h a l f b a k e r yCall Ambulance,
Rebuild Kitchen.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
This isn't a fun idea, but an attempt to help deal with a
very horrible problem. Bear with me.
I just watched a documentary on rape on college
campuses. It's an epidemic and many of these victims are
treated horribly from a system that stands to lose money
if
they properly prosecute the
rapists. They highlighted a
case where a now very rich and successful NFL
quarterback
raped a girl while in college and got away with it by
saying
it was consensual. The "She wanted it." plea is very
common in these cases. The rapists often say they
mistook
the woman's passivity or drunkenness for consent.
My proposal is to have a device that allows a woman to
clarify if she wants to have consensual relations or not.
It's
a variation on a common piece of body jewelry called a
waist chain or belly chain. The difference is it's got a
combination lock on it.
The idea is this would be symbolic. She unlocks and
removes it if she wants to have sex with somebody. If she
doesn't go through the trouble of un-locking the lock,
which would be, by design, hard to do if you're drunk,
she
is not consenting to sex. These would afford at least an
additional level of communication to the woman. And
men
would be made aware that if a woman doesn't willfully
of
her own free will remove this chain, they may be
charged
with rape. Its removal or being left in place would be at
least one factor admissible in court.
From the guy's perspective he would have to make
absolutely sure she took it off on her own, even turning
down the encounter should she forget or be too drunk
to
unlock it etc. Men need to be educated that no means no
of course, but having a clear indicator like this couldn't
hurt. And a chain left in place means no by default. She
doesn't have to say a thing.
It's not going to stop a rapist intent on raping his victim
but
that's not what its job would be. Even wearing it as a
symbol might have some effect. Like telling guys "This is
my body, my symbolic lock, if I don't open it keep your
hands off of me." It could be worn as an announcement
that "I'm here to have fun, not get molested." A symbol
that she's not at present interested in having sex unless
as
otherwise indicated. Flirting, having fun, whatever,
nothing in consensual in HER eyes unless and until SHE
removes this symbol.
And on the flip side, it might become a romantic thing,
the
act of her taking it off could be very sexy. It could
actually
end up being very sex positive being empowering
to
the woman while at the same time clarifying that she's
currently in a default "No means no" state until she
makes
it very clear otherwise. Of course nothing's perfect. For
instance a woman has the right to change her mind at
any
time, even if she's taken the chain off. And it's no
substitute for guys being respectful gentlemen and
women being careful but even if this could prevent some
rapes it seems like it might be worth it.
Perhaps a slogan to go with it. "Respect the chain!"
The Hunting Ground
http://www.dailymai...Hunting-Ground.html
Not a fun watch, but if you've got daughters kind of a must see. [doctorremulac3, Jul 03 2016]
What I had in mind
Anti-Invasive_20Underwear
As mentioned in an annotation. [Vernon, Jul 03 2016]
Testosterone
https://en.wikipedi...g/wiki/Testosterone
Such a simple molecule ... [8th of 7, Jul 03 2016]
Tea and Consent
https://www.youtube...watch?v=pZwvrxVavnQ
"If you’re still struggling with consent just imagine instead of initiating sex you’re making them a cup of tea." [tatterdemalion, Jul 04 2016]
Debunking campus rape
http://www.usnews.c...-about-rape-culture
I could literally post a hundred pages like this with comprehensive supporting documentation but there are none so blind... [Voice, Jul 09 2016]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
Why only symbolic? Think "chastity belt", only not really
such if the woman controls the lock. Perhaps I'll post a
separate Idea with possible details about that.... |
|
| |
I'd thought about that, then put myself in the
woman's place. I know I wouldn't wear one if I was a
woman. |
|
| |
By the way, the documentary is called "The Hunting
Ground". See link. Sorry to be a downer but this is
