20.10.10

The role of a Victim....

************************Disclaimer***********************
Let it be known that I am in no way just targeting the ladies with this post, I am in a happy relationship myself, and there will be a male version being posted soon.
 ************************Disclaimer***********************

Do you get tired of women playing "Miss Innocent"? It irritates me to NO avail that women get pissed off at men that "hit on them" at a venue or something as if he had "some friggin' nerve.....and the truth of the matter is...it's just that she wasn't attracted to him. Some of these women try to besmirch this man's name among other people saying "That's the guy who hit on me", here is how the situation goes, a guy is looking at your friend and this goes on for about five minutes (looking away and then back at her) untill he finally gets the guts to "go for the kill":


"Are you single?"

"Yeah"

"Do you have a boyfriend?"

"No"

"Seeing anyone at all?"

"No"

Granted most conversations aren't as straight forward as this one it's just an example, now then, at this point there always seem to be some sort of vibe that just causes the guy to lock up and just walk away. From here, I get to the heart of the problem, after the guy walks away  you look at you're friend and ask why was she in "standoff" mode it goes as follows:

"Well, he hit on me?"

"Yeah, so?"

"Well....um...*single girl gets flustered*...he hit on me! It was creepy!"

"Ohhhhh...okay.. Fair enough </sarcasm>"

Why can't just say what the real answer is, "I wasn't attracted to him." Go figure right? But why can't women just say THAT instead of calling the guy creepy?I asked my sister this question and this is what she gave me:


Girls going around declaring that a guy hit on them are just looking for attention.

"Look at me! Some guy actually found me attractive and approached me! Look at me!"

It has more to do with that then the guy himself. She declares he's creepy so she might have an excuse to declare it without coming off as a total attention whore.
 While I may not agree with that statement I do have to say that I would rather her just say, "A guy flirted with me," etc, etc, and be flattered about it,and leave it at that than actually defame the guys character....why defame his character? How does that help anyone? With that said, if she defames that guy's character, and goes around to our circle of friends doing the same thing, "spreading the word" about the guy's "creepiness" is that fair?Mind you I know (oh how I know) that some guys give off this intense aura of exulting creepiness but does that beget rudeness?

But getting to a more serious matter women seem to be able to point the finger at any man and blame them for attacking them and we all take their word for it. I read on the web about a case I have been following for a couple of years. A doctor is on trial in Melbourne for raping a woman. Both of them were drunk, he says the woman didn't say no, she says she was somehow unable to say no:

A BENDIGO doctor accused of raping a woman seven times in one night conceded to police that she was “out of it’’ at the time but believed he did nothing wrong, a jury has heard.

Arvind Sharma, 37, is accused of molesting the woman in late 2006 after a night of drinking and nightclubbing.

He is standing trial in the Victorian County Court in Melbourne on seven counts of rape and three of indecent assault.

Sharma and the woman were known to each other, and before the night of the alleged incidents had consensual sex up to four times, the trial has previously heard.

In his 2006 record of interview, played to the jury yesterday, Sharma told detectives Danny McQuinn and John Dalton that he was shocked at the woman’s allegations and did not realise she had left his house until after police arrived and arrested him.

He said the victim was “out of it’’, but not “comatose’’.

“She was out of it. She wasn’t passed out, but she was out of it,’’ Sharma said. ‘‘She was drunk and I was drunk.’’

Asked if the woman was consenting, Sharma replied: “By saying that, she didn’t say no. We were kissing, cuddling... in a drunk sort of way, so there was no ‘no way’ or anything like that.’’

The seven rape charges Sharma faces include three of digital rape, two of digital anal rape and one of anal rape.  
 So basically, what we have here is two drunk people having a fondle. She doesn't object to sex, so he goes ahead with it. It does seem that he was more aware than she was, although that is only because the article gives more of his side of the story than hers. I'd like to hear why she 'couldn't' object to sex. That would be interesting to hear.I can't work out what this guy is being accused of. He had sex with a woman who didn't object. She says she couldn't say no - how was he meant to read her mind? Couldn't any woman have sex with a man and then claim rape and argue she couldn't say no? However through all of this I have to say that I am not a feminist nor an I against them I stand in the middle, meaning I see that both male and females have pros and cons, however, it seems that one pro of being a female is a wee bit more damaging than anything a male could do.
*Article*


*EDIT* While I'm at it here: 


7 comments:

  1. women want to be hit on when they dress like whores

    ReplyDelete
  2. OMG !!! I JUST HATE THAT STUPID DUCK FACE !!!!
    I would slap that shit of off a girls face >.<
    FFFUUUU !!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Totally agreed with post and picture. Duck face is almost awkward.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yeah, I hate those too. Good for someone to point that one out.

    ReplyDelete