Total Posts:100|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Young girls dress too sexy?

SuzzaneO
Posts: 47
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 9:05:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Calling all daddy's, uncles and brothers? Is it just me or are young girls dressing more and more like little tramps everyday? Halter tops, daisy dukes, deep v-neck, cleavage showing (if there is any). YUK! Any girl between the ages of 8 and 16 (maybe even 18) have no business dressing like this? Is it the parents fault or the clothing manufacturers who make the clothes?
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 9:48:29 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 9:05:17 AM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Calling all daddy's, uncles and brothers? Is it just me or are young girls dressing more and more like little tramps everyday? Halter tops, daisy dukes, deep v-neck, cleavage showing (if there is any). YUK! Any girl between the ages of 8 and 16 (maybe even 18) have no business dressing like this? Is it the parents fault or the clothing manufacturers who make the clothes?

I'm sure we can find someway to blame the government.

But really, it is an issue with the parents and a lack of involvement. Of course, the government doesn't help when they do what they can do what they can to undermine a parent's authority (providing free condoms to 11 year olds without informing parents, making it illegal for a doctor to tell the parents when their girl has an abortion, and the like), there, I knew we could find a way to work the government into the blame game.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:08:14 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you don't wanna see it, don't look.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:24:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Anyone that can pay for their own clothes can dress however they want.

as far as the free condoms, I'd rather they use them than have unprotected sex, sorry if that offends you.
As far as reproductive rights, the grandparents of the potential child have no right to be informed if someone else has an abortion.

As far as the clothing itself, its not even a big deal. If parents don't like it, they don't have to buy clothes like that, however its really not a big deal.

fyi I'm 16, I wear the same clothes I did when 12-15 too. They would fit under your "banned" clothing, which isn't fair, because I like the style and feel of those clothes more than any other type.
Laws should have no business dictating what you can put on or in your body. If you don't like it don't buy it, encourage others to do the same, and they will stop. I know enough about the fashion industry to know that it changes, quickly enough anyway.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:25:15 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 10:08:14 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If you don't wanna see it, don't look.

this.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:30:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 10:24:50 AM, lovelife wrote:
Anyone that can pay for their own clothes can dress however they want.

as far as the free condoms, I'd rather they use them than have unprotected sex, sorry if that offends you.
As far as reproductive rights, the grandparents of the potential child have no right to be informed if someone else has an abortion.

Wow, that was a joke to try to drag the government into this. But okay.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:33:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 10:30:47 AM, OreEle wrote:
At 4/19/2011 10:24:50 AM, lovelife wrote:
Anyone that can pay for their own clothes can dress however they want.

as far as the free condoms, I'd rather they use them than have unprotected sex, sorry if that offends you.
As far as reproductive rights, the grandparents of the potential child have no right to be informed if someone else has an abortion.

Wow, that was a joke to try to drag the government into this. But okay.
not you, the op
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
headphonegut
Posts: 4,122
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:36:30 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 9:05:17 AM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Calling all daddy's, uncles and brothers? Is it just me or are young girls dressing more and more like little tramps everyday? Halter tops, daisy dukes, deep v-neck, cleavage showing (if there is any). YUK! Any girl between the ages of 8 and 16 (maybe even 18) have no business dressing like this? Is it the parents fault or the clothing manufacturers who make the clothes?

you said that like it's a bad thing.
crying to soldiers coming home to their dogs why do I torment myself with these videos?
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:53:18 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 10:08:14 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If you don't wanna see it, don't look.

Interesting.

Regarding gun control, the most common defense I've heard is that it's needed for defending one's self/property. Now, a household may or may not have valuables or items that are worth being burgled, but even so, people still want to have the right to own guns to protect those items. One never knows when some criminals might decide to pay a visit (which they would if they knew that the house has valuable items).

Now take this same example. Women dressing revealingly. Considering that males generally find the female form attractive, and this being displayed prominently, would make it, to put it midly, "worth the while to burgle". So, probably some "criminal" minded men could commit said burglary.

