Skip to main content

Welcome to our weekly series discussing rape and sexual assault. We're into week four and gaining readers with each addition to the series.

For those who are new to the series, we are sharing a list of statements that come from a 1990 survey of high school kids. They were surveyed before and after taking a Rape Awareness Program. Like the kids back then, we're taking a poll on each statement and comparing our responses with those from the 1990's. We're also discussing our responses in the comments and using the opportunity to expand our own knowledge, shine a light on our own pre-conceptions, and to discover new ways to discuss rape and sexual assault both within the progressive community and outside among family and friends.

Join us below for a re-cap of last week's statement and then don't forget to take this week's poll:

True or False: Women provoke and invite rape by their appearance and behavior.

Statement #3: Physically forcing someone to have sex is rape.

This statement is true.

The 1990 survey found that before taking a rape awareness class 94.2% of the students answered correctly. After the class, 97% answered correctly.

Here on Daily Kos and more than 20 years later, 93% 94% answered correctly. The remaining 20% 6% were split between those who marked this statement as false, 5% 1%,  and those who felt there were shades of gray, 15% 4%. (I apologize for all the strikeouts; my eyes went to totals instead of percentages and really messed up the numbers. Thanks to SandySin in the comments below for pointing out the mistake.)

Believe it or not, since the time this question was asked back in the 1990's, the legal definition of rape has changed. Our legal system was relying on a 1927 characterization of rape:

[Rape] is “the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will.”
The new legal definition came about only recently in January 2012 and was announced by Attorney General Eric Holder:
The new definition of rape is: “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
Obviously this changed allowed the word rape to be used in a much wider context that better fit the cultural norms of what we consider rape today.

Furthermore, the word consent was further defined by the Department of Justice. Lack of consent includes:

instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity, including due to the influence of drugs or alcohol or because of age. The ability of the victim to give consent must be determined in accordance with state statute. Physical resistance from the victim is not required to demonstrate lack of consent.
I find in very interesting that many of the 15% of people who chose Shades of Gray in last week's poll were very bothered by the missing word, consent, in last week's statement and then to see that the new definition of rape very much hinge on that word. My mind was opened a little wider when I learned that one of the reasons the word consent is so important concerns the BDSM community. For example:
I chose shades of grey because of BDSM play (12+ / 0-)
The question was worded to physical force, not consent. Sex without consent is rape. Sex with physical force can still include consent. Heck, even couples not in the scene will sometimes use some modicum of light physical force (like holding wrists, pushing onto a bed, etc.. rough sex without the BDSM) and still be consensual. So from where I sit (in a long term BDSM relationship that's lasted 15 years and counting) physical force does not equal rape. Lack of consent equals rape, even without physical force (say under threat or coercion).

comment by FloridaSNMOM

Almost all the concerns ended up dealing with the concept of consent. One of the commenters asked an intriguing question about marital rape and wondered if it was specifically declared illegal in all jurisdictions. I felt that the question deserved an answer and found this on Wikipedia:
The criminalization of marital rape in the United States started in the mid-1970s and by 1993 marital rape became a crime in all 50 states, under at least one section of the sexual offense codes. At that time, most states differentiated between the way marital rape and non-marital rape were treated. The laws have continued to change and evolve since 1993, but in some states, there still remain differences.
We also had several conversations about prison rape and many wondered if the rates of rape were higher than in the civilian population. kimoconnor got busy and found some websites for us to read.

She discovered a recap of studies on prison rape at the National Institute of Justice website. Among all the information available, this interesting fact stuck out:

Overall, inmate reports indicate that they do not define or consider sexual relationships and rape in the same way that persons within free society view them, and, as a result, perceive rape to be a rare occurrence.
That would mean statistical data on rape from prisons may be tainted by the way in which questions are asked of inmates. If they are asked specifically about rape, it's likely the numbers will be lower than the actual occurrences.

Her second find is a great article from the New York Review of Books, The Shame of Our Prisons: New Evidence. From the article, I'm choosing a few facts for you to mull over, but please, feel free to go read the entire piece.

According to the latest surveys, in 2011 and 2012, 3.2 percent of all people in jail, 4.0 percent of state and federal prisoners, and 9.5 percent of those held in juvenile detention reported having been sexually abused in their current facility during the preceding year.
The answer to the question about whether the rates of rape were higher in prison is complicated. A direct comparison to specific populations will show that it depends very much on who you are, even in prison. The above article says that people who experienced sexual abuse are more likely to be abused again therefore in prison, people who were abused as children are more likely to be targets of abuse:
As in previous studies, the rates of inmate-on-inmate sexual abuse reported by women were dramatically higher than the corresponding rates reported by men: among prisoners, 6.9 percent versus 1.7 percent. Men, on the other hand, reported higher rates than women of sexual misconduct by staff members (most of which is committed by staff of the opposite sex),3 and in juvenile detention, boys reported much higher rates of abuse by staff than girls did—most, again, committed by women.
Women are always more likely then men to be raped, even in prison.

A few more facts about prison rape that need to be highlighted:

The new studies confirm previous findings that most of those who commit sexual abuse in detention are corrections staff, not inmates. That is true in all types of detention facilities, but especially in juvenile facilities. The new studies also confirm that most victims are abused repeatedly during the course of a year. In juvenile facilities, victims of sexual misconduct by staff members were more likely to report eleven or more instances of abuse than a single, isolated occurrence. By far the two biggest risk factors for sexual abuse in all kinds of detention facilities are being “non-heterosexual,” as the BJS puts it, and having a history of sexual victimization that predates the inmate’s current incarceration.
Of the youth who reported sexual activity with staff, 63 percent said that no physical force or other coercion had been involved. Indeed, many of them reported that they had initiated the sexual contact, and about half reported that the staff in question had given them pictures or written them letters. While this may not reflect our typical conception of violent sexual abuse, it should be emphasized that much of the staff sexual misconduct in juvenile detention is precisely that.10 And sexual contact of any kind between staff and inmates is illegal in all fifty states, for good reason: the power imbalance between them is so extreme that it makes genuine consent on the part of inmates impossible.11 The notion of consent is even less applicable when the powerless are minors, making the behavior of staff members in these cases even less pardonable.
I think we can come to the conclusion that the vast majority of us on DailyKos can agree that "Physically forcing someone to have sex without their consent is rape." I will be sure to use that word consent consistently in future conversations about sexual assault.

