Slut shaming

Hey, I'm back to see how the discussion's getting along! I notice that you've all gone pretty off-topic, by talking about the definition of feminism rather than slut shaming.

Originally Posted by Astarael

Ningan, the onus is on you to back up your argument. You've been presented with statistics that negate your claim that what a woman is wearing plays a significant role in whether or not she will be raped. If all you can say in response is that the statistics are false because women are liars...well, of course your posts are going to be criticised.

Lysis just said my posts were disgusting, and clearly didn't read them. I was presented with statistics, which were created from total ignorance and denial. Of course a woman isn't going to say "I'm a slut." That's not calling women liars, it's calling them deniers. I will find my statistics which prove my point, (when I have the time) and they will be from a reliable source, not from some communist newspaper which says women and men are equal in every way, and all women dress smartly and reveal only their ankles.

Anyway, don't bother replying to this, because I probably won't reply back. But because I leave a thread because I'm tired with large amounts of coursework to do, it does not mean that I surrender and that you are right. Ciao!

Ningan, you have consistently lied and ignored any evidence presented that repudiates your points in order to make your argument sound better. Even now you go so far as to say that the statistics presented were created from ignorance and denial, however the only contended these repudiations through libel and proclamation that your opinion is supreme on this matter.

Allow me to be clear on this, you are not being punished or singled out for your opinion. Other members who've expressed similar views are not going to be punished simply because they've said "wearing proper clothes prevents rape" or something like that. This is purely because you wilfully ignore evidence presented within discussions that shows you are wrong.

This behaviour cannot be continued with the Serious Discussion board. It causes nothing but trouble and from this point forward, if you continue your posts will be deleted and further if you do not stop after that you will be punished for deliberately causing trouble.

Do not respond to this post within this thread. If you have a problem with it, send a private message to me or a moderator of the Serious Discussion board.

Further I ask other members to not respond to either the post I am addressing or this post, for the sake of continuing the discussion at hand.

The creator of this topic thinks that people who are known for being trashy, unintelligent, and exchanges bodily fluids with other people on a regular basis does not reserve to be made fun of.

Also, this topic is somehow about rape, which implies that those who associate "sluts" with "rape" assume "rape victims are sluts" by association.

Which is bull♥♥♥♥.

Edit: In response to the comment "What could she have possibly done" it is common knowledge that women are weaker, physically, than men. That's biology, not sexism.

Originally Posted by Anakrousis

The creator of this topic thinks that people who are known for being trashy, unintelligent, and exchanges bodily fluids with other people on a regular basis does not reserve to be made fun of.

Nobody deserves to be made fun of.

Though whether or not someone deserves to be criticized is a whole other matter. Lack of intelligence COULD be a reason to criticize somebody, as could their "trashy" sense of fashion.

But I don't really see why the number of sexual partners one has is by itself grounds for criticizing them.

Originally Posted by Double A

But I don't really see why the number of sexual partners one has is by itself grounds for criticizing them.

As I said before. No one has ever presented a rational argument as to why "sluts" are inherently bad?

I don't like the word slut because it is derogatory, I don't believe in derogating (word?) people who exercise their personal freedoms and don't seek to cause harm to others - this is all I see in what people define as a "slut".

Why can't we as a society respect and care for all people who do not seek harm on others? Why must we constantly be blaming, accusing, name calling and attacking those with different lifestyles? Be them promiscuous, prudent or anything in between!

---------- Post added at 03:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:26 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Anakrousis

it is common knowledge that women are weaker, physically, than men. That's biology, not sexism.

I think it is important to be pedantic here. This is incorrect.

I will rephrase this: it is common knowledge that women are, in general, weaker, physically, than men. That's biology, not sexism

I know heaps of women who are stronger then me, and I am a man. Thus your original statement is untrue. Your modified one, thanks to yours truly, is more closer to the facts.

Originally Posted by Awakening

I think it is important to be pedantic here. This is incorrect.

I will rephrase this: it is common knowledge that women are, in general, weaker, physically, than men. That's biology, not sexism

I know heaps of women who are stronger then me, and I am a man. Thus your original statement is untrue. Your modified one, thanks to yours truly, is more closer to the facts.

