Your donations pay for the CIH Forum hosting and software.
Please help the CIH Forums by disabling AdBlock Plus on this page.
Forum Home Forum Home :: The Message Board :: Commercials You Hate !!!!!
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Sarah: Think before you post.
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Sarah: Think before you post.

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
Author
Message
HollyRock View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Illustrious Video Moderator

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Mass.
Status: Offline
Points: 2888
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HollyRock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2009 at 9:25pm
Originally posted by Hootman Hootman wrote:

Holly, you're a hoot!!! LOL


I like how Betty Rubble is gazing at those giant underpants.  That's fun.
Let's try not to be boring, mkay?
Back to Top
Sponsored Links



Back to Top
Tiz View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar
I donated!

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 15709
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tiz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Jul 2009 at 11:19pm
Originally posted by notmegan notmegan wrote:

Originally posted by Tiz Tiz wrote:

Originally posted by The Last Brain Left The Last Brain Left wrote:

  
Most girls who post revealing pics of themselves do not do so for a mass audience. In fact they are usually meant for one person's eyes. While I agree that the girls who do this are NOT that innocent, they are not mass media whores who WANT middle aged men fapping to their pics.
 
So, what kind of message does that send? Now "Captain of the football team" thinks this 14 year old girl is sending me revealing pictures, shes a sure lay.
And surely, he won't print those pictures out and show all his buds.Shocked


When was the last time you were a 14-year-old girl?

I can still remember being so caught up in wanting a guy to like me. Teenage crushes are an emotional rollercoaster.

Of course it's all silly, but young people don't have the experience to know that.
 
Dunno, I do remember being a 14-16 year old boy. Did you post bra & panty pics to get that guy to like you?Confused
Back to Top
DolFan 316 View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 364
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DolFan 316 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 1:00am
Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

I guess it's like sexual harrassment sometimes.  The same action perpetrated upon the same woman, can be sexual harrassment or not, depending upon how desirable the guy is. 


HELL YEAH!!! PREACH AWN BRUTHA!!! Kinda makes all that yammering about it by feminists a bit of a joke, dontcha think?

I mean, common sense alone would strongly suggest sexual harrassment is sexual harrassment no matter who's doing it but nobody's ever accused people today of having too much common sense...

Then again I could just be another "hater" Wink
My nickname's the assman, because everywhere I go people tell me, "You're an ass, man!"
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 2:59am
It's h8r.
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Thor View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2008
Location: Rockaway, NJ
Status: Offline
Points: 56310
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Thor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 3:35am
I used to use the example of JFK Jr.  How many women would consider his sexual advances to be harrassment?  I guess I should update that, though.  LOL
 
 
Back to Top
ToxicShock View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ToxicShock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 9:21am
I'm not reading through 4 pages so forgive me if this has already been said, but a girl/woman/whoever should be free to post pictures (naked or otherwise) of themselves on the internet and not have to fear rape or sexual harassment.

Telling the girl it's "her fault" or that she "asked for it" is victim blaming and unnecessary. The blame needs to be put on the OFFENDER. A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes. But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!" or "it was her fault for being drunk!" is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that.

In the case of this commercial, that girl is dumb as f**k for not realizing that her "naughty" pictures got out over the internet. In this example, both people are 'wrong'. She's wrong for being foolish about her pictures, but he's even more wrong for coming onto a child.
Back to Top
ToxicShock View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ToxicShock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 9:33am
Originally posted by DolFan 316 DolFan 316 wrote:

Originally posted by Thor Thor wrote:

I guess it's like sexual harrassment sometimes.  The same action perpetrated upon the same woman, can be sexual harrassment or not, depending upon how desirable the guy is. 


HELL YEAH!!! PREACH AWN BRUTHA!!! Kinda makes all that yammering about it by feminists a bit of a joke, dontcha think?

I mean, common sense alone would strongly suggest sexual harrassment is sexual harrassment no matter who's doing it but nobody's ever accused people today of having too much common sense...

Then again I could just be another "hater" Wink


I don't know how many feminists you talk to, but the ones I know would be upset by sexual harassment no matter how good looking the person was - myself included. That common sense you spoke of is what I certainly have :) But perhaps that makes me a rare feminist compared to the ones you've encountered?
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 2:36pm
It's a total lack of a sense of humor & an air of deathly self-seriousness that all feminists seem to have in common.
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 3:15pm
Originally posted by ToxicShock ToxicShock wrote:

I'm not reading through 4 pages so forgive me if this has already been said, but a girl/woman/whoever should be free to post pictures (naked or otherwise) of themselves on the internet and not have to fear rape or sexual harassment.

