Rape + the way that you dress. Does it have an effect? - The Accused (1988) Discussion

[–] Cinderling 14 years ago

Clothes do not indicate whether you will be raped or not. I was in a jumper and baggy trousers when I was. No high skirts, low tops. There is no correlation.

reply

[–] veryfloraly 14 years ago

Its really about how the person carries themself too like if they are more passive then agressive, if you try to rape a agressive person who's not gonna back down your gonna have a problem, but if its a meek quite person a rapist would most likely get away with it.

Why fo' i cant sit up here n look at you ass?
N wonda what choo got up yo sleeve?

reply

[–] englisher101 13 years ago

Clothes do not indicate whether you will be raped or not. I was in a jumper and baggy trousers when I was. No high skirts, low tops. There is no correlation.

Just want to make it clear that I don't think anyone is saying that dressing a certain way makes anyone liable to be raped. The liability is solely on the part of the criminal who committed the foul act. It doesn't matter if a supermodel is walking around naked late in the night.

But clothing, looks, etc. all have to factor in. There has to be a correlation. If we're talking about the less common street cases, a man is not going to rape some random woman with no sexual interest in her. If he was purely interested in violence, there are plenty of ways to torture and humiliate people without having to get hard and stick it in. Sexual interest is increased when a woman wears make-up, sexy clothes, etc. but there are a lot of factors in what would make such a man target a certain woman and how she looks has to be a major one in a lot of cases.

Sure there have to be some really insane individuals who get aroused just by targeting a certain victim or just the act in itself (these few instances might be the ones where it's all about power but it's still about sadism and sex). There are even people who rob homeless people just to make them suffer (not because they needed money).

A guy wearing a T-shirt and jeans might get mugged in a bad neighborhood. That happens plenty of times but that doesn't mean that the way you dress has no correlation to being mugged. But a guy wearing an expensive suit and a $20,000 watch is far more likely to be mugged: he'd be lucky walking around late in the night without being mugged. Does that make him liable? No, not one bit. But this is just common sense. There is absolutely a correlation here even though it has nothing to do with liability.

Ultimately all this chatter about rape being purely about power and never about sex is about as rational as saying that mugging people is purely about inflicting suffering on others and never about being desperate for money.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] englisher101 13 years ago

Why do people like you need to believe that rape is just about sex?

No, it's not just about sex. The ignorance come from those who think it's just about power and never about sex. Anyone who believes it's just one absolute or the other and not some combination of both would most likely be overlooking a lot.

I state only the sexual factors because there are so many ignorant feminists out there stating that rape is always about power and never about sexuality. It just contradicts everything that every man with a functioning libido would understand. There's a reason why fathers tell their daughters not to wear skimpy clothes or stay out late in the night with questionable men. They're not worried about psychopaths who might want to have sex with their daughters against their will because they simply wish to humiliate and subjugate them, they're worried about horny young guys who might get too frisky (possibly against the daughter's will).

Most dangerous, I think, is that perpetuating this myth that rape is never about sex and only about violence and power might suggest to a young man that if he's sexually interested in a girl and she says no, as long as he's not trying to humiliate or harm her in any way, it might not be such a bad thing (maybe not full-blown rape since he just wanted to have sex with her). Yeah, that's a bit absurd, but one could actually take this suggestion that rape is only about power to that kind of degree.

reply

[–] CCRider01 13 years ago

englisher101 I just wanted to say that in a sea of political correctness. I find your comments refreshing. I agree that rape is not ALL about power and control as our feminist indoctrinated media would have you believe, it also has a sexual aspect to it. It is not all or nothing, ie back or white, few things in life are.

I fully agree that no matter what the women is wearing, it NEVER gives any man the right to rape her, heck for the majority of men that falls into the duh obvious category. The question is, should a female put herself in a position that "increases" the likelihood of being assaulted or raped? Using the rape scene in this movie as example, it was not just a question of what she wore, but a whole slew of poor judgement on her part. Being alone and dancing provocatively in the presence of a group of strange drunken men, kissing a man she just met, her body language and demeanor, all were factors - not to warrant the rape (absolutely nothing does), but they were controllable factors on her part that lead to it.

