One criticism of this piece, I've never felt pressure to wear make-up or dress a certain way. The pressure on women to look unnatural isn't really relevant to your argument here, it's not representative of all women. If you're trying to say rape is unrelated to appearance, you shouldn't try to defend the way some women dress.

bottom line... whatever we wear, wherever we go, whatever we do... A rape can not and will not happen unless there is a rapist present.

In my case I was drunk and so was the guy and he just sort of reached out and grabbed me. I was young, I was inexperienced at handling men, I was in a situation where I could not just pick up and go home (I was in military training in a strange town and drinking underage besides), so I felt it better to just go along. Given a clear choice I would not have had sex with him.

I'm not angry about it now and I have no idea, 17+ years later, where I'd even begin to have him prosecuted. I don't remember his name and he was a foreigner and for all I know, he went home. But what happened that night messed up my sexuality for years while I scrambled in vain to reassert control and call my own shots. I'm lucky someone didn't rape me again, or give me HIV, or worse.

And he never hit me, never called me nasty names and the next day, in fact, he was even sweet to me. But you better bet that as soon as he dropped me off where I wanted to go, I got the hell *out* of there and avoided him like the plague from then on out. And that took some doing because he worked at a place where I had to go to purchase personal supplies and such.

I certainly could have avoided the incident entirely by not going along with him in the first place and especially not getting drunk. But a friend of mine who was with us (she was married and I was supposed to be her "chaperone" because all she wanted to do was drink) did the same things I did and he never laid a hand on her. To say that certain behaviors "increase the risk" is to say that behaving in certain ways sets up a powerful field of gravity around your person that FORCES a guy to rip your pants off and do things to you. That's ridiculous. For all that men keep coming up with these stupid pseudoscientific reasons why they need to be in charge of everything while women should just go home and pop out the babies, they sure are helpless in the gravity well of a skirt that is three inches too short. If it's that difficult for y'all to take some responsibility, maybe it's time the women took over. Just sayin'.

http://www2.tricities.com/tri/news/local/article/blame_the_victim_religious_leaflet_claims_ungodly_dressed_women_provoke_rap/42253/

(and cotton/polyester blends)

That seems improbable, particularly given human creativity when it comes to hurting others. The main reason why the argument that rape is solely about power and specifically about controlling women is that rape is not limited to female victims. It is also not limited to adult victims or to male perpetrators. When one considers the myriad of ways in which rape occurs, it becomes far more complex than "rape is about power."

The other issue is the phrase "rape is about power" begs the question "power to do what?" The problem with that question is that there is no easy answer. Sometimes people want power in order to protect themselves. Sometimes they want power to hurt those who hurt them. Sometimes they want power to hurt others so that others know their pain. Sometimes they want power to hurt those they hate. Sometimes they want power to force their views on others, and so on.

However, the one thing that is clear is that those who rape must do so for a sexual reason because they could exercise power over people in many other ways. There is a specific reason why rapists choose sex as their method, and I suspect that for each person who commits rape the reason is likely unique to them.

It was stopped by non-lynchers recognizing that this was not a crime against individuals, but a way that some White people controlled the freedom of most Black people through random acts of violence. In the same way, some men control the freedom of most women through systematic acts of violence. That violence isn't sexual because the crime is about sex, it is sexual because the rapist can't think of a way to more effectively terrify and control women.

No. Power is a simple concept. Because "power" can take different forms does not make it complex. "Rape is about power" IS simplistic, like most political bumper stickers.

"“Rape is about sex,” however, has a pretty specific meaning and some pretty specific implications. Damaging and dangerous implications, I might add. This is what we’re arguing against."

That rape is SOMETIMES about sex does have pretty specific meaning and some pretty specific implications.

For one, it implies the need for legitimate discussion about drugs, arousal, physical strength, body language, romance, foreplay, sexual frustration, consent, competition, erections, teasing, winning, "women's prerogative",sexiness, porn, assertiveness, dress, and male libido is way past due.

Secondly, it implies that if America is ever gonna reduce CERTAIN kinds of rape then we are gonna have to improve the sexual behavior and attitudes of the entire species, not just men and not just women!

Finally, it implies that the strategy of "Rape is about power" ain't working, and it ain't gonna work.

That you believe these implications are damaging or dangerous does not make it any less true. In the end I don't think avoiding the truth is helpful.

