Don’t Tell Women to “Dress Carefully” to Avoid Rape

When asked about what he thought of a politician’s clueless remarks on rape, an auto rickshaw driver said: “The remarks are not all wrong, as the ‘city-girls’ do try to gain attention with their dressing and attitude, and could help the situation if they keep to themselves.”

By now everyone has heard this a thousand times. People always ask women to dress properly to avoid rape. Not just men, but many women themselves say this. And not just those from the lower strata, but from all walks of life. The attitudes towards rape might, just might improve as one climbs the economic ladder, but by no means is it a given. There are enough rationalizations. And here’s why they’re bullshit.

Women are Already Careful

Women in India are under siege. They are already conscious about the threats to their safety to a degree that I can never even imagine. I see it in the way they plan their schedules, and the questions they ask themselves about what they’re wearing before they go out. The cautious way they view men who come close to them in public. And it pisses me off that they have to do this. All over Europe and in the US, talking to strangers on the road is common. Light banter when sitting down at a restaurant. Compliments on your dress or other accessories, remarks on books or electronic devices. These are casual interactions that take place on a regular basis with no suspicion and no tension.

But not in India. I cannot just casually make eye contact with a woman in public here and expect a smile back in response in a friendly manner. And you know what? They have every reason to be suspicious. I have personally known men who would take it as an open invitation that a woman is “available” if she smiles back at them on the road. What should have been a casual “hi/hello” has turned into something sinister. And that sucks donkey balls.

So don’t go around telling women to “be careful at night” or “watch what you wear”. They’re already overburdened with the knowledge and they don’t need or appreciate additional comments from clueless assholes who don’t know jack.

Most Rape Victims are Already Properly Covered Up

The overwhelming number of rape victims are not glamorous girls who wear what they please and are proud of it. Most of them are assaulted when they’ve vulnerable and have no one to turn to. Schoolgirls are accosted on the road and dragged away. Women are raped in marriages because they have no recourse to the law. Those living alone in their houses are in danger. They key theme in all these is vulnerability.

It matters not to the Indian rapist whether a woman is dressed in underwear or wrapped in layers of blankets. What they look for is weakness and an inability to fight back. Never imagine for a moment that rapists lose control. They damn well know what they’re doing and carefully assess the situation before they decide to sexually assault someone. A well protected woman will always be safe regardless of what she’s wearing. I can give it to you in writing. Can you show me the number of scantily clad women who were assaulted when they had adequate protection?

I didn’t think so.

Rapes are not Natural Disasters

Those telling women to be careful insist that it’s just a common sense measure. After all when there’s a threat, don’t you take steps to prevent it? If it’s dark, aren’t you careful that you don’t fall down a pothole? People telling women what to wear take the line that it’s only reasonable after all. And how do you argue with that?

The flaw in thinking like this is in confusing a rapist with a natural disaster. A storm is not a citizen of the country. It obeys no rules and answers to no one. It has no free will. Getting hit by lightning is not personal. The lightning doesn’t have a choice whether to hit you or not. It makes perfect sense to take precautions against something that has no free will and no agency. A mad dog has no ability to control itself and we are all rightfully wary of it.

But a rapist acting in full possession of his senses cannot be equated with a lightning storm or a mad dog. The onus is on the rapist not to rape and not on the victim to avoid getting raped. Sexually assaulting someone is an act of free will. It is a choice. The entire responsibility lies with the person initiating the action.

Some people think it’s asking too much of a person who “lost control” because he saw a vulnerable woman. Bullshit. If they’re old enough to vote, old enough to get married, old enough to raise children, and old enough to enter legal contracts, they’re bloody well old enough to choose to keep their pants on.

Most Rapes in India go Unreported

Every once in a while someone will trot out statistics claiming to show that rape is more prevalent in so-called “western countries”. Though I’m sorely tempted to, I will not blindly assume bad faith on their part. Instead, I will calmly point out that the overwhelming majority of rapes in India go unreported. How many exactly? As much as 99%!

