Rape is a heinous crime. It is so barbaric and inhumane, some societies even put convicted rapists to death. Rape not only affects the victim physically. It also affects the victim emotionally and mentally - usually for a very long term, sometimes even lifelong.
So when AWARE equates a flirtatious behaviour like the come on signal to men, with the real victim of hardcore rape, that is nothing short of irresponsibility exhibited by AWARE.
Saying “it’s not your fault” to a sexual assault survivor can be life-saving – AWARE Exec Director
Date rape
Most rape is acquaintance rape, and more often than not it is date rape. To give you an idea – of the 34 rape calls that we received on our Helpline over the past two years, where information about the relationship between the perpetrator and the victim was made available to us, there was only 1 case in which the woman was raped by a stranger. In all the other cases, the rapists were people the victims knew.
Date rape is especially confusing for the victim as there is some level of consent to the situation and there is often an issue of evidence.
Even though the victim did not consent to the sexual penetration, she may have consented to meeting the accused at a late hour alone, to drinking and often to a certain degree of intimacy with the perpetrator, short of sexual intercourse. Although she is clear that she did not consent to sex, she feels partly responsible for the situation.
Isn't prevention better than cure? Isn't the good old grandmother's advice to young girls and young women that they should behave like ladies still the best anti-dote to date rapes?
Yes, even nuns and fully burka covered conservative Muslim girls get raped. But it can be seen the many of these are date rapes, no? You see a nun or a burka clad lady dancing and drinking in pubs?
Why doesn't AWARE simply tell the truth that if you behave sleazily, dress sleazily, mix around with sleaze, the chances of you ending up date raped are higher than if you put on your best behaviour and dress properly?
AWARE is acting highly irresponsibly by sending out a message to young women and girls that it is OK to have have fun, look as if you are a loose person, dress however little you like and when you get date raped, simply call the Hotline and AWARE will be able to help you get even with the b*st*rd who humped you because you decided you didn't like that hump last night.
Isn't that the crude message AWARE is sending out to young girls and women?
It is also an irony that AWARE has succeeded in convincing the govt to repeal Sect 157a - Section 157(d) to be repealed – Law Minister
Singapore’s Evidence Act is based on the Indian Evidence Act of 1872, which was based on the English common law during that period. Section 157(d) states that:
“The credit of a witness may be impeached in the following ways by the adverse party or, with the consent of the court, by the party who calls him:
(d) when a man is prosecuted for rape or an attempt to ravish, it may be shown that the prosecutrix was of generally immoral character.”
Two assumptions underlying Section 157(d) are that (1) a woman who is sexually experienced is less credible as a witness and (2) a woman who is sexually experienced is more likely to have consented to sexual activity.
With the above repealed, technically, a woman can accept the invitation of her date to his home, get cuddly, even get naked and even have sex with him on a regular basis.
Then one fine night when she gets more than what she could handle from her PMS, and decides to tell the world that she didn't want sex that night, her date can do nothing to say that they've had sex regularly the last two years as his defence.
Suddenly, the date becomes a rapist, and the woman, a date rape victim.
Now, that would:
1. Trivialize cases of REAL hardcore rape victims.
2. Endanger young women and girls because AWARE gives them the idea that "help is nearby"if you get date raped. So for god's sake, you can dress up (or rather dress down) and behave as sluttily as you wish.
As always, AWARE never fails to amaze me how its actions are more detrimental to young women and girls than any other organisation.
15 comments:
AWARE is so incredibly dumb as not to be AWARE that most Sing women feel that they are really doing nothing. Why even bother with post traumatic rape syndrome, when every women knows the best solution is to prevent it in the first place.
This is really an initiative by AWARE to reinforce the stereotypical image women are powerless and scatter brained.
I suspect AWARE has to do this. Otherwise many of its members will be asking, why is our subscription fee being used for. Apart from that I see nothing of value for womenfolk that it can possibly offer.
As a rape survivor, friend and parent to rape survivors, I hope you will take a deep breath and read up more on actual rape stories and statistics.
http://www.pandys.org/escapinghades/statistics.html
You are distinguishing between "hardcore" rape and other more acceptable rape which is pretty impossible. There are legal distinctions, but the damage of each rape is individual, and not about physical damage alone.
