@BellatricksStrange
I am literally not. OMG I can't believe some people are just so thick.
Indeed they are. You’ve posted several times saying “Is it outrageous when someone leaves their iPhone on display and it gets stolen” on a thread about rape. If it comparing women the iPhones, what are you posting that for?! What’s your actual point?
It's a simple question: Is it offensive to suggest one modifies their behaviour due to the existence of criminals?
If by ‘behaviour’ you mean ‘going out in public’ then yes of course it’s offensive.
In the case of keeping valuables out of sight, I think society has accepted it is not offensive. So why does it become offensive when the same suggestion is made in regards to personal safety?
BECAUSE WOMEN AREN’T VALUABLES YOU ABSOLUTE MORON.
Seriously; what are you not getting?! Do you understand the difference between women and iPhones?
In fact it's not even offensive when made in regards to general personal safety, only when it's directed at women. Nobody is getting offended by being told some neighbourhoods or estates are best avoided at night. But when it's suggested that women take sensible precautions, somehow this becomes offensive. Why?
Because when women are literally being killed when having a daytime run it seems that ‘sensible precautions’ mean staying indoors. It’s putting the onus on women to behave in a way that makes sure they don’t get raped - except the ‘behave’ part means ‘doing anything at all’
Same goes in regards to victim blaming. Most people, upon hearing that someone left an iphone on a car seat and it was stolen, would think, 'Well why did they leave it there?'. And that isn't considered victim blaming.
BECAUSE WOMEN ARE NOT IPHONES
Seriously are you being obtuse? Or do you really not get it?
Question for you: If insurance companies don’t pay out if you haven’t taken the right precautions to protect your goods - for example, if you leave your front door open and get burgled - why don’t the police have this policy for rape? Why do you think that is?
I'd go so far to say that most people would question why an ordinary bloke wandered into a dangerous estate at night, and we still don't consider that victim blaming.
I hope that if he was raped there’d be nothing but sympathy, and people like you wouldn’t say ‘what was he doing there at night’
Read this slowly: being mugged for an iPhone is not the same as being raped.
Yet ask that same kind of question - in similar circumstances, ie wholly avoidable had the victim employed reasonable precautions - in regards to a woman getting attacked, especially a sexual attack, and it causes a furore.
Because women aren’t valuables or objects and being mugged is not the same as being raped. I won’t keep repeating it but I sincerely hope one day you understand this.
What is the difference?
Women aren’t iPhones. HTH
Why is it legitimate to wonder why common sense and reasonable precautions weren't employed in every other circumstance bar that of a woman getting attacked?
Because women getting attacked is not the same as being pick pocketed or having an inanimate object stolen.
And to be clear - for those who are capable or reading and comprehending - this is not to say we should have to modify our behaviour because of criminals. It's merely an acknowledgement of the accepted reality that people do, because you know, we like to keep our persons and our belongings safe
Women aren’t belongings. Vaginas being violently penetrated is not the same as a stolen phone.
Do you get it yet?