That’s right. Just one percent of rapes in India make it to the police. And to add insult to injury, the police then often refuse to register an FIR and ask the girl to “compromise” or whatever the fuck they want to call it. So no surprise that rape statistics are low in India. What do you expect?

Bottom line. Indian women live a sucky life. I don’t know if they’re used to it or not, but I know that were I a girl living in this country I would want to get the hell away as soon as possible. I would want to be free to live my life, free to wear whatever I want without politicians blaming me for it, and free to walk down the streets alone at 3 am if I want. After all, I pay taxes too right? Don’t I have the same rights to the street at all times of the day that everyone else has?

But I’m not a girl. And it’s sad that I’m grateful.

What do you think of this post?
  • Agree (9)
  • Don't Agree but Interesting (0)
  • You're an asshole (0)

42 thoughts on “Don’t Tell Women to “Dress Carefully” to Avoid Rape”

  1. Even more to the point, the overwhelming majority of victims were assaulted by someone they knew. This fact is often overlooked by people who insisted that women are responsible for preventing rape. But I think it’s because if we keep the narrative of “stranger rape” more prevalent, then we can place all the responsibility on the victims to prevent rape, instead of working towards dismantling cultural narratives that allow for rape to foster in the first place.

    I had a discussion about this from a friend of mine who lives in India. During the aftermath of the Delhi gang rape and murder, he was telling me his women at his company wanted to create a cab service with the company and they would have a percentage of their checks taken out to fund it. What my friend didn’t understand was why they wanted this. He felt they were taking it too far. Yet, he was one of those people who’d say “women shouldn’t draw attention to themselves.” So I agree with you, we already do whatever we can to prevent rape.

    Reply

    • In reply to Ash

      It makes it worse when you realize how much better things can be elsewhere. Till you experience another country, you think that this is the only way.

      Reply

    • In reply to Ash

      If you hate it, then move out. No one is forcing you to live in India. I understand its bad, but just like any capitalist based thinking, if you don’t like it, find a better competitor.

      Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        That’s a stupid thing to say. If she hates it, it’s because she has cited a very valid reason. It is up to us all to ensure that women feel safe in this country, not advise anyone feeling unsafe to leave the country because hey, capitalism! What a ridiculous thing to say!

        Reply

      • In reply to Fem

        “If you hate it here so much, why don’t you just leave?” is not a good response. Newsflash: Many people don’t even have the resources to pack up and move to another country, and capitalism has a lot do with why that’s the case.

        Reply

      • In reply to RenKiss

        “No one can force her to move out either.” Bhagwad, somewhat agreed. I’m a very pro capitalist. I think of nation states as corporations. If you don’t agree with the corporate practices then you have every right to leave that corporation of interest. In terms of being forced out, well, that depends on the situation. If there is a dissedent that is causing absolutely social chaos, then the nation state has every rigth to kick them out. Napoleon was put into exile, right?

        “If she hates it, it’s because she has cited a very valid reason” So what? I hate Denny’s. No one forces me to go to Denny’s, so therefore, I don’t go to Denny’s to eat. Even if it is the ONLY restaurant or institution that has food within 10 miles, I will go out of my way, drive the 11 miles to the nearest non-Denny’s institution. It may be more difficult, but no one is forcing me to eat at Denny’s, even if they hold a 10 mile monopoly.

        “Newsflash: Many people don’t even have the resources to pack up and move to another country, and capitalism has a lot do with why that’s the case.” That shouldn’t be the institutions fault. The institution has a set of rules/regulations. If those that reside within the institution do not agree with the institutions policies, they are NOT forced to remain within the institution. IF they do not have the resources, this is NOT the fault of the institution. Example, I have a job. I HATE the job. No one is forcing me to stay at that job, at the same time, I don’t have the resources to simply pack up and find another job. It isn’t my employer’s fault, right?

