Periodic Table of Swearing

[Spence]

In the case R=0.62% or 0.00062, the number is closer to 0.01232 or 1.23%.

Sorry, typo. It's 0.0062. The calculation is correct.

No, it's NOT correct, shit. It is actually closer to 12%, as steersman said. (11.7%) Final Answer.
Adding graph to show my contrition. x = rape rate. If this isn't right then fuck it.

While you are shuffling your decimal places there :whistle: the other problem with this calculation is that it assumes independence.

Stranger rape is random almost by definition, but this ignores the fact that the vast majority of rape is committed by friends or family members; but this in turn means that rape is a consequence of circumstance, and someone who has been raped once is more likely to be raped again. (Observing this is *not* blaming the victim but noting common cause). This has been observed and measured statistically by some studies. It also has a very big impact in the numbers above.

Plus, as many have already noted, the surveys are often poorly worded and include things like consensual sex that was later regretted as rape.

[Steersman]

...
I'm willing to accept 0.164%. You've got some work to do before you can justify this 12.4% "gauntlet to run", however.

The statistics cannot be trusted. Not only do numerous women report rape and sexual assault that never happened, but how many men do you think feel comfortable reporting they were a victim of sexual assault and rape?

Certainly they all need to be taken with very large doses of salt. However, a link on A Voice for Men suggests, I think as I’m going by recollection, that the number of false-rape reports might be in the 5% to 10% range. However, the other side of the coin is the suggestion that less than 10% of all rapes are actually reported. Still suggests to me that there are far more rapes of women by men than of men by women or of men by men [the population inside the prison being substantially smaller than outside it – although one wonders]. Something that speaks to both the false-reporting and under-reporting is this:

A 2006 review of studies of false reporting in the United States, New Zealand and the United Kingdom concluded:

"Two conclusions can be drawn from this review of literature on the prevalence of false rape allegations. First, many of the studies of false allegations have adopted unreliable or untested research methodologies and, so we cannot discern with any degree of certainty the actual rate of false allegations. A key component in judging the reliability of research in this area relates to the criteria used to judge an allegation to be false. Some studies use entirely unreliable criteria, while others provide only limited information on how rates are measured. The second conclusion that can be drawn from the research is that the police continue to misapply the no- crime or unfounding criteria and in so doing it would appear that some officers have fixed views and expectations about how genuine rape victims should react to their victimisation. The qualitative research also suggests that some officers continue to exhibit an unjustified scepticism of rape complainants, while others interpret such things as lack of evidence or complaint withdrawal as ‘‘proof’’ of a false allegation. Such findings suggest that there are inadequacies in police awareness of the dynamics and impact of sexual victimisation and this further reinforces the importance of training and education. However, the exact extent to which police officers incorrectly label allegations as false is difficult to discern."

[Michael K Gray]

...the fact that the vast majority of rape is committed by friends or family members

That, in turn, ignores that fact that globally most rapes are committed by institutional inmates.
Such as:
Church run Seminaries & Priories, the Boy Scouts, the Catholic Church & their 'schools', Mormon churches, Islamic villages, the military, & the Prisons, especially the Youth camps.
And I shan't shut up about this statistic-blindness on your behalf until you stop it.

[Michael K Gray]

O'feel'ya does it again!
Original:

Feminism as a spiritual cause - ugh. Ugh ugh ugh.
If it's a spiritual cause there's no need or place for it to begin with. Nobody minds if women are "spiritual" all over the place, as long as they don't go demanding unspiritual things like serious work and freedom to wander and equal rights.

Replace "spiritual" with "atheist"

Feminism as an atheist cause - ugh. Ugh ugh ugh.
If it's a atheist cause there's no need or place for it to begin with. Nobody minds if women are "Atheist" all over the place, as long as they don't go demanding unatheist things like serious work and freedom to wander and equal rights.

This comedy gold just writes it's-self.

[TedDahlberg]

Either way, to say that normal sex has been criminalized in Sweden is simply ridiculous.

Then it is quite clear that we disagree on what constitutes "normal sex". Seeing as I view sleep-sex to be normative, and if I understand the arguments correctly, under Swedish law it is liable to prosecution, with guilt or innocence based on a subjective determination on who has the most credibility.

In your case, where you had a history of sleep-sex, but in one instance your partner suddenly decided that it was rape and reported it… The court would have to take into consideration that history, and most likely would find you innocent because of it. Of course your partner could lie and say there was no such history, or that it had all been rape, but that's hardly a problem with the law itself. The problem there is lies, and your partner could just as easily accuse you of raping her while awake and you would be in the exact same position.

I think you're confusing the accusation of crimes with convictions of crime. There is no way you can stop someone from maliciously accusing you of a crime. But the accusation doesn't mean an automatic conviction. And no, the courts here are nowhere near as arbitrary as you seem to have been led to believe.

[Steersman]

I do not believe the statistics are anywhere near a depiction of reality.

Of course these "stats" are complete fictional bullshit. ....

And I suppose this table from the UN – by country, year and per capita frequency – of actual reports or accusations to police authorities of rape does not qualify as factual evidence? One can quibble until the cows – or sheep – come home about the reliability of the numbers in each of the countries and whether they are under-reported or false-reported, but it seems to me that they have to be considered as a fairly solid starting point. Unless you maybe have some others to cite that are more credible?

Fill in here what I am going to say about the outrageously criminal 100% statistical ignoring of male prison rapes & male military rapes. ...

Regardless of how deplorable that situation is or how high are the numbers of rapes involved, I fail to see how that changes in the slightest the actual numbers of rapes reported in other – and larger – segments of society.

[Steersman]

No, it's NOT correct, shit. It is actually closer to 12%, as steersman said. (11.7%) Final Answer....

While you are shuffling your decimal places there :whistle: the other problem with this calculation is that it assumes independence. ....

Plus, as many have already noted, the surveys are often poorly worded and include things like consensual sex that was later regretted as rape.

Anyone know of an iPhone App that might be used to securely record contractual agreements for sex prior to the opening of hostilities – so to speak? Maybe additional modules to record The Main Event – blow by blow – should subsequent recollections be somewhat spotty? ....

[disumbrationist]

While you are shuffling your decimal places there :whistle: the other problem with this calculation is that it assumes independence.