Thanks for a great conversation last week... let's see what we can do with this week's statement!

Diaries in the Series:

True or False: Physically forcing someone to have sex is rape.

True or False: Rape Can Happen To Anyone

True or False: Most Rapists Commit Rape For Sex w/ Poll

Originally posted to A Progressive Military Wife on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 06:09 AM PST.

Also republished by Sex, Body, and Gender, Rape and Domestic Violence, and House of LIGHTS.

Poll

True or False: Women provoke and invite rape by their appearance and behavior.

8%14 votes
80%130 votes
11%18 votes

| 162 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  This one is utterly and completely false. (19+ / 0-)

    Appropriateness of attire is a completely subjective concept. It depends on a lot of factors including cultural, personal expression, etc. Just because someone dresses in a way you don't like or that you find provocative does NOT give you any right to touch or harass that person. EVER.

    Behavior as well is not an issue. Rape is about consent. Consent can be withdrawn at any point. Behavior has nothing to do with it. Behavior can be flirty or enticing, or provoking, but without consent it's still rape. Now if someone is coming on to you that strong, you can always get them for sexual harassment if they go to far. That doesn't give you the right to rape them.

    "Madness! Total and complete madness! This never would've happened if the humans hadn't started fighting one another!" Londo Mollari

    by FloridaSNMOM on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 06:15:11 AM PST

    •  But we make behavior the issue all the time (10+ / 0-)

      And quite frankly, it pisses me off. For example, when there is a rapist attacking women in a specific area, what is the recommendation from the authorities? "Don't walk alone in that area," "women should avoid that area." The same thing happens with hate crimes - we tell potential victims to be vigilant and limit their lives to avoid crime.

      I realize this can be good advice, but where's the PSAs telling men not to be violent? Where's the clear message that rape is wrong and will not be tolerated? One only has to look at the military to see how not making clear rules leads to a horrible situation.

      What really is the difference between "She was asking for it because she was dressed like a slut?" and "Women are at risk simply because they are women walking alone?" In either case it is a characteristic of the victim or potential victim that is being identified as responsible for the crime.

      A government that denies gay men the right to bridal registry is a fascist state - Margaret Cho

      by CPT Doom on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:10:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Just because you advise someone (6+ / 0-)

        not to walk alone after dark, doesn't mean that it's their fault for getting mugged when they do. That's the difference between taking reasonable precautions for your safety and being responsible for an attack. If someone is robbed, the robber is the one at fault, every time. It doesn't matter if they walked in the wrong neighborhood or if they didn't have an alarm on their house.

        "Madness! Total and complete madness! This never would've happened if the humans hadn't started fighting one another!" Londo Mollari

        by FloridaSNMOM on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 09:03:07 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  This is repeatedly a problem with military (4+ / 0-)

        messaging - always the warnings were at victims and never was any warning directed at potential rapists. Slowly this is changing but there are still a great many counselors working for rape prevention programs in the military that see the victims actions as the only controllable part of a rape scenario and therefore continue to give the same old advice over and over again.

        •  right. A few years ago my cousin (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          angelajean

          had to go to a "rape prevention" class and it was for women and basically told them how to be careful in how the dress, always walk with a buddy, etc. She thought it would be ok if there were a corresponding class for the men but there wasn't.

          I was pissed. It just showed everyone that women are responsible for rape.

  •  Wealthy people provoke and invite higher tax rates (10+ / 0-)

    with their expensive possessions and profligate lifestyle.

    See how easy it is?

  •  Consent is key. (14+ / 0-)

    Anything else is an excuse to do what someone intended all along.

    And if a woman could "provoke" or "invite" sexual assault by her appearance, wouldn't that make rape a corrective act? Teaching her a "lesson"?

    Also, the who appearance/turn on thing is subjective. What is considered by some to be provocative may be thought by others to be demure or proper or disgusting or not a sexual turn on.

    Gentlemen, congratulations. You're everything we've come to expect from years of government training (Zed, MIB).

    by GreenMother on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 06:27:32 AM PST

    •  I need a new keyboard: Whole--not who. (3+ / 0-)

      Gentlemen, congratulations. You're everything we've come to expect from years of government training (Zed, MIB).

      by GreenMother on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 06:28:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  right. In areas of North Africa a woman (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      angelajean

      is thought to have been provoking if she has bare arms or talks to a man alone.

      In some cultures I was astounded to find out that they truly believe that men CANNOT control their sexual impulses. That seems to be an underlying reason why they put the blame on women.

       I dated a man from one of those cultures an he had learned that men cannot control themselves. I asked him why he could (he was a very thoughtful and kind man) but he had no answer. His friends from the same country agreed that it just was how men were made so it was women who needed to not lead them on because men couldn't help it.

      Not one of these men, I believe, would rape anyone. I saw in their faces how repugnant the idea was to them. They themselves showed their idea was false.

      •  After we've fully dissected our own society's (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jplanner

        problems with rape, I think we should start to tackle some of the myths in other countries as well. It is eye-opening to see some of the preconceived notions and then even more eye-opening to realize that it wasn't that long ago that we as a society were thinking similarly. There does definitely seem to be a progression that makes me believe some rape can be blamed on culture itself and how that culture allows rape to exist. Therefore, culture should be able to change and prevent at least some level of rape.

        •  yes. In the case I mentioned for example (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          angelajean

          it is pure misinformation and ignorance. If one of these otherwise kind young men had a sister who'd be raped they might not respond with the compassion some in this country would. At the least, they'd wonder what she did to provoke the man since a man cannot control himself, they have learned. I don't understand though why they think men can't control themselves yet they can.

          And then we know that girls get beaten up and worse by the men/boys in their families sometimes for being raped or even to appear to be 'asking for it" by their behavior/dress.

          It makes me go back and remember how extraordinary the man I was with was. He wasn't super-educated though he was bright and going to college. He followed his heart when his sister was assaulted, not his head (based on what he knew to be true).