It's amazing tha your posts are even available on The Singapore Daily! I have never met a more bigoted individual who spouts such ridiculous statements without any factual verification or basis. Have you any statistics that that rape occurs more in western countries than in reigons where the women are covered from head to toe to make such a statement that slinkily dressed women get raped more often? I guess you probably agree with our law that sides marital rape - it absolved the men from all responsibilities and blames the women only. Having a good time without sex is not a crime and it should be the onus on both parties to restrain themselves and respect eac other in such a situation. There is a reason why the term consensual was created. If you only think of sex then u will see sex everywhere, whether the women are covered up or not.
Anon, you are the first person to claim to be a rape survivor, yet use the term "other more acceptable rape". Makes me wonder....
Please be more responsible. Prevention is better than cure.
Telling women that they can dress anyway they like is against the rules of safety first.
This has NOTHING to do with women's right to dress. It has to do with SAFETY.
Be responsible. Be brave. Tell the truth.
The truth is that the less you dress, the more unwanted attention you get.
That is a fact.
If you want to fight for women's rights to dress as they please, do it elsewhere. Don't use the topic of rape. That's irresponsible. Just like what AWARE is doing.
=====
Steve,
Stop being the hypocrite, pretending that you care for young women and girls.
Think carefully. Who are the ones who will advise these women and girls to dress conservatively? Mothers and grandmothers, no? Yes, they are interested in their daughters' and/or granddaughters' safety.
Who are the irresponsible ones who advise these women and girls to dress sluttily? Feminists, LGBTs, and all those who are hyped up on sex, sex, sex!
Nope, you are not being sincere in trying to protect potential victims. You just want to have fun that these girls dress up such.
Stop being a hypocrite.
what?
Excuse me but how did LGBTs get pulled into this argument?
I am a member of the LGBT community and I am a very conservative type which frowns on improper dressing probably in the same way as you.
Quit tarring everyone with the same brush. Just because you have a bone to pick with AWARE, don't pull others in with you.
I am still fully supportive of what you post (being the frumpy obasan here). However your generalization rankles.
Foxt
Instead of answering mu questions for hard facts and evidence you just avoid and throwmthe accusations at me. The point is u have no hard facts to back up yournsilly stupid and harmful sweeping statements. And isn't it ironic that Aware is made up of mothers,grandmother spand young single and married women of different races and religious affinities. So why not accuse them of not wanting women to dress conservatively? Your cited examples of feminie morality ARE the ones who are initiating the push for more equal rights. And somehow amazingly enough, u bring in the LBGTs out of nowhere - careful now we won't want to show off our other bigoted side. It's amazing how your mind manages to link one issue to another, one group of people to another without any relevance or rational connectivity. So who's the hypocrite now? And as wit your original post, back up your new statements with facts. Go watch the movie The Accused with Jodie Foster. Then check your self for some ounce of human empathy.
The pedophile troll from Down Under is back. Ignore him.
The main post is about the irresponsibility of sacrificing Safety First for the love of dressing scantily. It is about AWARE's irresponsible act, giving young women and girls the idea that you can forget about Safety First and dress however you like.
It is YOU who have not addressed that, but instead throw ad hominem with your "bigoted this and bigoted that".
It is YOU who went off course, talking about other countries when it is about how AWARE in SINGAPORE acts irresponsibly.
As for the LGBT community, isn't AWARE its mouthpiece?
Now address the point why the heck did AWARE irresponsibly sacrificed SAFETY FIRST for the sake of dressing down.
=====
To the last Anon, yes I can see the troll too. In fact, he's been lurking all along.
'Females who dress scantily tends to get more unwanted attention than not.' Perhaps.
But the problem comes when 'attention' turns into 'action'. Unwanted, unnecessary, crude and irresponsible action.
I'll go as far as saying there's nothing wrong with oogling at girls, esp those who choose to wear more scantily. Perhaps it's the attention they are seeking for. BUT that doesn't make them 'deserved' to be victims of this cruel act. No one is.
With your article, you are not only adding on to the pain that rape victims are going through by telling them it's their fault to begin with (whether or not it's your so-called hardcore rape is besides the point because all rape victims have one thing in common and is and should be the only thing that matters, which is that they are NOT concensual), you are giving these monsters the perfect excuse to justify their heinous act.