Yes, it assumes independence; this is as much as can be done without additional data - more of a back-of-the-envelope calculation. I wouldn't actually expect the proportion of victims to go to 1 in real life, due to a certain population of women being raped more than once while others not being at all do to individual differences in behavior, location, social group, etc.
Of course, there is a rather sinister side to the probability of rape not being independent: if one is raped, it means that one is more likely than average to be raped again. Thus the victim not only knows what the crime can do to him/her, but also that a someone who hasn't been raped doesn't know exactly what it's like and (perhaps) doesn't share the same risk - which must be rather alienating.

I must thank Steersman for (unintentionally?) showing me something I hadn't realized before:
that the function 1-(1-x)^n can be approximated by n*x if x is near zero and n << 1/x . I was wondering how he managed to get essentially the right answer using the 'wrong' math...

[Michael K Gray]

...the function 1-(1-x)^n can be approximated by n*x if x is near zero and n << 1/x...

Eh???
I'd put good money on that what you say is not true.

[Steersman]

...
I must thank Steersman for (unintentionally?) showing me something I hadn't realized before:
that the function 1-(1-x)^n can be approximated by n*x if x is near zero and n << 1/x . I was wondering how he managed to get essentially the right answer using the 'wrong' math...

As mentioned, a bit of a horse-back guess and a bit of luck ... :-) But basically, I think, sampling without replacement: population 100, first year 0.62% get raped [0.62 persons]; second year 0.62% of [100-0.62] get raped [0.616 persons]; etc., etc. Twenty years, approximately 12.4 persons raped – your 11.7 probably being the exact number – my probability and stats being a little rough around the edges.

But a real-world addition might be that some unraped women move into the demographic at the 15 year-old end while some raped/unraped women move out at the 35 year-old end. And, as you suggest, still some possibility of multiple rapes. Interesting problem of formulation even apart from the nitty-gritty social issues that motivate it ....

But time to call it a day; night all ...

[JackRayner]

....
Which, by that argument and using his numbers, means that something like 0.164% [0.246*100/150] of the population of women in the US are raped or sexually assaulted every year.

His original argument is about the range of people which rape actually affects, in response to the claim that if you're not a victim, your experience is not representative. (Meaning that victimization is the norm.)

Didn’t really see how that followed from the prestidigitation that he was doing with the numbers: the victimization rate is something quite a bit different from the numbers of people who have actually been victimized; raping one woman every year out of a population of 10 women means that in 10 years every woman has been victimized.

But that “victimization is the norm” sort of hangs on the definition of “norm”; if it means “average”, as seems typical, then the numbers don’t support that contention. But the actual numbers from the National Center for Victims of Crime [“a non-profit organization”] still doesn’t paint a particularly rosy picture:

Rates of victimization by sexual violence vary among ethnic groups. Approximately 1 in 5 Black women (22 percent) and White (18.8 percent) non-Hispanic women, and 1 in 7 Hispanic women (14.6 percent) in the United States have experienced rape at some point in their lives.

In which case one might argue that on average something like 15% of American women have been raped.

I've got several issues with your current source, and it has to do with 1] The ambiguity they display on that little stats page, and 2] Their sources...

On ambiguity: They begin by talking about sexual assault, say "Other studies on sexual assault have found:", and then call all of it rape. Every. Bullet point. Says. Rape. Where is this sexual assault they were just mentioning? Did they choose to ignore it because it's not edgy enough? Or was it all just lumped in and labeled rape for effect? They don't say. :think:

On sources: The CDC's [one of your source's main cited sources] definition of "rape" includes *attempts* at forced penetration. Ever had anyone attempt to force intercourse on you? RAPE!!1 Not "attempted rape". *Rape*!

Also, the CDC's definition for rape, which feminist organizations are pushing for the FBI to adopt, (No way, imagine that!) includes a bit on drugs. Essentially, that sex while under the influence removes a woman's ability to consent, TO INCLUDE CONSUMING THESE BY CHOICE. You could have both had as much to drink/smoke/whatever, and she could even be the one jumping on top of you!... Yet, penetrating her while she's under the influence = RAPE. I'm a goddamn rapist, but that definition. Pretty fucking sweet, huh? :clap:

*sigh*...

Listen; I know rape happens. And rape is bad. [And drugging others to have your way with them? Pretty despicable.] I'm just not going to sit here and have panic mongering ideologues with an agenda [not necessarily you, definitely your sources] blow smoke up my ass about its actual rate of occurrence... :snooty:

[Tsheo]

But then, most A+ chicks would freak at how my current partner got me into the sack the first time.

oh do tell.

He got me outrageously drunk by buying me doubles (I didn't realise they were doubles)
He drove me to his house after the bouncer said I was too drunk to remain at the pub we were at - at that point I didn't even know the name of the suburb he lived in, I'd met him at work a few weeks earlier and hadn't really needed to exchange addresses! - and I spent most of the drive passed out
He put me in his bed, I said something about not sleeping together that night (but really, I was very much DTF, I just didn't want to be seen as easy :lol: )
Five minutes later...

:lol: Sounds all very dreadfully juvenile, when I put it like that, which it was I guess. We were 24 (me) and 23 (him) at the time. Eight years and two kids later, still together and happy, and a long long way from those days...

***************************
As for rape stats, they've always seemed a vast overestimation to me. I know lots of young and not-so-young women, being female myself and having had lots of female friends and acquaintances over the years, lots of very close friendships... I know one woman who was raped (by a stalkerish ex who also tried to kill her, he is now in jail) and I also know one woman who spun a whole lot of bullshit about being gang-raped and in the end it turned out to be a big fat lie she was using to keep her white-knight boyfriend loyal and by her side.

I think rape is a despicable thing, I just think a lot of victim feminists use far too loose a definition of rape, and I think social scientists misuse statistics and come up with wildly inappropriate stats. I don't think it helps the cause of women who really have been raped AT ALL. I realise I don't know every single woman out there but I've known a lot of them, known a lot of them very closely and shared a lot of confidences, and the stats just don't seem to weigh up. Far far more of my friends and relatives should be rape victims, according to the stats. Do I just associate with extremely lucky women?? I know a couple extra who got indecently assaulted as children by uncles (separate incidents) but they weren't raped and I hardly think that's a feminist issue, given the amount of kiddy fiddling of boy victims.

[TedDahlberg]

Kind of interesting post by Ben Radford: Bearing the Burden: On Being Chosen to Suffer

[cunt]

I'm not sure why the exact statistics matter. It doesn't alter the end goal one bit, that goal is always going to be lowering the rate at which people get raped. The goal is 0%, nobody ever gets fucking raped, ever.