        •  The most interesting thing for me is that (0+ / 0-)

          for them men I met it wasn't about misogyny. It stemmed from misinformation. They really were so sure that, biologically, men could not control their sexual impulses. It adds quite a bit of understanding, at least for me, as to why they so closely guard women's behavior and often think.she is responsible for being raped.

          It makes me wonder if people working for women's safety and rights in these countries work to change the erroneous beliefs about men's self control. Probably it is a hard thing to talk about or get across.

  •  I'm starting to get really frustrated (4+ / 0-)

    by some members of the kink community here conflating their experience of consent play, or of willingly doing things that are not strictly "enjoyable," with victims' and advocates' definitions of rape.  It's not the same thing.  Nobody's saying it is.  Stop letting over-defensiveness trip you into providing cover for malignant rapists.

    And as for this one, as clearly and objectively obvious as it should be that appearance (read: sexiness) has next to nothing to do with rape, I do expect there will be at least a person or two to pop up and say "but what about the guy who takes a hot girl out on a date ..."  As if once we move from the realms of breaking into a stranger's house in the middle of the night and into the realms of people who are not complete strangers, the motivation for forcing a victim to have sex against his or her will suddenly becomes completely different.

    •  Actually I think the new definition of rape (11+ / 0-)

      proposed by the DOJ actually supports the view of those in the BDSM community - consent is key. It isn't about physical force, per se, but about the lack of consent. That isn't to say physical force isn't a part of rape but that physical force by itself does not implicate a rapist.

    •  Is BDSM really Okay? (0+ / 0-)

      It does make me start to wonder.

      BDSM is essentially consensual play at rape.  

      Can you really and truly value the autonomy and self-worth of others and then go and pretend to rape people?

      It's sort of like saying, "yes I'm a pacifist, I just collect guns because they look cool and I enjoy target shooting."

      Maybe you can be a pacifist skeet shooter, but its hard to imagine that you aren't then somehow complicit in the culture that promotes guns and violence.  

      BDSM porn in particular is very much part of "rape culture". It's no surprise that its partakers are defensive around the subject.

      •  Wrong. While pretend/play rape is occasionally (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Penny GC

        done by some people as part of BDSM that is not what it is about and I think you will find such play rape "scenes" are quite rare.  Though it is quite common to like being tied down and blindfolded during sex most of the time that is just because it makes it easier to concentrate on all the pleasurable sensations that your partner is giving you.  For things like a good flogging or spanking they are often done without any kind of restraints at all though that is up to personal preference.

        Oh, and yes most BDSM porn is crap and can (at best) be considered a roleplaying fantasy.   Why do you think even mentioning "50 shades of grey" in front of a bunch of kinksters is a good way to get nothing but groans and rolling eyes?

        You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

        by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:26:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Semantics...? (0+ / 0-)

          While it may be that few people go and play an out and out "rape scene" (and yes some do), a big part of BDSM is about the control, humiliation, and objectification of the submissive.  And I grant that some people may take a purely erotic stance (i.e. they're just in it for the physical pleasure of restraints and flogging).  But I don't think you can entirely dismiss that controlling and/or being controlled, objectifying and/or being objectified is a big part of what BDSM is all about.

          Similar dialectics of power and objectification very much fuel rape culture. Of course, you could turn this on its head and argue that BDSM is really a radical counter culture, in that the power dynamic is voluntarily sought rather than assumed (and often inverted with female doms, etc.). But I don't think the issue should be swept under the rug.  Nor should definitions of rape necessarily be worded in such a way to leave BDSM unscathed.

          •  While control can be a big part of BDSM (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RainDog2

            objectification and humiliation may or may not be depending on the person.  However, keep in mind that the Dom is considered fully responsible for the submissive's physical and mental safety and well being.  Abusing the trust of a submissive is considered to be pretty much the worst thing you can do and is considered to be identical to rape.  Oh, and in most cases you will find that outside of the actual "scene" or play session the submissive and dominant are co-equal partners.  In other words, once the play session begins you will see a switch from normal to dominant/submissive and then it will switch right back once it is over.  I also think you will find the number of people who aren't into submission/control/etc and just enjoy the physical sensations and the massive flood of endorphins (which cause an altered state similar to a runner's high but far more intense, often called "subspace") is more than you think.

            As for the definition of rape I think you will find the BDSM community is even more strict than most people.  Simply put, if she says no and you do it anyway it is rape.  If you try to coerce or pressure her into doing something she doesn't want to do on her own it is rape.  If you ignore a safeword or signal then it is rape.  If she is under the influence of recreational drugs or alcohol, even a tiny bit (like one drink an hour ago), then it is rape.  If she has said no to something during the pre-play discussion then the answer is no regardless of how much she begs you to do it during that play session (in other words, a no can't become a yes during play due to the fact that the often massive flood of endorphins can cause).  Not to mention little things like checking in regularly to make sure your partner hasn't lost the ability to communicate (not uncommon when reaching "deep subspace").

            You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

            by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 11:23:37 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  The reason the "community" is strict... (0+ / 0-)

              ... is because they know they're near the razor's edge.  

              And I might note that not everybody adheres to the community's self-professed standards.  Just from personal experience, nobody I've known who was into BDSM sex was particularly into safe words or pre-play talks or anything of the sort.  

              Also, as far as I can tell, coercion is the main point of the 'D' part of BDSM. Threats, exploiting phobias, etc., are all part of the 'play' of the discipline fetish.  

      •  I think you're wrong (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Penny GC, serendipityisabitch

        both about what BDSM generally (as opposed to occasionally, by some people) is; and also about the connection between play at rape and the real thing.   To make just one obvious point, there are a whole lot of female doms out there, and male submissives.  A whole lot.

        I can't say anything about BDSM porn since I've never seen any, but the porn industry as a whole is nothing I'd want to defend anyway.

        To get that much more into it would be way aside from the point of the diary, but since I'm the one complaining about the kink-related comments in the first place, I thought I should throw that out there.

    •  Wrong. There is a very good reason we are so (4+ / 0-)

      picky about making it about meaningful consent rather than the use of force or it not being strictly "enjoyable".  That is because the exact wording of definitions matter.  If you don't think so then why don't you ask those convicted under Operation Spanner as well as a few similar cases in the US about that.  Let me repeat that, using a poorly worded and ambiguous definition like the one in the previous diary* in the series has resulted in fetish clubs being raided and consenting adults being convicted and jailed as a result.

