PDA

View Full Version : If you flirt it's your fault for getting raped


MOBIUS
21-11-2005, 12:12:36
Or at least that is what 34% of people think according to an Amnesty International survey (http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news/press/16618.shtml)

That is over a THIRD of the population!!!:eek:

This reminds me of that thread of Alsie's about the guy she flirted with at work that couldn't understand that although she had flirted with him she wasn't going to sleep with him...:(

Kitsuki
21-11-2005, 12:13:41
Well you did wink at me Mobius, how was I to know...?

MOBIUS
21-11-2005, 12:17:52
That was different...;)

Funko
21-11-2005, 12:19:12
Yeah... pretty shocking stats.

Tizzy
21-11-2005, 12:25:41
Around one in 12 people (8%) believed that a woman was totally responsible for being raped if she’d had many sexual partners

:eek:


I'd be interested to know the gender breakdown of the results.

Funko
21-11-2005, 12:27:10
The Metro had some broken down by sex. Generally men were a bit worse but one stat was

5% of women think that if a woman was drunk when raped it was totally her fault compared to 3% of men thinking the same.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 12:29:33
Same study found 5% more women than men think if a woman is totally intoxicated then she is responsible if she gets raped.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 12:30:00
Oh yeah, that was it...what funko said

Funko
21-11-2005, 12:30:39
It's not 5% more women than men...


Total percentage of people who think an intoxicated woman is totally responsible for being raped 4%

Percentage of men 3%
Percentage of women 4%

Edit: just saw his agreement, sorry!

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 12:33:31
I can see a lot of older women (who's peers probably rarely drink), making up this %age.

For them, women gettin drunk and hanging around with louts is probably the same as a BNP guy walking round hackney with loads of expensive stuff shouting out that he hates black people.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 12:54:09
i'd like to see how the question was framed- that can influence the answer a lot too.

If a woman gets drunk, its not an invitation or justification, but equally she has hardly put herself in the best position to make judgements or defend herself. If you get drunk in a social situation such as a nightclub (I'm thinking of date rape here rather than being jumped down a dark alley) you have to know you're putting yourself in harm's way potentially, that's the nature of our society. I don't accept that its the woman's fault ever, but a lot of women don't take proper responsibility for their own safety. Prevention is better than cure.

Kitsuki
21-11-2005, 13:01:54
What Norks said - the survey sounds like it fails to make the distinction between it being "her fault" and her putting herself at greater risk.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 13:03:52
Yeah, if someone is stupid, it's quite easy to mistake that as fault.

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 13:07:53
Originally posted by The Norks
i'd like to see how the question was framed- that can influence the answer a lot too.

If a woman gets drunk, its not an invitation or justification, but equally she has hardly put herself in the best position to make judgements or defend herself. If you get drunk in a social situation such as a nightclub (I'm thinking of date rape here rather than being jumped down a dark alley) you have to know you're putting yourself in harm's way potentially, that's the nature of our society. I don't accept that its the woman's fault ever, but a lot of women don't take proper responsibility for their own safety. Prevention is better than cure.



Well, I'd agree there but maybe the word "responsible" in the questions is a little too ambiguous. Some of the respondents could have meant the woman is partly responsible because she has put herself in a dangerous situation, rather than meaning that she "deserves" it.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 13:11:23
Yeah, being an adult is about being responsibility. Clearly a woman who gets slaughtered, flirts with loads of men and gets raped can be said to have been acting irresponsiblty, but can she be said to have been at least partially responsible for the outcome?

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 13:15:58
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
Yeah, being an adult is about being responsibility. Clearly a woman who gets slaughtered, flirts with loads of men and gets raped can be said to have been acting irresponsiblty, but can she be said to have been at least partially responsible for the outcome?


I'm not reading others or expressing myself very well today. Is that a piss take?

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 13:20:09
No, not really.

Does irresponsible behaviour equate to being partially responsible for something?

Funko
21-11-2005, 13:26:56
You can download the full study from that link.

Question was:

Q3. I am now going to read out a series of scenarios which a woman may find herself in. In each could you please indicate whether you believe a woman is totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped if…

a) The woman is drunk (Base, n=1,083)
b) The woman has behaved in a flirtatious manner (Base: n=1,078)
c) The woman has failed to say ‘no’ clearly to the man (Base, n=1,076)
d) A woman is wearing sexy or revealing clothes (Base, n=1,076)
e) It is known that the woman has many sexual partners (Base, n=1,076)
f) The woman is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area (1,075)

Colon
21-11-2005, 13:29:57
Well, the behaving in "flirtatious manner" is also a bit of a problem. I think there was this study not so long ago that showed that women often unknowingly emit "signals" that are subsequently picked up by male counterparts.