I've yet to see a suggestion from the ftb board that might actually reduce the rate at all. They only seem to suggest bullshit like schroedingers rapist, forgetting that actual rapists really don't care how threatened they are going to make you feel (hint: they plan on raping you). They suggest crap like crossing the street if you see a woman walking the opposite direction, forgetting that rapists wouldn't bother with this or if they did, would cross back over the street when they are closer and the woman feels safer. Again, rapists are planning on raping people.

There was a recent anti-rape poster campaign put out by a police force over here. The message was essentially, "remember to drink responsibly and don't walk home alone". The reaction from supposedly anti-rape feminists was that the police were "blaming the victim", and ludicrously enough they forced the police to issue a clarification/apology. I can't wait for their own campaign "Hey rapist! Did you know that rape is illegal? Even drunk girls".

They seem to have forgotten that their feelings on any given subject, their level of comfort in a given situation, are not actually equally as important as stopping rape. So they only suggest things that will make them feel safer, not actually be safer.

[AndrewV69]

I think you're confusing the accusation of crimes with convictions of crime. There is no way you can stop someone from maliciously accusing you of a crime. But the accusation doesn't mean an automatic conviction. And no, the courts here are nowhere near as arbitrary as you seem to have been led to believe.

At this point I find your arguments compelling enough to drop my previous conclusions. I would like to thank you and acathode for your responses.

They were very much appreciated.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I'm not sure why the exact statistics matter. It doesn't alter the end goal one bit, that goal is always going to be lowering the rate at which people get raped. The goal is 0%, nobody ever gets fucking raped, ever.

I've yet to see a suggestion from the ftb board that might actually reduce the rate at all. They only seem to suggest bullshit like schroedingers rapist, forgetting that actual rapists really don't care how threatened they are going to make you feel (hint: they plan on raping you). They suggest crap like crossing the street if you see a woman walking the opposite direction, forgetting that rapists wouldn't bother with this or if they did, would cross back over the street when they are closer and the woman feels safer. Again, rapists are planning on raping people.

There was a recent anti-rape poster campaign put out by a police force over here. The message was essentially, "remember to drink responsibly and don't walk home alone". The reaction from supposedly anti-rape feminists was that the police were "blaming the victim", and ludicrously enough they forced the police to issue a clarification/apology. I can't wait for their own campaign "Hey rapist! Did you know that rape is illegal? Even drunk girls".

They seem to have forgotten that their feelings on any given subject, their level of comfort in a given situation, are not actually equally as important as stopping rape. So they only suggest things that will make them feel safer, not actually be safer.

Well, there's fuck all anyone can do about someone's rape impulses/premeditation if said someone is determined to act. They've tried here for years, with psychiatric followings of convicted rapists and such, but the degree of recidive after jail/psy-ward time is still pretty conscequent. Educating potential victims about how to behave in dangerous situations is not the perfect solution, but at least it's a start. Short of chemical castration for the perpetrator, and even this sometimes fails, as rape is not solely sexual in nature, but often a matter of power over the other.

But this is NOT "blaming the victim". It's giving potential victims the tools to avoid becoming an actual victim. Which the FTB A+ bunch should be all for.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Article in French, sorry:

http://www.publications-justice.fr/accu ... e-sexuelle

[Spence]

...the function 1-(1-x)^n can be approximated by n*x if x is near zero and n << 1/x...

Eh???
I'd put good money on that what you say is not true.

I see no point in the shortcut since with computers the full calculation is easy enough to do. This is probability so 0<x<1 and n is an integer, the term (1-x)^n expands
(1-x)^2 = 1 -2x +x^2
(1-x)^3 = 1 -3x +3x^2 - x^3
etc. etc.

If x is "near zero" (remember it is bound between 0 and 1, so near zero means a small fraction) then the higher order polynomial terms become insignificant. If x=0.1, the x^2 term drops down to 0.01 so (1-2x+x^2) to one significant figure can be approximated by (1-2x). Then 1-(1-2x) is approximately equal to 2x.

The problem I find is that most people do not find stats intuitive so taking shortcuts like this abstracts from what is actually being done and generally more mistakes get made (in my experience).

[TedDahlberg]

I think you're confusing the accusation of crimes with convictions of crime. There is no way you can stop someone from maliciously accusing you of a crime. But the accusation doesn't mean an automatic conviction. And no, the courts here are nowhere near as arbitrary as you seem to have been led to believe.

At this point I find your arguments compelling enough to drop my previous conclusions. I would like to thank you and acathode for your responses.

They were very much appreciated.

Always happy to help clarify something. And just to be clear, Sweden's no utopia where every law is perfect and every court ruling correct. But I'd say it's pretty comparable to any other Western country, allowing for local variations and quirks of course. And while feminism may seem pervasive here, as with FTB it's mostly talk and little action. As the man wrote, "full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".

[Tsheo]

I'm not sure why the exact statistics matter. It doesn't alter the end goal one bit, that goal is always going to be lowering the rate at which people get raped. The goal is 0%, nobody ever gets fucking raped, ever.

I've yet to see a suggestion from the ftb board that might actually reduce the rate at all. They only seem to suggest bullshit like schroedingers rapist, forgetting that actual rapists really don't care how threatened they are going to make you feel (hint: they plan on raping you). They suggest crap like crossing the street if you see a woman walking the opposite direction, forgetting that rapists wouldn't bother with this or if they did, would cross back over the street when they are closer and the woman feels safer. Again, rapists are planning on raping people.

There was a recent anti-rape poster campaign put out by a police force over here. The message was essentially, "remember to drink responsibly and don't walk home alone". The reaction from supposedly anti-rape feminists was that the police were "blaming the victim", and ludicrously enough they forced the police to issue a clarification/apology. I can't wait for their own campaign "Hey rapist! Did you know that rape is illegal? Even drunk girls".

They seem to have forgotten that their feelings on any given subject, their level of comfort in a given situation, are not actually equally as important as stopping rape. So they only suggest things that will make them feel safer, not actually be safer.

Well, there's fuck all anyone can do about someone's rape impulses/premeditation if said someone is determined to act. They've tried here for years, with psychiatric followings of convicted rapists and such, but the degree of recidive after jail/psy-ward time is still pretty conscequent. Educating potential victims about how to behave in dangerous situations is not the perfect solution, but at least it's a start. Short of chemical castration for the perpetrator, and even this sometimes fails, as rape is not solely sexual in nature, but often a matter of power over the other.