Maybe people don't want such things happening, and they say to the girls, please don't dress so. But it seems they can't. The response is "If you don't wanna see, don't look". How is this fitting? The "criminal" guys definitely want to see and much more.

If somebody says, please don't keep valuable items in your house and they get a response like "If you don't want to see, don't look", does it make any sense? But people keep valuable items in their homes and then proceed to defend them with guns. It would be stupid if they didn't protect them.

So, unless you advocate women to carry guns, wouldn't you say it makes sense for them to not dress so provocatively? And guns cannot be carried by minors. So what are you going to tell them? Otherwise it would be like not only keeping valuable items in your house, but displaying them prominently without having any protection for them.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 11:15:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 10:53:18 AM, Indophile wrote:
Now take this same example. Women dressing revealingly. Considering that males generally find the female form attractive, and this being displayed prominently, would make it, to put it midly, "worth the while to burgle". So, probably some "criminal" minded men could commit said burglary.

Maybe people don't want such things happening, and they say to the girls, please don't dress so. But it seems they can't. The response is "If you don't wanna see, don't look".
The OP's argument was "Yuk," not "That's unsafe."

So, unless you advocate women to carry guns
I do. And failing that, pepper spray can be legally carried by minors, and safely carried by people who do not wish to take the time to learn gun use.

Presumably, someone dressing provocatively is trying to attract attention from someone. The question is who. Clearly not dressing that way is not as optimal a solution as making oneself an effective target.

Incidentally, if I were a rapist I'd pay no mind whatsoever to how revealing someone's clothing was, I dunno about actual rapists tho. One can see their shape in most clothing.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 11:27:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I would never let my child dress like this http://image.thehothits.com... http://x17online.com... http://x17online.com... (not Miley, but her sister.)

Whatever floats some parents' boats, I guess. I always figured it was a California/Florida thing... even the adults barely wear any clothes. Is it just that hot?
TUF
Posts: 21,309
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 11:36:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 11:27:19 AM, nonentity wrote:
I would never let my child dress like this http://image.thehothits.com... http://x17online.com... http://x17online.com... (not Miley, but her sister.)

Whatever floats some parents' boats, I guess. I always figured it was a California/Florida thing... even the adults barely wear any clothes. Is it just that hot?

Holy crap. That first one is horrible...
"I've got to go and grab a shirt" ~ Airmax1227
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 11:38:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 11:27:19 AM, nonentity wrote:
I would never let my child dress like this http://image.thehothits.com... http://x17online.com... http://x17online.com... (not Miley, but her sister.)

Whatever floats some parents' boats, I guess. I always figured it was a California/Florida thing... even the adults barely wear any clothes. Is it just that hot?

Here is a photo of the women in my family: http://1.bp.blogspot.com...

This picture was taken at home, of course, I would never allow one of my womenfolk to leave the house with bare arms.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
nonentity
Posts: 5,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 11:40:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Yah, I'm not sure of the context of the first one... I mean, as a swimsuit, okay. But the way they're posing and they look like they're on some sort of red carpet (and the one on the right is only 11 this year and who knows when that picture was taken) just makes me tres disappoint.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 11:57:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Perhaps a decent argument could be made for restricting the clothing of young girls based on minimising rape (probably one I wouldn't accept) but doing it based on "YUK" is not valid or reasonable.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 12:04:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 11:15:47 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/19/2011 10:53:18 AM, Indophile wrote:
Now take this same example. Women dressing revealingly. Considering that males generally find the female form attractive, and this being displayed prominently, would make it, to put it midly, "worth the while to burgle". So, probably some "criminal" minded men could commit said burglary.

Maybe people don't want such things happening, and they say to the girls, please don't dress so. But it seems they can't. The response is "If you don't wanna see, don't look".
The OP's argument was "Yuk," not "That's unsafe."
If the response is "Yuk", it'd be safe to say that it's more than safe! I advocate more such dressing. Presumably rapists don't go for targets that are "Yuk" :)

So, unless you advocate women to carry guns
I do. And failing that, pepper spray can be legally carried by minors, and safely carried by people who do not wish to take the time to learn gun use.