pretty horrific stuff that really needs to be
addressed. (see link) |
|
| |
This idea does not seem to address the problem that such incidents, by their very nature, occur in the absence of impartial witnesses. |
|
| |
The chain could be attached to a small yappy bitey dog. |
|
| |
The idea puts responsibility for not being sexually assaulted on the woman. |
|
| |
//The idea puts responsibility for not being sexually
assaulted on the woman.// |
|
| |
You know, I was expecting to get a comment or two like
this. "But what if
the guy has a gun? Or even a bazooka?" |
|
| |
This is a clear sign that the woman wishes to be in
control of whether or not she has sex, this may be
enough to deter some of these guys. |
|
| |
I'll check it out. Maybe it's sensationalism maybe it's not. The
case they showed was pretty obviously factual though. |
|
| |
Let me get back to you after a little research. |
|
| |
// Whose responsibility is it? // |
|
| |
A dangerous blend of ethanol and testosterone <link> is the most likely culprit. |
|
| |
// there is also a distinct difference between predatory rape of the sober individual, and the careless fornications of stupid drunks. // |
|
| |
Ethanol causes elevated testosterone levels in human females. This is a proven medical fact. Hence // drunk woman who is horny //. |
|
| |
It's a highly emotive subject which makes it difficult to tease apart the complex mesh of social and biological factors. Good luck. |
|
| |
//For me, and forgive me if this rubs some of you the
wrong way, there is also a distinct difference between
predatory rape of the sober individual, and the careless
fornications of stupid drunks// |
|
| |
This is a touchy subject that I think warrants discussion
so I for one won't start pointing fingers at people for
honestly speculating about the problem. Yes, there are
cases where alcohol causes men AND women to have sex
when they wouldn't otherwise and where men might take
a woman's passivity as acceptance. Some kind of hard to
misread sign might be helpful. |
|
| |
OK, I'll phrase my evidently dispiriting comment more succinctly: this idea is moronic. |
|
| |
Calum, I'm guessing you haven't had much
experience
with man/woman relationships so you're probably
not
one to comment on this. |
|
| |
This is why people don't discuss issues that effect
our society. It just takes one turd to act like
they've got all the answers and is mortally
offended by anybody that might disagree. They
can't make a point that resonates by being logical
and calm so they just throw out an insult and run
away. The
bottom line is everybody just stops talking. |
|
| |
I don't have all the answers which is why I engage
in free discussion with other people who might
have some insight from a different perspective
that I might learn from. Chest thumping know it
alls who are connoisseurs of political correctness
finding something offensive behind every concept
just stifle the free exchange of ideas. |
|
| |
So calum, I've proposed something that might help
with the problem with women getting raped.
Besides throwing insults at somebody who might
try to address the problem, what's your idea
genius? |
|
| |
I'm with Calum on this one, if the problem of bullying was simplified by splitting the population into two groups, bullies and victims, and the victims compelled to wear "I am a victim, please do not bully" badges on their heads, I think a number of analogous problems would arise in-step with the problems that arise from this idea. |
|
| |
Say the idea becomes a success, and a bully picks a fight with someone who's not wearing the badge, does that make it ok? No, but if not, then what's the point of the badge? If a bully picks a fight with someone wearing the badge, will the bully be punished doubly hard afterwards? Which is worse, the bullying, or the bullying of someone wearing a badge? Aren't we missing something by even making that distinction? Is someone who's prepared to bully someone else actually going to pay attention to whether or not they wear a badge? |
|
| |