But this is NOT "blaming the victim". It's giving potential victims the tools to avoid becoming an actual victim. Which the FTB A+ bunch should be all for.

I don't think any crime rate will ever be reduced to 0%. Which is why I agree that learning strategies for how you can lower the chance of becoming a victim of [insert crime here] is a good thing. Why should rape be different? Why the feminist moral panic when someone suggests ways you could lower your chance of becoming a victim of rape? Do people get so upset about victim blaming when police offer suggestions for home security, or when IT experts tell us how to keep our PCs secure or avoid scams? Or more comparable, when you learn ways to avoid muggings or random physical assaults? Of course ALL crime is the fault of the criminal; doesn't mean there aren't ways to reduce your risk of coming across said criminal.

It's a lot easier to moderate your own behaviour, than it is humanity at large. I can control my own behaviour; I can't control others. I'm quite happy to take some responsibility for what happens to me. That doesn't take away from the wrong done by anyone who commits a crime against me; it doesn't mean my own actions didn't come into it at all though.

[windy]

I've yet to see a suggestion from the ftb board that might actually reduce the rate at all. They only seem to suggest bullshit like schroedingers rapist, forgetting that actual rapists really don't care how threatened they are going to make you feel (hint: they plan on raping you). They suggest crap like crossing the street if you see a woman walking the opposite direction, forgetting that rapists wouldn't bother with this or if they did, would cross back over the street when they are closer and the woman feels safer. Again, rapists are planning on raping people.

There was a recent anti-rape poster campaign put out by a police force over here. The message was essentially, "remember to drink responsibly and don't walk home alone". The reaction from supposedly anti-rape feminists was that the police were "blaming the victim", and ludicrously enough they forced the police to issue a clarification/apology. I can't wait for their own campaign "Hey rapist! Did you know that rape is illegal? Even drunk girls".

Well, the "don't rape" message could be useful in the grey areas where there was no planned rape but a miscommunication about consent. But if someone suggests that women could benefit from being a bit more proactive in such situations themselves, there is often a bait and switch back to violent coercive rape: "what, you are blaming the victim because she didn't fight back??"

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Want to reduce risks of car accidents? Don't drive drunk.
Want to reduce being ran over by a car? Look both ways before crossing.
Want to reduce dying on top of the Everest? Don't climb the Everest.

Want to reduce risks of rape? Don...VICTIM BLAMER!!!

Sums it up, I think...

Windy,

Well, the "don't rape" message could be useful in the grey areas where there was no planned rape but a miscommunication about consent. But if someone suggests that women could benefit from being a bit more proactive in such situations themselves, there is often a bait and switch back to violent coercive rape: "what, you are blaming the victim because she didn't fight back??"

talking just for myself I never make physical contact with a person (male or female) unless I read their body language as inviting. Open arms for a hug is a good hint. Flirtalicious looks and smiles are another. And if my reading was wrong and the person recoils, then that's it, sorry to have misread you, would you like me to leave now?

[BarnOwl]

The US government finally locked the XMRV=CFS propents in a lab and said "Prove it. While we are watching." (think psychics with Randis million dollar challenge)

Surprise surprise, no connection between CFS and XMRV.

Homer Simpson voice: "Wheres my parade? *shakes fist* Wheres my parade?"

Fantastic, Abbie! I think a lot of physicians have always classified CFS as a somatoform disorder - that's not to say that it's malingering, or that the symptoms aren't "real" to the patient, but rather that it's psychogenic. Of course there's a pretty significant stigma associated with psychogenic disorders in the US (and elsewhere), which explains in large part the desperation to find an organic causative agent for CFS.

Interesting thing I learned from a neurologist, about gait/balance/movement symptoms that are psychogenic rather than physical in origin: the patient may wobble and sway, but will not actually fall down. A patient with an organic lesion in basal nuclei, cerebellum, peripheral nerves, muscles etc. will, of course, fall down repeatedly ... often the reason that he or she seeks treatment.

On a related note, I think there's a certain amount of Münchausen by proxy associated with that persistent "special needs child as a gift from God" schtick, in some cases.

[cunt]

Just to clarify. I'm using the term goal in the sense of a desired outcome not as an a necessarily achievable outcome. Of course it will probably never be 0%, but that is always the goal.

Want to reduce risks of car accidents? Don't drive drunk.
Want to reduce being ran over by a car? Look both ways before crossing.
Want to reduce dying on top of the Everest? Don't climb the Everest.

Want to reduce risks of rape? Don...VICTIM BLAMER!!!

Sums it up, I think...

Sums it up well. Instead of actually making headway into reducing the rate of rape, they actually attempt to obstruct it and offer no realistic or useful alternatives.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

On a related note, I think there's a certain amount of Münchausen by proxy associated with that persistent "special needs child as a gift from God" schtick, in some cases.

Sorry to post so much, I'm in a short "normal" stage in a shitty health day.

I agree totally with that assertion. There seems to be a "want attention" quality to these people. And, in a nice loop, it seems to be the same for FTB A+.

ps: eh! My first sentence sounds just like what I'm condemning. But in my case, it's true! really true!!! (well, so true in fact that it's the second consecutive day I had to cancel and audition with a great singer for a side project. Back to vomiting now...)

[cunt]

[youtube]IcF4ZAsT2Do[/youtube]

[TedDahlberg]

I don't think any crime rate will ever be reduced to 0%. Which is why I agree that learning strategies for how you can lower the chance of becoming a victim of [insert crime here] is a good thing. Why should rape be different? Why the feminist moral panic when someone suggests ways you could lower your chance of becoming a victim of rape? Do people get so upset about victim blaming when police offer suggestions for home security, or when IT experts tell us how to keep our PCs secure or avoid scams? Or more comparable, when you learn ways to avoid muggings or random physical assaults? Of course ALL crime is the fault of the criminal; doesn't mean there aren't ways to reduce your risk of coming across said criminal.

It's a lot easier to moderate your own behaviour, than it is humanity at large. I can control my own behaviour; I can't control others. I'm quite happy to take some responsibility for what happens to me. That doesn't take away from the wrong done by anyone who commits a crime against me; it doesn't mean my own actions didn't come into it at all though.

Yesterday my boss suggested I might be interested in a course in how to deal with difficult, upset or unstable people and how to defuse threatening situations. Of course I slapped her across the face and told her just how outraged I was that she was blaming me for being accosted by unstable clients. Or possibly I had the sane response of saying that that sounded like a great idea.

