Controversy Over Utah Pastor's Tweet Re: Woman Posting Pics of Themselves in Revealing Clothing

[bluebell]

Someone shared this on my Facebook page and it seemed a little serendipitous.  

[LoudmouthMormon]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

3 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Dressing provocatively may occasionally, in some areas, at some times of the day, around some types of people, increase your personal risk of something bad happening.  Similar to how flashing cash, or ostentatious displays of wealth, or walking around oblivious to your surroundings, will sometimes increase your personal risk of something bad happening.  

Should that really be that much of a trigger notion?

It seems like the use of the word 'may' here changes the meaning of your previous statement, which was that women can decrease the risk of being sexually assaulted using only clothes.

"May" implies that the women might be able to impact their chances of rape through their choice of clothing, while "can" implies that women will be able to impact their chance of rape through their choice of clothing.   The difference is in the amount of control the woman has in the situation. 

If she "may" be able to do something then the idea that she cannot completely control the outcome remains intact.  If she "can" to something, then it implies that the outcome is under her control. 

I have no problem with the "may" statement.  It's the "can" statement that I don't agree with and find harmful.  

Now, for the fourth time, here's my statement:   "Women can increase or decrease their risk of being sexually assaulted, in certain situations, by how they choose to dress."

This time, I've tried turning a key phrase red, and enlarging the font.  Since this is the fourth time I've tried to clarify by cutting and pasting the exact same thing, and folks keep on just plain old ignoring parts of it, I hope folks'll forgive me if I don't try for a fifth time.

Last word is all y'alls.

 

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Now, for the fourth time, here's my statement:   "Women can increase or decrease their risk of being sexually assaulted, in certain situations, by how they choose to dress."

This time, I've tried turning a key phrase red, and enlarging the font.  Since this is the fourth time I've tried to clarify by cutting and pasting the exact same thing, and folks keep on just plain old ignoring parts of it, I hope folks'll forgive me if I don't try for a fifth time.

Last word is all y'alls.

 

The red part doesn't change anything that I said. 

Saying that someone may be able to decrease risk in certain situations is not at all the same as saying that they can decrease the risk in certain situation.  "Can" implies that the woman is in control of the outcome, and there is no situation where a woman is able to control a rapist's actions based on what she is wearing.

 

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Now, for the fourth time, here's my statement:   "Women can increase or decrease their risk of being sexually assaulted, in certain situations, by how they choose to dress."

This time, I've tried turning a key phrase red, and enlarging the font.  Since this is the fourth time I've tried to clarify by cutting and pasting the exact same thing, and folks keep on just plain old ignoring parts of it, I hope folks'll forgive me if I don't try for a fifth time.

Last word is all y'alls.

 

There is little evidence to support this.

 

It is accepted as self-evident by many. My theory is that this belief is a knee jerk mental response by potential victims or the friends or loved ones of potential victims of rape to try to justify that what happened could not happen to them. It is why in any discussion of a rape online (and sadly sometimes in person) will have someone (usually but not always a man) show up and start explaining all the bad choices that led to the rape and how it could have been avoided.

Edited February 12, 2022 by The Nehor

[longview]

27 minutes ago, bluebell said:

The red part doesn't change anything that I said. 

Saying that someone may be able to decrease risk in certain situations is not at all the same as saying that they can decrease the risk in certain situation.  "Can" implies that the woman is in control of the outcome, and there is no situation where a woman is able to control a rapist's actions based on what she is wearing.

She could is she had concealed carry (the great equalizer).  Plus exercising situational and environmental awareness.  And being physically fit and mentally tough and well-trained.  Same goes for men (they can get overwhelmed too).

[bsjkki]

2 hours ago, longview said:

She could is she had concealed carry (the great equalizer).  Plus exercising situational and environmental awareness.  And being physically fit and mentally tough and well-trained.  Same goes for men (they can get overwhelmed too).

Which has no bearing on clothing choices. Plus, this is a sad state of affairs in the world. 

Edited February 13, 2022 by bsjkki

[Rain]

1 hour ago, longview said:

She could is she had concealed carry (the great equalizer).  Plus exercising situational and environmental awareness.  And being physically fit and mentally tough and well-trained.  Same goes for men (they can get overwhelmed too).

My nature is to be so very sarcastic on this, but I don't like that side of me so I'm trying to write this better.

What you are saying is that the potential victim "could" avoid rape/assault if they:

- conceal carry

- have situational awareness 

- have environmental awareness

-be physically fit

-be mentally tough

-be well-trained

- not flirt

- not wear revealing clothing

- not drink

- not walk alone

So I have to go back to what BlueDreams was saying and ask why do we spend so much time and effort training potential victims what to do to not be a victim in those rare cases they could actually do something instead and not much time training potential rapists not to rape?

Why do we rarely even talk about what you can do to not be a rapist?  You won't get everyone,  but if a person could intentionally do something to stop from getting raped isn't there a possibility that a person could intentionally do something to stop themselves from being a rapist?