        Same principles. As human beings, we HAVE to apply basic economic and capitalistic principles to such things. Nation states are no different than corporate institutions.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        She does have every right of freedom of expression AS IT PERTAINS to Indian law. In the US, I have every right to defame Obama. In India, I am more restricted as to how I defame Modi.

        The institution set bylaws that forbid me from defaming Modi. If I want to defame Modi, I do have every right to move out and defame him in the United States. Again, capitalism wins. If I want to go to a place where my rigth to defame an individual (as long as it isn’t slanderous/libelous) exists, I can do the capitalist thing and simply move out and continue defaming.

        So if India does in fact restrict freedom of expression in certain areas, you as a citizen of this particular nation state must abide and/or complain within the bounds of the law. if you don’t like it, move out.

        Just like if you don’t like a corporation or your job, you can complain within the set limits as described by the corporations laws. If you still don’t like it, get another job.

        How is this any different?

        Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        No one can force her to move out either.

        Bhagwad, another fallacy regarding this quote is the institutionalized manner of a city, state, province, nation-state, etc.

        If a corporation deems an employee unfit, they potentially could determine them. Don’t nation states also carry this right to a lesser extent? If a person is viewed as traitorous to American society, treason laws can be carried out and the person of interest could, in fact, be forced to move out.

        Nation states have every right to do such things. Why not?

        Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        The question of whether or not a nation state is a corporation is off-topic. Suffice to say that there are obvious differences in the sense that one is not born into a corporation. A corporation doesn’t give its employees rights either. Neither is there a question of consenting to be part of a nation. People are inducted without their permission. And in many countries of the world, they are actively not allowed to leave either.

        But like I said, that’s not the discussion.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        She can say India is a bad place, at the same time, if you REALLY think India is such a bad place, simply leave. Lots of people do it. Come here to US. Texas is a great state.

        People are in fact inducted into nations by birth, coups, etc. What do I have to say about that? sorry, that is just the way things go.

        In any case, use common sense. If women in skirts tend to get raped in India, then don’t wear a skirt. Complain all you want, but use common sense. If you wanna wear a skirt, then don’t go to India.

        Reply

  2. As someone who’s never been outside of Europe it sounds really extreme. If it’s as bad as you make it seem I hope they will get more civilized. It also makes me more hesitant to even want to travel there someday.

    Reply

    • In reply to Shui

      Hopefully things will change with time. What else can we do other than hope right? Tourists definitely have to be careful. If you have the luxury of traveling with someone and make sure you don’t expose yourself, I guess you should be fine.

      Rapists are cowards. They’re looking for an easy hit.

      Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        Even with the bad news coming out of India, it’s still on my list of countries I want to visit. I totally get the mentality of wanting to avoid countries where these problems are rampant, but at the same time I feel I shouldn’t let that fear prevent me from living, you know. But I also hope things will change too.

        Reply

  3. Spot on Bhagwad! ‘Rapes are not natural disasters’ – Exactly! Its ridiculous that a criminal offence is being regarded as something that is ‘natural’ and ‘expected’!
    I have observed that people who resort to these ‘Dress Carefully’ lectures mostly fall into the following 4 categories:

    a) Men (Even the men who are empathetic towards the plight of women make such stupid statements. There are very few men who can actually put themselves in a woman’s shoes and relate to this issue).
    b) Women who are well-protected
    c) Women who have been lucky enough to not experience molestation of any kind
    d) Men and women who have not stepped outside India

    Or to sum up in a single sentence, people making such irrelevant statements are living under a rock!

    Reply

    • In reply to The Gender Nazi

      Somehow when talking about rape, all the usual commonsense ways we react to crime gets warped. If you fall down a sewer accidentally, no one berates you for not being careful. You don’t hear politicians making laws to prevent people from walking at night. You don’t get lectures from others how to avoid open sewers etc.

      Even if they give such advice about avoiding sewers, no one ever says it was the victim’s fault.