An argument can be made that a girl that dressess in such a way so as to attract dangerous attention is not showing great sense in the first place. On top of that you want her to have a gun :) Pepper spray is great. It should be made mandatory.

Presumably, someone dressing provocatively is trying to attract attention from someone. The question is who. Clearly not dressing that way is not as optimal a solution as making oneself an effective target.

The question is not who. The question is is it needed? One cannot control whose attention is grabbed. It just makes more sense to seek attention in a more specified way that only the person whose attention is sought would understand. As it is, I hardly think girls dress in such a way to attract attention. Maybe they feel comfortable, or maybe because their peers are wearing it, their idols are wearing it, it's fashionable, or whatever.

Incidentally, if I were a rapist I'd pay no mind whatsoever to how revealing someone's clothing was, I dunno about actual rapists tho. One can see their shape in most clothing.

It wouldn't matter how revealing the clothing was at the time of raping, only they might've worn such clothes some time before.. Rapists generally stalk someone for days on end before committing the act. (I'm no expert, but books, movies say so. Maybe they are wrong). One has to be diligent what one wears, or does, or portrays all the time. Just like displaying valuables necessitates constant protection. You cannot assume that just because you've stopped displaying your jewellery for one day would mean they won't get stolen that day.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
ccstate4peat
Posts: 2,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 12:38:12 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 9:05:17 AM, SuzzaneO wrote:
Calling all daddy's, uncles and brothers? Is it just me or are young girls dressing more and more like little tramps everyday? Halter tops, daisy dukes, deep v-neck, cleavage showing (if there is any). YUK! Any girl between the ages of 8 and 16 (maybe even 18) have no business dressing like this? Is it the parents fault or the clothing manufacturers who make the clothes?

Fücking hot is what it is
twsurber
Posts: 505
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 1:01:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I concur with you, but be forewarned, I got hammered on this same topic last summer and you probably will as well.

IMO, This is just one more contributing element to the moral decay of our "everything is socially acceptable" U.S.A.

In his farewell address, George Washington warned about caving in to the desires of special interest groups. So much for foresight.
xxdarkxx
Posts: 3,090
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 1:35:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 11:38:32 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 4/19/2011 11:27:19 AM, nonentity wrote:
I would never let my child dress like this http://image.thehothits.com... http://x17online.com... http://x17online.com... (not Miley, but her sister.)

Whatever floats some parents' boats, I guess. I always figured it was a California/Florida thing... even the adults barely wear any clothes. Is it just that hot?

Here is a photo of the women in my family: http://1.bp.blogspot.com...

This picture was taken at home, of course, I would never allow one of my womenfolk to leave the house with bare arms.

Brian wins this thread.
once again
Grape
Posts: 989
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 2:01:51 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
lol @ moralizing. No one has any business telling other people what is the correct way for them to dress.

also, lol @ 8-16 (or 18!) age range. I'm pretty sure there's something that happens during those years that affects the issue of wearing revealing clothes (and sexuality in general).
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 2:45:55 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If the response is "Yuk", it'd be safe to say that it's more than safe! I advocate more such dressing. Presumably rapists don't go for targets that are "Yuk" :)
To be quite fair OP i sfemale.

So, unless you advocate women to carry guns
I do. And failing that, pepper spray can be legally carried by minors, and safely carried by people who do not wish to take the time to learn gun use.

An argument can be made that a girl that dressess in such a way so as to attract dangerous attention is not showing great sense in the first place.
It also attracts desired attention. What would be "not showing great sense" is living a lifetime in fear, and hence not really living at all.

Presumably, someone dressing provocatively is trying to attract attention from someone. The question is who. Clearly not dressing that way is not as optimal a solution as making oneself an effective target.

The question is not who. The question is is it needed?
I don't need to get in that car and go to a movie. Yet that doesn't mean the risk of an auto wreck is good enough reason to stop me.