You would think people that really care would be willing to listen, but unfortunately they prefer politics over results.

"Rape is about sex," however, has a pretty specific meaning and some pretty specific implications. Damaging and dangerous implications, I might add. This is what we're arguing against.

At a certain level many things are about power and control, but that's like saying many things are made of atoms.
If as bellacoker says, most convicted rapists attack because they got into an argument with some other female, why not say rape is about "scapegoating"?
You call bullshit. I call politics!

"Some do. Some don’t. Trying to pin one single motivation on every rapist in the world is a little simplistic, don’t you think?"

It was rhetorical... and meant for Bellacoker, but I see you are starting to understand. Awesome! Human motivation is a complex issue. "Rape is about Power" is a bumper sticker not a scientific explanation.

I don't believe you really can't see the connection between those things. I call bullshit.

"Drunk males on college campuses across America do not rape their dates because a female professor gave them a C… or to scare the “coeds” into sobriety."

Some do. Some don't. Trying to pin one single motivation on every rapist in the world is a little simplistic, don't you think?

I thought rape was about power and control, now it's about displaced revenge? Make up your mind!

Drunk males on college campuses across America do not rape their dates because a female professor gave them a C... or to scare the "coeds" into sobriety.

Diana Scully interviewed a large number of convicted rapists and found that at the time of their crime most of them had recently had a fight with a woman other than their victim, their wife, mother, female boss. Rape, like lynching, is a crime designed to terrorize an entire group of people. Rapists want women to limit the scope of our behavior, and giving a woman rape prevention advice is as useless as telling a Black person in 1940's Alabama how not to get lynched, there is no way to prevent a crime that is not about you personally.

It's basic fucking common sense. Respect and decency. If a man was wearing an outfit that made him look particularly attractive, and was provocative-would it be okay for someone to go up to him while he was alone, and fuck him? No? Then why is it suddenly okay for a man to do that to a woman?

I'm not saying that you can't typically get a general grasp of someone's personality from the way they dress. Yes, if I saw a woman dressed like a prostitute, I would think she was a prostitute; if I saw a woman dressed like a police officer, I'd think she was a cop. What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter how they dress, no one is just allowed access to someone' body just because they are comfortable with showing it off.

I for one can attest to the fact that even if you are always jsut seen as "one of the guys", even if you are a tomboy with no overt sexuality, even if all of your life you could care less about what anyone thinks about your personal appearance-it won't stop this kind of thing from happening to you. I was raped and molested. I've been a "tomboy" all my life. I've always been just "one of the guys", because I was raised with guys. So what's the reasoning there? Was I "asking for it", or
bringing it upon myself just because I have a vagina?

Then perhaps you have not been in any major American city, particularly not in working-class, non-white neighborhoods. It was and continues to be fairly common for boys and men in such areas to be warned against wearing certain colors, certain popular clothing, hats or shoes, or certain accessories in order to avoid being the victim of a crime.

Even though there are well-meaning people who dole out the “don’t dress too sexy lest you get raped” advice, who wouldn’t dream of blaming the rape victim if that does end up happening…those people aren’t a majority.

I disagree. The majority of people who make those sort of comments typically are well-meaning and as a result do not consider their comments as blaming the victim. In most instances there is no malicious intent, just a sincere (albeit occasionally distorted) belief or perspective. As Gareth said, people try to rationalize the assault and simply latch on to the most obvious (to them) "cause" that allows them to maintain their worldview. It ranges from blaming women's clothing to blaming "teh patriarchy." Of course, this type of rationalization applies to all views, so even those who object to victim-blaming can and often do distort the actual situation despite being well-meaning.

As for the current issue of whether rape has anything to do with sex, my experience suggests that it does as there are thousands of ways to hurt people and gain power over them without involving any genitals. It is not likely just about power, but likely about the power to use someone for sex.

and that black guy walking in a white neighbourhood at night - well he was just asking to get arrested, wasn't he?

Of course there are deeper issues here than just the clothing. It is an issue that shouldn't be dismissed though.

I get that you understand this on an intellectual level, but in practice, that's often not the way it plays out. Think about it. How many times have you heard someone look at a woman and say "look at her outfit! It's like she's asking to get raped!" How many times, after someone was raped, have you heard people say "well what did she expect, with what she was wearing?" Or women who have been raped who DO blame themselves based on what they had been wearing at the time, or who have said things like "I guess I'm partially responsible"?