I would compare what Jodie Fosters character did, to a rich man going into a scuzzy bar alone, getting drunk and flashing his money to a bunch of likewise drunk men in a back room, and who's character is unknown. If he got mugged and robbed it would not be warranted but most people (including women) would say he was extremely stupid and somewhat brought it on himself. They certainly would not cut him nearly as much slack as they would a women flashing her sexuality in a similar setting.

There are many thing in life that I would love to do, and could do (it is my right and I am physically able), but I do not, and why not? After considering my options, I come to the conclusion that there are risks involved that I am not willing to take.

Realizing that pretty much every action you take in life has a reaction, is a large part of being an adult, as is understanding that just because you can does not mean you should. Yes, in a perfect world we should all be able to dress and act how we want, and rape should be a thing of the past, but you could make first time rape punishable by death, and it would still exist.

reply

[–] jeneamazing 12 years ago

First of all, RAPE IS HARM. So your argument about "a young man that if he's sexually interested in a girl and she says no, as long as he's not trying to humiliate or harm her in any way, it might not be such a bad thing"

The ideal that somehow the way a woman dresses will provoke rape is flawed. What that means is that given the right circumstances (particularly, the way of dress), ANY man will rape. That means YOU, with your powerful, incomprehensible, uncontrollable, male libido will somehow come upon the woman who is dressed in such a way that you could just not help yourself. Probably every woman who has visited this thread can account a story of some young frisky, horny guy who tried to have sex with her but DID NOT RAPE her, no matter what state of dress she happened to be in at the time. (and sadly, there's a good amount of women who've visited this board and been subject to rape and it wouldn't have mattered if they were wearing their Sunday best or their birthday suits).

The sexual interest that most rapists find in their targets is opportunity and vulnerability. The girl that looks most unlikely to fight back, the girl that looks most unable to fight back, the girl who looks most alone, the girl who looks most drunk, the girl who looks most lonely... NOT the girl whos knickers are easiest to remove.

There must be something else that provokes a rapist to rape. It's not feminists who support the idea that rape is about power, it's psychiatrists. A naked woman could prance around in a room full of men, (as many models do) and if there is no man INCLINED to rape, she'll be fine. A NUN, in full habit, could walk around speaking the gospel in a room full of rapists and given the opportunity, she will, within all reason be a victim of rape. Of course, there is no right to rape, that is an oxymoron. It can't be rape if there is a some right to do the act. If rape were just about sex, or just about sex and a little bit about power, there would be many prostitutes who would be willing to fulfill the needs of these men. The act of rape is about power, dominance and violence.

What really disturbs me about this movie that no one seems to mention, is her "friend" that leaves her completely intoxicated in a room full of strange men, who may or may not be inclined to RAPE. I don't know any women who would do such a thing and I'm sorry for women who do.

Life is pain, Princess. Anyone who says different is selling something.

reply

[–] englisher101 12 years ago

It's not feminists who support the idea that rape is about power, it's psychiatrists.

No, it's feminists. If this was a matter of true scientific objectivity, we would equally see the less politically correct side like Felson and Tedeschi's research on the matter, the fact that most rapists would prefer consensual sex to rape if possible, etc. The original research that supports that claim that most cases of rape come down to dominance and sadism rather than sexual gratification was not so black and white until feminists took it and turned it into a black and white act of complete misogyny and domination, completely overlooking those grey areas that suggest that sexual gratification is at least a factor in many of these cases if not the prevalent one.

My interest is in getting to objective truths. I am not dismissing the claim that misogyny and dominance play a significant role, I am dismissing the claim that they are the only factor to consider. My interests lie in the grey areas which I think are far too often overlooked.

There must be something else that provokes a rapist to rape

If it's something else other than simple sexual attraction, then yes, I'd agree. If we dismiss sexual attraction all together in all cases, then I would have to disagree.

The ideal that somehow the way a woman dresses will provoke rape is flawed.