It wouldn't matter how revealing the clothing was at the time of raping, only they might've worn such clothes some time before.. Rapists generally stalk someone for days on end before committing the act. (I'm no expert, but books, movies say so. Maybe they are wrong).
Most rapists are family members or close friends. The most effective rape prevention strategy is to not have a family or friends.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 8:57:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 2:45:55 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If the response is "Yuk", it'd be safe to say that it's more than safe! I advocate more such dressing. Presumably rapists don't go for targets that are "Yuk" :)
To be quite fair OP i sfemale.

So, unless you advocate women to carry guns
I do. And failing that, pepper spray can be legally carried by minors, and safely carried by people who do not wish to take the time to learn gun use.

An argument can be made that a girl that dressess in such a way so as to attract dangerous attention is not showing great sense in the first place.
It also attracts desired attention. What would be "not showing great sense" is living a lifetime in fear, and hence not really living at all.

Displaying a little common sense cannot be equated to living in fear. In fact, having guns can be thought of as living in fear (of somebody doing something that will necessitate your use of that gun), but that's beside the point.

Talking practically, where will the gun be kept if the dress is revealing in the first place? It has to necessarily be kept in a hand bag or something. Can't very well carry a gun in hand. It makes sense if the society is such that one can go about dressed as one pleases. That means, there is a time and place that is suitable. Just telling someone to be careful is not what you make it out to be.

Presumably, someone dressing provocatively is trying to attract attention from someone. The question is who. Clearly not dressing that way is not as optimal a solution as making oneself an effective target.

The question is not who. The question is is it needed?
I don't need to get in that car and go to a movie. Yet that doesn't mean the risk of an auto wreck is good enough reason to stop me.

Yes, you make a decision as to whether it's a good trade-off. Is attracting attention really that important? If so, there could be myriad ways. There is doing a thing one way, and then doing it sensibly. What's the harm in acting sensibly?

It wouldn't matter how revealing the clothing was at the time of raping, only they might've worn such clothes some time before.. Rapists generally stalk someone for days on end before committing the act. (I'm no expert, but books, movies say so. Maybe they are wrong).
Most rapists are family members or close friends. The most effective rape prevention strategy is to not have a family or friends.

Most effective rape prevention strategy is a sex-change operation! (Male rape is more in the nature of sexual harassment, or at least of a different nature, with different effects)

What can one do? One has to work with what one has. One can only control what's in one's hands.

It's not your choice who you have as family. Friends, yes. What you wear, at what times, yes.

Giving a gun to everybody is what kind of solution? My way, or the highway? Doesn't one have to adjust according to one's situation? Your method is, I'll do what I want (unless it's deemed illegal), and if someone does not agree, well, I have a gun. How does this make for a well-adjusted society? Should everybody in the family also have a gun, and use it for dispute resolutions within the family?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 9:20:02 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 11:27:19 AM, nonentity wrote:
I would never let my child dress like this http://image.thehothits.com... http://x17online.com... http://x17online.com... (not Miley, but her sister.)

Whatever floats some parents' boats, I guess. I always figured it was a California/Florida thing... even the adults barely wear any clothes. Is it just that hot?

You just gave C_N some fap material.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Phoenix_Reaper
Posts: 318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 9:44:54 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If they look the age of consent, in my case 16, I will look. female are well aware of what they are dressing and the only reason I can see them dressing like that is for attention. I oblige them. The only problem I have is when they look at me like I am a pedo. It is their fault about the way they dress attracts my attention.
Phoenix Reaper - To rise from the ashes of defeat and claim your soul.

: At 3/15/2011 4:23:07 PM, J.Kenyon wrote:
: Taste is for pussïes. Be a nihilist. Drink vodka.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2011 10:11:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Displaying a little common sense cannot be equated to living in fear.
Sure can. Maybe if it was a rational weighing of the marginal odds of unsafe occurrences it wouldn't be, but "common sense" is inherently fearful.

In fact, having guns can be thought of as living in fear (of somebody doing something that will necessitate your use of that gun)
Not in the same sense (The sense is: Giving up enjoyment over the fear).

Talking practically, where will the gun be kept if the dress is revealing in the first place? It has to necessarily be kept in a hand bag or something.
Answer your own questions eh?