No one deserves to be raped and it's crazy to think its the fault of the victim for it to happen to her.
The message has been and will always be "don't rape" and not "don't get raped".
Your insistence to link to temptation and lack of measures on the victim part tells that you don't understand the message, as usual.
Zhi Hui:
>>'Females who dress scantily tends to get more unwanted attention than not.' Perhaps.
But the problem comes when 'attention' turns into 'action'.
>>
Exactly, and that's what we all want to prevent.
>>I'll go as far as saying there's nothing wrong with oogling at girls, esp those who choose to wear more scantily.
>>
Problem is that if you are senior citizen and ogle, you will look like a Dirty Old Man. If you are a young gregarious guy, it will look that you ain't got no d*ck control. And if you are in between those two age range, it will look like you had no d*ck control when you were younger and you will be on your way to be a Dirty Old Man, when you get older.
Noting wrong with the label Dirty Old Man or The Guy with no D*ck Control, btw - just like nothing wrong with the term slut. You know what I mean.
>>With your article, you are not only adding on to the pain that rape victims are going through by telling them it's their fault to begin with
>>
Excuse me? Show me where I have made the statement that it's the victim's fault.
>>No one deserves to be raped and it's crazy to think its the fault of the victim for it to happen to her.
>>
It is even worse to act irresponsibly by ignoring safety first and tell them they can dress up scantily, only for them to attract more unwanted attention (and action), when the simple action of being safe could have saved her all that trouble, because it is A FACT that dressing up sluttily, gets you more unwanted attention (and action).
Btw, where have I said that I allow he victim to think it's her own fault?
My point is that those who tell these young women and girls that they can dress sluttily are the ones at fault.
Why doesn't anyone address that?
===
Anon:
>>The message has been and will always be "don't rape" and not "don't get raped".
>>
That's the laughable part. You think the criminal will listen to you?
>>Your insistence to link to temptation and lack of measures on the victim part tells that you don't understand the message, as usual.
>>
It is YOU who don't get the message. I am NOT placing blame on the victim. Let me repeat where I place the blame on.
I place blame on those who advise women and young girls that they can dress as sluttily as they wish. That includes AWARE.
Don't create strawman that I say I place blame on victims. That is the argument of the ill-advisors who don't wish to admit that their lousy non-workable advice doesn't work.
If it is so easy telling the rapist not to rape, it would be easy telling every criminal not to commit crimes.
The Police would be out of job if that idea is a workable one.
Get real. SAFETY FIRST.
Indeed I'm baffled.
Which part of the AWARE message that you've cited above encourages girls to wear scantily?
Isn't the message written all over the place on AWARE's website?
Exactly what is the message of Slutwalk, which AWARE gives full support?
Wanna tell readers?
Bravo Barrie,you have taken the words right out of my mouths!Advising girls away from scanty dressing is the universal right course of action.Yet we have insufferable whatevers who try to demonise our good intentions and sounds us out like villians.The atrocity of it all.Just look under kentridgecommon nusfp and you'l see the most terrible of such louses.
There is one more point i wish to bring up regarding this so-called protection of rape victims.8 years ago,there was a teen kidnap and torture case whereby a group of teens kidnapped a girl classmate friend,held her against her will,and tortured her.They were utterly inhuman,they went to the extent of stuffing sharp objects and a doll up her vagina.When convicted,the law didnt even send them to prison,they were just remanded in homes.And one of the female torturers even had leave from detention due to her pregnancy status.In my opinion,they were so vile they deserve worse than a death sentence.Where was the law,shanmugan and aware when the girl suffered such torture with so little redress?If any of u were older than me u'd know of this case,and i hope u all havnt forgotten the brutality of it.Those perpetrators' names werent even reavealed due to them being underaged.How could they be allowed to walk in our midst?
aware need not ask girls to dress scantily,just NOT stopping or discouraging them from doing so is sin enough.They are supposed to be for the betterment of women,how can they not speak against something that's not right,even if it's supposedly from their own kind?On top of whatever barrie has said.Even true friends would correct each others' mistakes.
Post a Comment