I would say that a woman dressed in the most skimpy clothing in a questionable bar is no more of a provocation than a rich man wearing a $20,000 watch walking the ghettos of South Central. He absolutely holds no responsibility if anything bad happens to him, but it's certainly not surprising if something bad did happen to him.

A naked woman could prance around in a room full of men, (as many models do) and if there is no man INCLINED to rape, she'll be fine.

So if a naked woman were to come across an island full of only men who were completely peaceful with no inclination or dream of rape or hurting anyone, you think she's perfectly safe when none of the men have even seen a woman for years because they never had any sort of prior inclination to rape? Of course in a civil society, men repress their urges. But if you put a beautiful naked woman in a room full of healthy young men, they will be fantasizing about having sex with her.

*** The difference between a rapist and a normal man in this scenario is the ability to resist acting on such urges. When a normal young man sees a beautiful naked woman, the desire is often going to be the same regardless of his actions. If you do not dispute that the desire is there, then I don't see how you could claim that the man is incapable of going to extremes to get what he wants if he does not have some kind of ulterior motive of power, sadism, or domination. If there's anything we know about the bad side of mankind, it's that men can go to extremes to get what they want, and it should be obvious from this scenario that all the men in the room will generally want the same thing: to have sex with this beautiful naked girl. ***

Hopefully the men will go about this gently, to protect the girl and be nice to her and get her sexual consent through affection and kindness and interest, but the door is going to shut for many of these guys who seek the normal channels. Good people are those who don't resort to crime or violence to get what they want, but as long as the desire is strong enough, there are going to be some who will resort to these measures.

The reason I must dispute this claim that rape is all about power and domination and humiliation aside from the research suggesting the contrary is that, as a guy with a functioning libido, I know these sexual urges and desires first hand, and I know the dark nature of men and how some will resort to anything to get what they want. The only reason I'm not going out and raping beautiful women is for the same reason that I'm not stealing cars or robbing banks.

reply

[–] lornamd-1 12 years ago

You make some good points Englisher but surely for most men a being repulsed by their touch would be a major turnoff and they would therefore the desire to rape is not in most men. Isn't that the difference between wanting rape and wanting sex?

Also its worth keeping in mind that research into rapists - Lisak, Koss, McWhorter etc - shows that rapists tend to target people based on vulnerability not sexual provocativeness hence why disabled women are more likely to be sexually abused than non-disabled women (I don' know the statistics but I'm guessing thats true of disabled males as well). Dressing revealingly actually makes someone no more likely to be raped.

reply

[–] englisher101 12 years ago

[...]surely for most men a being repulsed by their touch would be a major turnoff and they would therefore the desire to rape is not in most men.

If we go by the testimonies of the rapists in Felson and Tedeschi's research, they apparently would have preferred consensual sex to rape.

I think we have a very different view on the nature of man. I see him as a savage creature. Take away society, civilization, human intimacy, and a healthy dose of sexual outlets (girlfriends, pornography, etc), and I don't think he's going to see the girl not welcoming his touch as being such a significant turn off.

I don't see such a clear distinction between "wanting rape" and "wanting sex". While this would be exaggerated, I'd use the analogy of "wanting food" vs. "wanting to steal food". I can very clearly see a case based on just the savage nature of man where wanting sex leads to rape. I am not claiming that this is the majority of cases, especially not in a civilized society where crime of this sort is usually only being committed by the sickest of sociopaths.

As for rapists seeking out vulnerable victims, I think that also has a fairly intuitive explanation. Any criminal seeks out easy targets. A mugger may have a tendency to target women instead of men. That does not mean he's driven by misogyny.

As an example, I've seen documentaries and testimonies of Catholic priests who raped children and there's at least ample evidence to suggest that not all of them are even pedophiles. They merely sought the easiest and most convenient targets to satisfy their sexual urges. The ones who raped boys weren't necessarily even homosexual, they only chose the boys because that was the easy target. But this is another case where it's quite clear to me that there is a deeply sexual urge behind this criminal activity. While the testimonies I saw were admittedly a very small sample, these priests weren't necessarily dreaming about causing harm to another human being so much as yearning sexual intimacy, forbidden by their vows.