      *In other words, the term "forced" can be interpreted not just as as being coerced into having sex (presumably what was intended) but whether or not some physical force was used (such as those padded bondage cuffs or even just being held down).

      You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

      by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:58:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  We can agree, maybe, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        angelajean

        that such prosecutions weren't carried out in order to protect the alleged victims?  

        The discussion here is of ways to talk about rape that are broadly accurate and don't play into cultural biases against victims; not so much about what the wording of a legal statute ought to be.  There are still far, far too many people in the world who refuse to call it rape (or even wrong) when a woman goes silent mid-act, turns her face away, maybe says no or starts crying, yet a man continues to have sex with her.  There are still far too many people who won't call it rape (or even wrong) when a woman is so drunk her body is like a rag doll, and she can't participate or even speak clearly to say yes or no, yet a man has sex with her anyway.  "Is she enjoying it" gets at those situations very directly, in a way that most other ways of talking about rape do not, and that in itself makes it useful in a way that a strictly abstract and legalistic notion like "meaningful consent" could never be.  If we could get people just to go so far as to look at those supposed gray areas and say "ok, that was wrong" -- even if they follow it up with BUT ... --- I think that would be real progress.

        That's why it gets so aggravating to see kink coming into the discussion. I would argue until the cows come home that BDSM is by definition consensual, that it is nowhere in the same universe as rape, but I've never had the slightest need to do that.  By and large even people who hate the very idea of it seem to assume that it is enjoyable for the people who do it (because why else would they otherwise, I guess is the assumption).  But when every time someone here tries to argue in the context of an alleged rape that "she wasn't enjoying it anymore and that was obvious -- that makes it wrong!" only to be met with "ahem, in BDSM there is not always enjoyment and that's not rape" .... argh.  It is maddening, and whatever the intentions it comes off as severely derailing of what is an entirely good faith effort to provide a context in which a stubborn culture might finally start to understand why rape is defined as it is, and stop abusing the victims and coddling the abusers.

        I think when people do start advocating for specific legal language that could put kink communities at greater risk from any proscecutorial asshole with a bone to pick, then that is the appropriate time to debate what the strict definition should be.  Most of the time, though, that's not really what's going on.

        •  Except the popular language does influence not (0+ / 0-)

          just the legal language but the actions of police and prosecutors.  Or do you not see how making a statement like "she wasn't enjoying it anymore and that was obvious -- that makes it wrong!" could easily result in someone visiting the "dungeon" area of a fetish club for the first time immediately going outside and calling 911 because of the fact that "well she wasn't enjoying it at the time so it had to be rape!" (as it can take some time for the endorphins to kick in often times the first few minutes of a caning or whatever aren't pleasurable).  Sure, the charges might eventually be dropped but lawyer's fees are expensive and having a gun shoved in your face (by the police) is pretty traumatic.

          You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

          by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 10:07:16 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Rape with consent and without force (10+ / 0-)

    It is clear that physically forcing someone to have sex without consent is rape. However, I would argue that neither physical force nor lack of consent is a necessary condition of rape.  A woman might consent to sex as a result of the mere threat of force, and that would still constitute rape.  Even fear without the threat of force might get her to consent, as when a man tells a woman to put out or walk home.  And that would still be rape.

    Of course, one might argue that true consent is not given under such circumstances, and I suspect the law covering such cases might reflect that.

  •  There are no (10+ / 0-)

    "shades of grey" in that poll question.

    The rape of women is something men do, not something the women do (in this context), either by their action or inaction.

    They are victims of a crime, perpetrated by a violent criminal.

    Quite frankly, a woman should be free to walk down the street naked and be safe from being molested.

    I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
    but I fear we will remain Democrats.

    Who is twigg?

    by twigg on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 06:42:08 AM PST

    •  Well stated. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      twigg, kimoconnor, angelajean

      Nobody provokes having something done to them against their will. There is a deep-seated misogynistic rape culture that promotes these 'blame the victim' canards.

      I'd get irritated by people even voting shades of gray on this one, but DK polls are open to folks without a UID too, so who knows who is responding if they don't comment herein...

      •  I suppose there are (4+ / 0-)

        actually some arguments to be had that a person could actively provoke a situation that resulted in something being done to them against there will (certain bar fight scenarios come to mind), but I actually mean this relating to the question at hand. My first sentence was poorly constructed.

        No state of dress or undress is a provocation for sexual assault.

        Making excuses for rapists is disgusting on its own, but adding in blaming the victim is a whole additional level of depravity in my opinion.

        •  Kobe (0+ / 0-)

          The Kobe Bryant case shows complexity--purportedly the young woman went to his room in lingerie carrying a sex video.  At no point should a woman not be allowed to walk away--but, she shouldn't expect that only she can act naughty.
          Is it rape if the woman says no in the middle of the act?  Yes--can a jury ever not have reasonable doubt in such a case?  No system is perfect--rape is possibly the least perfectly tried criminal offense--where the accused often needs to prove his innocence.  As bad as that is, it is better than the other way around that existed for before the      1950s.

          Actions speak louder than petitions.

          by melvynny on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:19:24 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  what do you mean? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            surfbird007

            "only she can act naughty"?

            I am not familiar with this case, so I am having a hard time following your thinking here.

            Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

            by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:24:23 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  entrance (0+ / 0-)

              Walking into a man's room wearing only lingerie, and asking him to watch a sex video you brought, is more than merely being suggestive--more than merely dressing to tease.  That said, if the events happened as she stated, it was rape.  My concern is how is a jury to determine he said, she said, when the prelude is obvious.  Could easily be a set up to sue--or not.  I wouldn't want to sit in judgement.

              Actions speak louder than petitions.

              by melvynny on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:31:05 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  Consent can certainly be withdrawn at any time. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            jan4insight, angelajean

            And I most certainly believe that a woman can approach a man in lingerie, with a sex video, and expect to be the only one who acts "naughty," as you put it. I don't think sex is naughty, but anyway. Actually some people like non-reciprocated sexual teasing. It's not an implied invitation for sex, and certainly not an excuse for rape.