Personally I try to keep to keep to Stoicism, or my own interpretation thereof. Basically it boils down to accepting that one cannot control anything in the world but one's own reactions, and so the way to avoid unhappiness is to control your own reactions to the world. To quote Wikipedia:

Stoicism teaches the development of self-control and fortitude as a means of overcoming destructive emotions; the philosophy holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason (logos). A primary aspect of Stoicism involves improving the individual's ethical and moral well-being: "Virtue consists in a will that is in agreement with Nature."[6] This principle also applies to the realm of interpersonal relationships; "to be free from anger, envy, and jealousy,"[7] and to accept even slaves as "equals of other men, because all men alike are products of nature."[8]

I'd say this applies equally well to actions as well as emotions. Most things in the world are beyond my control. But I can modify my own actions to avoid or minimise at least some unpleasantness. Can't say I see the point of refusing to do so just because the world ought to be a nicer place. Yes, it really ought to, but it isn't.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

[youtube]IcF4ZAsT2Do[/youtube]

Fuck you! New keyboard and screen ordered!

[BarnOwl]

Sorry you're not feeling well today, Phil. Migraine again?

I'm fortunate to get only visual migraines (scintillating scotomas) - not at all painful, just mildly annoying.

IANAP, but my opinion is that FftB A+theism often resembles a factitious disorder - case in point being the "transient prosopagnosia" fabrication.

[James Onen]

windy, are you this windy? If so, kudos :D .

[cunt]

I've yet to see a suggestion from the ftb board that might actually reduce the rate at all. They only seem to suggest bullshit like schroedingers rapist, forgetting that actual rapists really don't care how threatened they are going to make you feel (hint: they plan on raping you). They suggest crap like crossing the street if you see a woman walking the opposite direction, forgetting that rapists wouldn't bother with this or if they did, would cross back over the street when they are closer and the woman feels safer. Again, rapists are planning on raping people.

There was a recent anti-rape poster campaign put out by a police force over here. The message was essentially, "remember to drink responsibly and don't walk home alone". The reaction from supposedly anti-rape feminists was that the police were "blaming the victim", and ludicrously enough they forced the police to issue a clarification/apology. I can't wait for their own campaign "Hey rapist! Did you know that rape is illegal? Even drunk girls".

Well, the "don't rape" message could be useful in the grey areas where there was no planned rape but a miscommunication about consent.

Another poster in the same campaign was directed at men who drink too much and force sex on women. With the message being that they will be arrested and convicted for doing so.

[dinnerbubble]

You don't need to take me so literally. Most of the time I'm just fucking about. I know perfectly well what a joiner is.

The opposite of a "splitter"?

No that's a "lumper".
And I'm actually a Jiner, it's just that I realised the Septics would probably assume that I was merely very gregarious, and get confused and angry.
So I used their word for what I do, although I've had a spell as a bench-hand too. Simples! We don't have carpenters per se in Scozzia. Not enough timber, historically, it all arrived ready sawn and sized from the Baltics and Canadia. Only place you'd get them was on big estates with their own woods. As my old journeyman used to spit in disgust, "Jiner ba christ! Ye couldny jine haun's!"

You don't need to take me so literally. Most of the time I'm just fucking about.

This^^. ^^THIS!!1!+263205.8^^, as you cool people have it ...

And wasn't that Jesus character actually the son of a mistranslation?
Like some sort of cleric-type job.
If he was a woodbutcher, well, talk about hoist by your own petard.

[TedDahlberg]

I'm fortunate to get only visual migraines (scintillating scotomas) - not at all painful, just mildly annoying.

I get those too. The first couple of times it happened and I had no idea what was going on it was really disturbing. Only found out that it was migraine related a few years back, thanks to some off hand comment about it on some podcast and me going "wait… that sounds awfully familiar". I count myself extremely lucky since so far it only seems to happen once very other year or so. Especially since my brother gets proper, lie-in-the-dark-for-a-day-and-hope-to-die migraines. My mother gets a little of both, so I guess we know who to blame.

[deadbubble]

And further suggesting that it might not be particularly wise to be taking the law into one’s own hands. Which makes quite a bit of sense given that even the legal system frequently gets things badly wrong ....

Where the fuck is that bitch Justicar when you need him, hey?

No, John, it's quite difficult to divine from your cock-waggling exposition that you are Always Right and Always get the Right Guy.
To me you sound like a bit of an Unstable Mabel, with an ingrained fear of the world and his uncle.
Judge Jury and Executioner? Cool. Like Breivik.

And by out of the game, I meant more or less no longer On The Game, in that (if They stop shifting the fucking goalposts,Tantalus-stylee) I can stop prostituting my decrepit carcass to Capital for a bit before I cark it. Although .. old scotch workman, from the Glasgow area, who likes a drink and a smoke?? Not lookin good, statistically :D. Better double up on the deep-fried Mars Bars and make a job of it.

[Spence]

Just to clarify. I'm using the term goal in the sense of a desired outcome not as an a necessarily achievable outcome. Of course it will probably never be 0%, but that is always the goal.

Well, we had this discussion about rape stats etc. on the threads at ERV and I said something similar (that the goal should be no rape) and a whole bunch of people got whiny about me stating the obvious. (Sadly it is necessary to state the obvious in these cases due to a high likelihood of quote-mining by any critics).

As for statistics, a good statistical model by someone competent can offer insight into likely cause and effects, as well as consequences of trying to change certain behaviours. That said, the "likelihood of a woman being raped during her life" as a statistic really offers no insight beyond trying to grab the headline. Perhaps it might count as an "awareness raiser" (as Dawkins might put it) but if you use dubious stats then it just causes more problems than it solves.

To me, a more useful and informative statistic is the probability of being raped by a stranger vs. being raped by someone known to the victim (friends, or family). The latter is far more likely than the former. If you want to do something to bring the rape stats down, you focus on the bulk of the cases.

It reminds me of a thread on pharyngula where one of the more extreme fems was complaining about the US rape culture, explaining that because of this culture if she did not want to be raped, she could not go out without a chaperone, and had to be back at home by 6pm. Not realising that most rapes are committed by someone you know (the chaperone is more likely to rape you than a stranger) and at home, in your own bed, at night - exactly where the misguided person thought she would be safest.