So while understanding clear markers and signals is important to people who seem to get confused by what is a fairly straightforward set of social mores. Is it really helpful to couch the problem in terms of a new signalling method (which itself will introduce more uncertainty since there are plenty of existing signalling methods) or is it better to discuss the problem in stark, simple terms without all the complicated stuff that (apparently) continues to confound, bamboozle and elude the perpetrators of this kind of thing? |
|
| |
For me, the answer is obvious - don't rape people. |
|
| |
Whether they're wearing a badge, or a special hat, or have had 1 pint, 2 pints or 11 pints. Just don't rape them. Don't rape them behind a bin, or in a bed, or in a bush. Just don't rape them. Even if they're not wearing a t-shirt that states, "Please don't rape me", still don't rape them then. Or if they're wearing a long dress, or a miniskirt, or a pair of dungarees, still don't rape them. It's really not that difficult, just don't rape people. Don't rape people. Don't rape people. Don't rape people. |
|
| |
Zen, thank you for disagreeing without being a jerk. I
respect your perspective. |
|
| |
I will respectfully counter that "Just don't rape
people" isn't much of a new solution. |
|
| |
How about a chain that says "Try to rape me I'll cut
your fucking balls off."? |
|
| |
//I will respectfully counter that "Just don't rape people" isn't much of a new solution.// |
|
| |
It's not a solution, but it is based (I hope) on a clearer definition of the problem. Which is "People rape other people." The solution is "Stop it". |
|
| |
I think what the problem isn't is "If only there were some clear, unambiguous signal that people could use to communicate that they don't wish to have sex." |
|
| |
//This is a clear sign that the woman wishes to be in control of whether or not she has sex// |
|
| |
Is a solution to this second problem. But I don't think signalling is necessarily the problem. Another aspect of the problem is the tacit suggestion that a person *might not* want to be in control of whether or not they have sex, and that a "clear sign" may be required, as a default, to indicate otherwise. |
|
| |
This isn't Microsoft Windows assuming you want to upgrade to Windows 10. But the underlying assumption isn't much different. |
|
| |
No, Microsoft. I do not wish to upgrade to Windows 10. Why are you bugging me to upgrade to Windows 10 all the time? I have no interest in Windows 10. I might have to occasionally use Windows 7, but that doesn't mean I have any interest whatsoever in upgrading to Windows 10. I do not need to wear a hat, or a badge, or to repeatedly remind you that I don't want to upgrade to Windows 10. And failure to maintain my non-Windows 10 signalling is not an invitation for you to upgrade my computer to Windows 10. It's just that I don't want to upgrade to Windows 10 right now. Please respect that and let me live a life that does not require me to continuously signal my intention not to upgrade to Windows 10. It should be your default understanding that no, I don't want to upgrade to Windows 10. If, at some later date, I do want to upgrade to Windows 10, I will tell you - clearly, and unambiguously - but until then, please, dear sweet Jesus, please do not assume I want to upgrade to Windows 10. Because I don't. |
|
| |
//How about a chain that says "Try to rape me I'll cut your fucking balls off."?// |
|
| |
How about men have to wear cufflinks that clearly state "I do not wish to have my balls ripped off?", just in case anyone assumes that without such clear signalling, it's ok for them to rip our balls off? |
|
| |
It might just work, but I'm not sure I'm ready to take that step into the unknown. |
|
| |
LOL, didn't see the windows upgrade analogy coming. But
I do think that the Windows 10's upgrade slogan should be
"Now even suckier!" |
|
| |
I got the idea seeing that they've adopted a mattress as
the symbol for the anti rape movement which I thought
was kind of pointless. The idea is to carry these around
campus to protests to make some ironic statement about
women just being sex objects. I thought that was sort of
silly so wondered is there were some kind of a symbol
that was A: easier to carry and B: able to actually be of
some use in some situations. |
|
| |
//How about men have to wear cufflinks that clearly
state "I do not wish to have my balls ripped off?"// |
|
| |
LOL, I assume you meant to put the ? after the quotation.