Even though there are well-meaning people who dole out the "don't dress too sexy lest you get raped" advice, who wouldn't dream of blaming the rape victim if that does end up happening...those people aren't a majority.

I'd assume most people who would advise a woman not to wear certain provocative dress are not intentionally applying responsibility to the woman for being raped, but are afraid that there may be men around who would commit action of an extreme male gender-type; that of a sexual predator, and rape her. It is not the fault of the woman, it is the fault of the situation that this can happen, and it is much easier to advise one person to be less of a target, than change the environment in which there may be men who would target someone in a sexual attack.

To be honest the short skirt issue could most likely be a matter of practicality. It's much easier to rape someone who is not wearing very much than it is to rape someone who is wearing a full length coat with buttons and zips. (Please don't see that as being through personal experience :D) It's about creating barriers to what a rapist wants, rather than blaming a woman for acting like a woman.

Anyway, both of these extreme gender roles are crimes of our society: convincing men that masculinity is synonymous with power, aggression and sexual dominance, so much so that he has the power to rape; And convincing women that femininity is synonymous with acting submissively, and dressing their bodies in a pseudo-sexually childlike way. Rape is naturally an extrapolation of these gender roles.

"No one in their right mind would say “they had sex” when someone was raped"

'Cause, you see, people say that all the time. The next 10 times you read news coverage about a rape, count how many times the word "rape" is used verses how many times they call it "forced sex" or "unwanted sex" or say something like "he had sex with her while she was unconscious." It's one of those things that you don't notice it until you notice it...but when you notice it, it'll horrify you.

Is your argument that any event where a penis enters a vagina is technically "sex" semantically sound? Maybe. The argument can certainly be made without making you look ridiculous, at least. But it's dangerous to conflate "sex" with "rape" in language considering rape is downplayed as "sex" soooo frequently. (Also, see what LeftSidePositive said earlier about the whole "if rape is sex, and sex is good, then rape can't really be that bad" point)

I assume the last paragraph was addressed to me.

I don’t believe in imposing nor banning burqa’s, but I don’t forget that clothes send important, and/or loud messages either. Unlike the French, Muslim fundamentalists and so many people on this thread I don’t flip flop on the topic when it’s politically convenient. From an officer’s uniform, to a lab coat, to a streetwalker’s clear heels… it’s obvious that clothes, like a picture, can be worth a thousand words.

As for provocative dress, the whole “I should be able to wear what I want, wherever I want” smells of Veruca Salt, not of civility nor common sense… nor survival.

My opinion of skirt length... let’s play the too short game, shall we?

If you need to keep pulling the bottom down
OR
If the hotel staff thinks you are there visit a “client”, not to stay
OR
If the valet snaps pictures when you get out of the car
OR
If your boyfriend says, “you aren’t wearing that out are you?”
OR
If men that would otherwise be reading the paper, stop to stare.
OR
If other women look at you with sour faces
OR
If Human Resources needs to call you into the office about “appropriate attire”

You are not exercising your right to expression. You are wearing a skirt that is TOO short!

Once again, no single technique is going to prevent every rape. Rapes happen for a variety of reasons, but any who woman deliberately communicates “Look at me. I’m sexy” ie. don’t you want to have sex with me?”, but is merely dressing/acting the part of “receptive” is increasing her chances of being in a situation where she will be taken advantage of.

A married friend of a friend’s wife was recently assaulted by a guy she met on one of those “cheater” websites. After sexting this guy for days and having him drive several hours to meet her at a hotel, she got a sudden case of the “guilts” while making out naked in the bed with him. Obviously he wasn’t interested in stopping so late in the game since he assaulted her. The incident of course went unreported, because she felt like it was partially her fault, she would have to tell her husband, and she knew the chances of conviction were low.

For example, the "leaving your house door unlocked" one. You might be able to argue (just might) that if you left your front door wide open exposing all the desirable things you have in your house, this may be construed as an invitation for someone to come in and help themselves to your TV, for example. If this someone also happened to be your friend/relative/acquaintance (as most rape perpetrators are), they may even be able to write it off as a misunderstanding (but I thought you said i could borrow your TV). This is if you see rape as stealing. And wearing a skirt as "putting goods on display".
However, if someone (complete stranger or most intimate friend) were to walk in through your wide-open front door and assault you, your wide-open front door (short skirt) would never be considered a mitigating circumstance. If you invited your friend/new next-door neighbour/cable guy into your kitchen for coffee and were assaulted, your friendly behaviour (flirting) would never be considered a mitigating circumstance.

