FabSwingers.com forum: Heated debate

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

I'm having a heated debate with an American lady who states That it doesn't matter what a woman wears or how she acts it is entirely the guys fault if she gets in a bad situation . My argument is that, while any form of assault is terrible, a lady should take into account that how she acts may have an effect on others and may put herself in danger by instigating certain behaviours. Her argument is sound in a perfect society but unfortunately we all have a reptilian part of our brain that doesn't listen to reason sometimes.

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Unless she's shoving her tits in your face or grabbing your cock, while she's sober, the onus is entirely on you.

I wouldn't lick a man's nipples if he was topless in front of me.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Starting a fight is no comparison to instigating sexual abuse.

It's scary that people think this way.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *innie The MinxWoman
over a year ago

Under the Duvet

"Starting a fight is no comparison to instigating sexual abuse.

It's scary that people think this way. "

Agreed.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago

Hillside desolate

I am entirely in agreement with your friend.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I'm having a heated debate with an American lady who states That it doesn't matter what a woman wears or how she acts it is entirely the guys fault if she gets in a bad situation . My argument is that, while any form of assault is terrible, a lady should take into account that how she acts may have an effect on others and may put herself in danger by instigating certain behaviours. Her argument is sound in a perfect society but unfortunately we all have a reptilian part of our brain that doesn't listen to reason sometimes.

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible."

If she has not done anything illegal than no. You need to be clear under what legal framework are you holding her accountable for his action/behaviour. If she has not broken a law, then to suggest she is to blame is victim blaming, surely?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible."

Is said woman acting aggressively or dressing provocatively ?... very different things which are to be treated differently ..if she's dressing provocatively that doesn't give anyone any right to touch her or make assumptions about her..if said woman is behaving aggressively in public to another person yes she should be accountable for her behaviour... Your statement/question needs to be much more specific before it can be answering subjectively

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's scary that people think this way"

Yes it is!

Of course we should all have a sense of self preservation - but that's not always the case!

Nothing justifies assaulting a woman whether she was naked in front of you or not!

I find it sad ( and scary) that it needs to be pointed out to people that doing anything against anothers will is wrong.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iffaWoman
over a year ago

wherever

Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?"

Absolutely needs clarifying. Even if it’s fisticuffs and she hits first, self-defense is legally defined and is different to free license to fight back.

If he is meaning she’s provocative and he sexually assaults her and indicating she is accountable for that, he is entirely wrong.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible."

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I can't actually believe I just read that

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

"Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?

Absolutely needs clarifying. Even if it’s fisticuffs and she hits first, self-defense is legally defined and is different to free license to fight back.

If he is meaning she’s provocative and he sexually assaults her and indicating she is accountable for that, he is entirely wrong. "

Ok. For clarification, the example used was a female in a bar pouring herself over different guys giving them the come on to get free drinks. Not just provocatively dressed but being overtly sexual to get what she wants. Then being absolved of all blame when someone tries to take it further.

The comparison i was trying to make was displaying overt behaviour to get a reaction then not taking responsibility for causing a reaction which could be disproportionate to what was intended.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's scary that people think this way

Yes it is!

Of course we should all have a sense of self preservation - but that's not always the case!

Nothing justifies assaulting a woman whether she was naked in front of you or not!

I find it sad ( and scary) that it needs to be pointed out to people that doing anything against anothers will is wrong.

Absolutely no way should anyone assault a woman or a man for that matter. But if someone's being a dick and we've all been there they need a strong word and putting in taxi and sent home. After all we are the self preservation society.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Her argument is sound in a perfect society but unfortunately we all have a reptilian part of our brain that doesn't listen to reason sometimes.

I'm trying to think of an interpretation of that sentence that isn't abhorrent. I don't think i can.

I'm not sure which makes me angrier, the suggestion that it's a woman's fault of she's attacked because a man can't help him self. Or the claim all men are like that.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *icecouple561Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

East Sussex

I think we should all take responsibility for our actions, including men who sexually assault women.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?

Absolutely needs clarifying. Even if it’s fisticuffs and she hits first, self-defense is legally defined and is different to free license to fight back.

If he is meaning she’s provocative and he sexually assaults her and indicating she is accountable for that, he is entirely wrong.

The comparison i was trying to make was displaying overt behaviour to get a reaction then not taking responsibility for causing a reaction which could be disproportionate to what was intended."

Clarify “tries to take it further” - if he tries by doing something illegal then he is entirely to blame and to state otherwise *is* victim blaming. If he asks her out etc and she gets pissed off then yeah she’s accountable for the ask, but then again nothing has actually occurred beyond a disagreement.

Which context are you defending?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible."

so if a woman is teasing you and bloke gets aroused then she caused the situation? her fault that the bad situation happened?

oh your heavy petting in bed and you are dying to fuck her but she says no? she aroused you? so she should deal with it?

woman in a swingers club playing with someone else, naked arse waving in the air looks so inviting. you think well shes doing that she should take whats coming?

Bloke waving his arse in the air going down on a woman in the club. think you have a right to stick a cock/dildo/finger up his ass?

well consider this. a blokes arousing me touching me hes teasing me. i reach for my strap on and give it him! but not what he wanted ...... but he was the one teasing me and arousing me. his fault..... right??

Consent is all important no means no and it makes no difference what so ever what happened before that word! NO it stops end of

cant say a woman is a cock tease she had it coming

just not acceptable on any level

take responsibility for your own actions and feelings.

Theres no excuse for 'but she was doing this so i did that'

if a woman walked naked down the street thats her right to. but some have the barbaric notion that naked female is game for everything, she was asking for it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?

Absolutely needs clarifying. Even if it’s fisticuffs and she hits first, self-defense is legally defined and is different to free license to fight back.

If he is meaning she’s provocative and he sexually assaults her and indicating she is accountable for that, he is entirely wrong.

The comparison i was trying to make was displaying overt behaviour to get a reaction then not taking responsibility for causing a reaction which could be disproportionate to what was intended."

So if a woman flirts with me and I buy her a d*unk I should expect sex in return? Amd if she says no it's her fault when I assault her?

Seriously? Do you understand what consent is?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming "

Not victim blaming. Sexual assault is wrong on every level. Just debating... playing devils advocate. I don't claim to be right, just putting forward an argument. Put it on here just to see what everyone thinks. It has also been discussed at work so want to get a different slant on things.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Are you backpedaling, OP?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

"Are you backpedaling, OP?

Nope. Just clarifying

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Are you still backpedaling?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Are you backpedaling, OP?

Nope. Just clarifying"

So you admit your original argument is incorrect if sexual or an assault takes place? If the male commits an illegal act and the female has not.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming

You're not allowed to ask for debate, you will be accused of fuck only knows what as you've seen. Asking any kind of question on the forum means that YOU are some kind of predator.

I think it's a good question - and understand it's just a question.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?

Absolutely needs clarifying. Even if it’s fisticuffs and she hits first, self-defense is legally defined and is different to free license to fight back.

If he is meaning she’s provocative and he sexually assaults her and indicating she is accountable for that, he is entirely wrong.

The comparison i was trying to make was displaying overt behaviour to get a reaction then not taking responsibility for causing a reaction which could be disproportionate to what was intended."

Still not asking for something she didn't want. There's this little thing called consent.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's scary that people think this way

Yes it is!

Of course we should all have a sense of self preservation - but that's not always the case!

Nothing justifies assaulting a woman whether she was naked in front of you or not!

I find it sad ( and scary) that it needs to be pointed out to people that doing anything against anothers will is wrong.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Is the op talking about sexual assault? Or starting fights?

Absolutely needs clarifying. Even if it’s fisticuffs and she hits first, self-defense is legally defined and is different to free license to fight back.

If he is meaning she’s provocative and he sexually assaults her and indicating she is accountable for that, he is entirely wrong.

The comparison i was trying to make was displaying overt behaviour to get a reaction then not taking responsibility for causing a reaction which could be disproportionate to what was intended.

Still not asking for something she didn't want. There's this little thing called consent. "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming

You're not allowed to ask for debate, you will be accused of fuck only knows what as you've seen. Asking any kind of question on the forum means that YOU are some kind of predator.

I think it's a good question - and understand it's just a question. "

Hang on. He’s posed his point of view in the OP and asked for thoughts and they’ve been given. He’s then switched to saying later this was not his thoughts and he was playing devil’s advocate. No one is to blame for taking the wording as written in the first post, and many sought clarification to context. I really wish if people are “debating” they’d state that they are posing a point of view they totally disbelieve if that is the case, othewise they can’t (and nor should others) be miffed or accusatory of anyone reading it as stated.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

See now this is a tough one , and I know I will probably upset the women on here , but these are the facts . In no way am I justifying men’s behaviour when they see the scantily dressed woman behaving in a provocative way , but some will see her as fair game .

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

OP....re read your opening message... now think about it and then admit you're view is wrong.. don't back pedal..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *laytimenowMan
over a year ago

Essex

OP next time you are going to get money from the bank

Try not to get robbed at gunpoint , as the Police will just say , well you are partially responsible.

What a Numbnut you are .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming

I'll be honest when you discuss 2 sides of a discussion, dismiss the other person's viewpoint as "fine in a perfect society", prefix your viewpoint with "my argument is" and defend your argument with "we are all capable of". Non of that sounds like a hypothetical view presented as devil's advocate.

Oh and nor does following up the claim that you are being devils advocate with "I don't claim to ve right".

But if I got that wrong and ive misread your post then sorry. So what is your view

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

You gave your opinion in your OP, so you didn't just pose a question.

Regardless of how some one dresses or acts, if no consent has been given then don't touch.

If consent is given it isn't carte Blanche to do anything you wish to a person just because you think they are being provocative and calling it on.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"See now this is a tough one , and I know I will probably upset the women on here , but these are the facts . In no way am I justifying men’s behaviour when they see the scantily dressed woman behaving in a provocative way , but some will see her as fair game .

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

I don’t disagree with the facts you state, I simply clarify additionally that the female is not accountable for those fellas that do see her as fair game. And if they break the law, they should be held entirely accountable for their having done so.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible.

I don't think a disclaimer that you are in no way victim blaming means that you aren't victim blaming

Oh and nor does following up the claim that you are being devils advocate with "I don't claim to ve right".

But if I got that wrong and ive misread your post then sorry. So what is your view"

That was my understanding of it too.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

but should your wife change her mind about entertaining the idea of sexual contact. she says no???? what then?? what is your answer for that going to be? its not tough at all unless you tell her she deserved it

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

What if she got more attention than you both wanted. What if a group of men thought she was calling on a rough, violent fuck that left her battered and bleeding, and they said she was asking for it by the way she was dressed and acting?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

Just as an aside - there was recently a display in the Centre Communautaire Maritime museum in Brussels that shows clothes similar to the ones that women were wearing when they were sexually assaulted (forums wont let me use the R-word) entitled "What were you wearing", that shows that the assumption that clothing plays a part in these assaults is incorrect.

The fault is always with the perpetrator, no matter what the victim is wearing, no matter if she is giving him the come-on. No means no, and importantly, an inability to give consent (d*unkenness for example) also means no.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

A very good point .

I would be extremely upset .

I’m glad that’s never happened ...

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?"

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

I do see your point

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Just as an aside - there was recently a display in the Centre Communautaire Maritime museum in Brussels that shows clothes similar to the ones that women were wearing when they were sexually assaulted (forums wont let me use the R-word) entitled "What were you wearing", that shows that the assumption that clothing plays a part in these assaults is incorrect.

And I think on a public forum it so important to clearly state and educate dubious and incorrect “debates” such as these. These posts are available to read long after the devil’s advocate has gone.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

Absolutely right .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ...."

The hypothetical female in the OP isn't looking to be sexually assaulted either.

You could equally make the "it's a compulsion" argument about people who like to mug people. It doesn't mean it's the victims fault.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

If she's a proper.. I mean real slut and throw in her being a thundering c u next Tuesday as well.. is it even 1% OK??

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iffaWoman
over a year ago

wherever

be a good girl, don’t wear revealing clothes, don’t talk to strange boys or any boys at all, don’t go out in public without a chaperone, don’t drink, don’t have fun, don’t embrace your sexuality. Then you won’t get assaulted because humans can’t be held responsible for what they do you must have done something to deserve it

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ....

The hypothetical female in the OP isn't looking to be sexually assaulted either.

You could equally make the "it's a compulsion" argument about people who like to mug people. It doesn't mean it's the victims fault. "

The point I was making was simple .

Both myself and my wife like the attention she gets when she dresses in this way and acts in a provocative way .

She isn’t looking to be assaulted .

I didn’t say it was a compulsion , I said it was the way some men behave when confronted by this , and that we enjoy the attention .

To liken this to being mugged because one looks minted and that it’s the person with a few quids fault is nonsensical .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *xycpl699Couple
over a year ago

kilmarnock

"Are you backpedaling, OP?

"
certainly sounds that way to me. hollie

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ....

The hypothetical female in the OP isn't looking to be sexually assaulted either.

You could equally make the "it's a compulsion" argument about people who like to mug people. It doesn't mean it's the victims fault.

The point I was making was simple .

Both myself and my wife like the attention she gets when she dresses in this way and acts in a provocative way .

She isn’t looking to be assaulted .

I didn’t say it was a compulsion , I said it was the way some men behave when confronted by this , and that we enjoy the attention .

To liken this to being mugged because one looks minted and that it’s the person with a few quids fault is nonsensical ."

It's quite a good analogy - lots of people enjoy dressing in their nicest and most expensive clothes and maybe also driving a flash car. They like to be noticed, like showing off.

They also enjoy the way that some people behave when confronted with this.

ergo....

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *laytimenowMan
over a year ago

Essex

If I went and riled someone up in a pub and he twats me, surely I should be held at least in part accountable for starting the right even if I didn't throw the first punch.

What does everyone else think?

**note, I am in no way victim blaming, merely pointing out that you cannot go around doing as you please and not expect consequences-however terrible."

Jyoti Singh Pandey,

___________________

I suppose she was to blame for what happened was she ?

You are a sorry excuse of a Man if you feel women are to blame .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ....

The hypothetical female in the OP isn't looking to be sexually assaulted either.

You could equally make the "it's a compulsion" argument about people who like to mug people. It doesn't mean it's the victims fault.

The point I was making was simple .

Both myself and my wife like the attention she gets when she dresses in this way and acts in a provocative way .

She isn’t looking to be assaulted .

I didn’t say it was a compulsion , I said it was the way some men behave when confronted by this , and that we enjoy the attention .

To liken this to being mugged because one looks minted and that it’s the person with a few quids fault is nonsensical .

It's quite a good analogy - lots of people enjoy dressing in their nicest and most expensive clothes and maybe also driving a flash car. They like to be noticed, like showing off.

They also enjoy the way that some people behave when confronted with this.

ergo...."

To be fair , now I look at it I can see it is .

But the reaction they seek is much the same as the one we seek ... admiration , and respect .

Not a beating , or an assault .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ....

The hypothetical female in the OP isn't looking to be sexually assaulted either.

You could equally make the "it's a compulsion" argument about people who like to mug people. It doesn't mean it's the victims fault.

The point I was making was simple .

Both myself and my wife like the attention she gets when she dresses in this way and acts in a provocative way .

She isn’t looking to be assaulted .

I didn’t say it was a compulsion , I said it was the way some men behave when confronted by this , and that we enjoy the attention .

To liken this to being mugged because one looks minted and that it’s the person with a few quids fault is nonsensical .

It's quite a good analogy - lots of people enjoy dressing in their nicest and most expensive clothes and maybe also driving a flash car. They like to be noticed, like showing off.

They also enjoy the way that some people behave when confronted with this.

ergo....

To be fair , now I look at it I can see it is .

But the reaction they seek is much the same as the one we seek ... admiration , and respect .

Not a beating , or an assault ."

That is exactly my point.

Blaming women for acting suggestively or dressing provocatively when a violent crime has been committed upon them is wrong.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"The point I was making was simple."

It wasn’t just simple. It was simply wrong.

"She isn’t looking to be assaulted"

Neither is the woman in the hypothetical situation described in the OP. There is no difference.

"To liken this to being mugged because one looks minted and that it’s the person with a few quids fault is nonsensical ."

Wrong. It makes perfect sense. They are nothing blaming a victim for having a crime committed against them because of the way they looked or behaved.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

I have to agree to some extent - two wrongs don't make a right. Yes I agree the onus is on men to ensure consent, but that doesn't mean I think dressing and acting over-provocatively is right.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have to agree to some extent - two wrongs don't make a right. Yes I agree the onus is on men to ensure consent, but that doesn't mean I think dressing and acting over-provocatively is right. "

Frisky, it’s so important to distinguish between your subjective dislike of behaviour that is legal and an illegal act (assault) and not conflate the two. Failing to do so perpetuates people thinking there’s a grey area in terms of legal accountability. There is not.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *imiUKMan
over a year ago

Hereford

I have to agree to some extent - two wrongs don't make a right. Yes I agree the onus is on men to ensure consent, but that doesn't mean I think dressing and acting over-provocatively is right. "

Why is it wrong?

See my analogy above - do you also think that dressing in expensive clothes "isn't right"?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

If a female acting suggestively and overtly sexually towards a d*unk male to get free drinks and then he grabs her arse can she honestly say that while she was not to blame for the man's action she played a proactive part in the sequence of events that lead to his action?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Some women dress in a sexual way to get the attention of men.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

What the fuck are you on, OP? Buying a lassie a drink does not give you the right to sexually assault her.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

Yes she did.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

I have to agree to some extent - two wrongs don't make a right. Yes I agree the onus is on men to ensure consent, but that doesn't mean I think dressing and acting over-provocatively is right.

I think there are plenty of people doing that. I think it's also important to accept that not all behaviour is wise.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

If she has done nothing illegal and he buys her drinks then that is his foolishness. If he grabs her arse against her consent then that is assault, and she is not accountable for his action. Her intent was to get a free drink not to get assaulted. Seriously, why is this so hard?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

Despite the fact that society has moved on since the Benny Hill type of humour in the seventies , there are still loads of fellas who think like this .

In a way , I’m glad as when my wife goes out on the pull , dressing very scantily - stockings , no bra , low top , she always succeeds in getting the kind of attention we love .

If you go out looking as though you have a few bob, some criminals will see you as fair game and mug you. Were you asking for it?

That’s a bit different , as I’m not hoping for someone to rob me ....

The hypothetical female in the OP isn't looking to be sexually assaulted either.

You could equally make the "it's a compulsion" argument about people who like to mug people. It doesn't mean it's the victims fault.

The point I was making was simple .

Both myself and my wife like the attention she gets when she dresses in this way and acts in a provocative way .

She isn’t looking to be assaulted .

I didn’t say it was a compulsion , I said it was the way some men behave when confronted by this , and that we enjoy the attention .

To liken this to being mugged because one looks minted and that it’s the person with a few quids fault is nonsensical .

It's quite a good analogy - lots of people enjoy dressing in their nicest and most expensive clothes and maybe also driving a flash car. They like to be noticed, like showing off.

They also enjoy the way that some people behave when confronted with this.

ergo....

To be fair , now I look at it I can see it is .

But the reaction they seek is much the same as the one we seek ... admiration , and respect .

Not a beating , or an assault .

That is exactly my point.

Blaming women for acting suggestively or dressing provocatively when a violent crime has been committed upon them is wrong. "

I agree , and I’m not blaming women at all .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Some women dress in a sexual way to get the attention of men. "

And there’s nothing wrong with that.

It never ever ever means that they are legally accountable for someone assaulting them though.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *loswingersCouple
over a year ago

Gloucester

"Some women dress in a sexual way to get the attention of men. "

Absolutely

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

Yes she did. "

But is not to blame. Period. Of course she played a proactive part, like the bar manager did by opening the establishment that night and the guy’s mum did by giving birth to him. But not to blame.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Some women dress in a sexual way to get the attention of men.

And there’s nothing wrong with that.

It never ever ever means that they are legally accountable for someone assaulting them though."

Where did I say they were accountable for being assaulted?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

It isn't. But her actions were aimed at illiciting a primal response from a d*unken individual whose inhibitions were lowered. Is it her foolishness thinking her actions should receive no reactions?

I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

Yes. A d*unk man will not be functioning mentally as he would sober.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have to agree to some extent - two wrongs don't make a right. Yes I agree the onus is on men to ensure consent, but that doesn't mean I think dressing and acting over-provocatively is right.

I think there are plenty of people doing that. I think it's also important to accept that not all behaviour is wise. "

Wisdom. Wisdom to not be free because of the poor choices and inability for others to follow the law and understand consent. Yes, whilst we have a society that is so unable to grasp it - then I agree we have to live in wisdom. Or repression, might be another term that fits.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

It isn't. But her actions were aimed at illiciting a primal response from a d*unken individual whose inhibitions were lowered. Is it her foolishness thinking her actions should receive no reactions?

I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation."

D*unk men can't be trusted to keep their hands to themselves. Sober men can't be trusted to keep their hands off a d*unk woman.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

Yes. A d*unk man will not be functioning mentally as he would sober. "

That is his defense for the mitigation of his crime, not a blame shift to her though.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Some women dress in a sexual way to get the attention of men.

And there’s nothing wrong with that.

It never ever ever means that they are legally accountable for someone assaulting them though.

Where did I say they were accountable for being assaulted?

Where did I say you did?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

I have to agree to some extent - two wrongs don't make a right. Yes I agree the onus is on men to ensure consent, but that doesn't mean I think dressing and acting over-provocatively is right.

Why is it wrong?

See my analogy above - do you also think that dressing in expensive clothes "isn't right"?"

If I got all blinged up and covered in jewellery I'd be a bloody idiot to go wandering around in areas where mugging was rife, yea. Does that mean I condone mugging? Nope.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

It isn't. But her actions were aimed at illiciting a primal response from a d*unken individual whose inhibitions were lowered. Is it her foolishness thinking her actions should receive no reactions?

I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation."

Yes she did.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

Yes. A d*unk man will not be functioning mentally as he would sober.

That is his defense for the mitigation of his crime, not a blame shift to her though. "

Indeed

And "I was d*unk" aint really gonna stand up in court

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Interesting to see how this debate differs from the one taking place here at work. And no-nobody is saying anything along the lines of 'she deserves it' or anything remotely along those lines

Another hypothetical example.

It isn't. But her actions were aimed at illiciting a primal response from a d*unken individual whose inhibitions were lowered. Is it her foolishness thinking her actions should receive no reactions?

I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation."

I was debating the legality. It hasn’t until this moment been a debate specifying clearly that you wanted to discuss morality not legality. Hence why I’ve clarified my comments all along in the context of legality. And I think in a topic such as this it’s essential to be clear.

Morals are subjective. There are a myriad of ways it could be discussed. Legality is not.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

The way I look at responsibility isn't black and white.

For example the man or women is 100% responsible.

I think each person has a certain amount of responsibility depending on the specific circumstances and situation.

I also think if people understand the difference between positive and negative rights then they would be able to look at situations from different perspectives.

Black and white, good and bad, yes and no thinking is normally were debate ends.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation."

Ethically, morally, whatever way you want to frame it; there is zero transferrance of any amount of blame. Period.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

Can i add something to this which happened to me in 1975. I sometimes took a near neighbours daughter who at that time was nearly 19 to the Top Rank in Reading on a Saturday night. I drove there and back as her parents wanted, so no drink for me. I will say the female was very good looking and had very good figure. She also new it. She would chat flirt with guys and get them to buy drinks.She dressed in short skirts etc as per that time. This night her friend who i also took came and asked me to help her get the friend back as she thought there may be a problem. When i saw her she was on the dance floor with a guy. There was a slow dance on and they were very close, his hands on her arse. She was not objecting. I waited until dance finished and they went to the bar area. Myself and her friend said to her we would be going soon. The guy basically told me to fuck off. I tried to explain i was taking her home as arranged. Then the guy swung for me and hit me. Luckily i moved but he caught my face.It was i say lucky for me, there were doormen near and restrained the guy. We left and i saw her later that afternoon , telling her she was really out of order. Her words were she flirted etc to get free drinks.I would like to ask who is at fault . ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

Question. So taking the sexual side of it away, if someone exhibited specific behaviour to illicit a negative response from another individual and that person then displayed that negative behaviour which wasn't wanted by the instigator how is blame apportioned.

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Can i add something to this which happened to me in 1975. I sometimes took a near neighbours daughter who at that time was nearly 19 to the Top Rank in Reading on a Saturday night. I drove there and back as her parents wanted, so no drink for me. I will say the female was very good looking and had very good figure. She also new it. She would chat flirt with guys and get them to buy drinks.She dressed in short skirts etc as per that time. This night her friend who i also took came and asked me to help her get the friend back as she thought there may be a problem. When i saw her she was on the dance floor with a guy. There was a slow dance on and they were very close, his hands on her arse. She was not objecting. I waited until dance finished and they went to the bar area. Myself and her friend said to her we would be going soon. The guy basically told me to fuck off. I tried to explain i was taking her home as arranged. Then the guy swung for me and hit me. Luckily i moved but he caught my face.It was i say lucky for me, there were doormen near and restrained the guy. We left and i saw her later that afternoon , telling her she was really out of order. Her words were she flirted etc to get free drinks.I would like to ask who is at fault . ?"

The man who assaulted you.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago

Hillside desolate

The guy who hit you. Who do you think is at fault?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

[Removed by poster at 25/04/18 22:51:17]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

Seen loads of fights start like that..

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Question. So taking the sexual side of it away, if someone exhibited specific behaviour to illicit a negative response from another individual and that person then displayed that negative behaviour which wasn't wanted by the instigator how is blame apportioned.

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?"

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

This is like saying intended (and consented) for physical touch and then rescinded after the touch the consent - if I compare back to a sexual context - in that scenario then no illegal act took place as you’re saying consent was given.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

Your original is that the did X behaviour to get Y but ended up with Z which they hadn’t wanted.

My point is if Z is illegal and X and Y are not, then perpetrator of Z is at fault.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *iSTARessWoman
over a year ago

London

For fuck sake. Consent is EVERYTHING!

Always

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?"

This is all dependent on the negative behaviour. If it's shouting and calling names that is not asking to be beat up.

It can't be compared to sexual behaviour because the outcome is different.

Getting a punch in the face isn't the same as being sexually assaulted.

If someone punched you you want to hit them back. If someone sexually assaulted you you wouldn't want to sexually assault them back.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?"

Because she’s not done anything illegal. Why is that a problem to understand? All of the context can be used to mitigate his defense when charged and tried for assault but it doesn’t make her responsible.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

Your original is that the did X behaviour to get Y but ended up with Z which they hadn’t wanted.

My point is if Z is illegal and X and Y are not, then perpetrator of Z is at fault. "

But could the perpetrator of X be able to say that they had no part in the outcome Z?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

This is a messy topic. No one has the right to do whatever they like to another human being. However i do have issues with the courts. If someone is murdered its stated publicaly joe bloggs is being tried for the murder of mr smith. If an allegation of the r word happens then only one name appears publically whether that person is guilty or innocent. Its wrong as is any assault on a male or female. The world dangerous. May we all live in peace & harmony

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

Your original is that the did X behaviour to get Y but ended up with Z which they hadn’t wanted.

My point is if Z is illegal and X and Y are not, then perpetrator of Z is at fault.

But could the perpetrator of X be able to say that they had no part in the outcome Z?"

I’ve already answered.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

This in part is what i was trying to point out. Some on here think the female had no fault in my post. Yet she totally admits to flirting and more to get drinks even if it causes problems.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Seen loads of fights start like that..

I have seen loads of fights start in similar situations but women are never ever responsible for their behaviour.

Also consent isn't as simple as saying yes or no consent could mean lots of different things depending on the situation.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?"

So, she flirted to get free drinks. A man, who she was happy to have feel her bum, felt her bum. What is she to blame for at this point?

It’s hard to tell from your story, but did she want you to step in? Need you to? Neither circumstance puts any blame in her court, just curious.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?

Because she’s not done anything illegal. Why is that a problem to understand? "

I thought this debate was about the moral, not the legal?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

"For fuck sake. Consent is EVERYTHING!

Always

Can you tell the rest of the world that one please?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"However i do have issues with the courts. If someone is murdered its stated publicaly joe bloggs is being tried for the murder of mr smith. If an allegation of the r word happens then only one name appears publically whether that person is guilty or innocent."

What problem do you think is being created here?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *SAchickWoman
over a year ago

Hillside desolate

"This in part is what i was trying to point out. Some on here think the female had no fault in my post. Yet she totally admits to flirting and more to get drinks even if it causes problems. "

She didn't have any fault. How could she know the guy was going to hit you? He's responsible for his own actions.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ilthyStrumpetCouple
over a year ago

Trowbridge

I haven't read the whole thread, but based on your OP, you absolutely ARE victim blaming!

I agree with your friend.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This is a messy topic. No one has the right to do whatever they like to another human being. However i do have issues with the courts. If someone is murdered its stated publicaly joe bloggs is being tried for the murder of mr smith. If an allegation of the r word happens then only one name appears publically whether that person is guilty or innocent. Its wrong as is any assault on a male or female. The world dangerous. May we all live in peace & harmony"

I don’t know off the top of my head the veracity of your statement, just to be clear - and assuming what you’re saying is that the accused alone is named pre-during trial of charge of r*Pe, and not the alleged victim, might this only be different due to the fact the victim is still alive, in comparison to a murder victim. Although I do have issue with trial by media in any situation, and feel safeguarding to allow for due process should be better, and take the point that an accused may be found not guilty.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

The reason being, she already knew that she would not be going home with him etc. At that time her parents would be waiting up for her and to see me drop her off.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"This in part is what i was trying to point out. Some on here think the female had no fault in my post. Yet she totally admits to flirting and more to get drinks even if it causes problems. "

She’s totally to blame for her behaviour, but not at all to blame for someone else’s behaviour and their taking action because of it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"The reason being, she already knew that she would not be going home with him etc. At that time her parents would be waiting up for her and to see me drop her off. "

So? Consenting to him touching her bum isn’t saying she’s going home with him? Why is this so hard to grasp?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also consent isn't as simple as saying yes or no consent could mean lots of different things depending on the situation. "

Please elaborate specifically. When is consent not meaning consent depending on the situation?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

How about I rephrase to 'and the response was of a greater magnitude than what was expected'

The initial action is deliberate. Putting all legality aside does person A have any responsibility for inciting the reaction of person B? Even if the reaction is disproportionate they still incited that action.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?

Because she’s not done anything illegal. Why is that a problem to understand?

I thought this debate was about the moral, not the legal? "

I’ve been clear I’m talking legally through the thread. The only clarification of a moral query was OP a while down the thread. The quoted scenario has not necessarily been clarified by its poster, I’ve continued to answer legally as I made my point earlier that morally it’s always subjective depending on your moral framework.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

Any person who gets non-consensual activities made to them from others is 100% not responsible for the cause of this due to their clothing. It is solely the perpetrators fault and victim blaming must stop.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?

Because she’s not done anything illegal. Why is that a problem to understand?

I thought this debate was about the moral, not the legal? "

There's a difference between legal and lawful.

People should have a good enough understanding of human behaviour to be able to predict what reactions their behaviour will illicit in the person they are interacting with.

Some people have no idea how to interact in a civilised way.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"The reason being, she already knew that she would not be going home with him etc. At that time her parents would be waiting up for her and to see me drop her off. "

Good lord. Re-read that back.

Cockteasing is not illegal. And does not entitle anyone to anything.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

How about I rephrase to 'and the response was of a greater magnitude than what was expected'

I need specific context to answer it from my own moral framework if not allowed to answer legally - and the point in answering it from a moral perspective is that it’s subjective and hence there is no one answer as everyone may subscribe to different standards. So it’s a moot question apart from polling, polling doesn’t exact a correct or incorrect resolution though.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also consent isn't as simple as saying yes or no consent could mean lots of different things depending on the situation.

Please elaborate specifically. When is consent not meaning consent depending on the situation?"

I can't be specific with out a specific situation and even then different people would agree or disagree if consent had been given.

There must be tons of legal cases that rest on wether consent was given or not.

The same way there are tones of contracts law cases based on offer and acceptance.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?

Because she’s not done anything illegal. Why is that a problem to understand?

I thought this debate was about the moral, not the legal?

There's a difference between legal and lawful."

Technically, yes, but not one that’s got anything to do with anything you’ve quoted, or anything in this thread.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"yes the ones who say the guy who hit me. Why is there no blame for the female doing what she knows could cause a big problem ?

Because she’s not done anything illegal. Why is that a problem to understand?

I thought this debate was about the moral, not the legal?

There's a difference between legal and lawful.

People should have a good enough understanding of human behaviour to be able to predict what reactions their behaviour will illicit in the person they are interacting with.

Some people have no idea how to interact in a civilised way. "

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

Now you have said yes legal and morally. The thing is with most legal things, there is a legal argument and if in court , will depend on who puts up the best "argument ". Morally is a very different question.People of both sexes have to take responsibilities for their actions even when drinking

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"The thing is with most legal things, there is a legal argument and if in court , will depend on who puts up the best "argument "."

Written like someone with no real (or, at best, horrifically limited) experience of court.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?"

To be fair, it’s not been phrased correctly to get the debate that would be a debate going. And my concern would always be that failure to set the information clearly allows room for misinterpretation and fuzziness of consent etc and thus that needs correcting.

The legal v lawful conversation is far more interesting.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?"

I'm not making excuses for anyone. It's a genuine debate here. No one is victim blaming or saying any female deserves any kind of abuse/rape. The main debate is if they are deliberately putting themselves in a potentially hazardous situation through their own actions. I was just throwing this out to the forum community. I'm just playing devils advocate a little bit.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also consent isn't as simple as saying yes or no consent could mean lots of different things depending on the situation.

Please elaborate specifically. When is consent not meaning consent depending on the situation?

I can't be specific with out a specific situation and even then different people would agree or disagree if consent had been given.

There must be tons of legal cases that rest on wether consent was given or not.

The same way there are tones of contracts law cases based on offer and acceptance.

Agreed, I thought you had a specific in this scenario.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"Now you have said yes legal and morally. The thing is with most legal things, there is a legal argument and if in court , will depend on who puts up the best "argument ". Morally is a very different question.People of both sexes have to take responsibilities for their actions even when drinking"

Please review the difference between legal and lawful.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

That's based on the assumption that all men will abuse the situation.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

To be fair, it took a while for your post to be mounded to a debate from the original post - which was not phrased as such, you have to admit that!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

To be fair, it took a while for your post to be mounded to a debate from the original post - which was not phrased as such, you have to admit that!

*moulded

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

Maybe I am missunderstanding but saying that a victim of sexual assault was in someway complacient in the crime is exactly what victim blaming is?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

very difficult subject.

My view is maybe contradictory... No man should ever raise a han to a lady - full stop (physical differences aside... its just unspoken etc). However, I've heard the phrase "behave like a man, treated like a man"

Whilst no condoning, or agreeing, Is their any particular reason that excuses ones behaviour on the basis of gender??

Re: sexual consent etc... regardless of alcohol consumption (yes, apologies for the assumption) I don't think any male should be unable to distinguish between consent and not.

the most extreme penalty should apply.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *irthandgirth OP Man
over a year ago

Camberley occasionally doncaster

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

Maybe I am missunderstanding but saying that a victim of sexual assault was in someway complacient in the crime is exactly what victim blaming is?

I never attached blame. The question is if their deliberate behaviour contributed to the unwanted outcome?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"very difficult subject.

Whilst no condoning, or agreeing, Is their any particular reason that excuses ones behaviour on the basis of gender??

Re: sexual consent etc... regardless of alcohol consumption (yes, apologies for the assumption) I don't think any male should be unable to distinguish between consent and not.

the most extreme penalty should apply.

I don’t argue a gender difference. If a male was acting provocatively and a female assaulted him then she is liable for her crime.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

And why do people react differently when it is in a sexual context?

Your scenario doesn’t make sense. You say they exhibit behaviour to illicit a negative response and then say they did not want the negative response. This isn’t currently comparable.

How about I rephrase to 'and the response was of a greater magnitude than what was expected'

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"very difficult subject.

Whilst no condoning, or agreeing, Is their any particular reason that excuses ones behaviour on the basis of gender??

Re: sexual consent etc... regardless of alcohol consumption (yes, apologies for the assumption) I don't think any male should be unable to distinguish between consent and not.

the most extreme penalty should apply.

I don’t argue a gender difference. If a male was acting provocatively and a female assaulted him then she is liable for her crime. "

have to agree.

I do find it hard to understand how consent is misunderstood tho. Not something anyone should misunderstand or misinterpret - BUT I'me not judging

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation."

The problem with this attitude is... where is the line drawn? When I was 'violated' some years ago, I instigated the situation. I kissed the guy, I touched his cock and aroused him - does that mean it was acceptable for him to ignore my 'No' and sexually assault me?

Because a shockingly high number of people have told me that, yes, I was partly responsible for this man making the decision to violate me.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

Maybe I am missunderstanding but saying that a victim of sexual assault was in someway complacient in the crime is exactly what victim blaming is?

I never attached blame. The question is if their deliberate behaviour contributed to the unwanted outcome? "

“a lady should take into account that how she acts may have an effect on others and may put herself in danger by instigating certain behaviours” - take into account (and be held accountable?), may instigate (and thus cause the happening of) - sorry OP you actually did imply the attachment of blame.

You were not clear if that was not your intent.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

Maybe I am missunderstanding but saying that a victim of sexual assault was in someway complacient in the crime is exactly what victim blaming is?

I never attached blame. The question is if their deliberate behaviour contributed to the unwanted outcome? "

Your asking if they contributed, which would imply a degree of fault on their part if you feel that they did.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

we have now gone to legal arguments. to the lay man, i have attended court as

being on jury service and witness. The barrister for the defence who questioned me tried to make out i was lying. yet he actually agreed at one point that i was correct. This sometimes is where our legal system can fail. The legal agruments against statements etc from people and facts or what happened

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"How the actual fuck is this still even a discussion....

Seriously, I dont understand.

Just ask yourself would you force yourself on a women because of how she was dressed or acted? I am assuming no. Then who are you making excuses for?

Maybe I am missunderstanding but saying that a victim of sexual assault was in someway complacient in the crime is exactly what victim blaming is?

I never attached blame. The question is if their deliberate behaviour contributed to the unwanted outcome?

You were not clear if that was not your intent. "

Agree Blanche

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I'm not debating the legality of it. How about the morality of it. She instigated the situation.

Because a shockingly high number of people have told me that, yes, I was partly responsible for this man making the decision to violate me. "

Exactly. The posters on this thread failing to clearly demonstrate understanding of consent is disturbing.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

such a horrible subject that can be easily misconstrued or miscommunicated...

Im in the no excuses camp. Men (as in this instance) as perpetrator should always be more perceptive..

I certainly would

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"The barrister for the defence who questioned me tried to make out i was lying. yet he actually agreed at one point that i was correct. This sometimes is where our legal system can fail. The legal agruments against statements etc from people and facts or what happened"

It’s hard to gauge with such a vague story, but it is perfectly reasonable to assert that someone is lying about some things, but right about others. The second half of your post is so vague, it’s not even clear what you’re trying to say. Making legal arguments about witness accounts is arguably the strength of our legal system.

What are you actually trying to say?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

In the scenarios discussed on here, my opinion I believe is clearly in line with legal responsibility and culpability. A fluffer of a situation (whatever their intent) that leads to someone else making a decision to break the law is not culpable for the other person’s action. The context could be used to mitigate for the perpetrators defense in a court of law but doesn’t mean the other person was responsible.

The more interesting legal conundrums for me are cases such as that of Lakeith Smith in the US. Sentenced for 30yrs for 16yr old A’Donte Washington’s murder in 2015 in Alabama, even though no one disputes it was a police officer’s bullet that killed him. Lakeith Smith is not even accused of having possessed a weapon. Under the state’s accomplice law, co-defendants can be guilty of murder if a death occurs when they are in the midst of committing a felony (it was a burglary). Now that’s interesting.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *abulously curiousCouple
over a year ago

manchester

What "behaviour " would be a green light to abuse? Wow.. just wow

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *ubiousOatcakeMan
over a year ago

Aberdeenshire

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable."

Culpability is responsibility.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

blanche you are either a lawyer, barrister or solicitor to quote the legal parts. to most on here who are not legal experts. as i have said, what happened to me , yes guy was to blame. MY argument is the fact she knew what she what was doing and had done several times before. So must take some responsibility for her actions even if indirect. To say she has no responsibility is no excuse .

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Culpability is responsibility."

Kind of - I'm differentiating.

If there's a better word for what I mean then feel free lol!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable."

Agreed. The difficulty being I could hold a wildly different moral code to the next person for what I believe to be rights and wrongs and thus there’s no real answer just a polling of opinion. Which moral framework do we use and who sets it, it’s kinda why the legal framework is there. It’s open to challenge and new precedent being set, of course. However in the case of “she flirted or fluffed for drinks and got sexually assaulted” original scenario I’m pretty clear that my moral code says he is entirely responsible for his decision to assault.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"blanche you are either a lawyer, barrister or solicitor to quote the legal parts. to most on here who are not legal experts. as i have said, what happened to me , yes guy was to blame. MY argument is the fact she knew what she what was doing and had done several times before. So must take some responsibility for her actions even if indirect. To say she has no responsibility is no excuse ."

I disagree.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

you did not answer the question . Are you legally qualified to quote what you say ?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"you did not answer the question . Are you legally qualified to quote what you say ?"

Sorry, I didn’t see a question asked. You made a statement.

Am I legally qualified to say what I say? It’s my opinion, so I feel qualified to say it.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable."

i have a question for you.

if you were dressed as you are in your main photo add that you are primal.

meet a guy having fun getting heated, rough and passionate. but he goes to do something you dont want at that time and you say stop or no. he doesnt stop he carries on.

do you think you are partly to blame when he didnt stop because of the way youre dressed and the way you behave during sexual fun?? or is he to blame for not stopping ?

this is what youre saying that the victim is partially responsible for the actions of another due to the fact theyve initiated or imitated sexual fun. im sure you will blame the guy for not stopping. you will think why didnt he stop, why didnt he listen??

i wouldnt wish it on anyone, but trust me if you ever experience it, it will open your eyes wide

worst still you try get police believe you when youre primal.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

you still have not answered my question are you qualified or not ? I am not asking who etc you work for, at least state you are a solicitor, lawyer or barrister

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

i have a question for you.

if you were dressed as you are in your main photo add that you are primal.

meet a guy having fun getting heated, rough and passionate. but he goes to do something you dont want at that time and you say stop or no. he doesnt stop he carries on.

do you think you are partly to blame when he didnt stop because of the way youre dressed and the way you behave during sexual fun?? or is he to blame for not stopping ?

i wouldnt wish it on anyone, but trust me if you ever experience it, it will open your eyes wide

worst still you try get police believe you when youre primal. "

Nods. I have to agree, that morally I feel similarly.

The thing is that people are entitled to have different moral standards and codes.

Legally, as your scenario is a breach of consent, it’s not up for debate.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"you still have not answered my question are you qualified or not ? I am not asking who etc you work for, at least state you are a solicitor, lawyer or barrister "

I have not answered you, you’re correct.

Do I legally have to answer you?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I can't actually believe I just read that

^^^ THIS ^^^^

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I can only really say in 'some' defence, regarding the weinstein case...one australian on the radio,said he invited her to his room...appears they had a drink and then he asked to massage her...she stated she felt uncomfortable doing this and said something like "you naughty boy" and told him she'd massage him.

I sat in disbelief listening..it seemed like a joke to her

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??"

I think you’ll find legal definitions of how the latter could be prosecuted so it’s not comparable to the scenarios debated earlier in the thread where the alleged inciting behaviours were not illegal or potentially illegal. So no, do the latter and I’d look to prosecute you as best I could too.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"I can only really say in 'some' defence, regarding the weinstein case...one australian on the radio,said he invited her to his room...appears they had a drink and then he asked to massage her...she stated she felt uncomfortable doing this and said something like "you naughty boy" and told him she'd massage him.

I sat in disbelief listening..it seemed like a joke to her"

I don’t quite follow what point you’re making, sorry.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

i have a question for you.

if you were dressed as you are in your main photo add that you are primal.

meet a guy having fun getting heated, rough and passionate. but he goes to do something you dont want at that time and you say stop or no. he doesnt stop he carries on.

do you think you are partly to blame when he didnt stop because of the way youre dressed and the way you behave during sexual fun?? or is he to blame for not stopping ?

. "

That is not the scenario I am discussing - telling someone to stop is not the same as inviting attention you did not want in the first place.