As written it's quite surrealistic. I actually prefer it. I
think a pair of these, exactly as written "I do not wish to
have my balls ripped off?" would be an amazing
conversation starter, and ironically a great way to meet
women. |
|
| |
Ok, probably not appropriate to be having fun talking
about such a serious topic. Sorry. I'll grim up. |
|
| |
Offensive and stupid idea. |
|
| |
// a clear sign that the woman wishes to be in control of whether or not she has sex |
|
| |
Because this is somehow in doubt otherwise? |
|
| |
Unfortunate that whatever you watched didn't tip you off to the nature of the problem, so watch the tea video and it will tell you. |
|
| |
//Offensive and stupid idea.// |
|
| |
//"If you’re still struggling with consent just imagine instead
of initiating sex you’re making them a cup of tea."// |
|
| |
It's been my experience that the most pompous and nasty
lecturing about sex comes from the people who don't
actually do it. |
|
| |
That tea video is ridiculous, a massive oversimplification
of a complex and nuanced issue. “I want to sex you”
“Oh yes you may sex me” is exactly not how 95+% of
casual sexual encounters go, nor how either party
involved wants them to. Neither party wants to be that
obvious about it – which leaves the central issue being
discussed here as consent signalling (and, increasingly,
verifiable recording of consent). Which [doc]’s idea is
trying to address, although perhaps more facetiously
than pragmatically. |
|
| |
Look, there’s generally several broad types of non-
consensual sex which are really quite fundamentally
different. They’re all unambiguously bad, but
oversimplifying terms can make debate difficult. It’s
simply not true to say that the motivation, state of mind,
decision process and moral culpability is identical,
between say on one hand, a violent sexual predator who
attacks someone in a park, as compared to say, a drunk
uni student, who has sex with another drunk uni student,
when often neither of them is really fully cognisant, or
aware of whether the other is consenting. These are
different things. That is not to say that the latter is
okay. But treating it identically to the former, is never
going to result in any progress. |
|
| |
The complexity with the nonviolent sexual assault lies in
consent signalling. And by that I don’t mean just
someone saying “yes” – I also mean perhaps someone
asking for a “yes”. Whether both parties are remotely
interested in talking about consent at the time of the
sexual encounter, or perhaps are making assumptions,
and the much more complex issue of withdrawl of
consent (and how that is signalled), or even more
complex again, reduced capacity to give consent - for
either party. And finally, the rare, but existent, issue of
retroactive withdrawal of consent. |
|
| |
I honestly think the whole issue is a moral quagmire.
People don’t seem able to discuss it without name calling
and ultimatums, as can be seen above, even in this,
generally amicable forum. As with a lot of things – if the
answer seems obvious to you, simple, and universally
applicable – that should be the strongest signal for you to
have another think – because issues like this do not have
simple answers – and never answers that everyone agrees
to that are fair to all parties. |
|
| |
//because issues like this do not have simple
answers -
and never answers that everyone agrees to that
are fair
to all parties.// |
|
| |
You are absolutely right. I was almost dreading
reading
another post till I read yours and realized "Wow,
this
person is actually using logic and reason rather
than drama,
anger and simplistic platitudes." |
|
| |
Love interesting insights from intelligent people. I
also
appreciate open, civilized dialog on potentially
incendiary
topics that allow us to explore possible solutions.
Whether we get it right or wrong, what's the harm
in
looking into it? |
|
| |
This problem fundamentally misunderstands consent, which is by definition not singular or contractual. You do not give your consent as a singular gesture, saying yes once, unlocking your chastity chain, instead consent is a sustained effort on both parties to only do things that the other party is clearly a willing participant in. In this way consent isn't given on any single occasion but exists as a understanding between two people that is maintained and informed throughout an encounter. As such a chastity belt is meaningless because it would mean no more than removing any other article of clothing, an entirely retractable gesture. |
|
| |
Everything you're saying is true but I'm not seeing
how having this symbolic chastity belt as you call
it, does
anything but send a signal that the woman is
aware of her rights to fully control a sexual
encounter. |
|
| |
But as you say, people having sex is a continuum of
non-verbal communication, that by the way,
nobody misunderstands. A very clear "No" could be
simple as a
woman not kissing you back. But I get what you're
saying. |
|
| |
I watched a bit of the absolutely ridiculous video.