Also, I thought the discussion about "rape being a form of sex" was ridiculous. I can just see the new dictionary entry for sex: sexual intercourse, also rape. or even worse, a dictionary entry for rape: see sex. (If you can't see why that's wrong, I'm not even going to try to explain it.)

Last but not least, about the "short skirt". Even if this were a valid, not to mention effective, way to prevent rape, where would you draw the line? At the knee? At the ankle? Or at the burka? One of the main arguments used to support imposing a dress code on women in Afghanistan, Iran and such is that it prevents rape.

Since even the “short too skirt” example (Amanda’s choice) caused so much denial, pardon me if I don’t believe you know what a “reasonable precaution” is. Check out what the “sufficiently feminine” means to a FeministBitch…“The outfit involved thigh-high boots and a leotard. Pretty sexy business…I’m sure I inspired some sexual desire that night” I had no idea such outfits are mandated for the women of New York.

“But the second you start talking about how women should be MORE careful than men, and start laying all sorts of restrictions on women’s behavior that you’d never dream of laying on men…that’s when it becomes a problem. I’ve never heard of a (straight, cisgendered) man being warned to not dress a certain way lest he become the victim of a crime.”

Lol. Do you know any men? Growing up we avoided certain athletic wear and colors because of gangs. Most of my adult peer group is careful of the jerseys we wear during football season. We choose attire that makes us fit in rather than be a target. We travel in packs often and drink with” buddies” for safety as well as camaraderie. We are aware that metrosexual attire can get you gay bashed.

And so you can understand the rule of “MORE” careful…

Minors > Adults
Woman > Man
Solo > Group
Unarmed > Armed

Women are weaker than men on average. Deal with it.

“And I’ll reiterate a point that’s been made a lot of times already: All of the “rape prevention” behaviors in the world wouldn’t do anything to protect against the vast majority of rapes, where the victim is a child and/or the rapist is an acquaintance–even a significant other, a spouse, a family member, or a close friend.”

Well, I’ll reiterate that this thread is about assault and WOMEN… ie adult females.
And ask once again, what percentage reduction would be good enough for you to actually start listening to prevention techniques? Because the “vast majority” threshold you wish to set is absurd. If you could cut 10% of breast cancer incidents by changing certain eating behaviors I’m sure you would.

I fucking hate Americans sometimes.

So if someone steals your car, I lack sympathy and the blame is on you. For owning a car, obviously. You ran the risk, you're partly to blame.

Women are not chosen as victims of rape because they wear provocative clothing, just as men that are raped aren't doing so either. You're holding the victim partly responsible for the crime, and not only does it make you look a HUGE prick, but it's intellectually indefensible in any way. Pretending otherwise doesn't make it so.

"I truly wish I had your luxuries while growing up. I survived with practicality, not political stances. If you were born into my life you would have been either a constant victim or dead by now."

Internet Tough Guy. Dick-measuring on the web. Laughable and pathetic.

"“Most convicted rapists do not remember what their victims were wearing.”

Only about 6% of rapists ever serve a day in jail… so can you tell me what the other 94% of rapists were NOT convicted actually remember?"

I don't think a lack of data means what you think it means.

And even IF the non-convicted 94% remember when their victims were wearing (a BIG if), it only shows that stalking and assaulting a person makes you very observant about your victim. Which is to be expected from someone who is setting out to rape someone, I would assume.

"“Victims range in age from days old to those in their nineties”

Yup, but 35% were between 18 and 24 and 75% between 16 and 39. Seems like plenty of opportunity for “provocative dress” and other risky behaviors in that group."

Again, data without context means fuck all, and making such assumptions is intellectually dishonest at best. "It's not that we live in a society the expects women to be weak, acquiescent sexual objects and encourage men to take advantage of them; it's the miniskirts!" Your ignorance boggles the fucking mind, I swear.

"For the record I am not a “rape apologist”"

Like when someone prefaces a comment with "I'm not a racist, but..." you make it blindingly obvious what you are with this simple statement.

Now fuck off back under the rock you crawled out from.

I'm regularly amazed at how blinkered so many people can be, especially those that try to undermine feminism by blaming it for the things it opposes. Head-shakingly absurd and if it weren't so damn depressing and common it'd be funny.

A short skirt increases both chances of receiving unwanted sexual attention and the chances of being not believed should something bad happen.

I am not telling anyone how to live their life. That is up to each individual. But I refuse to pretend there is no such thing as risky behavior when it comes to rape or any other type of potential crime. I truly wish I had your luxuries while growing up. I survived with practicality, not political stances. If you were born into my life you would have been either a constant victim or dead by now.

"Most convicted rapists do not remember what their victims were wearing."

Only about 6% of rapists ever serve a day in jail… so can you tell me what the other 94% of rapists were NOT convicted actually remember?

"Victims range in age from days old to those in their nineties"

Yup, but 35% were between 18 and 24 and 75% between 16 and 39. Seems like plenty of opportunity for “provocative dress” and other risky behaviors in that group.

"rape is a crime of power and control."

“Rape is a crime of power and control” is a political statement, not a fact.
Most crimes occur for varied reasons. People kill for…

1. Hate
2. Revenge
3. Greed
4. Opportunity
5. Enjoyment
6. Peer Pressure
7. Jealousy

People also rape for many of those same reasons.

For the record I am not a “rape apologist”, but it is obvious that you are a “risk denialist” Women can and should take reasonable precautions to cut their risk and are foolish if they engage in activities that enhance that risk.

P.S. I grew up with a guy who was/is? a career criminal. Often times he would decide to steal a purse from a woman in heels, because in his words” they have a hard time running away or after you.” Go figure! And thank god he never ran into Feministbitch on Halloween. As I remember he never had nearly the self control of the men in New York.

Your idea of "risk minimization" is to tell women to lead repressed, shut-in, uneventful lives. Not acceptable.

Here is some information on how your advice is not only repressive, but is also totally bogus:

Utah State University Sexual Assault and Anti Violence Information

Myth: Rape victims provoke the attach by wearing provocative clothing

- Victims range in age from days old to those in their nineties,
hardly provocative dressers.

***********************

Arizona's State Plan on Domestic and Sexual Violence

Like domestic violence, rape is a crime of power and control. Myths
that rape only happens to young, beautiful women wearing provocative
clothing perpetuate the idea that rape is a crime of passion, when in
fact all women are vulnerable to rape, regardless of age, race, class,
education or physical appearance. Research also shows that 60-75% of
rapes are premeditated and motivated by aggression and hatred, not
sex.

***********************
Prevention Pathways

Most sexual assault victims are wearing regular clothes like blue
jeans or pajamas when they are assaulted, not provocative clothing.

***********************

The ONLY thing that actually IS affected by the victim's dress or behavior is whether or not insensitive self-important idiots like you blame her afterwards:

Amnesty International in a national survey

34% believe women who flirt can be blamed if they are raped and 26%
say if a woman is in sexy clothing she is partly to blame

The disturbing attitudes towards rape and rape victims were uncovered
by Amnesty International in a national survey to promote its Stop
Violence Against Women campaign.

Do you know what happens to the chances of a statement being true when you use the phrase “DOES NOT IN ANY WAY” as you just did?

To use Amanda’s skirt example again, let’s say length didn’t help in the MAJORITY of incidents, but say 49%? What then? How about 13%? Suppose you could reduce risk in 3% of the circumstances by means other than an article of clothing? What then? What percentage makes it risk minimization??

I would bet that you don’t leave your front door unlocked do you? But it is your right. This is not a discussion about the first amendment so please spare me the “right to express” tirade. I’m sure plenty of “fighting” words are protected speech, but they can also get you in road rage incidents. Please focus on whether something is crime prevention or is not crime prevention.

As for “optional” being subjective… I think not. I was born in poverty. I ate in poverty and I slept in poverty. Let me know when 17% of American females are born in short skirts, eat in a short skirts and sleep in a short skirts… and not by choice. I will surely petition Noah Webster on your behalf.