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 13:31:45
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
No, not really.

Does irresponsible behaviour equate to being partially responsible for something?


I suppose putting yourself in a situation where you are at risk of being raped, mugged, kidnapped etc is pretty stupid so a small amount of responsibility must lie with the victim themselves - in that if they hadnt put themselves in that sort of situation they wouldnt have suffered.

But as for whether they "deserve" it - then, obviously, no they dont.

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 13:33:02
Originally posted by Colon
Well, the behaving in "flirtatious manner" is also a bit of a problem. I think there was this study not so long ago that showed that women often unknowingly emit "signals" that are subsequently picked up by male counterparts.


Such as swallowing a whole salami just for a bet but not realising that you have been starring at the guy in the dirty raincoat and rubbing your chest at the same time throughout?

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 13:37:44
Hmm, interesting thing about not saying clearly "No" to a man. Unless she is mute, I can't imagine any scenario where a woman is raped without saying no - or words to that effect. (unless of course rohypnol is involved, but that's a whole different matter)

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 13:42:18
Some of them say "I was scared so I just gave in and let him do it" or some such.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 13:50:10
Still can't envisage a situation (apart from a weapon related incident) where a woman would be so scared to at some point in the proceedings say "no don't do that" or some such thing.

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 13:52:57
Hmm, probably depends on the woman and the physique/attitude of the bloke too. imagine Bonny Langford being cornered by a WWF Wrestler for instance...

Funko
21-11-2005, 13:53:39
Like Rodgers I have heard/read numerous stories from women to that effect. I think it's probably just hard for us to imagine that situation.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 14:02:57
Originally posted by Rodgers
Hmm, probably depends on the woman and the physique/attitude of the bloke too. imagine Bonny Langford being cornered by a WWF Wrestler for instance...

So this WWF wrestler doesn't make any small talk (giving the woman a chance to say No politley without risking hiw wrath)...and just starts raping her?

A very extreme and rare situation I should imagine.

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:08:31
WTF?

You think most rapes begin with polite small talk?

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:09:30
Hi, I'm just going to rape you know, would that be ok?

Hmm... actually no I'm not really feeling like being raped today, would you mind awfully not doing that?

Oh of course, terribly sorry to have bothered you madam. Have a nice evening.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 14:16:29
Of course most rapes begin with polite small talk. Most rapes are done by people who know the victim and few are actually random strangers in parks.

FunkyFingers
21-11-2005, 14:29:59
This study is fundamentally flawed and is asking the wrong questions - the questions are clearly biased to the view that women going out drinking is inherently the cause of the fall of society.

The assumption of the study here is that women are raped because they go out and get drunk and inadvertantly stimulate a total stranger to assault them down a back alley or something. The facts show that the majority of rapes are initiated by men who are already known to the women.

The even more shocking statistic that I heard on R4 this morning was that the average prosecution rate for rape in the UK is 4%.

I think the media, and studies, should focus more on that angle, than jumping on the bandwagon of binge dinking and random stranger assaults.

Tizzy
21-11-2005, 14:31:10
That's a very good point Funky.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:31:48
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
Yeah, being an adult is about being responsibility. Clearly a woman who gets slaughtered, flirts with loads of men and gets raped can be said to have been acting irresponsiblty, but can she be said to have been at least partially responsible for the outcome?

why is she responsible for somebody else's actions towards her? Individuals have choice- rapists choose to rape.

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:32:15
I didn't get that impression at all. The drinking thing is only one of the questions.

The study is trying to show that people conceptions about stuff like that are wrong. That it's shocking so many people still have views like that.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:33:39
Originally posted by FunkyFingers
This study is fundamentally flawed and is asking the wrong questions - the questions are clearly biased to the view that women going out drinking is inherently the cause of the fall of society.

The assumption of the study here is that women are raped because they go out and get drunk and inadvertantly stimulate a total stranger to assault them down a back alley or something. The facts show that the majority of rapes are initiated by men who are already known to the women.

The even more shocking statistic that I heard on R4 this morning was that the average prosecution rate for rape in the UK is 4%.

I think the media, and studies, should focus more on that angle, than jumping on the bandwagon of binge dinking and random stranger assaults.

True. Also, if a man was raped, which is btw on the increase, I doubt if everyone would say he was asking for it. These attitudes stem from the common assumption that men must chase and women must trap.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 14:35:13
Originally posted by The Norks
why is she responsible for somebody else's actions towards her? Individuals have choice- rapists choose to rape.

It was a question, not a statement.
What I said was that we agree she is acting irresponsibly by getting wrecked and flirting with all and sundary. But does irresponsible behaviour make someone partially responsible? Only a question.

Tizzy
21-11-2005, 14:36:57
Originally posted by The Norks
why is she responsible for somebody else's actions towards her? Individuals have choice- rapists choose to rape.

Exactly. She may be responsible for getting herself into a potentially dangerous situation, but he is totally repsonsible for making it dangerous.

I have to stay away from this thread. Not many things get me really angry but this is going to.

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:37:22
Originally posted by The Norks
True. Also, if a man was raped, which is btw on the increase, I doubt if everyone would say he was asking for it. These attitudes stem from the common assumption that men must chase and women must trap.

I still disagree that this is the point of the survey (having read the entire thing). The study is trying to point out how widely these misconceptions are still held. (and how bad that is) It's not condoning them.

FunkyFingers
21-11-2005, 14:42:38
That's a fair point, there are serious misconceptions - I guess the problem is is that the media has served only to reinforce the common misconceptions as they match their own agendas, rather than reporting the wider scope of the study.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:43:19
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
Still can't envisage a situation (apart from a weapon related incident) where a woman would be so scared to at some point in the proceedings say "no don't do that" or some such thing.

Are you insane? Seriously? The hedgehog effect can cause people to freeze totally as they are plunged into a sudden unfamiliar situation. Any woman being raped will have in the back of her mind one very scary thing-possible death. My mother always taught me that if anyone tries to attack you, you let them get on with it and keep your life (hopefully). A lot of women think that way, and indeed the police advise women to think carefully before screaming/fighting back because it can make the attacker more violent.
You seem to think that rapists approach you nicely from the front and state their intentions clearly so you can say no, and if not you get a bit of unwanted sex. Its usually far more brutal and unexpected ie someone punching you to the ground for an opener. Have a look at some of the details the police released about that Anthony Imiela scumbag- he jumped women from behind and told them not to make any noise or he'd kill them. I imagine that isn't too uncommon.

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:44:52
Originally posted by FunkyFingers
That's a fair point, there are serious misconceptions - I guess the problem is is that the media has served only to reinforce the common misconceptions as they match their own agendas, rather than reporting the wider scope of the study.

Yes... it does seem to have received very mixed coverage. Although I guess the debate it's stimulated is good, that must have been the point.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:46:42
Originally posted by Funko
I still disagree that this is the point of the survey (having read the entire thing). The study is trying to point out how widely these misconceptions are still held. (and how bad that is) It's not condoning them.

yes I understand that, I was commenting on what I think is one of the causes of these misconceptions in society, not the intention of the survey.

YOu can see evidence of these attitudes in the sexual labelling of women as cockteases etc (ie she can control the man through her actions and therefore he is not responsible for his response). All part of the same sliding scale imo.

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:48:13
Yeah, think I misread your intent with that post.

And now I'm out of this thread as you are doing a much better job of saying what I was trying to than I was.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:49:30
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
It was a question, not a statement.
What I said was that we agree she is acting irresponsibly by getting wrecked and flirting with all and sundary. But does irresponsible behaviour make someone partially responsible? Only a question.

I don't agree that! Its no more irresponsible than men doing the same.
What I was saying before was that given the society we inhabit, more women should think about protecting themselves pre-emptively. I don't think its fair that we have to, but reality often isn't fair.

Japher
21-11-2005, 14:49:37
That's like saying that I deserve to get shot if I walk through Watts with a board on that says "I HAte Niggers" on it...

I will probably get shot, but that don't make it right. Two wrongs don't make a right.

If you walk like a slut, and act like a slut, don't get all surprised if you get treated like a slut.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 14:50:52
Originally posted by The Norks
Are you insane? Seriously? The hedgehog effect can cause people to freeze totally as they are plunged into a sudden unfamiliar situation. Any woman being raped will have in the back of her mind one very scary thing-possible death. My mother always taught me that if anyone tries to attack you, you let them get on with it and keep your life (hopefully). A lot of women think that way, and indeed the police advise women to think carefully before screaming/fighting back because it can make the attacker more violent.
You seem to think that rapists approach you nicely from the front and state their intentions clearly so you can say no, and if not you get a bit of unwanted sex. Its usually far more brutal and unexpected ie someone punching you to the ground for an opener. Have a look at some of the details the police released about that Anthony Imiela scumbag- he jumped women from behind and told them not to make any noise or he'd kill them. I imagine that isn't too uncommon.