            So in this hypothetical scenario: if the woman only wanted to tease the man in his hotel room, and he didn't like being teased without sex, then he needs to ask her to leave. He doesn't have to consent to teasing either. But he most certainly isn't entitled to sex simply because there's lingerie and an adult DVD involved. It pretty simple really.

            I also don't see this so much in terms of the difficulty of proving cases in court, but with what societal standards we hold ourselves to. Many things are hard to prove in court, but are still unacceptable.

            •  entrapment (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              serendipityisabitch

              Such behavior by an undercover cop would be called entrapment--and not admissible.

              Actions speak louder than petitions.

              by melvynny on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:51:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Bullshit. (0+ / 0-)

                It's not illegal to go to someone's room in lingerie with an adult DVD. It's not illegal to want to tease someone without having sex with them. It's not illegal to invite someone into your room hoping to have sex, and then kicking them out when what they want doesn't match you want.

                Where's the entrapment? We're not talking drugs or prostitution here.

                As I read it, by saying this behavior constitutes entrapment, you're implying rape as an obvious conclusion to the scenario. That is disgusting.

                •  wrong inference (0+ / 0-)

                  My concern is how this plays out in court.  I agree consent can be withdrawn--and definitely not implied--but, a jury would probably have reasonable doubt because of the possible entrapment. From Wikipedia---

                  In criminal law, entrapment is when a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit an offense that the person would have otherwise unlikely commited.[1] It is a type of conduct that is generally frowned upon, and thus in many jurisdictions is a possible defense against criminal liability.

                  Depending on the law in the jurisdiction, the prosecution may be required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped or the defendant may be required to prove that he was entrapped as an affirmative defense.

                  Sting operations are fraught with ethical concerns over whether they constitute entrapment.

                  Actions speak louder than petitions.

                  by melvynny on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:11:14 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  More nonsense. (0+ / 0-)

                    Why are you even bringing this up in the context of this discussion? It makes no sense.

                    Where are the sting operations taking place of the type you're implying? Where are the cops sending women into men's rooms to see if the men try to rape them? And who cares if it wouldn't hold up in court if they did try to operate those kind of stings? That's not germane to the discussion at hand.

                    In my opinion, you're just trying to distract from your original ignorant comment about the woman in the Kobe Bryant case by heading down this ludicrous side street involving hypothetical sting operations and the courts.

          •  It would be nice (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            melvynny, serendipityisabitch

            if the culture could even agree that a man who won't' stop sexual activities when asked is doing something morally wrong.  Whether such a scenario should be considered rape is a separate question; whether it could ever be successfully prosecuted is several steps beyond even that.

            I don't think we're even at the first point yet.

    •  most rape victims are raped by someone (6+ / 0-)

      they knew beforehand, not by strangers; one British source says 90%.

      The stereotype of serial rapists lurking in dark alleyways in seedy neighborhoods in order to pounce on unsuspecting women doesn't reflect the reality.

      The reality is that most victims knew their rapist from some context: perhaps a fleeting acquaintance, from work/school, or socially. Many rapes are committed by members of the victim's family; in such situations, there's often enormous pressure to avoid disturbing family relations by reporting it.

      "Making the streets safe" won't solve the problem, it's much deeper than that. Rapists don't go around with a mark of Cain on their foreheads, you can't tell who is or is not one by looking. If they have access to vulnerable women (or men), they're going to do it. And it's easier for a rapist to have access to someone they know, rather than a total stranger.

      "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

      by limpidglass on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:06:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The question ... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Alexandra Lynch

        was about clothing, and whether or not the way a woman dresses impacts the chance of her becoming a rape victim.

        In that context, making the streets safe is crucial.

        When women are raped by family, friend or acquaintance, clothing may play a part in the mind of the rapist, but there are probably other, more significant, factors.

        I hope that the quality of debate will improve,
        but I fear we will remain Democrats.

        Who is twigg?

        by twigg on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:12:00 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  you have to be careful how you state it (6+ / 0-)

          Rapists have different MOs, patterns, and preferences. Some may go out of their way to specifically target women who dress a certain way. Others may not, or may have totally different criteria for selecting their victims.

          So in that sense, the way a person dresses may "impact" the chance of him/her becoming a rape victim--but of course, there is no way of knowing what effect one's mode of dress or behavior may have upon some rapist.

          Does that mean a woman "provoked" or "invited" rape by dressing a certain way? The answer to that is no.

          Rape is not about sex but about power. The victim's sexuality and sexual behavior are incidental.

          Since most rapes are premeditated (NOT crimes of passion), victims are usually selected carefully and in advance. We don't blame people for being the victim of a professional thief, so we shouldn't blame people for being the victim of a rapist.

          "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

          by limpidglass on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:35:22 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  clothing (0+ / 0-)

          I will just point out since I think it is illustrative of the extrapolation people are doing, but there is no mention of clothing in the question.

      •  There are a few old customs (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Alexandra Lynch
        Rapists don't go around with a mark of Cain on their foreheads, you can't tell who is or is not one by looking.
        ... that I wouldn't mind bringing back.
  •  False (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ivorybill, jan4insight, angelajean

    Next question?

  •  The idea that women "provoke" rape (10+ / 0-)

    is built on the premise that men are animals who can't control their behavior.  That myth is convenient for rapists, of course, but it's total hogwash, dangerous to women and insulting to men.  Rapists have a choice.

    I've noticed that people who can grasp in the abstract that victims don't provoke rape, will often still slide into "she shouldn't have done xyz" in any given case, especially when it's a date rape.  But  the whole "he misread her signals" myth has been pretty thoroughly debunked.

    It's always possible to point to some imperfection in the victim's behavior, if that's what one is looking for.  Rape culture encourages that.  But it always comes down to the same thing:  rape is a choice made by the rapist.

    I shall die, but that is all that I shall do for Death; I am not on his payroll. - Edna St. Vincent Millay

    by Tara the Antisocial Social Worker on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 06:58:56 AM PST

    •  some cultures raise their men to believe this (2+ / 0-)

      even the non-rapists. I dated one, who couldn't answer when I asked him why He could control himself fine.