The other interesting point I made is that if you want to lean heavily on rape statistics, Rebecca Watson probably had more to fear from PZ than she did from Elevator Guy that night. Because elevator guy was a stranger. (In practice, she had little to fear from either of them, but a naive assessment of probabilities would put someone RW knows more in the frame than someone she didn't)

Oh yeah, and Chris Morris rocks. I'm sure the baboons would be outraged by jokes about rape. Although that stuff is mild compared to his blue jam series.

[franc]

http://www.atheismplus.net/

[John D]

And further suggesting that it might not be particularly wise to be taking the law into one’s own hands. Which makes quite a bit of sense given that even the legal system frequently gets things badly wrong ....

Where the fuck is that bitch Justicar when you need him, hey?

No, John, it's quite difficult to divine from your cock-waggling exposition that you are Always Right and Always get the Right Guy.
To me you sound like a bit of an Unstable Mabel, with an ingrained fear of the world and his uncle.
Judge Jury and Executioner? Cool. Like Breivik.

And by out of the game, I meant more or less no longer On The Game, in that (if They stop shifting the fucking goalposts,Tantalus-stylee) I can stop prostituting my decrepit carcass to Capital for a bit before I cark it. Although .. old scotch workman, from the Glasgow area, who likes a drink and a smoke?? Not lookin good, statistically :D. Better double up on the deep-fried Mars Bars and make a job of it.

Ok. So I will clarify and I will be crystal clear.

1) I will not punch someone for cursing at my daughters. They are generally well equipped in the cursing arena and they have never needed my help with this(other than my ready supply of examples of language they can use). I will never hit someone in public... I am far to calculating for this. I seldom do something so foolish.

2) I am happy to holler at anyone who I think deserves a dose of reality and I don't put up with too much crap in the way of unacceptable behavior. I can do this without cursing (and this is a very useful skill when it come to getting teenaged boys to behave and stop trashing the school etc.). If I witnessed someone trash talking my kid I would let them have it... and they would be scared when I was done (although I would not threaten them).

3) I will not let me girls be excessively bullied or psychically threatened in a real way. Most people can tell the difference. If a man were to get pissed at them and curse at them I would probably not need to intervene. But... if I was convinced a person was a real threat I would carefully, meticulously, and deliberately plan a response. This could involve the police, but perhaps not. It would depend on the circumstances. I am a practical person and I realize the police have limits on how well they can protect me and mine. These limits would be part of my plan. It might be entirely possible to scare the psycho away and I could live with that. But... I would not necessarily count on simple scare tactics.

Is this clear enough> sheeeesh!

[Philip of Tealand]

And further suggesting that it might not be particularly wise to be taking the law into one’s own hands. Which makes quite a bit of sense given that even the legal system frequently gets things badly wrong ....

Where the fuck is that bitch Justicar when you need him, hey?

No, John, it's quite difficult to divine from your cock-waggling exposition that you are Always Right and Always get the Right Guy.
To me you sound like a bit of an Unstable Mabel, with an ingrained fear of the world and his uncle.
Judge Jury and Executioner? Cool. Like Breivik.

And by out of the game, I meant more or less no longer On The Game, in that (if They stop shifting the fucking goalposts,Tantalus-stylee) I can stop prostituting my decrepit carcass to Capital for a bit before I cark it. Although .. old scotch workman, from the Glasgow area, who likes a drink and a smoke?? Not lookin good, statistically :D. Better double up on the deep-fried Mars Bars and make a job of it.

Ok. So I will clarify and I will be crystal clear.

1) I will not punch someone for cursing at my daughters. They are generally well equipped in the cursing arena and they have never needed my help with this(other than my ready supply of examples of language they can use). I will never hit someone in public... I am far to calculating for this. I seldom do something so foolish.

2) I am happy to holler at anyone who I think deserves a dose of reality and I don't put up with too much crap in the way of unacceptable behavior. I can do this without cursing (and this is a very useful skill when it come to getting teenaged boys to behave and stop trashing the school etc.). If I witnessed someone trash talking my kid I would let them have it... and they would be scared when I was done (although I would not threaten them).

3) I will not let me girls be excessively bullied or psychically threatened in a real way. Most people can tell the difference. If a man were to get pissed at them and curse at them I would probably not need to intervene. But... if I was convinced a person was a real threat I would carefully, meticulously, and deliberately plan a response. This could involve the police, but perhaps not. It would depend on the circumstances. I am a practical person and I realize the police have limits on how well they can protect me and mine. These limits would be part of my plan. It might be entirely possible to scare the psycho away and I could live with that. But... I would not necessarily count on simple scare tactics.

Is this clear enough> sheeeesh!

John, you are obviously a good parent and a caring MISOGYNIST....dammit, I mean, father! :D

[Dick Strawkins]

I guess we know who to blame.

I blame the patriarchy!

[franc]

Is this someone here? Most of the graphics are from here. Which is great - I at least encourage the theft.

[youtube]BXaaM9a4Iqk[/youtube]

[windy]

windy, are you this windy? If so, kudos :D .

Yes, that's me. Probably a good thing that there aren't several of me running around ;)

[ERV]

The US government finally locked the XMRV=CFS propents in a lab and said "Prove it. While we are watching." (think psychics with Randis million dollar challenge)

Surprise surprise, no connection between CFS and XMRV.

Homer Simpson voice: "Wheres my parade? *shakes fist* Wheres my parade?"

Fantastic, Abbie! I think a lot of physicians have always classified CFS as a somatoform disorder - that's not to say that it's malingering, or that the symptoms aren't "real" to the patient, but rather that it's psychogenic. Of course there's a pretty significant stigma associated with psychogenic disorders in the US (and elsewhere), which explains in large part the desperation to find an organic causative agent for CFS.

And of course a huge problem is that its a catch-all 'diagnosis'. Its hard to tease out what is 'going wrong' when all of the patients are so different.

That being said, there is obviously, to even the most casual observer, a sub-population that has hypochondria/ somatoform disorders, and other psychological disorders. I say this as a former hypochondriac (anemia + bored brain after my qualifying exam = panic attacks/Im dying. iron + regaining hobbies I dropped over the course of my education in favor of studying/working resolved the issue. oh wait, thats not right--'ALL OF MY MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES ARE THE FFTBULLIES FAULT!!!! BAAAAAAW!!! DADDY BEAT THEM UP!!!!' ). But the *extreme* anti-psychology/psychiatry sentiment in CFS communities gives them an excuse not to get help.

