGGIE J · 23-11-2005, 01:41

On the basis of whats been said and the grey area issue should those who cry rape falsely (and as in an earlier post) be named shamed and charged with an offence that would give them jail time as a certainty? As has been said the guy even though innocent is labeled for life and has had his life ruined yet there is no protection or recompense. Yes someone who is guilty could be found innocent and vice versa but could a change in the court setup change this? If it would why hasnt it been pushed through?

garinda · 23-11-2005, 01:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug

I past comment in A-Bs thread that I felt that in the case of murder the choice of “Twelve Good Men” may be an ideal that has past into history, as with the case for the death sentence I feel that a panel of Judges might be more appropriate for the consideration and sentencing of Rape cases. A profession jury is less likely to react emotively and act appropriately in the interest of the public. I do believe that Rape cases should be conducted in a manner where the perpetrator and victim should be given anonymity until all the evidence is available and the investigation is complete. I believe that to give a man’s or woman’s name to the public prior to a conviction being made is in itself a crime.

A man or woman falsely accused face a life of ruin irrespective of the eventual outcome, by the same token any male or female falsely accusing another person of rape should know that they will face prosecution and a custodial sentence for there maliciousness. Although I think it’s wrong to blame a victim for the actions of another I do believe that when an individual is shown to have actively encouraged the sexual attentions of another that they must face their responsibility for their own actions and this should be taken into consideration when sentencing the perpetrator.

In regard to the dressing provocatively and the rest of it, well I think that as gone on since we wore animal skins, that said we should all take appropriate action to insure our own welfare and safety when we are going out, either alone or with friends.

Ok, I'm still drawn to the bit where you say, and I quote in full,

'Although I think it's wrong to blame a victim for the actions of another I do believe when an individual is shown to have actively encouraged the sexual attentions of another they must face the responsibility for their own actions and this should be taken into consideration when sentencing the perpetrator.'

To then go on to say provocative dress had been around since we wore animal skins, I do find disturbing.

garinda · 23-11-2005, 01:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug

It’s not just woman who are victims of rape. I would agree with you within reason that a woman should be able to do what she wants. But she should also act responsibly and take regard for her own welfare and safety, as should we all.

They do in Saudia Arabia.

Covered from head to toe, and kept locked away.

Sadly they still have rape there, usually by family members.

SPUGGIE J · 23-11-2005, 01:51

I have 3 sisters and heaven forbid this happened to them I would dispite my own thoughts and views would have no optoin than to let the court in whatever form follow due process and accept its verdict. At the end of the day we could argue go round in circles and run this till our dieing days but it is at present out of our hands.

Doug · 23-11-2005, 01:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Ok, I'm still drawn to the bit where you say, and I quote in full,

To then go on to say provocative dress had been around since we wore animal skins, I do find disturbing.

Look at costume and fashion throughout history and you will see wildly differing degrees of provocative dress. This might be a full bosom being displayed in the form of a heaving chest, a tight waist line defined by the use of a corset right down to recent times with topless dresses and mini skirts. at the end of the day Grainda I can only express my view point the way I see it. If you perceive it another way then that’s a matter for you…

garinda · 23-11-2005, 01:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug

Look at costume and fashion throughout history and you will see wildly differing degrees of provocative dress. This might be a full bosom being displayed in the form of a heaving chest, a tight waist line defined by the use of a corset right down to recent times with topless dresses and mini skirts. at the end of the day Grainda I can only express my view point the way I see it. If you perceive it another way then that’s a matter for you…

Garinda Fashion/Textiles B.A. (Hons.)
I do happen to know the social implications of dress throughout the ages.

Doug · 23-11-2005, 02:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Garinda Fashion/Textiles B.A. (Hons.)
I do happen to know the social implications of dress throughout the ages.

Then you will know what I was taking about won’t you.

SPUGGIE J · 23-11-2005, 02:02

So the clothing that is worn if classed as "provocative" should meen by all means look but you cannot touch?

garinda · 23-11-2005, 02:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug

Then you will know what I was taking about won’t you.

Yes I do, but I still stand believe that provocative dress shouldn't be used as evidence of any consent in a rape trial. Something that could be implied from your original post.

garinda · 23-11-2005, 02:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

So the clothing that is worn if classed as "provocative" should meen by all means look but you cannot touch?

Errrrr..................YES Spuggie!

Your not telling me that if you saw a girl with a short skirt and a low cut top, you would take it as an invitation to touch her????????

chav1 · 23-11-2005, 02:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Errrrr..................YES Spuggie!

Your not telling me that if you saw a girl with a short skirt and a low cut top, you would take it as an invitation to touch her????????

no but i would definatley ask if i could

Doug · 23-11-2005, 02:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by SPUGGIE J

So the clothing that is worn if classed as "provocative" should meen by all means look but you cannot touch?

What I was saying is that provocative forms of dress have been with us throughout our history and shouldn’t be use in an argument that dress is associated with rape. Very few people have report rape on a nudist beach or in connection with nudism in general so in my mind the state of dress of a victim shouldn’t be taken to mean that they asked for it. The rapist doesn’t necessarily think of what the victims wearing, there interested in exerting power over them and abusing the victim’s weakness.

Doug · 23-11-2005, 02:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Yes I do, but I still stand believe that provocative dress shouldn't be used as evidence of any consent in a rape trial. Something that could be implied from your original post.

That’s your interpretation Grainda and not what I actually said. It is a matter of reading what i did say in contex of the actual report.

garinda · 23-11-2005, 02:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug

in my mind the state of dress of a victim should be taken to mean that they asked for it.

Sorry not editing your post, a direct quote.

If that is your opinion we will have to agree to disagree, rather strongly on my part.