      It seemed to me they believed the responsibility to avoid rape is on the woman...they jumped into the lion's cage...because of this.

      It may be one reason why, in some cultures, women who are raped are looked down on, blamed, and sometimes even incarcerated.

  •  What shades of gray are there? (4+ / 0-)

    And I would love to hear from those who chose this why they did so.

    I think it is important to discuss this as it is the only way we learn.

    Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

    by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:02:23 AM PST

    •  Might not be people with an account. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kimoconnor, angelajean

      I'm pretty sure polls are open to anyone who visits the site. Unless they comment here, I'm not sure there's any way to know.

      Given some of the asinine comments last week though, I'm not assuming it's not someone with a UID either. Those responses piss me off. This is so clear cut.

  •  The key here is "provoke and incite" (5+ / 0-)

    Obviously, women don't "incite" or "provoke" rape, because the perpetrator is responsible for committing the crime, not the person who is victimized.

    That's settled. This is the same Taliban/Wahabbi cultural mindset that legislates that women cover themselves and not appear alone in public because of the sexual effect they have on men.

    But here's where well-intentioned people sometimes argue: Exercising prudence and caution is NOT a bad thing, and it's not blaming the victim to suggest caution in certain situations. I heard an interview with a woman who had been educating college age women about the risks of binge-drinking and the pattern of non-consensual sex that sometimes occurs when a certain type of predator targets women who are incapacitated or incapable of saying "no"... and how often such behavior goes unreported, uninvestigated, and unpunished. The message was "keep yourself safe and don't binge-drink at frat parties".

    Seems like sound advice - there's a difference here between suggesting behavior modification that reduces risk, and placing the blame on someone who does not heed that advice and is assaulted. The prevention message needs to be paired with acceptance that the a woman who does not take preventative action is still a victim of a crime and deserves full unreserved support and medical attention, and the perps deserve prosecution. With that caveat, and from my perspective, training people to avoid situations that increase risk is not victim-blaming, but preventative health.

    But from the interview I heard, this perspective is controversial. So have at it - school me if I'm off-base. I'm open to hearing opposite perspectives, nuanced or not.

    “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

    by ivorybill on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:02:36 AM PST

    •  non-consentual sex = rape (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ivorybill, Sychotic1, surfbird007

      I think we might want to just put that phrase out of our language here.

      How about we train men and boys more and stop making women responsible?

      I see in this argument a serious double standard. Men: it is OK to drink up at parties but don't drive home. Women: do not drink too much or wear provocative clothing to protect yourself.

      I see nothing wrong with teaching people in general to be safe. But when you tell women to act in one way, and ignore the men, the problem persists.

      Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

      by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:12:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Agreed, Kim (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        serendipityisabitch

        Non-consensual sex = rape. Period.

        Also agreed - Frat boys should be educated to behave toward women as fellow human beings (and not to binge-drink too!)

        But I know you have worked abroad, in Afghanistan to be exact, so let me give you another example of why addressing female behavior without blaming victims sometimes makes sense. In several middle eastern countries, we caution female expat staff not to take taxis alone at night.  We require our staff, male or female, to abstain from even the suspicion of any sexual relations with members of the host country because in some places, that can get one's lover killed. Do we need to train on women's rights and the idea that people should be able to love who they want without coercion? Of course. Are we going to be able to train every Iraqi taxi driver in a situation of, eh, imperfect rule of law, to respect the physical integrity of an uncovered single woman at night? Now, I have to say that many Iraqi taxi drivers would take it upon themselves to protect a single woman at night with their lives, if necessary, just as many frat boys would assure that an inebriated young woman is protected and safe. But you're never going to train all taxi drivers or frat boys. Sometimes you need to take a harm reduction model.

        “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

        by ivorybill on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:28:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  We are discussing the US here (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          surfbird007, angelajean

          So while I will tell you I NEVER went anywhere without a driver known to me and my fixer (yes, a male) in Afghanistan, I do not think it applies here. I remember landing in Dubai and a man who was helping with people getting taxis called a special one for me, with a woman driver! Did I object? No, because I was not at home.

          We do not have same laws or customs as in Iraq or Afghanistan or elsewhere. While I do think they can change the attitudes towards women in those places over time, I think the manner we act and what we can expect is different.

          Here in the US we have no excuse to not expect that we can much more quickly educate men and buys to understand the laws of consent.

          And I believe we CAN train all our frat boys! Will we ever end rape? No, but I think we can end the level of entitlement you see in some young men here, especially in these high school football stars for example.

          And women in burqas get raped. I think those cultures just dont want any other men to see THEIR women more than they think they are protecting them. Though this is just my opinion and I do not have evidence to back that up.

          Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

          by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:07:27 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Training men and boys (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            angelajean, serendipityisabitch

            Agreed 100% Men and boys have responsibility and can be educated. In fact I've been working with colleagues on a healthy relationships guide for unaccompanied immigrant children. But the very process of working on that guide has made me think a lot more about how both messaging and prevention do need to take into consideration different risks and harms that are inherently gender-based. What I have trouble with is the way that discussion of ways in which women can minimize risk gets so rapidly turned into an issue of male lack of accountability, and society's unwillingness to hold them accountable. It's not an either, or situation. It's both.

            “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

            by ivorybill on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:27:07 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I guess there is a fine line between (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              ivorybill, JenS, serendipityisabitch

              teaching young women how to best be safe, and those (not you) suggesting women must give up rights or dress in specific ways to avoid rape. Hell, it won't work anyway, women and men of all types and ages get raped, regardless of how 'sexy' they might look and most often women are raped at home or the home of someone they know.

              I will say, on a positive note, that we are ahead of many places on changing the attitude that women must take all responsibility to avoid rape. But from events like those in Stubenville and elsewhere, we still have a long way to go in training not only those who might commit rape, but others who somehow think some guys should 'get a break' because of their sport skills or some other nonsense.

              Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

              by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:35:34 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  We're in agreement (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                serendipityisabitch

                I think maybe our own gender differences play into this in subtle ways. While I think men and boys need to be educated, cultural change needs to happen, and perpetrators need to be punished... I fear that incidents like Steubenville are going to occur. And, maybe it's mansplainin', but it is hard for me not to feel as if messaging needs to be at least somewhat gender-specific, and this includes not just situational awareness but also helping young people establish secure identities and self confidence to push back against more subtle forms of coercion. But the way these messages are presented, understood and internalized are going to be gendered... The way one would teach this to boys versus girls (and LGBTQ youth) might well be different.

                “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

                by ivorybill on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:50:27 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  It's very difficult. (3+ / 0-)

              Imagine a young immigrant woman arriving in the US wanting to participate in our culture with her new friends. Everyone is going out drinking and all the woman are dressed a little more daring than she's used to but she wants to fit in. If our only advice to this woman is to not go drinking or to dress differently, then she isn't going to listen at all and I can't say that I blame her. To suggest that she get to know the people she's with before getting drunk with them - probably sage advice. To suggest that she not be alone with a man she doesn't know very well - more sage advice.

              Yet none of that advice makes a difference. Rapists are smart and intelligent and they plan ahead. The best advice for women that I've heard so far to prevent rape is for women to talk to each other about the men in their group - a man prone to raping usually has committed rape in the past and there are clues to his behavior. Talking to the man himself won't matter as he'll have all the right answers until the moment he rapes her.

              Right now it is easier for men to commit rape because there is still a wide-spread societal belief that women shouldn't be in those situations and they've made themselves more vulnerable. Somehow they have it coming. And many women still believe that they are to blame as well so they are less likely to report rapes when they happen. That's why some of us get so upset at all the warnings on how women should behave.

      •  And for the sake of argument... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        serendipityisabitch

        let me suggest a line of thought that issues of sexual assault may be inherently unequal between genders...

        Men can be subjected to unwanted sexual acts by women, albeit very rarely. It's false to assume this is not an assault at all, or that a man's physiological functioning assumes consent. But it does seem to me that ultimately male on female sexual assault is on balance more harmful, physically and psychologically.

        Now, I'm not convinced of this position, and it is irrelevant to the discussion about whether men and boys should be educated. But there are additional, specific and severe risks that women and girls face, and a harm reduction strategy might include different messaging for females versus males.

        Also, I used "non-consensual sex" in my original comment above because that includes a wider range of behaviors than "rape" - such as disrobing someone and taking photos, for example. All rape = non-consentual sex, but the inverse is not necessarily true.

        “If the misery of the poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

        by ivorybill on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:01:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I agree. And also, I am sure that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ivorybill

          raping a man anally is as bad as male on female rape, to the victim. It isn't very likely that the rapist would be a woman but it is possible (objects). Apparently rape of men by other men is quite common in the service. Because men vastly outnumber women, there actually are more men who are raped in the service than women. But of course the percentage of women who are raped is much higher than men.

      •  This makes me think of the MADD drunk driving (3+ / 0-)

        campaign. Stopping people (primarily men) from driving drunk was almost impossible to accomplish because we couldn't stop men from drinking in the first place. So instead of stopping drinking, we asked friends and family to be aware of the behavior and to be the ones that stopped it.

        The rape awareness programs that seem to be working and bringing down numbers are working on a similar premise - ask the people in the partying situation to help prevent rape.

        Tara mentioned a very successful one a few diaries back, Don't Be That Guy.

    •  It's not bad advice (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      angelajean, ivorybill

      Especially the way you phrased it.  Accurate information about the kinds of things that rapists look for in a victim can be useful to be aware of, and to my knowledge this is accurate.  I just wish it would stop coming up every damn time in discussions like this one, because on a societal scale such awareness does nothing to prevent rapes.  The rapists will just target someone else.  Or maybe the same person, in a slightly different context, one she doesn't know about or considers an acceptable risk.

  •  I was dressed for church (8+ / 0-)

    Had just came frm church.. False.

    We the People have to make a difference and the Change.....Just do it ! Be part of helping us build a veteran community online. United Veterans of America

    by Vetwife on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:09:10 AM PST

  •  I can't put it any more starkly than this. (6+ / 0-)

    If a young woman, say, at a college party is attired in a shirt that says, "Rape Me!", her "no" still means no 100% of the time, and her attire is by no means an "invitation" to a violent attack.

    If I don't lock my doors, it doesn't give you the right to steal my stuff.

    How about I believe in the unlucky ones?

    by BenderRodriguez on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:13:58 AM PST

    •  It doesn't (0+ / 0-)

      It doesn't give anyone the right, but it does invite those who don't care they don't have the right.  Do you think the PSAs telling people to lock their cars because most stolen cars were unlocked are misguided?

      •  No, no, no. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        NancyK

        Nobody is inviting rape, ever, for any reason. There may be an argument for warning people to take precautions against dangerous people, but your comment is disturbing.

        Your attitude is part of the problem that enables rapists by blaming the victim.

      •  human beings are not cars (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        surfbird007, jan4insight, NancyK

        And I'll be damned if I have to lose the right to be a full citizen out of fear. Using your logic I should never walk home alone in the dark.

        Also keep in mind, most rapes are not the kind you infer ( a stranger in a dark alley) but known to the victim.

        Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

        by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:18:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I think invite is too strong a word (0+ / 0-)

        She's not being wise but the entire responsibility lies with the man. To keep that fact present, it works best not to talk about culpability and the woman's attire in the same breath/sentence.
        It is possible to think of it as he is entirely responsible and men must be taught this. No matter if there is a naked gorgeous woman who had been wearing the "rape me" tee shirt prior to disrobing.

        In counseling the woman, we can teach her what maybe be wise and unwise to not attract undesirable attention. That should be held entirely separate from blame/responsibility which is on the rapist alone.

        To add onto other's analogy:mmIf you leave your car in a place where every car parked there has been stolen, you were unwise.You  might even say to self "It's my fault I was so stupid to park there". But the car thief is NOT less responsible and NOT less culpable, nor will he be charged for a lesser crime. The fact that you unwisely parked there and "provoked" the theft will not come up..

  •  my reaction (0+ / 0-)

    I think there is a subtle but important difference between saying the woman provoked/invited rape, and saying she is in any way at fault or could have done anything realistically to prevent it.  Take an extreme hypothetical.  A raper only likes to rape Asian women and is out looking for a target.  Doesn't an Asian woman invite rape from this rapist?  The more I massage 'invite' and 'provoke' in my mind, the less I'm certain of the answer, but it still feels like a yes.

