@BillRM,
Quote:Tell me where guys are claiming that women are asking for it by being dress one way or another at least in the Western world.
That claim is a 99.999999999 percents an anti-male myth and nothing more.
Your dear friend Hawkeye has made such a claim--he has refereed to women who wear "slutty clothing" as signaling they are "asking for it".
No matter what a woman wears, it is not an invitation to be raped.
You and Hawkeye have both referred to some females as "acting like whores" or "loose women"--again, trying to justify the rapes of such women. No matter how many sex partners a woman has had, or how flirtatiously she acts, that is not an invitation to rape her--and it does not justify raping her.
The two of you have an appalling double standard--you see it as fine, and perfectly acceptable, for a male to have many sexual encounters, but you demean and degrade a female for enjoying similar sexual freedom. In fact, you both have voiced opinions that such women are trash, and "asking to raped", and therefore their claims of rape should be discounted.
The two of you consistently blame rape victims for their rape and rationalize and excuse the behavior of rapists.
Quote:
Krumple the title of this thread is just a strawman or strawwoman title to allow Firefly to start selling her positions on sex laws beginning with the emotional high ground.
I'm not selling "any positions on sex laws"--the title of this thread was to start discussion on the victim blame that people like you and Hawkeye engage in to excuse the behavior of rapists. I don't have to "sell" the sex laws--these laws are already in effect and are accepted, and obeyed, by the overwhelming majority of people--in the U.S., the U.K., Canada, Australia, and on and on.
Not just "the emotional high ground", but, more importantly, the moral high ground, is behind laws designed to deter, and prevent, and punish, the crime of rape. Rape, any type of rape, is a despicable crime in the minds of most people. The problem is that neither you nor Hawkeye view rape as a big deal. You both convey the attitude, "She'll get over it" while you moan over the "poor man" who is convicted of her rape.
Quote:Hint it is the consent issue and when and if a rape had or had not occur not if a woman is asking to be rape or not.
Your thinking is overly simplistic and it is intended to be deliberately deceptive. Victim blame--what she was wearing, the fact she was drinking, the fact she was flirting, etc.--are excuses made to imply that these things indicated consent for sexual intercourse--and that is just not true, those things do not indicate consent for sexual penetration. There is a definite connection between the title of this thread and whether the legal requirement for consent to a specific sexual act was actually given--whether explicit consent for sexual intercourse was given by the woman.