What the heck is this clueless piece of junk? A
video for how to have sex for people that are
functionally retarded? Be sure to watch the whole
series including "How to walk", "How to breathe",
and the advanced series "How to go to the
bathroom." |
|
| |
The time in the process this "chastity chain", would
figure into the communication would be at the
very first meeting. It would be a visual
communication that the woman feels very in
control of her consent. It would be saying "I want
respect and the right to say no. I think this might
discourage those that might push past boundaries
to get more than the woman is willing to offer. |
|
| |
Again, this idea was inspired by seeing the symbol
currently being used to bring awareness to
women's rights to control when they have sex, a
mattress being carried or sometimes having slogans
written on it. I thought this one was better and
may actually have a bit of actual utility. |
|
| |
There could be messages associated with this as
well. "A woman wearing this WILL, not might, WILL
call the police and fully prosecute you for rape if
you push her in any way past where she is willing
to go sexually." |
|
| |
Kind of a "Fuck you!" to potential rapists. What's
wrong with that? |
|
| |
Women should not have to wear chains in order to have their private space respected. It's actually a nasty notion and I'm quite surprised that it has not been more vigorously challenged here. |
|
| |
No surprise that you're shocked and offended. It's
kind of what you do. |
|
| |
My guess is you're really shocked and offended by
people talking about sex, a subject that makes you
uncomfortable. |
|
| |
Like I said, it's been my experience that the most
pompous and nasty lecturing about sex comes from
the people who don't actually do it. |
|
| |
Maybe you think other people should have to wear symbols to deter attacks and unwarranted attention? No women should have to wear anything. Why should any human being have to wear a symbol to deter someone from attacking them? It's like something that the NRA or Trump would advocate. |
|
| |
Easier to obsess about Donald Trump than to put in
the work necessary to form relationships that
might lead to intimacy. Your whole life revolves
around hatred of one man, a politician running for
office in a foreign country. I believe this is because
you're frustrated with the lack of closeness to
another human being in your
personal life. Or do you have sex every day the
same way you travel to the United States on a
regular basis? |
|
| |
Maybe if you were to talk about something other
than Donald Trump once in a while you might
meet somebody nice. He's in your every thought.
This is about rape on
college campuses and you bring up Donald Trump. |
|
| |
Might be time to get some help. |
|
| |
Show me where I expressed these terms: "shocked and offended"? I said I was surprised that the idea had not been more vigorously challenged here. The halfbakery is for the most part quite respectful of women, but this is not respectful. The idea that any women needs to wear a symbol in order to deter a potential rape is a nasty notion, and the thin edge of a dangerously right wing type of thinking. You should also desist from attacking me and concentrate on defending your idea. Personal attacks on me will get you nowhere. The halfbakery is about ideas and not about attacking those who post them or respond to them. |
|
| |
Sounds like I hit the nail on the head. |
|
| |
Idea [marked-for-deletion] advocacy. Also sexist and fascist in nature. |
|
| |
Advocating that women not be raped? |
|
| |
You mean like wanting to silence those who may disagree
with you? |
|
| |
My advice to you: When you're in a hole, it's best to stop digging. |
|
| |
While you make some very valid points, I believe you
misunderstood her recalling of the situation for the
camera. |
|
| |
//rape was occurring and the "victim" yelled at the
intruder
to get out.// |
|
| |
I obviously wasn't there but in the documentary she says
the
rapist yelled at the guy to get out, not her. She further
goes on to say the guy who walked in the room said "Hey,
what are you doing, she's telling you to stop." |
|
| |
// Women should not have to wear chains in order to have their private space respected. It's actually a nasty notion and I'm quite surprised that it has not been more vigorously challenged here. |
|
| |
One reason I have elected not to respond further is because of childish outbursts of sexual ad hominem the author devolves into when challenged. |
|
| |
//Offensive and stupid idea.// |
|
| |
I have never insulted anybody who didn't insult me first. |
|
| |
But thank you for going away though. |
|
| |
New suggested title: "Waste Chain With Cocksuck Links" |
|
| |
Well, with that, I think we can put this idea to bed. Score:
2/2. Better luck next time. |
|
| |
(And note to self: no more posts about sex.) |
|
| |
Oh, well, contradictory stories then. |
|
| |
I believe she won a lawsuit against him and the school
though. |
|
| |
Despite all the hatred this attempt to help keep girls
from
getting raped has fomented, I
wish something could be
done beyond what's being done now. I don't think the
current symbol for the movement, a
mattress being carried around, is a good one. |
|
| |
Although to look on the bright side, there were several
dozen annotations on this post and not a single mention
of Hitler and only 1 mentioning of Trump. |
|
| |
I think maybe we're moving in the right direction. |
|
| |
Well, I've learned from this that some people get very
touchy
about subjects concerning sexual politics so this is my last
sex related post. Then again some people get touchy
about just about anything. |
|
| |
Thanks for posting that police report. I just read
the transcripts and, Wow, 180 degree opposite from the
story she told. If she's lying she's a very evil person. If the
two witnesses are lying, same thing. |
|
| |
Yea, they basically said she pretty much raped HIM.