Telling the girl it's "her fault" or that she "asked for it" is victim blaming and unnecessary. The blame needs to be put on the OFFENDER. A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes. But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!" or "it was her fault for being drunk!" is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that.

In the case of this commercial, that girl is dumb as f**k for not realizing that her "naughty" pictures got out over the internet. In this example, both people are 'wrong'. She's wrong for being foolish about her pictures, but he's even more wrong for coming onto a child.
 
So, I guess if a girl decided it would be cool to smear raw ground beef all over herself & walk inside a pen full of hungry lions, getting eaten alive wouldn't be her fault either, eh?
 
Or, on a more plausible note, if she thought it would be cool to walk into an outlaw biker bar & strut around half naked, she wouldn't be considered to hold one shred of responsibility for anything that happened to her there, either.
 
Right?
 
Because as we all know, a woman should be able to wear anything she damn well pleases with no thought to the possible consequences, and any consequences she may suffer, will never be considered to be even partially her responsibility, even though she engaged in behavior that expopsed her to risk to begin with.
 
Right?
 
In any other area of life, all people, both men & women, are considered responsible for their own safety & well being. If you have unprotected sex with strangers & get aids, it will be considered your fault for engaing in risky behavior. Drive without your seat belt & get injured in a wreck, even your insurance company will successfully argue in court that you share some of the responsibility for your injuries. But when it comes to fashion choices & how a gal presents herself in public, whether by dressing in skimpy, revealing clothes or posting sexually suggestive pictures of herself online, suddenly reponsibility goes out the window & it's a ghastly social faux-pas to even hint that she may have brought something on herself by the choices she made.
 
Of course stalking or raping a woman is criminal & morally wrong. But that doesn't mean that it's just perfectly OK for women to exacerbate their chances by making themselves a target.
 
I don't think most women really understand what the sight of an attractive, nearly naked  female does to a man with an active libido. Most men can control themselves, but some just can't. And those guys have eyes, too.
 
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
HollyRock View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
Illustrious Video Moderator

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Mass.
Status: Offline
Points: 2888
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote HollyRock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 4:29pm
Originally posted by ToxicShock, four posts above ToxicShock, four posts above wrote:

I'm not reading through 4 pages so forgive me if this has already been said, but a girl/woman/whoever should be free to post pictures (naked or otherwise) of themselves on the internet and not have to fear rape or sexual harassment.

Telling the girl it's "her fault" or that she "asked for it" is victim blaming and unnecessary. The blame needs to be put on the OFFENDER. A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes. But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!" or "it was her fault for being drunk!" is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that.

In the case of this commercial, that girl is dumb as f**k for not realizing that her "naughty" pictures got out over the internet. In this example, both people are 'wrong'. She's wrong for being foolish about her pictures, but he's even more wrong for coming onto a child.
Let's try not to be boring, mkay?
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Jul 2009 at 6:54pm
Originally posted by HollyRock HollyRock wrote:

Originally posted by ToxicShock, five posts above ToxicShock, five posts above wrote:

..... a girl/woman/whoever should be free to post pictures (naked or otherwise) of themselves on the internet and not have to fear rape or sexual harassment.
 
A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes.
 
But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!".........is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that.
 
I never read such an opinion ("her fault") posted here, & almost never hear it said anywhere else, although I'm sure it is. But it does sound like in one breath Toxic says that being cautious in one's appearance is important, but then in the next breath, she says that even if one didn't exercise such caution, assigning ANY fault or responsibility whatsoever to that person, is disgraceful & inexcusable.
 
It's just kind of a mixed message. On one hand, she agrees that personal responsibility is necessary, but on the other hand, when one fails to exercise said personal responsibility, the resulting consequences are not the fault of said person.
 
I'm just trying to ascertain how those two views can be reconciled into one.
 
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Prometheus View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 27 Apr 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 245
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Prometheus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jul 2009 at 8:06am
Originally posted by Tiz Tiz wrote:

Originally posted by Hezadancer Hezadancer wrote:

This ad is just the nice way of saying "Stop being a dirty little attention whore, perverted old men are going to be touching themselves to your pictures".
 
What about the perverted old women touching themselves to revealing young boy pictures?Wink
Damned double standards....... 