I totally agree how that can happen in violent assault, but as we've already said most rapes are commited by people who know their attacker. I imagine most such situations do start with a proposal, a refusal and then violence.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:51:54
Oh.My.God. What neanderthal cave did you crawl out of Japher?

Can you define slut for me please? How does a slut walk and act EXACTLY?

Can men be sluts? If so can they expect the same treatment?

The Norks
21-11-2005, 14:52:39
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
I totally agree how that can happen in violent assault, but as we've already said most rapes are commited by people who know their attacker. I imagine most such situations do start with a proposal, a refusal and then violence.

Well I'd say you're pretty far off the mark, having heard experiences of friends etc

mr.G
21-11-2005, 14:52:54
she walks like a slut like she had it coming.
men can't be sluts cause they are men and cool.

Japher
21-11-2005, 14:54:54
[chris rock]
I ain't saying it's right

but I understand
[/chris rock]

It's like the innocent guy who gets shot in the meth lab during a bust... What is an innocent guy doing in a meth lab?

All I'm saying is use good judgement. If you aren't avoiding trouble you're inviting it.

Nills Lagerbaak
21-11-2005, 14:55:06
Not at all, I have read many police reports and gazettes (in my boring days at HM prison Reading). They all confirm what Funky said, most rapes are by people who know their victims.

Funko
21-11-2005, 14:58:11
Whilst that is true, that doesn't mean that your assumption of what happened during the attack is right in any way.

Rodgers
21-11-2005, 15:00:32
Originally posted by Japher
That's like saying that I deserve to get shot if I walk through Watts with a board on that says "I HAte Niggers" on it...

I will probably get shot, but that don't make it right. Two wrongs don't make a right.

If you walk like a slut, and act like a slut, don't get all surprised if you get treated like a slut.


No, I would imagine she is more likely to get asked if she is a prostitute. Otherwise, how come really old women get raped by burglars sometimes?

I dont think the women who get raped are all dressed like whores. They are just a random cross-section of women.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 16:16:08
I've seen reports that say that a high percentage of rapes are committed after petty thefts/burglaries etc, because the assailant is on an adrenalin high. The thing about all this 'she looked like a slut' etc is that very often its women who look absolutely normal who are raped- old women, young girls, women out jogging or walking the dog etc. Rape isn't a crime about sex, its about power. Most rapists are married or in a relationship, they ust want to get power over someone else.

What scares me most is that 90% of rapes go unreported and only 5% of those reported end in a conviction. Basically that means that almost any man can rape a woman and get away scot free.

The Norks
21-11-2005, 16:19:34
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
Not at all, I have read many police reports and gazettes (in my boring days at HM prison Reading). They all confirm what Funky said, most rapes are by people who know their victims.

what funko said- its like being mugged, you don't have time to say 'please don't hit me' because you're more than likely on the floor before you know whats happened.

Thats an interesting point too. Why is rape considered to be something you might be asking for, whereas mugging or assault is always the perpetrators fault. People don't go around saying 'oh well he had a lot of money in his wallet, he was asking for it!' Even if you flash something valuable you don't get the shaming and blaming rape victims get.

Japher
21-11-2005, 16:23:47
I always say "they were asking for it"...

The Norks
21-11-2005, 16:25:59
I'm sure you do

Japher
21-11-2005, 16:31:01
you were asking for that...

King_Ghidra
21-11-2005, 16:33:49
Originally posted by The Norks
Thats an interesting point too. Why is rape considered to be something you might be asking for, whereas mugging or assault is always the perpetrators fault. People don't go around saying 'oh well he had a lot of money in his wallet, he was asking for it!' Even if you flash something valuable you don't get the shaming and blaming rape victims get.

i don't think that's true, viz. the many police advertising campaigns round Reading saying don't flash your mobile around, etc.

recently some of the footballers who appeared on footballers cribs advertising their flash homes were robbed. i certainly wasn't alone in having a good :lol: at that

and everyone knows, if you shout your mouth off you might get it hit, i can guarantee you the first people to tell someone they are being an annoying asshole are their friends, in the hope that they won't get hit or start a fight

so i have to say, i think most people do recognise the concept of 'asking for' a variety of crimes that could be perpetrated on you

mr.G
21-11-2005, 16:34:20
I always say if a girl wears a mini skirt and wiggles a lot "she is asking for it"...