Forced her way into the cab with him, followed him to his
room, initiated the encounter even kicking the goofy
room mates out of the room when they walked in. |
|
| |
Pretty sad, very very evil person or people at work here
and we have no idea who's who. Or at least I have no
idea. |
|
| |
I hate that this gal became the cover girl for this
movement. Even if she's an innocent victim, there are
plenty of cases where there is no controversy. Having this
case at the forefront casts a shadow on all the young
women who ARE victimized. |
|
| |
Ok, I'm sick of this. Depressing. Dr3 out. |
|
| |
//I just watched a documentary on rape on college campuses. It's an epidemic// |
|
| |
Stop right there. no one supports rape, but campus rapes are uncommon and becoming less so. You should look at unbiased statistics, not studies done by idiots and politically motivated liars which group together any sex involving alcohol (or even any sex where someone wasn't repeatedly verbally assenting!) into rape and any unwanted touching into sexual battery. |
|
| |
Sorry, don't care any more. |
|
| |
But I'm glad you're not troubled by women getting raped. It's
also comforting to know that all those women were lying. |
|
| |
By the way, did you actually watch the documentary? |
|
| |
// I'm glad you're not troubled by women getting raped.// |
|
| |
See, I knew you were going to say that. Your type always falls back to obvious non sequiturs and ad hom's. I felt like an idiot typing "no one supports rape", since it's so bleeding obvious. But I knew your next step would be to accuse me of secretly wanting rape to happen, so I tried to head that off. Sadly your lack of reading comprehension rivals your other cognitive inadequacies. But we're getting into territory the halfbakery wasn't made for so I'll stop posting here. |
|
| |
Well, there may be a reason for that. |
|
| |
I'm inclined to support the girl who's walking around with a mattress; not so much the one where the guy broke up with the gf after (unannounced breakup) sex, and she cried "rape". Also, not so much anybody who uses the phrase "rape culture" like it's a given. |
|
| |
One of the problems seems to be that they call uni security guards - that are in charge of parking and guiding drunk children to their dorms - "campus police". |
|
| |
[+] not the greatest idea, and I got sidetracked thinking it was a chastity belt, but it's something. |
|
| |
I think there are evil men taking advantage of
drunk
women and evil women getting drunk, having
sex and then deciding to renew their honor by
lying about the encounter. |
|
| |
I appreciate people talking about possible solutions
though. Dialog about controversial subjects is a
good thing. There's no harm in speculating or even
being wrong. We can disagree without being
unkind. |
|
| |
Sighs.... the dumbing down of the halfbakery continues..... |
|
| |
//We can disagree without being unkind.// |
|
| |
Correction: Intelligent people can disagree without being
unkind. |
|
| |
//wake up drunk in a parking lot chained to a line of supermarket trolleys.// The voice of experience ? |
|
| |
[xenzag] Then feel free to sow some pearls of wisdom, oh enlightened one. |
|
| |
Here's some wisdom: if you bash this dot . with a hammer,
you can make it grow a spider's web. |
|
| |
How is that wisdom and not simply cause and effect ? |
|
| |
You will be wiser after the event. |
|
| |
What does it mean to take off your consent belt off?
Anything? Everything from there on out no matter what?