    •  no, I disagree (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1, surfbird007, angelajean

      First of all I wonder if rapists have 'types' at all. And if it is possible that someone only rapes one race (your example), no other woman of the same race are not provoking anything.

      I think provoke is something one does on purpose, or with a specific purpose.

      Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

      by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 07:21:51 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  if a rapist had no 'type' (0+ / 0-)

        wouldn't they be just as likely to choose a male as a female?  If they were choosing their victim completely independent of their appearance?  Indeed there are situations where this is the case such as inter-family rape and some military rape.  But I think this just highlights the fact that there are other situations where it is not.

        •  Possibly (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          surfbird007, angelajean

          YOu see some who rape both young girls and boys.  I bet that happens with adults too, but do not have stats to prove.

          I guess the 'type' is young huh? So all young kids are provoking rape? That is just silly.

          I think the only type rapists have are those people who are vulnerable for one reason or another.

          Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

          by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:12:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Can (0+ / 0-)

        Speaking just on the definitions of the words and not this specific usage for a second.  Can an inanimate object provoke or invite something?  I would say yes.  Are people 100% animate or are they the sum of animate and inanimate parts?  Are your toenails animate?

        I hate to be arguing semantics, but in a sense that seems the whole point of this exercise.  I do think others are extrapolating aspects of the question that aren't quite there.

    •  My son and I are having this conversation today (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      serendipityisabitch, kimoconnor

      over the word provoke. What does it actually mean? Is provocation always intentional? Sometimes I get angry with him and I can explain the behavior that provoked my reaction and he will tell me that the behavior was not intended to provoke in the first place.

      •  Ah, but was it even if unconsciously? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        angelajean

        I seem to remember being very cleaver at figuring out how to provoke my mother, and being intentionally innocent about it after the fact. She had all the power, the only thing I had was an ability to get under her skin. Though, I learned that this might have felt good at the time, it certainly did not help in the end.

        Provocation may not always be intentional, but I would bet it is most of the time! Especially when dealing with adults.

        Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

        by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 11:58:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Saw a local news feature... (3+ / 0-)

    ... that billed itself as "How To Avoid Being Bullied" for young people in school situations. It suggested that wearing certain clothes and acting certain ways invite bullying. I see no difference between this approach and the one that says women should avoid dressing in certain ways and behaving in certain ways if they want to be safe from rapists. Although I understand the protective goals involved, teaching this to youngsters of either sex seems shortsighted. And don't the people who warn women against provocative dress, extroverted public behavior and unsafe areas claim the same "protective" reasoning?  

  •  Obviously the Correct Answer is no (0+ / 0-)

    but it's easy to overthink it, and many of us are trained by standardized tests to do so. For example, if a woman goes up to a group of guys and says "rape me", is that not inviting rape by her behavior?

    warning: snark probably above

    by NE2 on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:37:37 AM PST

    •  And is that not a silly hypothetical? (0+ / 0-)

      We can all come up with some highly unlikely examples like the one you pose, but it is not necessarily reflective of reality.

      Where ignorance is our master, there is no possibility of real peace. - Dalai Lama

      by kimoconnor on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 09:20:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  No it is not. It might be an invitation to sit (0+ / 0-)

      down and discuss the possibility of a "play rape" scene (and those require a shit ton of discussion and planning beforehand to ensure both the physical and mental safety of everyone involved) but nothing more.

      You have watched Faux News, now lose 2d10 SAN.

      by Throw The Bums Out on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 10:34:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  True or False, 'Muffin' top is jeans that are (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean

    incorrectly tailored or a woman with an incorrect body size.

    This is the first step in the appearance slope. It drives me crazy.

    --------------

    Why is it easier to buy a gun than it is to register to vote in most states?

    by 88kathy on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 08:52:57 AM PST

  •  Unless they are wearing clothing that (0+ / 0-)

    clearly in worlds that invites sexual advances --which provides consent-- Never.
    There's that "consent" issue.
    And yes, this is facetious.

    The road to excess leads to the palace of Wisdom, I must not have excessed enough

    by JenS on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 10:05:22 AM PST

  •  The prison rapes stats seem low to me n/t. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    angelajean

    “The answer must be, I think, that beauty and grace are performed whether or not we will or sense them. The least we can do is try to be there.” ― Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek

    by 6412093 on Thu Nov 14, 2013 at 10:08:56 AM PST

  •  better analogy (0+ / 0-)

    Terrorism.  There are a lot of similarities between terrorism and rape.

    Heinous crime: check, check.
    Unjustifiable: check, check.
    victim is never to blame: check, check.
    once is once to many: check, check.
    sows fear even in those not effected: check, check.
    act is more about power than the result: check, check.

    And yet I support a smaller military and intelligence apparatus.  Will this invite attacks?  It is disingenuous and naive to suggest it wouldn't or that it wouldn't make us less safe.  And yet I support those policies anyway.  The risk created is, while non-zero, manageable and acceptable.  Do drone strikes and military troops on foreign soil provoke attacks?  Again it would be dishonest to suggest they don't though this admission should never be construed as a defense of the acts.  And while I may oppose those policies, it is not because I think they might provoke terrorist attacks.

    I also wonder if some of the difference of opinion is indicative of different world views.  If you have a fate/pre-destiny/newtonian view of the world, it is easy to see how you might see how someone's appearance/behaviour has little to no effect on their likelihood to be raped.  But if you ascribe more to a chaos theory/quantum mechanics view of the world, then everything effects everything.  If everything effects everything, how could someone's appearance/behavior not have an effect?

  •  Still trying to understand your statistics (0+ / 0-)

    In the recent results, you state:

     93% answered correctly. The remaining 20%

    are you really getting 113% results? Can we do this on election day?

    This type of error is what gives the opposition credibility (a very hard job, usually).

    Is your point that 80% of people answered as you think, and the remaining  20% were split: 5% of the total didn't agree with you and 15% couldn't make up their minds?

    BTW, I agree with you, I'm just a very critical reader.  Please, don't give the "She asked for it" crowd leverage.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site