On a related note, I think there's a certain amount of Münchausen by proxy associated with that persistent "special needs child as a gift from God" schtick, in some cases.

Ugh. Dont get me started.

[John D]

John, you are obviously a good parent and a caring MISOGYNIST....dammit, I mean, father! :D

Somehow the father role suits me. Why fight it? We all need some kind of motivation.. some kind of role to play... some way of telling ourselves our life story.

I find myself questioning the view that is common amongst atheists that social roles are bad. It just seems to me that there is not much left if we got rid of our social roles entirely. And even when gay marriage becomes fully legal in the US (which it will eventually) we will still have social roles. There will be a smearing of the roles between men and women etc., but there are still norms that are important to keep things humming along.

I am well suited for the provider and protector role of a traditional American father/husband. It just works for me. I actually think it is sad that so much media portrays the traditional father as a buffoon and slovenly beer swilling pig. To some extent I blame some feminist concepts for much of this. The "patriarchy" has served people pretty well for the last few thousand years. Some of the concepts regrading a parent's role in raising children and providing material and security are a foundation of modern life. Let's not trash all the good stuff.

and lastly... while I am on this silly rant. I will make sure I tell my daughters how to stay safe. I tell them not to accept a drink from a stranger, not to go to the bar alone, not to get too drunk at a Frat party, etc. This DOES NOT make me a rape apologist or a potential rapist. It makes me a protective father who knows that the world is full of bad shit. This is one of the reasons the pretty pink princesses like Jen and Becci make me furious. What would they do without their protector/provider mothers and fathers? ... okay... that's enough for now.

[lost control]

Put your coffee / drink away before clicking (trigger warnings to save keyboards are fine, right?):

[AndrewV69]

Someone help out the aspie? What sort of mentality decides that Kampala, Ulan Bator, and Port Moresby are obscure when they are all capital citys with a significant history?

Is this ignorance? Some sort of humour/irony I just do not get? What?

http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com ... mment-1409

Freethought Kampala ? This is just weird. What other obscure cities have a great blog of freethinkers ? Freethought Oulan Bator ? Freethought Port Moresby ?
Anyway, great job.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Someone help out the aspie? What sort of mentality decides that Kampala, Ulan Bator, and Port Moresby are obscure when they are all capital citys with a significant history?

Is this ignorance? Some sort of humour/irony I just do not get? What?

http://freethoughtkampala.wordpress.com ... mment-1409

Freethought Kampala ? This is just weird. What other obscure cities have a great blog of freethinkers ? Freethought Oulan Bator ? Freethought Port Moresby ?
Anyway, great job.

O-o

[ERV]

Nanny Benson, Twatson, and the kid who should be studying are having a discussion about whether they should hate Jesus and Mo forever and never find any of the cartoons funny because of the 'Girls' comic.

I still dont understand those of you who describe Watson as 'smart':

@AlexGabriel @rhysmorgan @OpheliaBenson I think so. Terribly written & drawn, baffling. Like, why is she under the bar? Is that a beard?

Well, Stupid, drawings are, traditionally, in two dimensions, while the world we live in in real life is in three dimensions. Artists will use things like 'perspective' to give the illusion of three dimensions in their 2D drawings. So, Barmaids quote bubble is lower and 'closer' to the reader, because she is behind the bar, while Christian God is sitting 'behind' the bar 'further away'. The artist is not attempting to give the impression that Barmaid is under the bar, and Christian God is on top of the bar.

:shock:

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I still dont understand those of you who describe Watson as 'smart':

I don't!

[real horrorshow]

Nanny Benson, Twatson, and the kid who should be studying are having a discussion about whether they should hate Jesus and Mo forever and never find any of the cartoons funny because of the 'Girls' comic.

Stupid cunts.

[Tigzy]

I still dont understand those of you who describe Watson as 'smart':

I don't!

She's as thick as pigshit, in my estimation. I've never read a blog post of hers that has ever actually made me stop and think, 'hmmmm. Interesting.' (which PZ Myers has managed numerous times, despite my immense dislike of him). However, I would contend that she is as sly as fuck and an adept emotional manipulator who has a keen instinct for self-promotion, given that her intellectual contributions to Atheism/skepticism are precisely nil, even though she has conned what seems to be many, many people into believing otherwise.

[windy]

Well, Stupid, drawings are, traditionally, in two dimensions, while the world we live in in real life is in three dimensions. Artists will use things like 'perspective' to give the illusion of three dimensions in their 2D drawings. So, Barmaids quote bubble is lower and 'closer' to the reader, because she is behind the bar, while Christian God is sitting 'behind' the bar 'further away'. The artist is not attempting to give the impression that Barmaid is under the bar, and Christian God is on top of the bar.

That's Moses!

Ophelia complains that some people think the 'invisible' barmaid is hot. Eh, she's clearly not getting objectified based on her looks but some people find her intelligence sexy, that's bad now?

[GenerallyFading]

I'm very interested in the victim mentality because I used to be one. I was bullied at work, suffered from symptoms described as PTSD, had depression, self-harmed, was suicidal. I joined a Depression forum and we all talked and sympathised and at the time it was really helpful. As time went on, I began to become concerned that the constant talking and remembering was actually holding me back, rather than being helpful. The end came when I was reading a thread posted by a person who threatened to commit suicide. One person from the forum went to her house and was downstairs with their partner whilst this person was on line upstairs saying they were suicidal and were going to kill themselves. I ran out of things to say. I felt that there pretty much wasn't anything to do if someone is saying, "I'm going to kill myself" whilst there were two people in the house, specifically because they were going to kill themselves. But I feel evil and horrible for being impatient with them.

I've been through counselling, anti-depressants, CBT - pretty much everything. The only thing which has given me any kind of hope or relief is when I take responsibility for myself and decide that I can't simply rely on the world to become a better place to suit me. That has never worked.

I still feel suicidal, but for me that's my own personal decision. Sorry if this upsets people, but to my mind, it's my life. But no one wants to discuss that, they all rush around waving their hands in the air, going, "You mustn't feel that way". I just can't find people who will discuss the choice rationally. But certainly group hand holding is great to start with and then starts to feel like.....indulgence. Like I don't have to learn how to stand on my own two feet.

[Tigzy]

Just caught this from the Prune's latest word-seepage: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... /09/dirty/

For the first time, yesterday and today, I’m feeling something like what Jen felt – wanting to get out. Everything seems dirty and polluted, including me.