That's not a rhetorical question.  I just don't understand why we have to demand so much responsibility from a potential victim, but don't even give practical info on how to avoid being a rapist.

Edited to add: there are classes and conferences teaching people self defense.  How many of you would take a class on how not to be a rapist? 

 

Edited February 13, 2022 by Rain

[longview]

2 hours ago, Rain said:

Why do we rarely even talk about what you can do to not be a rapist?  You won't get everyone,  but if a person could intentionally do something to stop from getting raped isn't there a possibility that a person could intentionally do something to stop themselves from being a rapist?

It is called human nature, the natural man, an enemy of God.  Communists and sociallists and what have you think they can build an utopia by making everybody equal.  But every one of those collectivist experiments have failed abysmally.  Why?  Because even the movement leaders are carnal.  Some of them can not resist making themselves into gods.

2 hours ago, Rain said:

How many of you would take a class on how not to be a rapist? 

The very BEST course is to become true and faithful disciples of Jesus Christ.

[Rain]

27 minutes ago, longview said:

It is called human nature, the natural man, an enemy of God.  Communists and sociallists and what have you think they can build an utopia by making everybody equal.  But every one of those collectivist experiments have failed abysmally.  Why?  Because even the movement leaders are carnal.  Some of them can not resist making themselves into gods.

The very BEST course is to become true and faithful disciples of Jesus Christ.

I don't feel like you really answered my questions. I feel like the answers avoided the actual questions.

It is a given that we are trying to become like our Heavenly parents and we fall very short.  That doesn't stop us from classes about reading our scriptures better, avoiding car accidents, how to have a better marriage, honoring our father and mother, controlling anger, avoiding alcohol etc.  What makes rape different?

Total guess, but I would bet a lot of rapists don't go out intending to be a rapist.  Especially before their first or only time. 

If studies found that if just 25% of the population took a 30 min class and it cut rapes by 50% would you be willing to go to it?

[CV75]

On 2/10/2022 at 1:36 PM, smac97 said:

Pastor Causes Outrage After Saying Women Should Never Post Photos Of Themselves In Bikinis, Bra Or Underwear

I'm interested in hearing your perspectives on this.  

I'm also curious as to reactions like these.

Again, what are your thoughts on his response to the criticisms he has received?

For me, it seems like there are a few topics that are of such import, sensitivity, and about which there are such diversities of viewpoints and opinions, that they (the topics) should always be addressed with great care, with much tact, decorum, civility, and so on.  Public commentary about modesty in women's clothing, particularly by men, is one of those topics.

Here, I have some reservations about the time, place and manner of the pastor's comments.  They come across as unsolicited (being addressed to all women, everywhere), somewhat brash, and somewhat insolent.  And while I think he is correct to object to inappropriate reactions to his comments (sending him "unsolicited sexual images and videos"), I think he also should have remained focused on the subject matter.  Perhaps he could have found a way to advance and improve the discussion by responding to reactions that were appropriate.

This story has also caused some introspection for myself.  I need to consider some of the things I say that might likewise be brash, insolent, or otherwise inappropriate in terms of time, place and manner.

Anyway, thoughts all around?

Thanks,

-Smac

I would be interested in examining some of the evidence he used in preparing his remarks  !!!

 

 

[juliann]

20 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Now, for the fourth time, here's my statement:   "Women can increase or decrease their risk of being sexually assaulted, in certain situations, by how they choose to dress."

This time, I've tried turning a key phrase red, and enlarging the font.  Since this is the fourth time I've tried to clarify by cutting and pasting the exact same thing, and folks keep on just plain old ignoring parts of it, I hope folks'll forgive me if I don't try for a fifth time.

Last word is all y'alls.

 

What the heck is that supposed to mean? Is there a store where I can buy rape safe clothes?

[Calm]

6 minutes ago, juliann said:

What the heck is that supposed to mean? Is there a store where I can buy rape safe clothes?

I think also a list of the “certain situations” would help clarify what he means.

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, longview said:

It is called human nature, the natural man, an enemy of God.  Communists and sociallists and what have you think they can build an utopia by making everybody equal.  But every one of those collectivist experiments have failed abysmally.  Why?  Because even the movement leaders are carnal.  Some of them can not resist making themselves into gods.

The very BEST course is to become true and faithful disciples of Jesus Christ.

From reading up on sexual assault and rape cases a lot of times the guy doesn’t think it is rape. Often they will say exactly what they did and even agree on the definition of rape but somehow what they did wasn’t rape because they have this idea that rapists are deviants who use zip ties and/or beat the victim and plan the whole thing in advance. It is the “No True Scotsman” fallacy except about rapists. That is what we need to drive home to the potential rapists. It is rape. It is wrong.

Rape is primarily a men’s issue because they are the aggressor in most cases. Yet when we talk about rape prevention it is always about things potential victims should do. It is the equivalent of trying to cut down drunk driving numbers by teaching “defensive driving”.