When "Common Sense" Equals Advocating for Rapists
Billvon said:
Uh - OK. Do that if you like.
Okay, the first thing we need to clear up is a morbid joke; every once in a while it gets to the point if this sort of Infinite Prevention Advocacy is intended to increase the advocate's chances of getting away with forcing himself on a woman.
And this is why:
Use good judgment in what parties to attend. What to wear. Who to date. What to drink and how much. What to tell people they talk to. How to let people know when they are worried about someone's attention. How to escape risky situations. How to defend themselves.
You need to
stop ignoring reality.
Review
#145 above. Not only are you presuming women utterly stupid, but you're trying to offer them prevention tips that address the
clear minority of rapes in society.
And I ask a question in that post, one you can answer:
What common sense advice does one offer someone deciding whether or not to undertake an endeavor with a better than one in three chance of resulting in rape?
And that's just intimate partnership. Add in relatives and acquaintances, and you're talking about a risk factor exceeding seventy-five percent.
Yet by
your definition, this reality has nothing to do with common sense, which is where your prevention advocacy slips into vicious, ignorant myth.
As I discussed with
Bells, just yesterday, your definition of common sense translates to "adherence to unfounded myth" instead of "obvious course according to reliable outcomes".
Common sense, according to reliable outcomes: With a 78% risk of a detrimental outcome, one might well stop and consider whether such an endeavor is undertaking.
Common sense, according to Billvon: A 78% risk of detrimental outcome is irrelevant to common sense, which says, instead, that women are somehow responsible for other people's behavior because of something they wore.
And that's where the morbid joke takes a twist.
Look, most of us aren't going to go out and commit the kinds of rapes you're telling women how to prevent. But the resistance shown by so many men to considering the sorts of rapes they
might commit against their wives and girlfriends? Yeah, there comes a point when such determined distraction and deception becomes suggestive.
So tell us, Billvon, please:
How can you advocate "common sense" while pretending that the biggest risks women face in this context are irrelevant?
If you really think "common sense" should not only focus solely on aberrant risks, but also specifically discount the most consistent risks in an assessment, it's not really "common sense" you're advocating. Conventional wisdom, maybe. Like the conventional wisdom that Eric Cantor was safe in his primary? Or that we would find a significant WMD program in Iraq? Or perhaps the
conventional wisdom in Arkansas, as expressed by a sheriff countenancing the murder of a woman by a known abusive partner: "The question you're asking me is what's wrong with the courts. I'm asking you, what's wrong with the women?"
Or as a state legislator from Arkansas recalled of a push to track protection order violators:
"There were so many cases, over and over, where law enforcement just didn't believe the victim. I had prosecutors tell me that women made this stuff up. It's unfortunately still an environment of—I'm a husband and I think I have the right to beat my wife, if that's what I feel like I need to do. That goes with marital privileges."
Common sense, or conventional wisdom?
And yet, you are so
determined to keep pushing this misogynistic excrement, despite evidence showing what's wrong with it.
Here is a good list excerpted from the RadicalRedHead website, from a woman who has been raped and now advocates rape prevention:
=====
1) He invades your space: A potential rapist often invades your space-visually, verbally and physically. The night Brian Hoffman raped me, I noticed he constantly stared at me the entire night. He was visually invading my space.
2) He seems distracted: He may ignore your wishes by acting distracted. Trust me, his hearing is just fine. For example, You tell him youre ready to call it a night but he orders you another drink instead, and then says, "Oh, I thought you said you wanted another." Dont be fooled by this.
3) He wants you alone: He can be subtle about isolating you. If youre getting bad vibes, stick with your group, and make sure you have your own ride home.
4) He wants you wasted: Alcohol and drugs are a factor in around 90% of assaults. Of course this doesn't mean that you are at fault. However, they make you vulnerable and provide an excuse for his behavior.
Doesn't even begin to touch on 78% of rapes.
Furthermore, consider point #1. In a stand-your-ground state, should the RadicalRedHead stand her ground and shoot a man to death for visually invading her space? If that's really what this needs to come to, I'll start a fund to help women buy guns and bullets. But I don't think it needs to go that far. Indeed, if men weren't statistically so dangerous, a woman would have no reason to stand her ground against a guy visually invading her space.
Really, have you thought your arguments through?
And point #4, that a woman might become "vulnerable and provide an excuse for his behavior" is beyond merely suggestive.
There is no excuse, and one cannot be so provided.
In the end, you appear to just be putting the whole thing back onto women.
Stop advocating for rapists, Billvon.