Why is it cute to show a naked toddler, and a felony to show a naked toddler sitting on your knee? Why do they show baby-ass in diaper commercials, but to see a woman's butt on tv is irreconcilably offensive?  Why can we see man-boobs (when most of us would rather not), yet woman-boobs are grotesquely-damaging for a child to see?

Why? Evangelisticals are so confused, they don't even really know how to tell us how to live, but they do anyway. Not surprising that nothing on man or baby is sacred, considering the typical controversy surrounding them.
Immune to all forms of marketing since 1976!
Back to Top
musicman View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar
Formerly 0000

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Greater Boston
Status: Offline
Points: 7561
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote musicman Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10 Jul 2009 at 5:56pm
The way I see it, it isn't about placing blame anywhere.  The attachment of blame is quite irrelevant.  It's about helping young girls, some naive, some not, not increase the potential of harm coming to them because of some perv.
 
Unfortunately, countless numbers of young girls are victimized by predators due to no fault what-so-ever of their own.  Some by their own family members.
 
The basic message of the PSM is to encourage young girls not to throw gasoline on the fire.
 
 
 
Back to Top
ToxicShock View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 286
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ToxicShock Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Jul 2009 at 7:55am
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by HollyRock HollyRock wrote:

Originally posted by ToxicShock, five posts above ToxicShock, five posts above wrote:

..... a girl/woman/whoever should be free to post pictures (naked or otherwise) of themselves on the internet and not have to fear rape or sexual harassment.
 
A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes.
 
But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!".........is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that.
 
I never read such an opinion ("her fault") posted here, & almost never hear it said anywhere else, although I'm sure it is. But it does sound like in one breath Toxic says that being cautious in one's appearance is important, but then in the next breath, she says that even if one didn'tANY fault or responsibility whatsoever to that person, is disgraceful & inexcusable. exercise such caution, assigning 
 
It's just kind of a mixed message. On one hand, she agrees that personal responsibility is necessary, but on the other hand, when one fails to exercise said personal responsibility, the resulting consequences are not the fault of said person.
 
I'm just trying to ascertain how those two views can be reconciled into one.
 


"A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes. But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!" or "it was her fault for being drunk!" is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that."


I really don't understand what's difficult to comprehend from that sentence. Personal responsibility is important in a variety of situations, absolutely. Everyone - male, female, child, adult - should be respectful of themselves, and careful. Always. But sometimes that's not enough. There are certain situations where personal responsibility has nothing to do with their attack. Like the child who was molested by her Uncle. Just shouldn't have gone over to Uncle Bob's house then?

Is it stupid and irresponsible for someone to get super drunk or high or do anything else to the point where they become extremely vulnerable to personal harm? Absolutely. That goes for anything, not just rape and sexual assaults.

Nice fallacies you used though. Props for that.

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

"Because as we all know, a woman should be able to wear anything she damn well pleases with no thought to the possible consequences, and any consequences she may suffer, will never be considered to be even partially her responsibility, even though she engaged in behavior that expopsed her to risk to begin with."

Yes.

If your mother/daughter/sister/female friend were to wear a short skirt and a sexy top and get raped one night, would you still say it's her fault for wearing a low-cut shirt? Or that she was asking for it? Or that she was responsible for her attack, perhaps?

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

"But that doesn't mean that it's just perfectly OK for women to exacerbate their chances by making themselves a target."

How does a woman make herself a target? By wearing a short skirt? What is your fool-proof way to prevent rape? By never wearing a short skirt? You are saying that if a woman dresses provocatively, any assault that happens to her is HER fault and HER responsibility, when it was the ATTACKER who made the choice to assault her.

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

"I don't think most women really understand what the sight of an attractive, nearly naked  female does to a man with an active libido. Most men can control themselves, but some just can't. And those guys have eyes, too."

There is something seriously wrong with someone who rapes and assaults people. Like you said, the average man will not act on those thoughts/impulses. This tells me that the person who is doing the attacking is very sick indeed. You've almost got the idea, but you drop the ball too soon.

Active libido or not, that's no excuse for assaulting or raping a woman (or anyone else for that matter). EVER.

Here, I'll help you out with a few links of interest:
http://rapesurvivor.pbworks.com/Victim-blaming
http://scienceblogs.com/bioephemera/2009/07/telegraph_blame_the_rape_victi.php
http://www.pandys.org/articles/selfblameandsurvivors.html

"Only one person makes the choice to rape. There are things we can (and should!) do to protect ourselves, but the only person who can prevent rape is the rapist him or herself. Bad decisions, neutral decisions, good decisions; to me it doesn't matter. We should be able to live our lives, we should be able to trust our family and our neighbors. Rapists should not rape. Period."

I'm done with this. I've made my point quite clear and if you still don't get it, that's your problem. All bitterness and anger aside, I really encourage you to read and go through the links I provided, maybe even read some rape survivor stories. I hope that it will change some of your thoughts on this topic, and that you will exercise some empathy when judging the assault/harassment of others.
Back to Top
DolFan 316 View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 364
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DolFan 316 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 1:21am
Originally posted by ToxicShock ToxicShock wrote:

I don't know how many feminists you talk to, but the ones I know would be upset by sexual harassment no matter how good looking the person was - myself included. That common sense you spoke of is what I certainly have :) But perhaps that makes me a rare feminist compared to the ones you've encountered?


Sorry for taking so long to reply. And yes, it does.

I think a lot of the blame BTW should go to whoever came up with the attitude of, "I'll put myself out there and act like I'm available, but then act all indignant when the 'wrong' guy takes me up on it". This is NOT condoning rape, I'm just saying if a young lady (or a middle aged one Wink) only wants one type of guy, then go ahead and let the world know. Just say so. That way the rest of us male rabble can move on with our lives Smile
My nickname's the assman, because everywhere I go people tell me, "You're an ass, man!"
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 2:17am
Originally posted by ToxicShock ToxicShock wrote:

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

Originally posted by HollyRock HollyRock wrote:

Originally posted by ToxicShock, five posts above ToxicShock, five posts above wrote:

..... a girl/woman/whoever should be free to post pictures (naked or otherwise) of themselves on the internet and not have to fear rape or sexual harassment.
 
A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes.
 
But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!".........is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that.
 
I never read such an opinion ("her fault") posted here, & almost never hear it said anywhere else, although I'm sure it is. But it does sound like in one breath Toxic says that being cautious in one's appearance is important, but then in the next breath, she says that even if one didn't exercise such caution, assigning  ANY fault or responsibility whatsoever to that person, is disgraceful & inexcusable. 
 
It's just kind of a mixed message. On one hand, she agrees that personal responsibility is necessary, but on the other hand, when one fails to exercise said personal responsibility, the resulting consequences are not the fault of said person.
 
I'm just trying to ascertain how those two views can be reconciled into one.


"A certain amount of being cautious and responsible for ones appearance/actions is important, yes. But saying "it was her fault for dressing so skimpy!" or "it was her fault for being drunk!" is disgraceful, and there is no excuse for that."


I really don't understand what's difficult to comprehend from that sentence. Personal responsibility is important in a variety of situations, absolutely. Everyone - male, female, child, adult - should be respectful of themselves, and careful. Always. But sometimes that's not enough. There are certain situations where personal responsibility has nothing to do with their attack. Like the child who was molested by her Uncle. Just shouldn't have gone over to Uncle Bob's house then?

Absurd comparison. More like "Sue shouldn't have gone out bar-hopping alone in that tight little ultra short black skirt with her boobs hanging halfway out".

Is it stupid and irresponsible for someone to get super drunk or high or do anything else to the point where they become extremely vulnerable to personal harm? Absolutely. That goes for anything, not just rape and sexual assaults.

Nice fallacies you used though. Props for that.
 
I didn't. Nice false accusation though. Props for that.

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

"Because as we all know, a woman should be able to wear anything she damn well pleases with no thought to the possible consequences, and any consequences she may suffer, will never be considered to be even partially her responsibility, even though she engaged in behavior that expopsed her to risk to begin with."

Yes.
 
I knew it. When it comes to women's "clothing rights", women will defend each other to the bitter end no matter how whorey the clothes might be. Oh, they'll gossip amongst each other & rip other women's look to shreds between themselves, but let a man imply that dressing like whore makes a woman partially responsible for getting herself assaulted & you all form a steel curtain around her.

If your mother/daughter/sister/female friend were to wear a short skirt and a sexy top and get raped one night, would you still say it's her fault for wearing a low-cut shirt? Or that she was asking for it? Or that she was responsible for her attack, perhaps?
 
That depends. Was she out bar hopping by hereself or was she with friends who could protect her & being careful to stick close to them?

Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

"But that doesn't mean that it's just perfectly OK for women to exacerbate their chances by making themselves a target."

How does a woman make herself a target? By wearing a short skirt? What is your fool-proof way to prevent rape? By never wearing a short skirt? You are saying that if a woman dresses provocatively, any assault that happens to her is HER fault and HER responsibility, when it was the ATTACKER who made the choice to assault her.
 