My interest once again is not to claim that rape is all about sex. It's merely to claim that there are at least cases where sexual urges are a driving force behind it, not necessarily an urge to cause harm, humiliation, or dominate another human being. If we want to stop to the act, I think we need to better understand it, and claiming it to be a pure act of violence and humiliation and domination and not at all about sex I think overlooks too many grey areas. For example, if we want to study rape cases in the Catholic church and we're only thinking about sadism, I think we might miss the point completely. I believe we'll get much further understanding the issue by looking at it from a point of sexual depravity caused by a vow of chastity.

reply

[–] lornamd-1 12 years ago

Sure but just cause rapists would prefer consensual sex that doesn't mean the desire to rape is in all or most men. Stealing food vs eating food and sex vs rape doesn't really work as a comparison cause food is inanimate & the sensation of eating something is the same regardless of how you got it whereas sex with a consenting person is clearly going to be very different from raping someone.

I don't think its true to say rape is never about sex either (though I would never claim to be an expert). I don't think it even makes sense to say "rapes about power not sex" cause there is an undeniable connection between power & sex. I just think most people wouldn't get find an unwilling person a turn on.

reply

[–] englisher101 12 years ago

The stealing food vs. eating food analogy is certainly an exaggerated distinction, but there is certainly a sex drive that is primitive and savage as part of a man's programming. If driven to extreme conditions and with a lack of a gentle, kind soul to keep such savage desires in check, I fear for women in a society that does not keep such primitive urges in check.

I just think most people wouldn't get find an unwilling person a turn on.

At the risk of sounding like a sociopath (I need other men to step up here), I don't think most men care so much about consent as being part of a turn on. Most men are turned on through visual stimuli more than anything else. Some resort to fetishes, some get turned on by sadism, and some masochism, but most are aroused more than anything just by the female form itself along with the desire to touch. Just look at the number of men who have frequented strip clubs. They know it's not consensual and they know that love has no part of it. They even have to pay for it, yet it's perfectly fine to be able to touch and see a naked woman to turn them on. A lot of strip club goers are even married, so they're turning away from the consensual love of their wife in favor of seeing and touching a woman who cares little about them.

The main reason this subject fascinates me is because I feel like there's a great deal of misunderstanding about male libido. It's a lot more perverted than I think most women make it out to be. When a man wants to have sex with his partner, it's not with thoughts of consent and kindness and love. Flattery and kindness and romance does not make a man hard. It's far more savage thoughts about seeing the woman naked and touching her flesh and penetrating her that makes him want to have sex. Of course many men also derive pleasure from seeing the woman's satisfaction and love for him, but that's also something that is usually a characteristic of an older, more experienced man, not a sexually deprived young man who may end up going to extremes just to get an idea of what he's been missing.

I should also provide some context. I realize that most of the research suggests that rape has more to do with violence and domination than sexual gratification. Nevertheless, I'm surrounded by rape every day where I currently live and work: Roppongi, Tokyo. Every morning around 5am when clubs close and the morning train begins, we see young, attractive girls so drunk that they can't even stand on their own. It's also one of the most common sites for rape in Japan with notoriety for men slipping rape drugs into women's drinks.

I even have a friend who was raped. She did not even realize it until she got pregnant. Now for this to happen, I cannot see it as being compatible with the belief that rape is never about sexual gratification. If it was about violence, power, dominance, misogyny, she would have been hurt and made aware of what was happening. The sick guy that did this to her was most likely a clubgoer himself looking to get laid only to end up going empty-handed until he found my friend so drunk that she was barely conscious.

I see numerous girls this way outside almost every morning and a number of guys offering to take them to their home or to a hotel, and the ones that gain the most attention are the most attractive ones. Unattractive ones tend to go ignored. Here potential rape victims are not few in number; they're all over the place due to the legal tolerance for public drunkenness. While I cannot assume all of the men who approach drunk women in this way while offering to take them somewhere intend to take advantage of these girls, there have to be a good number with bad intentions considering what we hear all the time about Roppongi. I do not believe these men to be sadists who dream about rape. I believe they are just horny young men who wanted to get laid and found an easy way to do it by taking advantage of a barely conscious girl.

