Originally Posted by Kenny_C.002
Hollywood. Industry. To think that people are little more than ants in a propaganda-filled environment is silly.
I don't think anybody's arguing that clothes are in their all-time low in terms of the amount of cloth that exists on a woman's body. I mean, knee-high skirts were considered risque like 50 years ago. Now we have wearing miniskirts as a norm. So yes, it has been more suggestive even if we compare to fashion 10 years ago. Mormon/Muslim talk is specifying that wearing these clothes are an act of infidels, which obviously is not my argument. I simply state what is and left it at that.
One cannot deny that wearing less clothing is more likely to provoke drunk men into doing stupid things. Until we fix the problem of alcohol, sexy clothes will always give a higher risk of being raped than not, even if it isn't that big of a difference due to the sheer little amount of rape that is random. Seriously, it doesn't matter if it was more prominent in the middle (I think you meant middle) ages that it exists now in this form as well as the more common "assailant is someone the girl/boy knows" form.
run those things, people
decide what is popular, people
decide to listen.
I can deny it, and I will. Rape was more common 35, 40, 50, 60, 70 years ago than it is now. Want to know why? Women have rights. It has everything to do with the argument. No, rape rates have not increased, they have and will not increase(d), they have decreased. That proves that the way women dress have very little effect on the amount of rape.
Alcohol affects everyone differently. It does not make everyone a wh0r3, or a sex craving maniac, so alcohol is not necessarily the problem, rather, it is sexism that is the problem.
Thus, the argument is void.