Let me quote you from above.... "Nice fallacies you used though. Props for that."
 
Her responsibilty is commensurate with the level of riskiness of her overall behavior. If she dresses like that on a date with a guy who she's known for some time & trusts, that's one thing. If she goes out alone like that knowing damn good & well how dangerous the world is these days, then she has to be seen as partially responsible. I don't go walking around crackhead neighborhoods late at night because I know it's dangerous. Plain & simple.
 
Originally posted by Jimbo Jimbo wrote:

"I don't think most women really understand what the sight of an attractive, nearly naked  female does to a man with an active libido. Most men can control themselves, but some just can't. And those guys have eyes, too."

There is something seriously wrong with someone who rapes and assaults people. Like you said, the average man will not act on those thoughts/impulses. This tells me that the person who is doing the attacking is very sick indeed. You've almost got the idea, but you drop the ball too soon.
 
And knowing the high level of sick violent people running around these days, why the hell would any woman with an ounce of common sense go out bar-hopping alone DRESSED LIKE SHE WANTS TO GET LAID??????? Wacko

Active libido or not, that's no excuse for assaulting or raping a woman (or anyone else for that matter). EVER.
 
Well DUH. Give yourself a big gold star for your command of the obvious. Clap

Here, I'll help you out with a few links of interest:
http://rapesurvivor.pbworks.com/Victim-blaming
http://scienceblogs.com/bioephemera/2009/07/telegraph_blame_the_rape_victi.php
http://www.pandys.org/articles/selfblameandsurvivors.html
 
No thanks.

"Only one person makes the choice to rape. There are things we can (and should!) do to protect ourselves, but the only person who can prevent rape is the rapist him or herself. Bad decisions, neutral decisions, good decisions; to me it doesn't matter. We should be able to live our lives, we should be able to trust our family and our neighbors. Rapists should not rape. Period."
 
Ahhhhh yes.... trying to talk reason with a sick minded or a violent personality who doesn't give a sh*t. So typical.

I'm done with this. I've made my point quite clear and if you still don't get it, that's your problem. All bitterness and anger aside, I really encourage you to read and go through the links I provided, maybe even read some rape survivor stories. I hope that it will change some of your thoughts on this topic, and that you will exercise some empathy when judging the assault/harassment of others.
 
All the bitterness & anger has come from you.
 
 
It's sad when you can't carry on an intelligent conversation with some people without them getting all snotty about it.
 
Oh well.....
 
But I find it humorous that keep insinuating that I somehow "don't get it", when you're the one who doesn't "get it".
 
You make it sound like I'm somehow excusing the act of rape, when I'm not. But I will state categorically, any woman who goes out to nightclubs by herself or even with another girl or group of girls, dressed in an ultra short, tight-fitting skirt with a plunging neckline showing off a lot of cleavage & wearing what Amy Winehouse referred to in song as "Fuck Me Pumps", then spends the evening hanging out & flirting with strange men, is putting herself in a dangerous situation. And if something bad happens to her, while it might not be technically "her fault", SHE BEARS A PORTION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY for doing all the things that put her in that situation.
 
Embedding disabled. Right-click on image then left click "Watch on YouTube".
 
 
 
 
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
FaithSF View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar
I donated!

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Myrtle Beach SC
Status: Offline
Points: 4729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FaithSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 2:59am
While I certainly don't condone rape or assaut, and while I've always felt that it wasn't a woman's fault because of the way she was dressed, I have to say that in the last approximately 10 years, I have really fought with myself over this.  The way women have been dressing, with the belly shirts and low-rise pants (which, thank God, seem to be going away now), the "whale tails," etc., I have occasionally wondered whether they were not--unknowingly--"asking for it." 

I know that sounds terrible, but girls seem to not understand the potential repercussions of the way they dress and the way they put themselves out there.  And I don't know what the answer is, because parents can tell their daughters that they look like tramps, but if everyone else was dressing that way, they won't listen.  Another mom who was on the PTA board with me when David was in high school told me that you couldn't FIND any pants that weren't low-risers, and she said it was really difficult, because her daughter did not have the body for these clothes--and how do you tell her that without hurting her feelings?

I've also heard that teenagers (high school and probably junior high) are now having oral sex so casually that it's almost like a good-night kiss.  That is just so incredible to me, because to me oral sex is even MORE intimate than intercourse.  And I have family back East who are high school teachers, telling me that it's now a status symbol for the girls to get pregnant and have babies--while in high school!  I asked if this was lower income kids, and they said NO--it's affluent kids, it's all kids.  I was floored by this.  Between all this information and the girls like "Sarah" who post intimate pictures of themselves, I feel like society has really bottomed out.

Sorry for the long-winded post, but what I'm trying to say is that girls may not realize what they are doing is so wrong, if that's what their whole society is doing.  Men need to keep themselves under control.  Yes, it's hard.  Yes, these girls are throwing sex in their faces.  But I still can't say that assailants aren't totally responsible for their actions. 

I think the commercial is good.  I agree totally with MM's post:

Originally posted by musicman musicman wrote:

The way I see it, it isn't about placing blame anywhere.  The attachment of blame is quite irrelevant.  It's about helping young girls, some naive, some not, not increase the potential of harm coming to them because of some perv.
 
Unfortunately, countless numbers of young girls are victimized by predators due to no fault what-so-ever of their own.  Some by their own family members.
 
The basic message of the PSM is to encourage young girls not to throw gasoline on the fire.
 
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 3:11am
Originally posted by FaithSF FaithSF wrote:

While I certainly don't condone rape or assaut, and while I've always felt that it wasn't a woman's fault because of the way she was dressed, I have to say that in the last approximately 10 years, I have really fought with myself over this.  The way women have been dressing, with the belly shirts and low-rise pants (which, thank God, seem to be going away now), the "whale tails," etc., I have occasionally wondered whether they were not--unknowingly--"asking for it." 

I know that sounds terrible, but girls seem to not understand the potential repercussions of the way they dress and the way they put themselves out there.  And I don't know what the answer is, because parents can tell their daughters that they look like tramps, but if everyone else was dressing that way, they won't listen.  Another mom who was on the PTA board with me when David was in high school told me that you couldn't FIND any pants that weren't low-risers, and she said it was really difficult, because her daughter did not have the body for these clothes--and how do you tell her that without hurting her feelings?

I've also heard that teenagers (high school and probably junior high) are now having oral sex so casually that it's almost like a good-night kiss.  That is just so incredible to me, because to me oral sex is even MORE intimate than intercourse.  And I have family back East who are high school teachers, telling me that it's now a status symbol for the girls to get pregnant and have babies--while in high school!  I asked if this was lower income kids, and they said NO--it's affluent kids, it's all kids.  I was floored by this.  Between all this information and the girls like "Sarah" who post intimate pictures of themselves, I feel like society has really bottomed out.

Sorry for the long-winded post, but what I'm trying to say is that girls may not realize what they are doing is so wrong, if that's what their whole society is doing.  Men need to keep themselves under control.  Yes, it's hard.  Yes, these girls are throwing sex in their faces.  But I still can't say that assailants aren't totally responsible for their actions. 

I think the commercial is good.  I agree totally with MM's post:

Originally posted by musicman musicman wrote:

The way I see it, it isn't about placing blame anywhere.  The attachment of blame is quite irrelevant.  It's about helping young girls, some naive, some not, not increase the potential of harm coming to them because of some perv.
 
Unfortunately, countless numbers of young girls are victimized by predators due to no fault what-so-ever of their own.  Some by their own family members.
 
The basic message of the PSM is to encourage young girls not to throw gasoline on the fire.
 
 
Great post. Thumbs%20Up
 
IMO You were right on the two major points.... the bulk of the responsibility lies with the assailant or attacker, but a lot of women are throwing sex in guys' faces & thereby putting themselves at undue risk.
 
The very point I was trying to make.
 
 
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
Hezadancer View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive
Avatar

Joined: 06 May 2008
Location: Around
Status: Offline
Points: 3776
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hezadancer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 4:03am
Originally posted by FaithSF FaithSF wrote:



And I have family back East who are high school teachers, telling me that it's now a status symbol for the girls to get pregnant and have babies--while in high school!  I asked if this was lower income kids, and they said NO--it's affluent kids, it's all kids.  I was floored by this. 


