TimS comments on The more privileged lover - Less Wrong

-16 [deleted] 04 March 2013 04:20PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (108)

Comments (108)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: TimS 06 March 2013 04:05:22AM 0 points [-]

When we talk about reducing rape risk in terms of women dressing less sexy, the unstated implication is that men won't be able to resist their sexual urges.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 06 March 2013 04:21:37AM 2 points [-]

wedrifid:

Of course he is perfectly capable of not having sex. I don't think anyone was doubting that (or even saying anything that used that as a background assumption).

Yes. That was yet another instance where you said something as if people needed to hear it, where I had not suggested otherwise in any way, and neither did the OP.

When we talk about reducing rape risk in terms of women dressing less sexy, the unstated implication is that men won't be able to resist their sexual urges.

Who here is part of that "we"? Are you? "We" should imply that you are part of that group. Are you?

That's not my unstated assumption, and I doubt it's an assumption held by anyone here.

Comment author: TimS 06 March 2013 04:38:00AM *  1 point [-]

That's not my unstated assumption, and I doubt it's an assumption held by anyone here.

Then I'm confused by this entire conversation.

Relevant quotes:

Well, wearing attractive clothing might make you, y'know, more attractive, and thus a "better" target for the rapist.

or

my core assertion is that refusing to take into account skirt length, as you put it, is irrational [and thus likely to lead to more rapes]

Comment author: buybuydandavis 06 March 2013 05:20:28AM -1 points [-]

IMO, mugasofer expressed himself poorly to begin with when he said "getting away with it risk", and despite your efforts to make the distinction between that and desirability risk, he continued to treat that phrase as if it meant "getting raped risk".

If you go through his responses, they're consistent with the latter, and not the former, and he states explicitly

No-one here is claiming that dress can absolve the rapist of blame.

and

And my core assertion is that blah blah... Not that rapists are somehow innocent because their victim failed to discourage them. Their choices are their own...

A short skirt doesn't entitle anyone to rape, and he is clear on that. And I don't see anyone even touching on the idea you posed:

unstated implication is that men won't be able to resist their sexual urges.

All I see is the implication that more men won't resist, not that more men won't be able to resist.

Comment author: TimS 06 March 2013 04:36:03PM 2 points [-]

All I see is the implication that more men won't resist, not that more men won't be able to resist.

But men do resist. They risk all the time. The majority of male responses to sexual desire is to resist.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit