Poster blames rape victims, does it?

If society, as a whole, wants to reduce the incidence of rape, there are many ways to go about it and targetting the rapists should have the most beneficial effect.

If you, as an individual, wish to reduce the risk of suffering rape on a night out or date, staying relatively sober and with friends will have a significant effect.

I agree with this.

Individuals might choose to stay relatively sober, family and friends might choose to advise individuals to stay relatively sober and stick together etc. This is about mitigating individual risk.

But as RootsBoster said earlier "A rapist will rape, regardless". Mitigating individual risk doesn't reduce the amount of rape, it simply means the rapist is more likely to rape somebody else.

There is no evidence to suggest that the more women drink overall, the higher the incidents of societal rape.

There is evidence that the less that women drink, the more they dress modestly, there are actually more incidents of societal rape. This is why I mentioned Egypt earlier, it's Egypt and countries like it that provide the evidence.

I'm not suggesting that the negative correlation between between drinking and rape implies causation, I think it's more complicated than that. It's more related to patriarchy. As a society becomes more patriarchal, there will be more sexual assaults.

Cairo was a relatively liberal city 35 years ago, and you would struggle to see a veil there. Now nearly every woman is veiled, and the rates of sexual abuse is so commonplace that many men don't think there is anything wrong in touching up a women in public. Not wearing a veil almost guarantees some sort of sexual abuse. The more women have been told what to wear, the more sexual abuse.

I don't like this campaign because it's society telling women what they should do. It's patriarchal in nature.

 

But as RootsBoster said earlier "A rapist will rape, regardless". Mitigating individual risk doesn't reduce the amount of rape, it simply means the rapist is more likely to rape somebody else.

 

I would have thought that many rapists are opportunists, if the opportunity doesn't present its self then they won't rape anyone, burglary is the same, open windows invite burglars, closed windows put them off, if everyone locked their windows and door there will be less burglaries.

The crime survey that the statistic came from was the subject of criticism, to the point of ridicule, on the More Or Less programme.

 

Basically the survey asked victims of crime, and the criminals, "have you or anybody you have been with had a drink in the last 24 hours?"

 

It's pretty obvious that the results of such a question would be pretty meaningless. Statistically most people will have been drinking one third of the time anything happens.

That being the case I want my NI contribution back.

.

 

Individuals might choose to stay relatively sober, family and friends might choose to advise individuals to stay relatively sober and stick together etc. This is about mitigating individual risk.

 

But as RootsBoster said earlier "A rapist will rape, regardless". Mitigating individual risk doesn't reduce the amount of rape, it simply means the rapist is more likely to rape somebody else.

 

There is no evidence to suggest that the more women drink overall, the higher the incidents of societal rape.

 

There is evidence that the less that women drink, the more they dress modestly, there are actually more incidents of societal rape. This is why I mentioned Egypt earlier, it's Egypt and countries like it that provide the evidence.

 

I'm not suggesting that the negative correlation between between drinking and rape implies causation, I think it's more complicated than that. It's more related to patriarchy. As a society becomes more patriarchal, there will be more sexual assaults.

 

Cairo was a relatively liberal city 35 years ago, and you would struggle to see a veil there. Now nearly every woman is veiled, and the rates of sexual abuse is so commonplace that many men don't think there is anything wrong in touching up a women in public. Not wearing a veil almost guarantees some sort of sexual abuse. The more women have been told what to wear, the more sexual abuse.

 

I don't like this campaign because it's society telling women what they should do. It's patriarchal in nature.

Well thought out and constructed.

Only in the same way that wearing short skirts might remind predators of the easy access they would have to a woman's body. I don't think anyone in their right mind would blame the victim for being raped simply because she wore a short skirt.

Many people not in their right mind have opinions, trying to rationalize with them would be like trying to rationalize with a rapist. Some of those opinions are mostly a result of ignorance, some of those opinions come from the judiciary and those within the establishment with influence. Many blame clothing, make-up, alcohol as a catalyst for rape and a multitude of other actions. Victim blame is more mainstream IMO, although this poster doesn't reinforce it, it does help support and continue the idea of blame..

When you say "could be the case", what other reason do you think the NHS could have made the poster for?

I have no doubt the intentions of the NHS were honourable.

---------- Post added 31-10-2014 at 18:08 ----------

They are in the scenario I presented and two different juries can come to different verdicts.

But they are your scenarios, not reality. Try presenting a scenario based on factual and identical. You're just playing let's pretend.

 

But they are your scenarios, not reality.