For the record, I dressed as the Silk Spectre II for Halloween this year. The outfit involved thigh-high boots and a leotard. Pretty sexy business, and I admit I wore a skirt over it for the journey from my house to the subway station (out of respect for my orthodox Jewish neighborhood, not out of fear). However, once on the train, I ditched the skirt and stood there on a train full of people, only a quarter of whom were also in costume.

Did anyone touch me? Catcall me? Assault me? No. And this was on a subway line in NYC that is actually notorious for groping. Lots of men saw me, and none of them assaulted me, yet I was as uncovered as I have ever been in public. This proves to me that rape is clearly not about sexual desire (because, damn it, I looked hot! I'm sure I inspired some sexual desire that night!).

What the short skirt IS likely to affect, however, is whether or not she will be blamed for it if she is raped, and whether she'll be able to have any success in the criminal justice system.

Also, stop acting like we should have to give up our rights to express ourselves and present ourselves as we see fit. Whatever your wife likes to wear is incredibly irrelevant. Women have many different preferences and reasons for how they appear, and it is not for you to declare what is optional and what is not.

"Familial sexual terrorists are the most heinous, destructive form of sexual predators in our society. Familial sexual predatory behavior is a silent epidemic in our country and all across our globe. This silent epidemic continues, due to the victim's level of shame, self loathing, basically non existent self esteem, and the mistaken belief usually held in the victim's mind of personal responsibility associated with the crime of familial sexual terrorism perpetrated against themselves by members of their own family. The statistic is 1 in 3 females and 1 in 5 males, 20% of our children will be sexually preyed upon before they reach their l8th year. This statistic begs the societal question," Exactly who does our society think is committing these crimes against our most vulnerable, innocent citizens, our children?""

and another chapter:

"California National Organization for Women is writing to request that you enforce Damon's right to trial and basic right to live free of abuse, by prosecuting his named abuser, his father.

Damon has repeatedly made credible disclosures to mandatory reporters and others of the sexual and emotional abuse he has suffered at the hands of his father, and still the perpetrator of his alleged crimes has gone unpunished."

More from NOW on the protection of children from abusive parents:

"They are not the only ones. This month, the NOW Foundation joined other leading organizations working on family law and family violence in a complaint filed against the United States with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The complaint charges that U.S. courts are failing to protect the life, liberties, security, and other human rights of abused mothers and children by frequently awarding child custody to abusers and child molesters. PAS is one predominant strategy being used by lawyers to place children in such danger. A recent Newsweek article noted the finding of a Harvard study that in custody cases involving documented spousal abuse, 54% granted custody to the batterer, and parental alienation was used as an argument in nearly every single one."

Here's Salon's Broadsheet discussing the abuse of children by women:

"The response on Perry’s message board was immediate and overwhelming -- an outpouring of support and a devastating number of similar tales. On and on it goes, for hundreds of posts: “I was sexually abused by my father and my aunt.” “Mine was spousal abuse.” “I do remember things that I just have not told anyone, and it's hard, because I don't think anyone will believe.” “What's a little molestation when it comes from your own older sibling right? I haven't mentioned this to anyone and I constantly try to push it to the far corners of my mind to escape it.”

Though other celebrities, notably "Precious" producer Oprah Winfrey, have come forward in the past with their own stories of childhood abuse, Perry is unique. He’s easily the most famous man to talk about being molested, and he’s forthright about being abused by both a male and a female. Though accurate data is hard to come by, the Lucy Faithfull Foundation estimates approximately 15 percent of sex abusers are women. "

I could go on, of course, but I think I've pretty definitively shown that your assertions are utter hogwash.

You have utterly failed to address my point that it's NOT feminism that's making these statements. It's well-established, traditional, status-quo thinking put forth mainly by men. Women have been told we're in constant danger and not fit to go out in public for a LOT longer than 40 years.

Your statements that feminists don't support preventing child abuse is absolutely, totally false. (see next post for abundant detail)

HOW do feminists give credence to "don't wear miniskirts" and "don't flirt"?? We say over and over again that these are NOT acceptable attitudes and that they do NOT prevent rape. Just because we want to focus attention on a serious issue does not mean that we're endorsing every crackpot theory that anyone has ever had about it.

YOU are taking feminist positions (rape is a serious issue) out of context (saying we advocate hyper-vigilance). YOU DON'T EVEN UNDERSTAND WHAT THE FEMINIST POSITION ON THIS ISSUE IS!!! Or, really, any issue for that matter. I remember on the "Stroll in the Jungle" thread when you repeatedly asserted that feminists don't think women need to ask for consent, when we told you OVER and OVER again that we think consent is required for everybody.

