PiousPrat - PrinceHumperdink doesn't want to address what the tread is about - I do.
PrinceHumperdink - If someone wears skimpy clothes, they are not making themselves more likely to be attacked in general because a rapist could just as easily target old women wearing pacamacs.
That's actually the most valid point you've made. If the factor of selection - the trigger - is rubber/latex etc then a rpist may well select a victim on that basis.
You're referring to a text from 1979 - a lot more interesting work - with supporting data has been done since then. You're such a literalist --- when it suits you.
For a man who rapes women - what are the selection criteria - ie how does he choose?
- must be a woman
- what age group does he prefer
- what race, colour
- hair, build, appearance
- what stimulates him
And so on, none of this can be controlled the victim, that is, she can do nothing about it because each rapist is different and you never know what you will encounter BUT rapists are exposed to the same stimuli as the rest of society and will largely be activated by the same urges BUT unlike the rest of society, they will act violently on those urges.
So, you are probably less likely to be the victim of a pacamac fetishist rapist simply because the number of males aroused by that particular stimulus is small - and, as in the wider society, correspondingly, very few of those would
be potential rapists.
However, other clothing is very widely used in society to create sexual arousal - often profitably exploited by 'glamour models' to sell masturbation material to men.
If you wear this kind of clothing you will create sexual arousal in a far greater number of men and, consequently, even statistically speaking alone, the wider the population sample who share a particular arousal trigger, the more likely it is to include at least some men capable of sexual attack.