The other case that interests me is the Catholic Church. For an entire organization to have so many rapists and pedophiles implies to me that there's something more going on than the mind of an individual. I don't think Catholicism attracts rapists or produces rapists. I believe it's the vow of chastity that is probably more to blame than anything else. A lot of sexual deviants are people who could not have ordinary sex lives, so they tried to get something resembling one however they could, including criminal ways. Had these priests had the means to have a normal, healthy sex life, I don't think we'd find so many reported cases of rape and pedophilia in the Catholic church.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ADawn07 14 years ago

It doesn't have an affect. Rape is about power, not about sex. So, what the victim is wearing matters not. Rapists may say that as a way to justify it. But, it is a proven psychological fact that rape has nothing to do with attraction or lust. Just the power the rapist feels.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] englisher101 13 years ago

It doesn't have an affect. Rape is about power, not about sex. So, what the victim is wearing matters not. Rapists may say that as a way to justify it. But, it is a proven psychological fact that rape has nothing to do with attraction or lust. Just the power the rapist feels.

You never see men carrying on about how rape is all about power and never about sex. Know why? Because that myth is propagated by women: the victims of the crime. They have their one-sided view of the situation without any idea of how men think and feel and establish their own ideas about it, but any man who simply knows what it is like to be a man knows that it's not just about power and humiliation and sometimes it's not about those things at all (just purely desire).

Women don't understand male libido one bit. They can't even imagine it. The ones who think they do and have an active sex drive of their own still don't understand. We can see that by studying women who went through a sex change. The ones that received testosterone treatments have often said that they knew men were horny, but they had no idea! Some of them become so preoccupied with sex that they can't think of anything else (even worse than the average man because they never knew what it was like to cope with those urges before).

To take sex drive out of the equation is really putting a one-sided spin on the situation, misunderstanding it to the point where there's no hope for a solution. A solution can only come about by truly understanding the cause of the problem.

For instance, why are there so many reports of children being raped by priests in the Catholic church? Is it because the priests wanted to assert their power over their alter boys and wanted to force them into submission, or could it be that they were just so sex-deprived as a result of their vow of chastity that it drove them to find the closest, easiest victims to release them of their sexual urges? It's quite clearly the latter case, and a lot even seem to feel guilty about it (they would have preferred it to be a victimless, consensual act). We have to understand sexuality better to understand rape: repression usually leads to the worst kinds of desperate individuals.

That's not to say that all cases of rape were simply caused as a result of sexual desire, but to say that it's only about power and humiliation and never about desire is so inherently wrong that it's downright absurd and even offensive because sexual repression is definitely a contributor to rape as we can see in prison, the Catholic church, and other places where sexual depravity is clearly the primary contributing factor leading to rape.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] mfentruck 13 years ago

Why is it that no one EVER makes the reverse argument? I keep seeing what is so obviously shifting part of the responsibility towards the victim. How about this: If you are in a situation where someone is provoking you or teasing you sexually like one of the men at the bar and it got to the point where you couldn't control yourself then it is YOUR responsibility to remove yourself from that situation.

It really bothers me that no one has argued that the men at the bar should have just walked away. It's insulting to rape victims as well as men and perpetuates an idea that men are irrational and aren't able to control their own bodies (even though the majority of men aren't rapists).

reply

[–] Noirdame79 13 years ago

I love how so many of these "arguments" try to shift the blame onto the victim. Like the rapists themselves weren't responsible for what they did. Did you know that sexual assault is brutal, that threats are often made, that victims are often beaten and in some cases, murdered?

No one deserves to be raped, and no one deserves to get away with rape. Most of these offenders will commit sexual assault crimes again. Most rapist are sexual predators, like pedophiles. I'd love to hear some arguments about how people try to justify children being raped, or elderly people.

Rapists are responsible for their actions. They are not helpless or unable to control their sexual desires. Married men with children commit rape. Do research on rape and you will find there are different kinds of rapists, with different MOs. It's easy to pass judgment when you haven't been in that type of situation yourself. People wonder why rape is underreported when the victim, already terrorized, hurt and brutalized by their experience (if they are lucky enough to survive), fears being attacked again and being judged. Rape shield laws in the US were passed because a victim's sexual history, and what they were wearing when they were assaulted has no bearing on the case at all.