King_Ghidra
21-11-2005, 16:36:51
but i wanted to add, i don't think that means provocatively dressed women are asking to be raped

that's bad logic

the natural consequence of dressing provocatively is to be stared at

The Norks
21-11-2005, 16:50:30
Originally posted by Japher
you were asking for that...

yes it must be my magic minge controlling you

The Norks
21-11-2005, 16:55:39
Originally posted by King_Ghidra
i don't think that's true, viz. the many police advertising campaigns round Reading saying don't flash your mobile around, etc.

recently some of the footballers who appeared on footballers cribs advertising their flash homes were robbed. i certainly wasn't alone in having a good :lol: at that

and everyone knows, if you shout your mouth off you might get it hit, i can guarantee you the first people to tell someone they are being an annoying asshole are their friends, in the hope that they won't get hit or start a fight

so i have to say, i think most people do recognise the concept of 'asking for' a variety of crimes that could be perpetrated on you

yes thats true, but I guess what I was trying to say is that there isn't the degree of shame attached to it that there is with rape, or of doubt about whether it was 'invited' or not.

Scabrous Birdseed
21-11-2005, 20:09:57
Plus society doesn't usually try to use it as some sort of legal defence. A person robbed of their mobile phone or whatever won't be asked by any self-respecting defence lawyer whether they were flashing it around, whereas questions about previous sexual behaviour, degree of inebriation, way of dressing etc. are pretty common in rape trials. Rape is one of the few crimes where the supposed "moral" character of the victim (rather than the perpetrator) is routinely questioned, both by society around the victim and the courts.

No wonder so few rape victims dare step forward.

Gary
21-11-2005, 20:29:19
Someone who has stuff stolen from their house might be asked why all the doors and windows were left open, and a sign stuck outside saying "gone away for the week". What s suggestion, they weren't asking to be robbed.

Lazarus and the Gimp
21-11-2005, 21:35:57
Originally posted by Gary
Someone who has stuff stolen from their house might be asked why all the doors and windows were left open, and a sign stuck outside saying "gone away for the week".

That's aberrant and careless behaviour. Having a sex life isn't.

Japher
21-11-2005, 21:37:45
No, but having a sex life you don't want is generally do to careless behavior.

Lazarus and the Gimp
21-11-2005, 21:39:25
Do you have figures to back that up?

Japher
21-11-2005, 21:45:46
of course not

Colon
21-11-2005, 23:05:28
Originally posted by Rodgers
Such as swallowing a whole salami just for a bet but not realising that you have been starring at the guy in the dirty raincoat and rubbing your chest at the same time throughout?

No...

Drop the sarcasm would you? The point is that flirtatious behaviour may not always be conscious.

Nills Lagerbaak
22-11-2005, 09:30:56
Originally posted by Scabrous Birdseed
Plus society doesn't usually try to use it as some sort of legal defence. A person robbed of their mobile phone or whatever won't be asked by any self-respecting defence lawyer whether they were flashing it around, whereas questions about previous sexual behaviour, degree of inebriation, way of dressing etc. are pretty common in rape trials. Rape is one of the few crimes where the supposed "moral" character of the victim (rather than the perpetrator) is routinely questioned, both by society around the victim and the courts.

No wonder so few rape victims dare step forward.

Well, it's such a serious crime that can't be disproved by the "purpetrator" so the only defence in some cases is the character of the victim (especially where there are no signs of violence). And of course the defendant's character is the first thing to be discussed in all cases.

Also I think if the person was flashing their mobile around in a real dodgy area without a care in the world, I think most laywers will argue that he was either mad or looking for attention / a conviction.

Lazarus and the Gimp
22-11-2005, 21:49:43
Balls.

The reason why rape victims have their sex lives and dress sense pored over is to look at whether mens rea was present in the attacker. In other words- did he intend to rape?

You'd struggle to find similar arguments used in street theft trials, because the question of consent doesn't arise.

The Norks
22-11-2005, 22:50:38
ahh but did the attacker mean to borrow the phone?

Colon
22-11-2005, 23:08:06
Borrowing only takes place with mutual consent.

MoSe
23-11-2005, 09:55:58
I borrow a lot of things from colleagues without them knowing it, I just hope I'll get their consent later...

no, sorry for the nonsequitur

it's a really interesting thread, and I seem to agree with everybody, so I don't understand why are you arguing ;)

In short, what would you think of someone who sticks his head in a lion's mouth and gets it chomped off? His fault, because the lion acted according to its nature, which all know in advance.
But I agree that a rapist choses to rape, because man is a superior being, and it's not driven by instincts, and understands what living in a society entails regarding social beavior.... doesn't it?
Law should treat men as if they corresponded to that description.
I don't think that a provocative woman is responsible in the least if she gets raped. But if she entices some thugs, thinking they should stick to the above ideal, well, she's very very dumb, and no, se does not "deserve" it, but she "looked for trouble"

MoSe
23-11-2005, 09:56:53
this came out too serious!
Work makes you take things seriously, that's why it's bad posting from work!
:D

mr.G
23-11-2005, 10:22:22
I think if girls go out in a pants wizz an open crutch
and toppless and mumbling i want some dick now now now then she is asking for it.