Yes, you make a decision as to whether it's a good trade-off. Is attracting attention really that important?
I'm not female, but I'd certainly take on greater risks to get laid than to go to a movie.

If so, there could be myriad ways. There is doing a thing one way, and then doing it sensibly. What's the harm in acting sensibly?
We don't know, you haven't concretized it. Or the odds of harm of acting "insensibly" for that matter.

Most rapists are family members or close friends. The most effective rape prevention strategy is to not have a family or friends.

Most effective rape prevention strategy is a sex-change operation! (Male rape is more in the nature of sexual harassment, or at least of a different nature, with different effects)
Most effective rape prevention for a male is to not go to prison. Second best is to develop an excellent grip on soap.

Giving a gun to everybody is what kind of solution?
I never recommended such gifts.

Doesn't one have to adjust according to one's situation? Your method is, I'll do what I want (unless it's deemed illegal), and if someone does not agree, well, I have a gun.
Yes, if someone tries to rape me for a clothing choice, I am perfectly comfortable resorting to deadly force.

How does this make for a well-adjusted society?
It gets rid of the rapist. How does letting such a creature survive make for a well-adjusted society?

Should everybody in the family also have a gun, and use it for dispute resolutions within the family?
Depends on the nature of the dispute. Many disputes can simply be settled by leaving if you don't like it. Unless, of course, the family forces you to stay, in which case a gun is a reasonable option.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2011 10:15:17 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/19/2011 10:11:22 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Displaying a little common sense cannot be equated to living in fear.
Sure can. Maybe if it was a rational weighing of the marginal odds of unsafe occurrences it wouldn't be, but "common sense" is inherently fearful.

Does that make it less sensible? Every safety measure is inherently fearful. In that sense, all advanced societies can be said to live in fear most of the time. Do you see many safety measures in third world countries?

In fact, having guns can be thought of as living in fear (of somebody doing something that will necessitate your use of that gun)
Not in the same sense (The sense is: Giving up enjoyment over the fear).
Safety <> fear. If I give up the enjoyment of driving at 150 mph, am I doing that out of fear, or out of safety?


Talking practically, where will the gun be kept if the dress is revealing in the first place? It has to necessarily be kept in a hand bag or something.
Answer your own questions eh?
Have you ever looked inside a girl's handbag? You seriously think there's space there for a gun???


Yes, you make a decision as to whether it's a good trade-off. Is attracting attention really that important?
I'm not female, but I'd certainly take on greater risks to get laid than to go to a movie.
Attractive girls need hardly take any risk to get laid. Which gun crazy world do you live in? :)

If so, there could be myriad ways. There is doing a thing one way, and then doing it sensibly. What's the harm in acting sensibly?
We don't know, you haven't concretized it. Or the odds of harm of acting "insensibly" for that matter.

There are no specific odds, only the probability of harm occuring increases. That's all one can say. If one acts sensibly, and still undergoes harm, that can be attributed to bad luck (if that's any consolation). But if one's harmed when it could've been prevented, that's hard to digest.


Most rapists are family members or close friends. The most effective rape prevention strategy is to not have a family or friends.

Most effective rape prevention strategy is a sex-change operation! (Male rape is more in the nature of sexual harassment, or at least of a different nature, with different effects)
Most effective rape prevention for a male is to not go to prison. Second best is to develop an excellent grip on soap.

Again, which gun crazy world do you live in? Here, these things are already in place. You know what's the punishment for breaking and entering, burglary, etc.? Prison. But does that stop you from getting guns to defend yourself? (Getting guns to defend onself can also be said as "acting sensibly" according to you, right?) So why not have the same lookout for rape prevention? Act sensibly.

Giving a gun to everybody is what kind of solution?
I never recommended such gifts.
Bad phrasing on my part. Having everybody buy guns is what kind of solution?

Doesn't one have to adjust according to one's situation? Your method is, I'll do what I want (unless it's deemed illegal), and if someone does not agree, well, I have a gun.
Yes, if someone tries to rape me for a clothing choice, I am perfectly comfortable resorting to deadly force.
Prevention is better than cure. Or is that also to be thrown aside? (as being inherently fearful)

How does this make for a well-adjusted society?
It gets rid of the rapist. How does letting such a creature survive make for a well-adjusted society?