Rape is about domination, control and humiliation. If a man was raped, would you say he deserved it? If a child was raped? Rapes are often committed by someone the victim knows and trusts, including family members.

There's never an open invitation to rape someone. No one has the right to violate anyone else.

reply

[–] novastar_6 13 years ago

Yeah that's what I say, I would LOVE to know how a CHILD dresses so that they ask to be raped, what are they wearing that they deserve that since they obviously MUST be sending out some kind of signal that they want it. Oh they don't do that? Then why do people think the women do? And what signals do male rape victims put out? And how about the elderly. Hey, what about if a nun is raped? Full body habit, where's the revealing part come into that?

reply

[–] leybadana 8 years ago

I love how so many of these "arguments" try to shift the blame onto the victim. Like the rapists themselves weren't responsible for what they did. Did you know that sexual assault is brutal, that threats are often made, that victims are often beaten and in some cases, murdered?

No one deserves to be raped, and no one deserves to get away with rape. Most of these offenders will commit sexual assault crimes again. Most rapist are sexual predators, like pedophiles. I'd love to hear some arguments about how people try to justify children being raped, or elderly people.

Rapists are responsible for their actions. They are not helpless or unable to control their sexual desires. Married men with children commit rape. Do research on rape and you will find there are different kinds of rapists, with different MOs. It's easy to pass judgment when you haven't been in that type of situation yourself. People wonder why rape is underreported when the victim, already terrorized, hurt and brutalized by their experience (if they are lucky enough to survive), fears being attacked again and being judged. Rape shield laws in the US were passed because a victim's sexual history, and what they were wearing when they were assaulted has no bearing on the case at all.

Rape is about domination, control and humiliation. If a man was raped, would you say he deserved it? If a child was raped? Rapes are often committed by someone the victim knows and trusts, including family members.

There's never an open invitation to rape someone. No one has the right to violate anyone else.

you are so correct. i hope others see the light.

"I have never seen a vision, nor learned a secret, that would damn or save my soul"!

reply

[–] geoffrey-jackson 12 years ago

by b73142 (Sun Jul 2 2006 19:24:29)

I'm doing a report on this subject. Would anybody like to give any feedback on this? My opinion on it is no matter what the other person is wearing, that doesn't give the other person a right to take advantage of them. Any thoughts? Thanks in advance.

by perfectdays9 on Sat Aug 25 2012 19:14:52

I think that NOTHING justifies rape. No one asks to be raped, and I would never say that.

However, while I feel rape is about power and control and sexual release, I also think that dressing inappropriately can bring on negative attention from perverted men.

You can be raped wearing a snowsuit and not looking sexual at all, but it's just human nature for men to feel lustful at the sight of a scantly clad woman. Dangle that in front of men that are perverts or psychos, and trouble could arise.

Plus, if a woman is representing herself as sexual and easy by wearing revealing clothing, a sexual predator might interpret that as the woman "asking for it" and might think that since she was dressed that way anyway, that is what she wanted.

I agree with everything you said.

There would be a correlation between dress and willingness. But even all willing women may prefer some men and not others and some places and not others. Women may have intentions but they still have a right to reconsider before committing. Nobody has a right to coerce another into doing something against their will. Some people may be intimidated and submit but feel taken advantage of and want to be heard. Of course there is the other wide of the story. The courts are the place for this. The "sometimes no means a yes" argument is a grey area.

The film was good. I can see how a lot of people are distracted by the sexual aspects. I looked at the broader moral and social picture.

Jody Foster acted well but didn't seem to get the support from the other actors.

7/10 Good.

reply

[–] lornamd-1 12 years ago

http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1109&context=djglp#B139#page=19

According to the DUKE JOURNAL OF GENDER LAW & POLICY

"studies of rapists suggest that victim attire is not a significant factor. Instead, rapists look for signs of passiveness and submissiveness"

reply