Maybe it's like marriage, where after that moment your
male partner can rape you at will. |
|
| |
Well, I assume you're being facetious with that last
sentence, as you know consent is always
mandatory, at
least in the civilized world, even if the parties are
married. |
|
| |
But I think what you're getting at is, as much as
the chain
in place might be an additional signal to "Go no
further"
the removal of the chain might make it hard to
stop or
say sex
was non consensual should the woman change her
mind.
Pretty much the same as stripping naked.
But there should be no controversy in anybody's
mind
about when it becomes rape. It's when, at any
time, the
woman wants to stop and the man continues
against her
will. And yes, it can even be after consensual
intercourse
has started, and it might not be because she's a
crazy
person. What if she begins to feel pain? Did she
lose the
right to have somebody stop inflicting physical
pain on
her? But anyway, if that
was your point I get it. |
|
| |
That being said I would suggest the woman leave it
on
unless and until she's ready to go all the way. Same
as
taking her clothes off and giving other signals
beyond
that.
But those of us who've never played World Of
Warcraft
know
that sex is a ongoing series of continual physical
communications, if it's any good that is, and "STOP"
is
always on the table throughout. |
|
| |
How about a kind of fun message along with the
lock like
"In your dreams pal!"? A little sassy and not as
mean is
"Touch Me And I'll Cut Your Balls Off!" I don't think
there's
anything wrong
with a little message that the gal's not a pushover.
Yes?
No? |
|
| |
OK, I guess it's my turn to volunteer to be misunderstood and verbally abused… |
|
| |
// if the problem of bullying was simplified by splitting the population into two
groups, bullies and victims, and the victims compelled to wear "I am a victim, please
do not bully" badges on their heads // - [zen tom] |
|
| |
// Women should not have to wear chains in order to have their private space
respected. It's actually a nasty notion and I'm quite surprised that it has not been
more vigorously challenged here. // - [xenzag] |
|
| |
// Maybe you think other people should have to wear symbols to deter attacks and
unwarranted attention? No women should have to wear anything. // - [xenzag] |
|
| |
So. I agree that women should not have to wear chains. |
|
| |
I do not think anyone here thinks women should have to wear chains. |
|
| |
From the beginning of the idea, the chains were never, as far as I can tell, proposed
to be in any way mandatory. It is entirely optional for a woman to wear one. |
|
| |
Indeed—and especially because the chain could be inconvenient for some activities
like sports, and most women probably just wouldn't want to wear it all the time—I
think it is very important to make this clear, not just to everyone here, but to
society at large if this is implemented: WEARING A CHAIN IS OPTIONAL, so not wearing
a chain does not mean 'fair game'. |
|
| |
Therefore, all arguments based on the chain somehow being mandatory are
strawman arguments and are hereby declared invalid unless subsequently reworked
to be based only on true premises, or unless my interpretation of the original idea as
being an optional (not mandatory) chain is found factually incorrect. |
|
| |
// My advice to you: When you're in a hole, it's best to stop digging. // - [xenzag] |
|
| |
Also, because men can also be raped, it would presumably be acceptable (AND
OPTIONAL!) for a man to wear one (but it would likely be less popular than with
women, for perception-of-masculinity reasons). |
|
| |
Reads like a speech given by Donald Trump's wife at a Republican convention, except she copies her's from Michelle Obama. |
|
| |
Great idea. You should wear it always. |
|
| |
If I were a woman I wouldn't have a problem wearing this.
I'd make it look damn good. |
|
| |
I'm assuming the female version of you, however, would
be
ill advised to wear any jewelry that would draw attention
to your body. Perhaps something in a burlap tutu would
be
more appropriate, yes? |
|
| |
"Our next model is WcWina, showing that burlap is in
again this year. And for a hat, she's sporting a lovely
potato sack with eye holes cut out." |
|
| |
If you were a women, wearing a potato sack with holes in it
would be a legal requirement. Ha |
|
| |
That gives me an idea. Thanks Xen, you're a
continuing source of inspiration. |
|
| |