Is your prerogative to get rid of the rapist, or to not be raped in the first place? Also, I was talking about a society where your choice of dispute resolution is a gun. Is that a well-adjusted society? Just waving around a gun won't solve anything unless you are prepared to use it.

Should everybody in the family also have a gun, and use it for dispute resolutions within the family?
Depends on the nature of the dispute. Many disputes can simply be settled by leaving if you don't like it. Unless, of course, the family forces you to stay, in which case a gun is a reasonable option.

A gun is a reasonable option, as in you'll shoot them? What if you can't leave easily?
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2011 10:36:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/20/2011 10:15:17 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 4/19/2011 10:11:22 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Displaying a little common sense cannot be equated to living in fear.
Sure can. Maybe if it was a rational weighing of the marginal odds of unsafe occurrences it wouldn't be, but "common sense" is inherently fearful.

Does that make it less sensible?
The common part does already.


In fact, having guns can be thought of as living in fear (of somebody doing something that will necessitate your use of that gun)
Not in the same sense (The sense is: Giving up enjoyment over the fear).
Safety <> fear. If I give up the enjoyment of driving at 150 mph, am I doing that out of fear, or out of safety?
Is driving at 150 mph really that important to you?

Have you ever looked inside a girl's handbag? You seriously think there's space there for a gun???
Yes and often yes.



Yes, you make a decision as to whether it's a good trade-off. Is attracting attention really that important?
I'm not female, but I'd certainly take on greater risks to get laid than to go to a movie.
Attractive girls need hardly take any risk to get laid.
True. They are, on the other hand, pickier. :P

If so, there could be myriad ways. There is doing a thing one way, and then doing it sensibly. What's the harm in acting sensibly?
We don't know, you haven't concretized it. Or the odds of harm of acting "insensibly" for that matter.

There are no specific odds, only the probability of harm occuring increases.
As it does going to a movie in a car.

Most rapists are family members or close friends. The most effective rape prevention strategy is to not have a family or friends.

Most effective rape prevention strategy is a sex-change operation! (Male rape is more in the nature of sexual harassment, or at least of a different nature, with different effects)
Most effective rape prevention for a male is to not go to prison. Second best is to develop an excellent grip on soap.

Again, which gun crazy world do you live in? Here, these things are already in place. You know what's the punishment for breaking and entering, burglary, etc.? Prison. But does that stop you from getting guns to defend yourself? (Getting guns to defend onself can also be said as "acting sensibly" according to you, right?) So why not have the same lookout for rape prevention?
Getting guns is rational in many situations, I don't specialize in common sense.

(Also a note on the rape prevention via sex change, unless you pass which is unlikely, that's profoundly stupid, people often rape transsexuals just because the idea pisses them off).


Giving a gun to everybody is what kind of solution?
I never recommended such gifts.
Bad phrasing on my part. Having everybody buy guns is what kind of solution?
A solution that makes the criminals alter their lifestyles based on crime, rather than having the law abiding citizens do so.

Prevention is better than cure. Or is that also to be thrown aside? (as being inherently fearful)
Ask again when you've rejected ever leaving the house for anything other than groceries or the cash to buy them.

Is your prerogative to get rid of the rapist, or to not be raped in the first place?
Preferably one gets rid of the rapist before they get your clothes off, so both.

Also, I was talking about a society where your choice of dispute resolution is a gun. Is that a well-adjusted society?
Yes, and EVERY society except an anarchy involves dispute resolution via gun. And an anarchy will never exist, an attempted anarchy will still involve it, simply causing the attempters to lose.

A gun is a reasonable option, as in you'll shoot them?
Yes, if a family regards me as a slave, and the law does not, I will shoot them (If the law does, I will work to change that).

What if you can't leave easily?
Because they are initiating force or for some other reason? Name it.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2011 11:29:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 4/20/2011 10:36:32 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 4/20/2011 10:15:17 AM, Indophile wrote:
At 4/19/2011 10:11:22 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Displaying a little common sense cannot be equated to living in fear.
Sure can. Maybe if it was a rational weighing of the marginal odds of unsafe occurrences it wouldn't be, but "common sense" is inherently fearful.

