Seeing That Women Can Go Topless Now Do You Suppose A Lot More Rapes Will Happen?

[Poeticus]

Could you find evidence that they were NOT raped?

Namaste,

I couldn't find anything....all I could find was about how women from opposing religious groups were targeted because the perpetrators thought that was the best way of hurting their enemies....since the "honor" of the family rests in the female in South Asian culture and not with the male, it only makes sense that the women were targeted...in fact, the men and boy children were usually burned alive or hacked into pieces...

M.V.

 

[DallasApple]

The rape mentality!

 

[Poeticus]

The rape mentality!

Namaste,

Please witness what my grandmothers and grand-aunts had to go through...

[youtube]jGiTaQ60Je0[/youtube]
Partition The Day India Burned (Full) - YouTube

They were completely innocent yet they were targeted. By the grace of the Gods, my grandfathers and grand-uncles were able to find them and safely carry them back home.

M.V.

 

[Poeticus]

Namaste,

Any thoughts, Mystic?

M.V.

 

[Alceste]

I know you weren't talking to me but I think "reasons" for rape vary.Like I dont' think Catholic priest (sorry) raped little boys for power or dominance" It was purely sexual IMHO..They wanted to get laid.

Pedophiles are an odd phenomenon. They usually sincerely believe that the sexual relationships they are having with children are not abusive - that children are behaving in a sexual manner and desire sexual relationships. The existence of NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) kind of illustrates... something. It's like a deranged philosophical position. They believe if you can manage "seduce" a child with various enticements, the child is consenting and benefits from the encounter. They usually believe that they are in a mutual, loving, consenting sexual relationship with their victims. Kids don't know how to say no or what to say no to, and since pedophiles are heavily invested in perceiving reciprocal enthusiasm, they do not perceive what they do to kids as sexual coercion.

You can get a sense of how that mentality works by looking at the Catholic Church's reactions to the various abuse scandals that have plagued them for the past decade or so. The whole institution seems genuinely perplexed that anyone believes pedophile priests were abusive. At times, they've even claimed that the pedophile priests were the victims of seduction by gay 13 year old boys.

Those who rape sexually mature victims, on the other hand, generally do perceive their behavior as coercive. That's the whole point of it.

I agree, the "reasons" certainly vary, but like any act of violence or coercion, all the "reasons" are bollox. Just don't do it. Simple as that.

 

[Poeticus]

Anyway back to the OP..It's OUR COMMUNITY that is ALREADY SO SCREWED UP ..that I believe if tomorrow every women could and DID go topless???The rape would rise.And sorry A&E I do not think the rise would be equally male victims to females...

And that is SAD! You know we should all be raping each other equally.

Namaste,

In my original posts, I stated that women should wear whatever they want and men should just have to deal with it and control themselves. I am very old fashioned in this sense; women need to be more free, in my opinion. Patriarchy has damaged the notions of "free women" to the extent of subjugation.

In Ancient India, women wore nothing on their torso except necklaces adorned with jewels (as can be seen by the Ajanta and Ellora Cave paintings that represent that time period of the Gupta Empire). Homosexuality was also part of society. The Muslim invaders and then the British did much to curtail these things for they saw them as taboo and against their Abrahamic view of how the world should operate. Such inflated egos they had, eh?

M.V.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Anyway back to the OP..It's OUR COMMUNITY that is ALREADY SO SCREWED UP ..that I believe if tomorrow every women could and DID go topless???The rape would rise.And sorry A&E I do not think the rise would be equally male victims to females...

And that is SAD! You know we should all be raping each other equally.

Oh no, I never said that... I don't think that topless women will incite rape.

 

[Alceste]

Namaste,
This is what I mean:

The best looking women are affected the most during war rape.

All women are affected by the threat / possibility of rape during war. My cousin works with the UN in conflict zones, and ANY female refugee, old or young, fat or thin, tall or short, homely or handsome,is automatically categorized as "at risk".

Certainly, the youngest women are "the most" at risk. The highest likelihood of being raped is between 12 and 18. Beauty is subjective though. One man's perfect rape victim is another man's snaggle-toothed harridan.

Also, why stick to raping the women when you can ALSO rape the men and torment them even more?

I don't think they are unimportant; I just believe that male on male rape is more complex.

That's an incredibly fascinating thing to say. Can you elaborate please? In what way is male on male rape more complex? In what way is male on female rape simpler?

Me, I honestly think it's all very simple. EQUALLY simple. I don't perceive the rape of this, that or the other gender on some other gender as totally different subjects. I think that, broadly speaking, the motive for all violence, everywhere, is basically the same for everyone.

 

[Alceste]

Namaste,

I couldn't find anything....all I could find was about how women from opposing religious groups were targeted because the perpetrators thought that was the best way of hurting their enemies....since the "honor" of the family rests in the female in South Asian culture and not with the male, it only makes sense that the women were targeted...in fact, the men and boy children were usually burned alive or hacked into pieces...

M.V.

Is it not dishonorable for a man to be forcibly sodomized by another man in South Asian culture? Or to be forced to perform fellatio on another man, or a large group of men?