It's also important to note that in a fight, if a human can attack certain weak points on an opponent's body, it doesn't matter who is stronger.

Originally Posted by Anakrousis

Someone's pretentious.

Originally Posted by Era

Irrelevant Conclusion (a.k.a. red herring)--diverts attention away from a fact in dispute rather than address it directly. Example: “Ganondorf's tax policies may be popular, but I suspect he had an affair and is paying that Gerudo whore to keep quiet. The media should investigate that!”
A red herring (the unrelated alleged affair) attempts to change the subject away from the popular policies. However, if the original discussion were of Ganondorf's public integrity (encompassing both popularity and conduct), this argument could be perfectly valid.

He corrected me by changing a single word, although it was already understandable, then proceeded to stroke his ego about it; despite the fact that everyone knows that not every single man is stronger, physically, than every single woman. Also, it could only fit under "red herring" definition if he had a point, validity, and if i was not completely clear and not trying to distract from a logical flaw

Originally Posted by Anakrousis

He corrected me by changing a single word, although it was already understandable, then proceeded to stroke his ego about it; despite the fact that everyone knows that not every single man is stronger, physically, than every single woman. Also, it could only fit under "red herring" definition if he had a point, validity, and if i was not completely clear and not trying to distract from a logical flaw

In that case, don't quote his entire post and make it seem as if the entire post reeks of pretentiousness. I thought you were referring to the first part of his post as well, diverting attention away from the flawed position that "sluts" deserve to be "made fun of".

Originally Posted by Ysionris

Curiously, why are men not demeaned by the same criteria?

I believe they are.

--Talking in general now, not in direct reply to the quote...--

I don't demean anyone for their dress, but like I said in an earlier post, your dress is a form of language. And men can dress seductively just as well as women.

And going back to the language thing, I really dislike it when men wear pants that aren't around their wastes, but instead hanging down below their rears and showing off their white underwear for the world to see. Now, I'm tolerant of this dress, but still, when I see this "gangsta" look, to me it displays irresponsibility and apathy. Not to mention I'm reminded of drugs. Not to say that the person wearing this IS a drug-dealing gangster. It's just what the dress is communicating to me, so I'm automatically wary. I don't think of anyone this way, because I try to have a tolerant mind and let everyone do what they wanna do, but yeah. First impressions count. I know you're not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but it's better to be safe than sorry, right?

So this is far from sexism. I could care less what gender you are, and the spotlight isn't always on rape victims who dress a certain way.

But anyways, apart with being careful how one dresses to help avoid raping situations (every little bit helps, so ♥♥♥♥ you if you think I'm a victim blamer) , I think free self-defense classes should be available to women, especially in areas where rape incidents are more common. That'll teach rapers to think twice before touching anyone ever again...

Double A, you're not a mod.

Anakrousis, if you don't want to defend a ♥♥♥♥ty post. Don't make a ♥♥♥♥ty single sentence post. You're a better SD poster than that.


Lets get back on track with discussing the issue and not with how good our posts are.

Originally Posted by Double A

In that case, don't quote his entire post and make it seem as if the entire post reeks of pretentiousness. I thought you were referring to the first part of his post as well, diverting attention away from the flawed position that "sluts" deserve to be "made fun of".

it could have been assumed that i was talking about the part that was relevant to me

Originally Posted by AzraelBlack

You're a better SD poster than that..

Also, I don't mind defending things but the backlash against it was not logical

Originally Posted by Zecora

I really dislike it when men wear pants that aren't around their wastes, but instead hanging down below their rears and showing off their white underwear for the world to see.

This. Practically every guy at my college dresses like that and I don't know why it's so fashionable because it looks ridiculous. Then again, some of the stuff that girls wear is stupid too. But even if I don't like what some other people wear, I still don't think it's right to blame someone for being attacked based on what they're wearing. Even if the victim should have taken more precautions that doesn't take any of the blame off the attacker.

Originally Posted by Poe Princess Mara

Even if the victim should have taken more precautions that doesn't take any of the blame off the attacker.

No one ever said otherwise or is trying to make such an argument.

Originally Posted by Zecora

No one ever said otherwise or is trying to make such an argument.

I never said anyone was. I just wanted to verify that since the rest of my comment sounded fairly judgmental about what other people wear.