qftBlue Herring wrote:
Yeah, her statement wasn't anecdotal at all.
I think you're simply reading into it whatever suits your argument, rather than just taking the statement as intended.Blue Herring wrote:
Yeah, her statement wasn't anecdotal at all.Jaekus wrote:
Maybe, but I think I'd take the word of a criminologist who has studied this extensively over the anecdotal "evidence" being presented in this thread.Blue Herring wrote:
Sorry, but you can't expect people to avoid semantics when the whole fucking argument is about semantics.
Also, that criminologist's logic doesn't follow. Just because some people are into grannies or target specific people they know doesn't mean that an enticing attire won't attract attention from a predator.
Surely she'd have a better reason then "NOT EVERYONE WHO'S RAPED WEARS THAT STUFF" if she'd actually have a reason. Rather, it seems like an issue she feels about personally, since a second later she stated that it's "a common myth that aims to blame the victim" which is utter crap.
I understand the desire to blindly believe anyone who has any perceptive authority because it's easier. But really, it doesn't do anyone any good.
So, if she is right, she can present her data for it professionally instead of a half-assed abduction.
Personally, I can't really understand the desire to blindly believe anyone who has authority. I just think her word carries more weight in this instance.
Also, if you bothered to read the article correctly you would find the quote as being a "huge myth" was actually made by Darshika Selvasivam, the vice-president of the York Federation of Students.
Last edited by Jaekus (2011-05-13 20:47:14)
"I should have known." Dave Grohl
"One of these things is not like the other"burnzz wrote:
"I should have known." Dave Grohl
Great song.
Canadian cops get such a bad rap...
Hm, interesting thought. Care to elaborate?Jaekus wrote:
I think you're simply reading into it whatever suits your argument, rather than just taking the statement as intended.
An instance where she has authority. I don't see what other reason you could have, since her actual words were utter crap.Personally, I can't really understand the desire to blindly believe anyone who has authority. I just think her word carries more weight in this instance.
You're right. I'm terrible with names. My point still stands though, her reason was terrible.Also, if you bothered to read the article correctly you would find the quote as being a "huge myth" was actually made by Darshika Selvasivam, the vice-president of the York Federation of Students.
Reciprocity wrote:
Canadian cops get such a bad rap...
http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q82/ … /kith1.jpg
She was saying linking style of dress to rape is ridiculous, the comment was intended as such. I'm sure she was interviewed and the journalist who wrote the piece thought the quote about women and veils was a nice little sound byte. Of course, we will never know the entirety of the interview but that's how it was presented, or so I read it at any rate.Blue Herring wrote:
Hm, interesting thought. Care to elaborate?Jaekus wrote:
I think you're simply reading into it whatever suits your argument, rather than just taking the statement as intended.
In your opinion.An instance where she has authority. I don't see what other reason you could have, since her actual words were utter crap.Personally, I can't really understand the desire to blindly believe anyone who has authority. I just think her word carries more weight in this instance.
Not really. It's validated several times in the article by different people, like this last part for example:You're right. I'm terrible with names. My point still stands though, her reason was terrible.Also, if you bothered to read the article correctly you would find the quote as being a "huge myth" was actually made by Darshika Selvasivam, the vice-president of the York Federation of Students.
Toronto Police spokeswoman Meaghan Gray said cautioning women on their state of dress is not part of any police training.
“In fact, this is completely contradictory to what officers are taught,” she said. “They are taught that nothing a woman does contributes to a sexual assault.”
Well, it's the only argument anyone is presenting.Jaekus wrote:
She was saying linking style of dress to rape is ridiculous, the comment was intended as such. I'm sure she was interviewed and the journalist who wrote the piece thought the quote about women and veils was a nice little sound byte. Of course, we will never know the entirety of the interview but that's how it was presented, or so I read it at any rate.
It's not my opinion. It's a fallacious argument, that's not my doing, that's reality, unless you're blaming me for Epistemology. If you're going to state that the reasonable isn't true, you better have a reason.Jaekus wrote:
In your opinion.
It doesn't matter how many people say it, if they don't give a fair reason, it has no merit.Jaekus wrote:
Not really. It's validated several times in the article by different people, like this last part for example:Toronto Police spokeswoman Meaghan Gray said cautioning women on their state of dress is not part of any police training.
“In fact, this is completely contradictory to what officers are taught,” she said. “They are taught that nothing a woman does contributes to a sexual assault.”
Last edited by Blue Herring (2011-05-14 00:33:58)
A woman who dresses like a slut and is victimized does not share any of the blame for the assault. But why expose yourself to more risk?
dont ever get in a car again
Tu Stultus Es
this has been pointed out a coupla dozens of times already in this thread by multiple people. and the reply, invariably, was something like this:Stingray24 wrote:
A woman who dresses like a slut and is victimized does not share any of the blame for the assault. But why expose yourself to more risk?
it's time to close the tread.eleven bravo wrote:
dont ever get in a car again
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
Why?Shahter wrote:
it's time to close the tread.
lol, case in point.Jaekus wrote:
Why?Shahter wrote:
it's time to close the tread.
ad nauseamJaekus wrote:
Why?Shahter wrote:
it's time to close the tread.
ad nauseum
Really though, if you don't want to read, don't click the link?
Really though, if you don't want to read, don't click the link?
Last edited by Jaekus (2011-05-15 02:59:54)
Actually, "ea" is correct.Jaekus wrote:
ad nauseum
Ah, I understand now.lowing wrote:
lol, case in point.Jaekus wrote:
Why?Shahter wrote:
it's time to close the tread.