I completely agree Faith, but it's not just high school kids. Basically anyone who's been in a semi serious relationship, but not married want to have kids together, like it's a symbol of how much they're in love. What happened to just buying a puppy? It doesn't matter if they don't have enough money themselves to get by or if they don't have enough space for a family, it's just baby first, money and house second. Little do they know once you HAVE a baby, money and house aren't always easy to come by. I get looked at like the odd man out because I'm married and just bought a house and I don't have kids yet by all my baby making friends who have not been married long or aren't married at all. Well gee whiz, I guess I'm the dumb one for wanting to finish my education first! I've only got another little over a year to go, and HELLO I'm only 21 for God sakes.
Back to Top
MrTim View Drop Down
Junior Executive
Junior Executive
Avatar

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 6840
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote MrTim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 4:59am
If this PSA was set 20 years ago, it would have been about Sarah's Polaroid pics being passed around....
Back to Top
FaithSF View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar
I donated!

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Myrtle Beach SC
Status: Offline
Points: 4729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FaithSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 6:00am
Originally posted by Hezadancer Hezadancer wrote:

Originally posted by FaithSF FaithSF wrote:



And I have family back East who are high school teachers, telling me that it's now a status symbol for the girls to get pregnant and have babies--while in high school!  I asked if this was lower income kids, and they said NO--it's affluent kids, it's all kids.  I was floored by this. 


I completely agree Faith, but it's not just high school kids. Basically anyone who's been in a semi serious relationship, but not married want to have kids together, like it's a symbol of how much they're in love. What happened to just buying a puppy? It doesn't matter if they don't have enough money themselves to get by or if they don't have enough space for a family, it's just baby first, money and house second. Little do they know once you HAVE a baby, money and house aren't always easy to come by. I get looked at like the odd man out because I'm married and just bought a house and I don't have kids yet by all my baby making friends who have not been married long or aren't married at all. Well gee whiz, I guess I'm the dumb one for wanting to finish my education first! I've only got another little over a year to go, and HELLO I'm only 21 for God sakes.


I know, Heza, and when I went to my five-year high school reunion (in 1978), there were TWO of us women who were not yet either engaged or married with kids.  But I'm talking about teens who are in high school.  That used to be unthinkable!  And it's stupid!
Back to Top
FaithSF View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar
I donated!

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Myrtle Beach SC
Status: Offline
Points: 4729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FaithSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12 Jul 2009 at 6:01am
Originally posted by MrTim MrTim wrote:

If this PSA was set 20 years ago, it would have been about Sarah's Polaroid pics being passed around....


True, MrTim.  Except that it was a rare occurrence, unlike what seems to be going on today, with kids "texting" their nude pictures to each other!
Back to Top
DolFan 316 View Drop Down
Commercial Hater
Commercial Hater
Avatar

Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 364
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DolFan 316 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Jul 2009 at 10:25pm
Oh, women dress the way they do and go bar hopping because they want to get laid all right, but only by the "right" guy. Problem is, they expect *everybody else* to somehow know this, even though humans are not telepathic.

As far as the behavior in general of kids today, people should've thought of that when the so-called "Sexual Revolution" started 40 years ago. (A pretentious as hell title when you consider the people starting it were products of a literal record number of pregnancies, which of course meant their parents were having tons of sex, but without making a huge deal out of it and in the context of loving relationships which I guess meant their sex somehow didn't count and they were actually prudes or something Wacko Then again these were the same people who made abortion legal without even considering how much fewer in number they'd be if their parents had been all for it. Good lord Baby Boomers were stupid sometimes.)

But my point is, when you glamorize sex for sex's sake and paint everyone who doesn't have it by age 16 at the latest a complete loser, you lose the right to be shocked that your 12-year old daughter is giving blowjobs to all her classmates. Because honestly, what else did you expect? Sex is like alcohol, it's downright foolish to think people are going to do it in moderation or do it responsibly.
My nickname's the assman, because everywhere I go people tell me, "You're an ass, man!"
Back to Top
FaithSF View Drop Down
Revolutionary
Revolutionary
Avatar
I donated!

Joined: 15 Apr 2008
Location: Myrtle Beach SC
Status: Offline
Points: 4729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FaithSF Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Jul 2009 at 3:15am
Originally posted by DolFan 316 DolFan 316 wrote:


As far as the behavior in general of kids today, people should've thought of that when the so-called "Sexual Revolution" started 40 years ago. (A pretentious as hell title when you consider the people starting it were products of a literal record number of pregnancies, which of course meant their parents were having tons of sex, but without making a huge deal out of it and in the context of loving relationships which I guess meant their sex somehow didn't count and they were actually prudes or something Wacko

HUH?  As in, what the hell are you talking about?  Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand what you are trying to say.  You have several points in there, and I don't know what you mean by any of them.

Then again these were the same people who made abortion legal without even considering how much fewer in number they'd be if their parents had been all for it. Good lord Baby Boomers were stupid sometimes.)