MoSe
23-11-2005, 10:27:45
anyway, this all reminded of a classic psychology test used in companies, a friend once told me.
can' recall whether I already posted it last year

Here it goes.

A married woman spends the night with a lover while her husband is away. He'll come back next morning from a work trip.
The city where they leave is split in two by a turbulent river.
The lover brings her to his home on the other side of the river.
She needs to get back before dawn.
The lover got what he wanted, it's not a long walk to her home across the bridge, there are no taxis, so she sets to walk home.
On the brid there's a huge madman foaming at the mouth and with a knife in hand. She fears he'll kill her.
She gets back to the lover's house to ask him to take her home with his car, but he doesn't want to know. She could stay by him, but he's not moving, and she can't drive. She must be back, she'd have no excuse if her husband finds out the night absence.
She recalls that there's a ferry.
At the dock, she finds that the first boat run will leave in time for her to get back safe. But the ticket is a bit expensive, and anyway she didn't bring any money with as the lover paid all.
She tries to convince the captain to let er on for free, because of her dire situation. The captain refuses, because the ferry company has fired a colleague for the same reason: he had offered a free ride to a disguised inspector who came up with a moving story...
She goes back again to the lover, but he refuses to give her any more money, laughing.
She remembers that her former boyfriend lives on that side of the town, so she rings at his door and ask him to lend her the ticket money, for old times sake. He's still hurt about having been dumped albeit few years have passed, it's 5am and he's not alone, he tells here she should face the consequences of her choices and shuts the door in her face.

With no resources left, she must choose whether to let her husband discover her night absence, or face the madman on the bridge hoping to negotiate her way thru.
She takes the second chance, and the madman kills her.

Who's responsible for the woman's death?
- the woman herself
- the madman
- the husband
- the lover
- the ex-bf
- the captain
The test asks to rank the 6 characters in responsibility order....

mr.G
23-11-2005, 10:29:42
u

MoSe
23-11-2005, 10:29:44
Originally posted by mr.G
I think if girls go out in a pants wizz an open crutch
and toppless and mumbling i want some dick now now now then she is asking for it.

but if a girl says you "fuck me" and after you got it in she says "I've changed my mind, get it out" and you don't retire at once, it's still rape.

mr.G
23-11-2005, 10:30:36
pfffffft then i am already finished.

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 10:36:58
Intersting... I would say


- the woman herself. She knew the man was mad, trying to reason with him was suicide
- the lover - knew about the madman,
- the captain

- the ex-bf - didn't know about the madman
- the husband - had no influence in the proceedings
- the madman - He's mad and has no responsibility at all


Hmm, I gave up tryi9ng to reason....needs more time. What does that say about me?

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:37:50
Interesting.

1. The Madman

For the others, she made a stupid choice, the lover was a bastard but she could have stayed with him, the captain was just doing his job, the ex boyfriend didn't do anything wrong, the husband doesn't know anything about the situation. But still, they aren't responsible for her death only the situation that led up to it.

Who else? The Taxi Drivers for not working late? The police for allowing a madman to be on the bridge?

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:39:32
Nills. interesting answers, I like them.

Ok, so I change my answer. No-one was responsible. :beer:

Tizzy
23-11-2005, 10:45:32
In order:

The Madman
The Woman
The Lover
The Captain
The Ex
The Husband

Although only the madman is really responsible, he's the only one who actually killed her.


Edit: although Nills does make an interesting point....

mr.G
23-11-2005, 10:47:50
In order:

The Madman
The Woman
The Lover
The Husband
The Captain
The Ex

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 10:52:11
The mad man in this story is just an analogy for an extremely dangerous situation. The woman knows that their is no reasoning with him and he has clearly stated that he will kill her. All her choices are based around knowing exactly this, I don't think he holds any responsibility.

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:53:02
The Madman (responsible even if his madness meant he didn't choose to be)
The Woman
The Lover
The Ex
The Captain
The Husband

mr.G
23-11-2005, 10:53:47
Maybe he is mad because of an argument he had wizz the woman when she went to her lover?

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:53:55
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
The mad man in this story is just an analogy for an extremely dangerous situation. The woman knows that their is no reasoning with him and he has clearly stated that he will kill her. All her choices are based around knowing exactly this, I don't think he holds any responsibility.