Yes they are and I used them to point out the reality that two juries can come to different verdicts even if they was presented with identical cases and identical evidence.

I would have thought that many rapists are opportunists, if the opportunity doesn't present its self then they won't rape anyone, burglary is the same, open windows invite burglars, closed windows put them off, if everyone locked their windows and door there will be less burglaries.

Not necessarily, burglars would take greater risks, since most have a habit to feed.

Not necessarily, burglars would take greater risks, since most have a habit to feed.

Some burglars would take greater risks, since some have a habit to feed.

And some wouldn't burgle anyone if they didn't see open windows and doors.

 

And some wouldn't burgle anyone if they didn't see open windows and doors.

Are you saying there are a subset of burglars who commit burglary simply based on open windows and doors, and if everyone closed their doors those criminals would cease to exist as criminals?

Are you saying there are a subset of burglars who commit burglary simply based on open windows and doors, and if everyone closed their doors those criminals would cease to exist as criminals?

The police say that most most burglars are opportunists, and opportunists only act when there is an opportunity, if there is no opportunity they won't act, hence the reason police advise people to lock their houses, locking them cuts burglaries because opportunist burglars don't get an opportunity.

Nonsense. Most burglaries are carried-out out of sight, which is usually the rear of a property..To look for an open window or door they would have to be committed to burglary first hand before the "opportunity" was handed to them. Most will avoid a front facing open window in preference to a locked window at the rear. You use the word "Police" to dignify and elevate your crappy wordplay.

Shoplifters enter open properties..with all goods on display. Most are repeat offenders, many are organised..they are no more opportunist than I am as someone who doesn't shoplift or burgle., they, like burglars are mostly dedicated and planners. You're using "opportunist" as though it's some form of apologetic medical condition. You probably use the same for rapists and child molesters to affirm and incriminate the victim who "provided" the opportunity. Read up on psychological projection, it may allow you insights into you're own damaged psyche.

Nonsense. Most burglaries are carried-out out of sight, which is usually the rear of a property..To look for an open window or door they would have to be committed to burglary first hand before the "opportunity" was handed to them. Most will avoid a front facing open window in preference to a locked window at the rear. You use the word "Police" to dignify and elevate your crappy wordplay.

 

Shoplifters enter open properties..with all goods on display. Most are repeat offenders, many are organised..they are no more opportunist than I am as someone who doesn't shoplift or burgle., they, like burglars are mostly dedicated and planners. You're using "opportunist" as though it's some form of apologetic medical condition. You probably use the same for rapists and child molesters to affirm and incriminate the victim who "provided" the opportunity. Read up on psychological projection, it may allow you insights into you're own damaged psyche.

So you are saying that the police are wrong.

Most burglars are opportunists. http://www.essex.police.uk/be_safe/burglary.aspx

Most burglaries are committed by opportunist criminals. http://www.humberside.police.uk/staying-safe-at-home/crime-reduction/dwelling-burglary

Most burglars are “opportunists” https://www.cambs.police.uk/crimeprevention/advice/prevention/Home%20Security%20Self%20Assessment.pdf

Nonsense. Most burglaries are carried-out out of sight, which is usually the rear of a property..To look for an open window or door they would have to be committed to burglary first hand before the "opportunity" was handed to them. Most will avoid a front facing open window in preference to a locked window at the rear. You use the word "Police" to dignify and elevate your crappy wordplay.

 

Shoplifters enter open properties..with all goods on display. Most are repeat offenders, many are organised..they are no more opportunist than I am as someone who doesn't shoplift or burgle., they, like burglars are mostly dedicated and planners. You're using "opportunist" as though it's some form of apologetic medical condition. You probably use the same for rapists and child molesters to affirm and incriminate the victim who "provided" the opportunity. Read up on psychological projection, it may allow you insights into you're own damaged psyche.

my bold

Making your argument personal does not make your argument any more valid ron, the fact remains, regardless of any analogies, that drunk females can and do become rape victims to opportunist males ..... the NHS poster seems to be making that point IMHO !

So you are saying that the police are wrong.

No. I'm saying you're a perjurer. You extended what the police may say with what you say, as one.

The police say that most burglars are opportunists,

is not the same as..

The police say that most most burglars are opportunists, and opportunists only act when there is an opportunity.

Which implies without opportunity burglars wouldn't exist.

If you provide a comment by the police stating such dangerous hyperbole as you I'll show you an equally overstated metaphor.

Everyone is an opportunist, not everyone is solely defined as such, unless you define everyone as having opportunist tendencies..