      But somehow when a woman gets raped everyone and their grandma comes up with advice on what she could have done differently. Moreover, they all imply that she deserved it and she brought it upon herself etc.

      Mind you, no onus is placed on the rapist to control himself. It’s assumed that the victim has to do all the hard work to avoid it!

      Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        “You don’t hear politicians making laws to prevent people from walking at night.” Not true, there are curfews.

        “Even if they give such advice about avoiding sewers, no one ever says it was the victim’s fault.” If the case goes civil, and the city finds that it was the victims fault, the city could easily say that they will NOT pay for any damages and more extreme, could even prevent this victim from walking at certain times in certain areas.

        “But somehow when a woman gets raped everyone and their grandma comes up with advice on what she could have done differently.” NO one is forcing these women to listen to this advice. It is just that, advice.

        Sure there are laws, but there is also common sense.

        Here in Los Angeles, the black area (the ghetto) is South Central Los ANgeles. You have the freedom to say I HATE NGGRS on a sign based on your first amendment, but the local police would ADVICE you not to do that in South Central Los Angeles simply because of the dangers that come along with saying such things in a ghetto that is mostly black.
        The rape principle applies. It is human nature. Crimes happen. It is up to law enforcement to enforce such laws, however, law enforcement cannot enforce the law 100% of the time EVERYWHERE at once.

        Even here in the US, it is adviced for women to go with male partners to avoid rape. Again, rape is against the law, but the law cannot protect you 100% of the time.

        Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        You’re confusing civil and criminal law.

        Also, no one asks for the protection of the law at all time. What people in fact are asking is speedy punishment within a reasonable time frame.

        I’ve not met anyone demanding that the police protect them 100% of the time.

        Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        “You don’t hear politicians making laws to prevent people from walking at night.” Not true, there are curfews.

        This is the kind of refutation I hate to see the most, because it’s glib and irrelevant. Do you really believe curfews are instituted because of the dangers of falling into sewers? No? Then you’re just attacking a weakness in how he stated his argument. (If you do, you’re wrong.) Curfews exist because criminal activity makes it dangerous to be out late at night, generally speaking.

        “Even if they give such advice about avoiding sewers, no one ever says it was the victim’s fault.” If the case goes civil, and the city finds that it was the victims fault, the city could easily say that they will NOT pay for any damages and more extreme, could even prevent this victim from walking at certain times in certain areas.

        What case? Unless the sewer was flawed somehow, I don’t think there’s a lawsuit here. Also, you can’t stop a person from walking in certain times at certain areas, are you insane? (Now there’s a real lawsuit waiting to happen). Meanwhile, No one will say ““The remarks are not all wrong, as the ‘city-boys’ do try to pay attention to other things, and could help the situation if they keep their eyes to themselves.” People might or might not acknowledge fault but won’t publicly talk about it and give life advice to them on how to avoid it.

        “But somehow when a woman gets raped everyone and their grandma comes up with advice on what she could have done differently.” NO one is forcing these women to listen to this advice. It is just that, advice.

        The problem isn’t that they’re giving advice it’s that they aren’t saying “Fuck you horrible rapists.”, instead saying to the woman “here’s how to avoid it”. What the fuck?

        Sure, it’s true that the women could maybe, in some cases, avoid it better, and then they get called out on it. But where’s the part where the MEN get called out on it? When’s the part where MEN get advice on how to avoid raping? Where people say that MEN ought to be acting differently? All the advice is just a way to place the blame on the 0.1% of the woman, while avoiding the fact that it’s 99.9% the man’s fault.

        Sure there are laws, but there is also common sense.

        Here in Los Angeles, the black area (the ghetto) is South Central Los ANgeles. You have the freedom to say I HATE NGGRS on a sign based on your first amendment, but the local police would ADVICE you not to do that in South Central Los Angeles simply because of the dangers that come along with saying such things in a ghetto that is mostly black.
        The rape principle applies. It is human nature. Crimes happen. It is up to law enforcement to enforce such laws, however, law enforcement cannot enforce the law 100% of the time EVERYWHERE at once.

        Of course there’s common sense, but there is no inherent desire to hold a sign saying ‘I hate everyone in this neighborhood’ in most people, so that common sense isn’t a restriction. But a very large amount of teenage girls do have the inherent desire to wear revealing clothing, go out on their own without a male chaperone, draw attention to themselves, etc.

        In regards to your scenario: imagine if you got the same reaction as you would get from holding that sign, just from being white. Then, when you got jumped and beaten up, everyone said that white people in a black neighborhood should try to not draw attention, look less threatening, go with a black chaperone, etc. Sure, people would admit that you should be more careful in this situation, but they’d acknowledge that it is a horribly fucked-up one that needs fixing badly. Just like the case of rape in India.

        Of fucking course the law cannot be enforced everywhere at once, but with that acknowledged, it’s not being enforced nearly enough or well enough.

        Even here in the US, it is adviced for women to go with male partners to avoid rape. Again, rape is against the law, but the law cannot protect you 100% of the time.

        Huge amounts of women, schoolgirls, etc, here in America, go home from school or work or anything else alone and are fine. There’s the occasional rape, yes, because the law cannot protect you 100% of the time. But there is a reasonable expectation, say, 90 or 80 or 70 or whatever percentage. As it stands, the amount of protection Indian women are getting from the law is far below anything you could call reasonable.

        TL;DR:
        Not going to sum up my points, just say this. Nowhere do you say ‘rape is wrong’ in any of your 3 posts. You do say it’s a crime, but don’t really condemn it when you say it. Instead you push blame onto women. Nowhere else in the civilized world can a man sexually assault a provocatively dressed woman and then look into a camera expecting to be applauded for his actions. Why? Because rape is so much more accepted here. And why is that? Well, in part, because everyone blames the women, while not even acknowledging the men’s massive share.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        Thats because its easy to blame the victim and be done with it. Getting defensive is the best defense, didn’t you know? Shifting the focus on rapist will cause society to turn the mirror on itself. People will be forced to examine many issues like poor law and order, corruption, patriarchy, fragile male egos, dysfunctional families, social conditioning which prevents men from looking at women as equals and not as prey, constant sexualization of the female body in media, poverty, joblessness, male entitlement, gender segregation, abysmal gender population ratios and so many other factors which foster the ‘rape culture’.
        Now tell me, which is easier for the general populace? Pointing out the skirt length of the victim as the reason for rape or admitting that they are a part of a society which has successfully terrorized half the population from time immemorial and that the entire society is to blame for the rape?

        Reply

      • In reply to The Gender Nazi

        Shifting on the rapist is easiest. I’m just saying use common sense. You don’t go into South Central screaming I hate negros. You can do that in maybe West LA, but not in South Central Los Angeles. India is the same way. Maybe you can go to parts of Mumbai to wear a skirt, but maybe you can’t do that in parts of Dehli. Same thing.

        Who cares about the whole “male entitlement” thing? We are discussing a crime. Rape is a crime, just like theft, murder, etc etc.

        And just like murder, you are more likely to get killed in a place like South Central versus West Los Angeles. India is the same way. Certain places welcome skirts, others don’t. Use common sense.

        Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        People like Western View don’t like pesky things like facts and reality, so they just push for “don’t do this, don’t do that, blah, blah.” There are so many women who have what they call “rape schedules.” That means women navigate the world everyday in order to avoid rape . This isn’t using “common sense,” this is living in fear and no one deserves that.

        Reply

  4. So in sum, saying “move out of the country if you don’t like it here” is a dumb argument and just reeks of intellectually laziness. Especially when you’re trying to apply capitalistic terms to social issues.

    The rape principle applies. It is human nature. Crimes happen. It is up to law enforcement to enforce such laws, however, law enforcement cannot enforce the law 100% of the time EVERYWHERE at once.