No, read it again. She fears he'll kill her, she doesn't know and he didn't state he'd kill her.

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 10:54:00
I don't think you can be mad and responsible, by definition.

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:54:21
Originally posted by mr.G
Maybe he is mad because of an argument he had wizz the woman when she went to her lover?

I wondered if the madman was the husband

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 10:56:20
He he, the clever choice would be if the hubby was the Captain, and clearly sends her to her death saying....heard it all before love, can't help you...he he he

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 10:57:03
Reponsibility is the act of making choices. The only person who didn't make a choice is the madman, surely he is least responsible?

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:57:16
I have a new order


The Husband (for being so cold the woman needed a lover)
The Lover (for only wanting to use her for sex and not caring enough to drive her home)
The Ex (for being unsympathetic to her plight)
The Captain (for being a jobsworth)
The Madman (he's not really responsible as he's mad but he did kill her)
The Woman (would have been fine if it wasn't for all these bloody MEN putting her in an impossible situation)

Funko
23-11-2005, 10:58:16
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
Reponsibility is the act of making choices. The only person who didn't make a choice is the madman, surely he is least responsible?

Yeah, I'm sold.

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 10:58:43
Brilliant. You've got the job. Now the (female) bosse's subservant bitch for the rest of your life....mwuhahahahahaha

Lurker the Seconder
23-11-2005, 10:59:20
Originally posted by Funko
I have a new order


The Husband (for being so cold the woman needed a lover)
The Lover (for only wanting to use her for sex and not caring enough to drive her home)
The Ex (for being unsympathetic to her plight)
The Captain (for being a jobsworth)
The Madman (he's not really responsible as he's mad but he did kill her)
The Woman (would have been fine if it wasn't for all these bloody MEN putting her in an impossible situation) seconded

Funko
23-11-2005, 11:00:52
Originally posted by Nills Lagerbaak
Brilliant. You've got the job. Now the (female) bosse's subservant bitch for the rest of your life....mwuhahahahahaha

Woo hoo!

Gary
23-11-2005, 11:10:00
The woman herself and the lover seem to share the major responsibility. Unsure one can put one above the other, but if pushed, she is expected to show personal responsibility for herself. She should have come out with sufficient resource to return, He should have accepted his part in the clandestine arrangement gave him the responsibility to make reasonable checks his lover would be safe. Between them they hold the most responsibility because they should take sensible precautions.

The ex-boyfriend isn't under any increased obligation to help those who call at 5am beyond the moral responsibility we all have to help others. He holds some responsibility for his refusal but not a great proportion.

The captain isn't being charitable but he isn't obliged to be. Indeed he has given a perfectly good reason why it makes no sense for him to give a free ride. No mention is made of him giving her the fare, so that doesn't come into it.

The madman is usually absolved from responsibility because he is mad. One could argue of philosophical grounds that we are all subject to determinism anyway, but that makes a mockery of the whole question.

The husband isn't involved, there is nothing in the tale to suggest he is responsible for any of this. He, arguably, has to be last.

Unless, oh course, you're just trying to avoid a kicking and not answering honestly :)

Tizzy
23-11-2005, 11:15:07
Originally posted by Gary
The woman herself and the lover seem to share the major responsibility. Unsure one can put one above the other,

I struggled a bit with that to start with but she made the choice to cheat on her husband, which is what got her into the situation.
The lover is a bastard for refusing to help her but she wouldn't have needed the help had she been faithful.

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 11:15:11
Think that just about sums it up, although I would put the Captain above the ex, as he has the same humanitarian obligation as the ex, but also has direct means of helping her. All semantics really though...

Funko
23-11-2005, 11:17:02
My feminist one was partially a joke and partially an experiment to see if I could make a reasonable argument for any order...

Tizzy
23-11-2005, 11:20:57
That's sort of the point, there is a reasonable argument for any order you choose, it's all in the way you interpret it.

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 11:29:01
Yeah, I want to see the answer grid... These psycho analytical tests always have a "what sort of person are you", blah blah blah.

I guess people who side against the lover might be considered emotional. Who side against the woman, moralistic, who side with the Madman - practical
who knows....