Let's quote your favorite show, Seinfeld:  "Do you know what you're talking about? Because I don't think you know what you are talking about!"  Seriously, though, if my mother had had an abortion during her pregnancy with me, I doubt I'd be bothered by it.  I doubt I'd be bothered by ANYTHING.  Duh. And I didn't make abortion legal, but I thank God it is available.  And, actually, the Supreme Court decided that it IS legal.  Not only that, but there were many, many abortions performed in the back alleys and filthy places, using unsterilized coat hangers and knitting needles and without anethesia.  Women died or became sterile because of these butchers and hack jobs.  Once it was ruled as legal, that stopped.  Women could have abortions in clean, legitimate doctors' offices and hospitals.  Abortions will always happen; it is only a question of how safe they will be. 

Oh, I so did not want to get into the abortion argument!  But let me just add that almost every woman who opts for abortion agonizes over it.  And any woman who does not?  Then her maternal instinct is flawed and she should not be having children anyway.

But my point is, when you glamorize sex for sex's sake and paint everyone who doesn't have it by age 16 at the latest a complete loser, you lose the right to be shocked that your 12-year old daughter is giving blowjobs to all her classmates. Because honestly, what else did you expect? Sex is like alcohol, it's downright foolish to think people are going to do it in moderation or do it responsibly.

I"m a Baby Boomer, and I never painted "everyone who doesn't have [sex] by age 16 as the latest a complete loser," and I don't think many Baby Boomers have 12-year-old daughters. Again, I don't think you know what you're talking about.  Unless you were one of those teased and called a loser?  That might explain this rant of yours.




But, hey, it's just my opinion. 
Back to Top
Jimbo View Drop Down
Honor Roll
Honor Roll
Avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Location: Florida
Status: Online
Points: 45234
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jimbo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 14 Jul 2009 at 2:19pm
Originally posted by FaithSF FaithSF wrote:

Originally posted by DolFan 316 DolFan 316 wrote:


As far as the behavior in general of kids today, people should've thought of that when the so-called "Sexual Revolution" started 40 years ago. (A pretentious as hell title when you consider the people starting it were products of a literal record number of pregnancies, which of course meant their parents were having tons of sex, but without making a huge deal out of it and in the context of loving relationships which I guess meant their sex somehow didn't count and they were actually prudes or something Wacko

HUH?  As in, what the hell are you talking about?  Maybe it's just me, but I don't understand what you are trying to say.  You have several points in there, and I don't know what you mean by any of them.

Then again these were the same people who made abortion legal without even considering how much fewer in number they'd be if their parents had been all for it. Good lord Baby Boomers were stupid sometimes.)

Let's quote your favorite show, Seinfeld:  "Do you know what you're talking about? Because I don't think you know what you are talking about!"  Seriously, though, if my mother had had an abortion during her pregnancy with me, I doubt I'd be bothered by it.  I doubt I'd be bothered by ANYTHING.  Duh. And I didn't make abortion legal, but I thank God it is available.  And, actually, the Supreme Court decided that it IS legal.  Not only that, but there were many, many abortions performed in the back alleys and filthy places, using unsterilized coat hangers and knitting needles and without anethesia.  Women died or became sterile because of these butchers and hack jobs.  Once it was ruled as legal, that stopped.  Women could have abortions in clean, legitimate doctors' offices and hospitals.  Abortions will always happen; it is only a question of how safe they will be. 

Oh, I so did not want to get into the abortion argument!  But let me just add that almost every woman who opts for abortion agonizes over it.  And any woman who does not?  Then her maternal instinct is flawed and she should not be having children anyway.

But my point is, when you glamorize sex for sex's sake and paint everyone who doesn't have it by age 16 at the latest a complete loser, you lose the right to be shocked that your 12-year old daughter is giving blowjobs to all her classmates. Because honestly, what else did you expect? Sex is like alcohol, it's downright foolish to think people are going to do it in moderation or do it responsibly.

I"m a Baby Boomer, and I never painted "everyone who doesn't have [sex] by age 16 as the latest a complete loser," and I don't think many Baby Boomers have 12-year-old daughters. Again, I don't think you know what you're talking about.  Unless you were one of those teased and called a loser?  That might explain this rant of yours.




But, hey, it's just my opinion. 
 
Seriously.
 
What was the point in bringing up abortion?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Great news guys.... With the Air Hawk, flat balls are no longer a problem!!!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 2345>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.04
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.



"CANDIE!"