    Even here in the US, it is adviced for women to go with male partners to avoid rape. Again, rape is against the law, but the law cannot protect you 100% of the time.

    If you can read clearly, you’ll see that I pointed out above that stranger rape isn’t all that common. Most women are raped by someone they know. So the point of “don’t go out without a male partner” is stupid.

    On the issue of making laws, that’s the easy part. But when it comes to actually enforcing them that’s another issue. Sure a victim can report rape, in the best case scenario the, rapist would be punished, but that’s not how it plays out. In fact, the victim is the one who is often questioned. People who work in law enforcement are also under the influence of cultural narratives that encourage rape culture. This is why victims are very reluctant to report rape, because they know they’re ones who will be questioned and shamed. Thus, you have police officers who refuse to do their jobs.

    Reply

    • In reply to RenKiss

      Capitalism works in law enforcement too. DOn’t like the way India enforces laws? No problem, come on over to Texas. We enforce our laws very well. Its like a corporation. Don’t like workin’ for the other guy? Come on over here and work.

      Stranger rape? Raped by someone you know? Its all the same thing. A crime is a crime is a crime, right? Who cares who the perpetrator is.

      I stand firmly by going out with a male partner–a grandfather, great uncle, father, uncle (father/mother’s sibling) brother, husband, son, grandon, etc. Those are the ONLY male partners a woman should go out with.

      Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        I stand firmly by going out with a male partner–a grandfather, great uncle, father, uncle (father/mother’s sibling) brother, husband, son, grandon, etc. Those are the ONLY male partners a woman should go out with.

        *yawn* Right, because male partners, grandfathers or any male relatives never commit rape. That never happens. It’s just some guy who jumps out the bushes. >__>

        Reply

      • In reply to Western Point of View

        Capitalism works in law enforcement too. DOn’t like the way India enforces laws? No problem, come on over to Texas. We enforce our laws very well. Its like a corporation. Don’t like workin’ for the other guy? Come on over here and work.

        No problem, except that you have to get a visa which isn’t always possible. Then leave behind everything you’ve ever known, your entire family, all your friends, acquintances, etc, learn a new language, get enough money for the travel and accomodations, and of course find a new job in a shitty economy. NO PROBLEM BRO!

        Stranger rape? Raped by someone you know? Its all the same thing. A crime is a crime is a crime, right? Who cares who the perpetrator is.

        Except that if you’re getting raped by someone you know then all the arguments about provocative clothing and actions are more or less fucking nonsense, which makes all the rickshaw driver bullshit even more retarded than it already was. Which is difficult to do, believe you me.

        I stand firmly by going out with a male partner–a grandfather, great uncle, father, uncle (father/mother’s sibling) brother, husband, son, grandon, etc. Those are the ONLY male partners a woman should go out with.

        What if you don’t have any of those? Grandfather Great Uncle are probably too old to defend against a male in his prime, Father could be dead or busy with work, Uncle doesn’t necessarily exist or live near enough to chaperone you around, Brother doesn’t necessarily exist, might be too young if you’re the oldest child by a few years, Husband Son and Grandson all assume you’re married so yea.

        Sure, you probably have brothers and uncles. But, they may not want to go with you and have their own stuff to do. And, what if you’re the oldest child (17.) Your brother is 3 years younger (14). That’s nothing to a 25 year old man. Plus, now your schedule is dictated by someone else entirely. Plus, what if you want to go out to a bar or a girl’s night out? Would you want them there? What if you want to go on a 5hr shopping spree? Would they really stay through that?

        Reply

  5. Well said! I’ve never come across a man who would like to step into a woman’s shoes for even a minute – this tells me a lot about women’s status in society…

    Reply

  6. I love these rant posts!
    Well said! People don’t suggest men to stay home thinking they might rape someone! Would they? So sad that people are made to believe that this way of thinking is correct- that the reason for rape is the victim’s way of dressing or whatever!

    Reply

    • In reply to Pink

      I think people view rape as a natural part of the order of things. It’s not viewed as something abnormal. And so naturally they expect women to act as if “it happens”.

      Reply

  7. “That’s right. Just one percent of rapes in India make it to the police. ” The article you link to mentions a report published in the Lancet. Here is the full report published in the Lancet:

    http://download.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140673614604359.pdf?id=jaaJrOB0PjqEA9Qm7f5Au

    Some observations:

    1. The Lancet report talks about “sexual violence”, NOT rape.

    2. The report is NOT a peer reviewed scholarly article published in the Lancet. It is merely a “correspondence”, which means its basically a letter to the editor. The academic value of such a letter is ZERO.

    I think you should do due diligence before making claims that are factually wrong.

    Reply

  8. hey, just wanted to say I totally agree with the premise that rapists wouldn’t lose control if the girls are properly protected, but I feel like you make this claim a lot without the proof to back it up. I think it’s kind of self-evident honestly, but I’d like to see some.

    On a larger level, i’d really like to see an experiment of scantily clad, beautiful ladies walking through dangerous areas with multiple professional and armed bodyguards. I know this would be tough as hell to do without a lot of money (and you’d ideally want to keep it a secret until it happens), but it’d be interesting to see what happens.

    Honestly, I think the whole ‘lost control’ thing is crap in the sense that it’s more like… they ‘let go’ of their control, giving in to their basic interests. But they didn’t HAVE to do that, they made the decision to follow those instincts.

    Reply

    • In reply to tehy

      I’m pretty sure if we look at just about every rape victim, the crime occurred when they were vulnerable. I’d love to hear any story of a guy who jumped an actress on stage. Or “lost control” at a beauty pageant during the swimsuit competition.

      Yeah – they choose to let go. I doubt if we can equate this in any way with loss of control.

      Reply

      • In reply to bhagwad

        Like I said, i totally agree with the premise. And I don’t equate it with loss of control at all. I guess it has some surface similarities which is what gives rise to all this ‘we lost control’ nonsense, along with it being a great excuse.

        Mostly the reason I would love to see this experiment happen is because…well, you always talk about this experiment in such a way that i expect to see one of the words hyperlinked to an article proving this, and it’s just weird to read about you saying “No human would act this way in this scenario specifically” and then not offer up any proof for it, I guess it’s just that I live in America and don’t have much experience with how this stuff plays out, so even though i can rationally accept what you’re saying a part of me says ‘how do you know’ when you get that specific.

        Plus it would be an amazing tool to use, just point to it any time a rapist uses that excuse.

        By the way why don’t these people just suggest that women all carry around pepper spray/chemical mace/etc? That’s a real stop to rape, even carrying mace will the same kind of discouragement and deterrence as “Not dressing provocatively” while letting you dish out an actual consequence if they go ahead with it, pain plus much higher risk of being captured by police. Yes, it’s still a fairly crappy argument, because it means you dictate how women live, and that they feel like they’re living in fear because they have to carry a weapon. But at least it would WORK, you know?

        Reply

      • In reply to teh y

        My company distributed pepper sprays to all the female employees on the eve of women’s day. But yes, I agree that the Government and Police should spread more awareness regarding their availability and usage.

        Anyway how much ever solutions or precautions we come up with, the end point is that the basic mentality of people should change. That is the root problem. Dealing with just the symptoms will have little impact. I know of two molestation attacks on me where a pepper spray wouldn’t have been of any use to me. And I was fully covered on both the occasions (as if that matters)..

        Reply

  9. Great post. As a woman I can relate to this – every day in every second we are trying to prevent ourselves from getting raped. We are already careful. And the sad thing is this already creates so many limitations on us – we can only go out at certain times, to certain places, have weapons in our purse, and ALWAYS be alert, dress “modestly” even though it is 100 degrees, etc.
    The only way we can prevent getting raped is if the rapists decides to have some respect for another human being and not rape!

    Reply

Leave a Comment