If I went out dressed like that, yes, I would certainly consider myself responsible for inviting sexual attention.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

A lone Palace supporter goes into a bar full of Arsenal supporters when his team have just thrashed them and calls them all a bunch of cocksucking motherfuckers......does he bear any responsibility for the outcome?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

i have a question for you.

if you were dressed as you are in your main photo add that you are primal.

meet a guy having fun getting heated, rough and passionate. but he goes to do something you dont want at that time and you say stop or no. he doesnt stop he carries on.

do you think you are partly to blame when he didnt stop because of the way youre dressed and the way you behave during sexual fun?? or is he to blame for not stopping ?

That is not the scenario I am discussing - telling someone to stop is not the same as inviting attention you did not want in the first place.

If I went out dressed like that, yes, I would certainly consider myself responsible for inviting sexual attention. "

So by that point, would a naked cyclist at one of these types of charity naked events be responsible if she stopped to change a tyre and was away from the group and someone random assaulted her because she was naked and thus “responsible” for inviting sexual attention - it’s ludicrous... I have to strongly disagree that even if someone is cavorting for sexual attention and even if they touch or start to have sex, the minute consent is clearly withdrawn and the other person doesn’t stop they have committed a crime - whatever someone is wearing they are not responsible for someone overstepping consent. It’s such an issue to blur this.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry."

Fair enough. It’s simple, I don’t agree with your morals.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *JB1954Man
over a year ago

Reading

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry."

This is what i have been pointing out in my posts. The female knew exactly what she was doing to get drinks . Even allowing guys to feel her up. Yet she had no intention of going home with them. She knew i was there to take her home and also trouble from her parents even if she was of legal age. Even at that time. So she is not responsible for her actions even if someone else gets hurt?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"A lone Palace supporter goes into a bar full of Arsenal supporters when his team have just thrashed them and calls them all a bunch of cocksucking motherfuckers......does he bear any responsibility for the outcome?"

What’s the outcome? They laugh, they murder him? What?

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry.

She’s responsible for her actions, yes. Not yours or the guy that hit you.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

i have a question for you.

if you were dressed as you are in your main photo add that you are primal.

meet a guy having fun getting heated, rough and passionate. but he goes to do something you dont want at that time and you say stop or no. he doesnt stop he carries on.

do you think you are partly to blame when he didnt stop because of the way youre dressed and the way you behave during sexual fun?? or is he to blame for not stopping ?

That is not the scenario I am discussing - telling someone to stop is not the same as inviting attention you did not want in the first place.

If I went out dressed like that, yes, I would certainly consider myself responsible for inviting sexual attention. "

so your responsible for sexual assault because you dressed seductively, titillating and enticing, because youve flashed some skin? that gives anyone the right to touch and assault you? make it sound like dressing that way and teasing youre only dressed that way giving everyone consent to assault you.

no matter how anyone dresses or behaves gives no one the right unless its expressed.

otherwise god help any woman who is deemed flirty or dressing how ever that arouses another.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

“unfortunately we all have a reptilian part of our brain that doesn't listen to reason sometimes.”

Rapiest comment ever.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"“unfortunately we all have a reptilian part of our brain that doesn't listen to reason sometimes.”

Rapiest comment ever. "

Isn’t it just?!

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry.

Fair enough. It’s simple, I don’t agree with your morals.

And I don't agree with your refusal to accept responsibility for a choice to deliberately provoke.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *Gloryhole.West.LondonMan
over a year ago

West London

First, "an American lady"? OK, "British ladies", would you say that's a condescending way of referring to you? Then, what about the dumbwits who don't clock she's just doing it for the free drinks? Why is there an unspoken sense of male entitlement throughout this thread? Why do we need to even suggest it might be remotely OK in the guise of a debate around morality, legality, lawfulness? Big crimes against humanity with the loss of millions of lives have started under the same (pseudo)intellectual pretence, framing human beings on the basis of their gender, ethnic origin or sexual preference. Ladies and gents, ladies or gents, we are all entitled to equal human rights. We're not stripped of them by our actions.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

What’s the outcome? They laugh, they murder him? What?"

That is not my question, the outcome is irrelevant. The question is do we bear any responsibility when we set out to provoke? I say yes we do.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

"In a moral sense, responsibility is not totally an either/or situation - both can be responsible even if only one is deemed culpable.

Hmmm, that's narrowing it down to one very specific thing - 'decision to assault'.

Thinking out loud (and I am getting tired now at this time of night) are we saying that the provocateur is never to blame?

I provoke a man sexually, I'm only teasing, he misunderstands that, crosses the line of consent - he is to blame.

I go into a pub in Brixton, loudly shout a tirade of racial hatred using the N word - and I should bear no responsibility for the consequences??

I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry.

Fair enough. It’s simple, I don’t agree with your morals.

And I don't agree with your refusal to accept responsibility for a choice to deliberately provoke."

fair enough. Can I just clarify, do you mean that in the opening post scenario where the woman was flirting to try and get free drinks but was assaulted....? I’m intrigued if you hold her responsible in that example (the premise of the thread) - and it’s fine if you do, I’m just asking so I’m clear.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"If I went out dressed like that, yes, I would certainly consider myself responsible for inviting sexual attention. "

That is not what I am saying no - there is a line between 'unwanted sexual attention' and 'assault'. The provocateur bears some responsibility for the first but not the second.

Just because it is wrong for a man to assault me does not make it right for me to provoke him.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 26/04/18 01:15:49]

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

" That is not my question, the outcome is irrelevant. The question is do we bear any responsibility when we set out to provoke? I say yes we do. "

I hear you. I just feel strongly that it’s important when having “grey” area debates such as moral responsibility to distinguish the outcome in terms of legality and context to help me distinguish how I answer purely because I think the oversimplification is unhelpful and misleading.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"I'm not interested in the legal argument, only the moral, sorry.

Fair enough. It’s simple, I don’t agree with your morals.

And I don't agree with your refusal to accept responsibility for a choice to deliberately provoke."

I think I answered in the post above. I do not see responsibility as lying 100% at one door or the other.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Thanks Frisky, for clarifying.

Interesting discussion.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By *risky_MareWoman
over a year ago

...Up on the Downs

"" That is not my question, the outcome is irrelevant. The question is do we bear any responsibility when we set out to provoke? I say yes we do. "

Lol, and I think over simplifying complex moral issues into 'black/white' 'his fault/her fault' legalese is unhelpful and misleading!

We are doomed to disagree on many such questions, we hold very different world views.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

To be fair I was simplifying through the thread as was presenting the legal argument.

A debate on ethics is different and I’ve referenced that a number of times, I’ve not really provided my ethical debate point of view fully, but that’s fine.

(closed, thread got too big)

Reply privately