Oh please, do kindly fuck off Nanny Fee - withered, superfluous polyp on the body of skepticism that you are. It would be a wonderful, wonderful thing.

Course, she could just be manufacturing drama or support-whoring. If the comments are anything to go by, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's the latter.

[Dick Strawkins]

Nanny Benson, Twatson, and the kid who should be studying are having a discussion about whether they should hate Jesus and Mo forever and never find any of the cartoons funny because of the 'Girls' comic.

I still dont understand those of you who describe Watson as 'smart':

@AlexGabriel @rhysmorgan @OpheliaBenson I think so. Terribly written & drawn, baffling. Like, why is she under the bar? Is that a beard?

Well, Stupid, drawings are, traditionally, in two dimensions, while the world we live in in real life is in three dimensions. Artists will use things like 'perspective' to give the illusion of three dimensions in their 2D drawings. So, Barmaids quote bubble is lower and 'closer' to the reader, because she is behind the bar, while Christian God is sitting 'behind' the bar 'further away'. The artist is not attempting to give the impression that Barmaid is under the bar, and Christian God is on top of the bar.

:shock:

I think we should be thankful to Ophelia here.
She's just proven that Watson is, in fact, thick as a plank!

What sort of atheist doesn't understand 'Jesus and Mo'?
Ophelia posted Jesus and Mo cartoons for years on Butterflies and Wheels. She still does - as does virtually every other 'new atheist' site.
Everybody knows that the cartoons are badly drawn but that's not the point - it's the writing, which is consistently brilliant and hits all the correct targets.
How on earth can a modern intelligent atheist not understand 'Jesus and Mo'?
I guess modern intelligent atheists DO understand it.
Rebecca Watson, on the other hand...

[ERV]

Just caught this from the Prune's latest word-seepage: http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterflies ... /09/dirty/

For the first time, yesterday and today, I’m feeling something like what Jen felt – wanting to get out. Everything seems dirty and polluted, including me.

Oh please, do kindly fuck off Nanny Fee - withered, superfluous polyp on the body of skepticism that you are. It would be a wonderful, wonderful thing.

Course, she could just be manufacturing drama or support-whoring. If the comments are anything to go by, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's the latter.

OH MY GAWD why cant any of these people just GO AWAY?

You know what happens when I get really busy in the lab? I dont put up a post saying 'POOR ME IM SO BUSY' 'OH I JUST DONT HAVE THE ENERGY TO BLAAAAAG' 'ITS SO HARD TO BALANCE ACADEMIC LIFE WITH MY HOBBIES POOOOOOR MEEEEEEEEAH'. I just dont post for a couple of days. When I go on vacation irl and dont want to blog, I just go on vacation. If I havent found anything I feel like writing about, I just dont post.

Its like they HAVE to write about every goddamn thing/thought as if anybody gives a shit.

BLLUUUUUUUGH.

If you have to positively refer to a Marcotte 'article' for 99% of your blog post, YOU NEED TO GO AWAY FOR A WHILE.

JUST LEAVE. Dont tell me about it, just do it.

[JackRayner]

I don't think any crime rate will ever be reduced to 0%. Which is why I agree that learning strategies for how you can lower the chance of becoming a victim of [insert crime here] is a good thing. Why should rape be different? Why the feminist moral panic when someone suggests ways you could lower your chance of becoming a victim of rape?

Because, the feminists have a narrative to maintain if they mean to continue to receive funding for all of their different orgs, and to have a seat at the table. They see utility in there being victimized women, which is also why they lie about the numbers of rapes and about domestic violence. If they start including domestic violence under "sexual assault" one day, I will not be the least surprised.

[Archdude]

Andrew, the yearly Michigan Womyn's Music Festival is very very excluding of trans women, pre or post op, no matter what. It's an issue that's been argued for years, and they only reason these so called feminists are able to keep the trans women away is because that Equal Rights Amendment thing never happened. Otherwise they'd be forced to treat all genders equally. They would have to let cis men in too. Only the lack of equality laws lets them get away with having women-only public events, ironically.

Wow, Scented Nectar. I'm climbing down this rabbit hole, what outrageous bigotry. There are apparently entire websites dedicated to attacking TG people as Fake Women, both cruelly and with faux-concern for their rights. Thanks for this!

[JAB]

Oh please, do kindly fuck off Nanny Fee - withered, superfluous polyp on the body of skepticism that you are. It would be a wonderful, wonderful thing.

Course, she could just be manufacturing drama or support-whoring. If the comments are anything to go by, I wouldn't be surprised to find it's the latter.

OH MY GAWD why cant any of these people just GO AWAY?

You know what happens when I get really busy in the lab? I dont put up a post saying 'POOR ME IM SO BUSY' 'OH I JUST DONT HAVE THE ENERGY TO BLAAAAAG' 'ITS SO HARD TO BALANCE ACADEMIC LIFE WITH MY HOBBIES POOOOOOR MEEEEEEEEAH'. I just dont post for a couple of days. When I go on vacation irl and dont want to blog, I just go on vacation. If I havent found anything I feel like writing about, I just dont post.

Its like they HAVE to write about every goddamn thing/thought as if anybody gives a shit.

BLLUUUUUUUGH.

If you have to positively refer to a Marcotte 'article' for 99% of your blog post, YOU NEED TO GO AWAY FOR A WHILE.

JUST LEAVE. Dont tell me about it, just do it.[/quote]

She's cultivated a commentariate that believe that she's right to feel threatened and scared, so if she just stopped blogging for a day or more, some of her horde would probably be in a panic and start showing up at her house to be sure she was OK... the brave ones anyway...ie the white knights. (The others would be following at a safe distance...likely banging coconuts shells together.)

[JAB]

block quote fail above... read erv's last comment o correct it

[JAB]

(Note... I have no evidence to back up this idea) It seems to me that the stranger rapist is likely going out to rape somebody, likely anybody (likely sex dependent, though). So if you want to be safe from this you follow the rules everyone says... not walking alone, or in skimpy clothing etc. Seems like this might be good advice to keep it from happening to you. BUT, the rape still happens, but to someone else. You would think those interested in reducing the rate of rape wouldn't spend too much time on this one (after all, rape still happens a lot in Saudi Arabia). That has to be handled by working on the root of the matter, whatever that is. Promoting those other strategies that only serve to collapse the odds onto fewer targets leads one to victim blaming.