You are so wrapped up in your misperceptions and prejudices that you can't even understand what people are saying to you.

The same applies to the feminist message. Similar feminist ideas like the above create the false impression that women are in imminent danger at all times, which in turn will lead people to believe women's only option is to avoid anything that could lead to sexual violence, which often results in people creating "tips" for women.

The point is not to avoid the topic, but to discuss it rationally and without promoting fear. By asserting that women are in constant danger, feminists actually give credence to suggestions like "don't wear miniskirts" or "don't flirt" because the message is that nothing can really be done to prevent sexual violence against women. Likewise, dismissing valid, practical advice does a great disservice to those you want to protect. I cannot recall how many men my age heard the "stranger danger" talk in school, yet never thought that it applied to women (for obvious reasons) or men who abused them. That kind of misinformation coupled with hyper-vigilance just perpetuates the problem.

I don't know what universe you live in, but the risk of rape to women *is* unacceptably high. One in six women will be raped in their lifetime (and before you mention the one in six statistic for boys, that is sexual abuse of all forms, and for girls it's one in FOUR). And have you read the groping articles? Are you honestly trying to claim that women are NOT in significant danger of assault? And the articles on groping here are about what services you can access, NOT telling women to abandon essential aspects of their lives.

And, it's not feminists who are telling women to be hyper-vigilant: I have never had a woman I would describe as "feminist" give those spiels about all the things you can't do and how much danger you're in. It's always uptight school administrators, security officers who have never thought about following that advice themselves, and very establishment media commentators. Have you noticed that all these articles here on The Sexist are bringing up these rules are SAYING THAT THEY'RE WRONG?! I know I had to explain satire to you like eight times, but I didn't realize your reading comprehension was that bad.

And you are absolutely, completely wrong to believe that society says that women are "more deserving of protection and safety." Not even close. We are told that we are weaker, more delicate, more helpless, more emotional, fundamentally dependent, easy targets, inherently sexually enticing, unnatural to want to have a social life, more easily "sullied," likely to be "irrevocably" damaged, and lots of other hogwash. Whatever chivalry (which is VERY patriarchical, NOT feminist!) says women are "deserving" is taken away amazingly quickly--you drank alcohol? Not "deserving of protection [or] safety." Did you read the horrible things that people wrote about that 15-year old rape victim in Richmond? You wore a short skirt? Nope. You walked alone? Ha! You spoke to a man? What, you didn't know you just gave up your bodily autonomy at "hello"? You had sex before? No longer deserving. Not only that, but basic legal protections start to evaporate if we are not "perfect" by patriarchical standards. Police officers won't pursue cases and rape kits won't get tested, and juries (if it even gets that far) can be persuaded that you "were asking for it."

For instance, a large of portion of the posts on this blog frame women as being in immediate danger of sexual assault at virtually every moment in virtually every place by virtually every male. It is not surprising that some people will take that and run to extremes with it.

That narrative needs to be stopped because it just creates paranoia, and that paranoia tends to result in the unrealistic, hyper-vigilant, typically bad rules you mentioned.

One way to address that is to stop framing women as being in imminent danger. Another would be supporting practical safety advice. Those things will help the situation, both in terms of quelling unnecessary fear and in terms of prevention. However, one cannot challenge ridiculous rules while promoting the paranoia that prompts those rules.

Wearing a mini-skirt is by no means an open invitation by a woman to be raped, but "good" neighborhood, or "bad", it may well make them a more probable target. Extending this to a crime like auto-theft, choosing to leave your keys in the ignition, whether in a "good" neighborhood, or "bad", is a choice that increases the probability of your car being stolen. Similarly, driving a particular make/model car will likely make it a more attractive prize for a criminal. It's an exercise in ignorance to think that engaging in particular kinds of behaviors at particular times and places will not have some impact on the probabilities of crimes occurring.

As depraved and amoral as it is, a rapist is never thinking about a woman as a woman (or even as a human), they are thinking about women as discardable sex objects. Anything a particular woman has done to magnify the typical rapist's perception of her as a sex object is likely to increase the likelihood of them becoming a victim. Can that really be denied/ignored?