JM^3
23-11-2005, 13:49:32
The Madman... as he actually did it

The Lover.... as he is a cold-hearted bastard

The Woman... as she seems to make mistakes over and over again... (although I think that the reason she tries for home is because she realises the lover is a bastard and wants to not cause issues with her husband)

The Captain and The Ex are about the same, they should take care of their fellow man (the Captain has no reason to beleive her though.. the Ex should have reason to beleive her.. but might not)

The Husband I would put last, as we are not told that he is mean, cold, or in anyway undesirable or responsible

JM

MoSe
23-11-2005, 14:20:47
:eek:

I completely hijacked the thread!!!! :lol:

The test was introduced to me orally andseveral years ago, so I have no answer grid.
I tried to be the most concise (and yet it's longwined as it is), so I might have partly forgotten and partly expunged some detail, I tried to give the gist of the story: if you want to base your conclusion on what I literally wrote please do, but be informed that it might have little foundation.
IIRC the woman mad her situation wholly clear to every interlocutor, so the ex knows about the madman too.

very interesting answers, otoh this IS a classic for stirring discussions! :)

I'm not even sure whether the question was exactly about reponsibility, or it rather asked who was "guilty"...

In italian for instance you might interpret responsible as "materially responsible" (it's a bit of a stretch by us too), so I think I answered "strictly speakig the madman is, but he can't be held morally responsible"

Intersting how most place the husband last.
But the woman would rather risk her life than letting her husband know of a night out...
I'd expect as many version with the husband ultimately responsible for creating the situation, I mean, not for making the wife look elsewhere, but for keeping her in such terror that she can't say "what the fuck, let him know!"

(of course this is not stated, you can equally assume that he's lovely and the best of men, so that she doesn't want to risk to lose such a treasure... but then wouldn't he be able to forgive a night out? I think the story intentionallty leaves this and some other details out, to see how you fill'em in)

JM^3
23-11-2005, 14:29:24
yeah

I agree that there are many different possible husbands

the one that is a terror, and that she fears to get caught by

or the one that is really sweet, so she wishes not to hurt (he would forgive her.. but that does mean that she wishes to let him know)

I am not going to assume the worst of the man (it interests me that some do), and so put him last.. I can see very few putting him first without assuming the worst of him

pretty much the only they we can tell about the the Husband and Wifes relationship is that she is willing to cheat, and that their relationship isn't an open one (maybe we could also understand that he is busy, it might be what the him being away, represents)

JM

JM^3
23-11-2005, 14:32:43
note:

I would consider the Lover as an example that the woman makes bad descisions (I mean, he is such a bastard). As such it seems perfectly reasonable ot me that she just made a bad descision about crossing the bridge, and that her husband would forgive her if she stayed with the Lover.

edit: It also seems perfectly reasonable to me that there was no real reason to take him as a lover in the first place. We aren't told anything negative about the Husband, but we are told something very negative about the Lover.

JM

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 14:34:29
But even if he is a monster, cheating on him is not the answer, leaving him is the answer. One must assume that the woman is able to leave him if she wants to.... IT's such an open-ended situation, it's great!

JM^3
23-11-2005, 14:46:50
she might not be able to leave him...

even though in todays society that is definitely what I would suggest

if we are going purely on speculation, we could speculate that her husband is a bastard since her lover is a bastard

but that all is not in the story

we are told very clearly that the Lover is a bastard, we are told next to nothing about the husband (and none of it negative unless you are very different than I)

JM

Tizzy
23-11-2005, 14:51:44
Originally posted by JM^3


if we are going purely on speculation


We are, that's the point!
These things analyse you by seeing how you interpret the situation and the assumptions you make to get to your conclusion.

JM^3
23-11-2005, 14:54:19
yeah.. but their is speculation that is based on info

and specualtion that isn't

I personally am min favor of not assuming things without evidence..

so I don't assume the husband is a bastard

JM

Tizzy
23-11-2005, 14:56:29
But some other people might - saying that she wouldn't be cheating on him without a good reason, so he must have done something wrong.

Nills Lagerbaak
23-11-2005, 14:56:33
Which means you are

a) A decent person who likes to think the best on people and prbably doesn't have a deep seated nurotic complex
b) Not a psychotic femenist man-hater.

There...that'll be £70 please. Thank you, come again.


Whoops! That was meant for JM...just in case there's any confusion :)

mr.G
23-11-2005, 15:15:56
:lol:
jesjes I paid 10 x 75 euros for those kinda answers

Lazarus and the Gimp
23-11-2005, 19:47:27
Originally posted by MoSe

Who's responsible for the woman's death?
- the woman herself
- the madman
- the husband
- the lover
- the ex-bf
- the captain
The test asks to rank the 6 characters in responsibility order....

Are we talking factual responsibility or legal culpability?

If we're talking legal culpability...

1- The madman. Unless he satisfies the test for criminal insanity as defined by R v McNaughton (which is very narrow- you can be exceedingly mad and still not qualify), in which case he's not responsible.

The others don't qualify.