 

[DallasApple]

TRUST me this is INSTINCT I have been "around the block"..If tomorrow I went toppless I am "more likely" to get raped. than if I didn't..I promise you .

And I live like right SMACK in the middle of America.

I also live in a DIVERSE culture because I guess Dallas is "progressive" !

 

[DallasApple]

Oh no, I never said that... I don't think that topless women will incite rape.

Right like women wearing short skirts didn't?

 

[Poeticus]

Namaste,

All women are affected by the threat / possibility of rape during war. My cousin works with the UN in conflict zones, and ANY female refugee, old or young, fat or thin, tall or short, homely or handsome,is automatically categorized as "at risk".

Yes, I agree. During the end of WWII (for example), women between 8 and 80 were raped in Germany by the Soviets as well as in the occupied territories by the Imperial Japanese Army. But, I think you misunderstood my approach. The most beautiful have it the worst because they are persistently raped more than the ones that are not so attractive (geez I sound so shallow don't I? )...

Certainly, the youngest women are "the most" at risk. The highest likelihood of being raped is between 12 and 18. Beauty is subjective though. One man's perfect rape victim is another man's snaggle-toothed harridan.

Yes, but I am pretty sure that the majority of the perpetrators have a common notion of what they find beautiful. Since my approach was about war rape, I repeatedly stressed the fact that women are targeted so often because they are the "honor" of the men that are being fought against. The women are raped in order to demoralize the enemy. Raping the youngest and prettiest females will hit the spot...

Also, why stick to raping the women when you can ALSO rape the men and torment them even more?

Please, explain. Aren't both equally able to get raped with the same ferocity?

That's an incredibly fascinating thing to say. Can you elaborate please? In what way is male on male rape more complex? In what way is male on female rape simpler?

Male on female rape isn't simpler. It is more prevalent. And, male on male rape is very complex to me because it doesn't hit home the idea of dishonoring the enemy as male on female rape does. But, I will clearly state this: many young boys are sodomized in war rape, usually at a similar tenacity as the females are...

Me, I honestly think it's all very simple. EQUALLY simple. I don't perceive the rape of this, that or the other gender on some other gender as totally different subjects. I think that, broadly speaking, the motive for all violence, everywhere, is basically the same for everyone.

And, I never disagreed with this. Yet, we got into a useless argument...

M.V.

 

[Alceste]

TRUST me this is INSTINCT I have been "around the block"..If tomorrow I went toppless I am "more likely" to get raped. than if I didn't..I promise you .

And I live like right SMACK in the middle of America.

I also live in a DIVERSE culture because I guess Dallas is "progressive" !

What if you carry one of these:

Moderator cut: image removed​

Bet you'll be fine!

 

[Poeticus]

Is it not dishonorable for a man to be forcibly sodomized by another man in South Asian culture? Or to be forced to perform fellatio on another man, or a large group of men?

Namaste,

To be honest, engaging in male rape is not seen as such.

But, to settle the matter between you and me: I do not agree with that mentality.

If that didn't make sense, please let me know and I will elaborate.

Again, I repeat, I do not condone such a mindset by some fellow South Asians...

M.V.

 

[Alceste]

M.V.

Yes, but I am pretty sure that the majority of the perpetrators have a common notion of what they find beautiful. Since my approach was about war rape, I repeatedly stressed the fact that women are targeted so often because they are the "honor" of the men that are being fought against. The women are raped in order to demoralize the enemy. Raping the youngest and prettiest females will hit the spot...

Please, explain. Aren't both equally able to get raped with the same ferocity?

No, it is more damaging and destructive to rape the man AND the women than it is to rape only the women he cares about.

To rape only the women says only "ha, you could not protect your daughters and wives". To rape the women AND ALSO rape the men says "HA - you could not protect your women AND you couldn't even protect yourself, AND you're not even a man! You're a homo!"

A man whose female family and friends have been violated can still fantasize about revenge - he can still see himself as a "man" - a protector, a provider, a strong character to carry the prospects of the family into a brighter future.

A man who has NOT ONLY had his female relations violated, but has ALSO been violated himself does not feel like a man any more. He doesn't feel capable of revenge. He doesn't feel capable of providing for or protecting even himself, let alone his family.

On top of that, he will often end up impotent. He will not even be able to make love to his wife. Probably, she has also been violated, but he can't tell her of his own experience. There's a good chance she'll leave him. What kind of man allows himself to be sodomized by a gang of soldiers? What kind of man performs fellatio on a gang of soldiers? What kind of man can't even walk straight or sit on a chair without leaving a blood stain? If he can't protect himself, how can he protect her and her daughters?

Male on female rape isn't simpler. It is more prevalent. And, male on male rape is very complex to me because it doesn't hit home the idea of dishonoring the enemy as male on female rape does.

See above.

But, I will clearly state this: very young boys are sodomized in war rape, usually at a similar tenacity as the females are...

And, I never disagreed with this. Yet, we got into a useless argument...

M.V.

Yep. Pretty much everybody gets raped when there's a war on. Doesn't really matter whether or not they're wearing shirts.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Right like women wearing short skirts didn't?

Well, women cover their entire bodies in some places in the world and they still get raped.

 

[Poeticus]

No, it is more damaging and destructive to rape the man AND the women than it is to rape only the women he cares about.

To rape only the women says only "ha, you could not protect your daughters and wives". To rape the women AND ALSO rape the men says "HA - you could not protect your women AND you couldn't even protect yourself, AND you're not even a man! You're a homo!"

A man whose female family and friends have been violated can still fantasize about revenge - he can still see himself as a "man" - a protector, a provider, a strong character to carry the prospects of the family into a brighter future.

A man who has NOT ONLY had his female relations violated, but has ALSO been violated himself does not feel like a man any more. He doesn't feel capable of revenge. He doesn't feel capable of providing for or protecting even himself, let alone his family.

On top of that, he will often end up impotent. He will not even be able to make love to his wife. Probably, she has also been violated, but he can't tell her of his own experience. There's a good chance she'll leave him. What kind of man allows himself to be sodomized by a gang of soldiers? What kind of man performs fellatio on a gang of soldiers? What kind of man can't even walk straight or sit on a chair without leaving a blood stain? If he can't protect himself, how can he protect her and her daughters?

Namaste,

And, I agree wholeheartedly. It is sad that such a thing occurs. Especially in 2013AD...

But, there is a different side to your explanation above...

South Asian society doesn't see it that way. Thus, male rape in the region isn't conducted in the way by the explicit reasoning you put it. If you were to ask a Marxist Rebel after they have just pillaged a village and raped women in India about if they raped the men, they will simply say: "ew (seriously, I am not joking)...that was not our goal...instead, we just killed them first and then had our way with their women"....

When the Indian Army conducts their "night raids" in Kashmir to root out insurgents, they sometimes force the sons and husbands of the women they rape to watch...same thing goes for the Pakistani Army when they conduct their "night raids" in Pashtun territory...

The mentality in the region isn't about raping the males to destroy the foundations of the opposing enemies so they can't even pleasure their wives...that same type of thinking isn't even found in the Subcontinent...

In fact, any activity that relates to sodomy (of males) is seen as one of the most barbarous things you can do (thanks to the British and their propaganda) that it can't even be conducted in war - it is something very "untouchable" like.....

M.V.

EPIC: So, maybe, in the Congo....raping of both males and females is very prominent....but, not so much in the Subcontinent....sodomizing men is very taboo regardless of intention in South Asia.....So, I guess that the approach to how rape is conducted varies in certain societies...

 

[Poeticus]

Well, women cover their entire bodies in some places in the world and they still get raped.

Namaste,

(I know you weren't talking to me)

Yes, exactly. Very true. Muslim women being covered up didn't stop American soldiers from raping them in Iraq nor in Afghanistan.

Excuse my French, but he**: it didn't even stop male soldiers in the US Army from raping their female counterparts in uniform....

Sad. But, tis true. You make a good point. I gave you a frubal.



M.V.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Offically the fastest moving thread ever.... and its about boobs..what a suprise.

Though my logic is this.

Topless women won't turn non-rapist into rapists.
Topless women won't incite rapists more than "skimpy" outfits already do and they are legal. Has there ever been a real study done to see what the skimpyness of a woman's clothes has to do with the likelyhood of her being raped?

The majority of rapes are done by people the victime knows. Showcasing breasts in public won't increase these calculated rapes.

Rapes on the street are all about opprotunity. They knew they were going out to rape someone that night. It wasn't something like "Oh man she is so hot. Gonna go punch her in the face six times and threan her with a knife while I drag her into her room and rape her in front of her kids! That would be so hot!"
It is all about the "opprotunty" to rape rather than the sheer attractivness of the woman.

 

[Alceste]

Offically the fastest moving thread ever.... and its about boobs..what a suprise.

Though my logic is this.

Topless women won't turn non-rapist into rapists.
Topless women won't incite rapists more than "skimpy" outfits already do and they are legal. Has there ever been a real study done to see what the skimpyness of a woman's clothes has to do with the likelyhood of her being raped?

The majority of rapes are done by people the victime knows. Showcasing breasts in public won't increase these calculated rapes.

Rapes on the street are all about opprotunity. They knew they were going out to rape someone that night. It wasn't something like "Oh man she is so hot. Gonna go punch her in the face six times and threan her with a knife while I drag her into her room and rape her in front of her kids! That would be so hot!"
It is all about the "opprotunty" to rape rather than the sheer attractivness of the woman.

Or, to put it in another light, the "attractiveness" of a stranger-rape victim is defined by his or her perceived vulnerability, in the mind of a rapist. Just like the attractiveness of a mugging victim or a bullying victim. Not by some random assortment of arbitrary physical characteristics by which our society defines physical beauty. I don't believe young people are targeted by sexual offenders because they are "beautiful", but because they are "vulnerable". Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and the sex offender perceives vulnerability as beauty.