Does that make it less sensible?
The common part does already.
Ok. I can work with that.



In fact, having guns can be thought of as living in fear (of somebody doing something that will necessitate your use of that gun)
Not in the same sense (The sense is: Giving up enjoyment over the fear).
Safety <> fear. If I give up the enjoyment of driving at 150 mph, am I doing that out of fear, or out of safety?
Is driving at 150 mph really that important to you?
What if it is? That was not my point anyway. Do you believe that one should do anything and everything one wants (unless it's illegal), and no such thing as sensible, unnecessary, anti-social, or any such adjective foisted upon you by any other should matter or be a factor?


Have you ever looked inside a girl's handbag? You seriously think there's space there for a gun???
Yes and often yes.
Is that a norm or a deviation? :)



Yes, you make a decision as to whether it's a good trade-off. Is attracting attention really that important?
I'm not female, but I'd certainly take on greater risks to get laid than to go to a movie.
Attractive girls need hardly take any risk to get laid.
True. They are, on the other hand, pickier. :P
There are two types of picky. One when there is no other option, and one where there are lots of options. Risk is involved only in the first case, you agree? The pickiness you state is the second one, right?

If so, there could be myriad ways. There is doing a thing one way, and then doing it sensibly. What's the harm in acting sensibly?
We don't know, you haven't concretized it. Or the odds of harm of acting "insensibly" for that matter.

There are no specific odds, only the probability of harm occuring increases.
As it does going to a movie in a car.
You should stop at going to a movie. No need to add on the "in a car" part.


Most rapists are family members or close friends. The most effective rape prevention strategy is to not have a family or friends.

Most effective rape prevention strategy is a sex-change operation! (Male rape is more in the nature of sexual harassment, or at least of a different nature, with different effects)
Most effective rape prevention for a male is to not go to prison. Second best is to develop an excellent grip on soap.

Again, which gun crazy world do you live in? Here, these things are already in place. You know what's the punishment for breaking and entering, burglary, etc.? Prison. But does that stop you from getting guns to defend yourself? (Getting guns to defend onself can also be said as "acting sensibly" according to you, right?) So why not have the same lookout for rape prevention?
Getting guns is rational in many situations, I don't specialize in common sense.
Alright, but does that mean there is no other option?

(Also a note on the rape prevention via sex change, unless you pass which is unlikely, that's profoundly stupid, people often rape transsexuals just because the idea pisses them off).
Ha. I was replying in kind to your statement about not having a family or friends.


Giving a gun to everybody is what kind of solution?
I never recommended such gifts.
Bad phrasing on my part. Having everybody buy guns is what kind of solution?
A solution that makes the criminals alter their lifestyles based on crime, rather than having the law abiding citizens do so.
They will alter their lifestyles of course. Only the stakes will now be much higher. Just like the stakes are now higher because North Korea/Pakistan is nuclear. India and Pakistan are both nuclear. That didn't stop them from fighting a war.


Prevention is better than cure. Or is that also to be thrown aside? (as being inherently fearful)
Ask again when you've rejected ever leaving the house for anything other than groceries or the cash to buy them.

Ask again when you've rejected anything because it'd be a hassle to deal with the consequences.

Is your prerogative to get rid of the rapist, or to not be raped in the first place?
Preferably one gets rid of the rapist before they get your clothes off, so both.

That's preferable. But it's preferable to not be in that situation, yes?

Also, I was talking about a society where your choice of dispute resolution is a gun. Is that a well-adjusted society?
Yes, and EVERY society except an anarchy involves dispute resolution via gun. And an anarchy will never exist, an attempted anarchy will still involve it, simply causing the attempters to lose.

Individuals cannot be expected to behave rationally. Having a gun gives one powers that entail a lot of repsonsiblity and restraint. I'm sure you can be expected to behave in a responsible manner with a gun. Are you willing to take a chance that everybody you know will? (If you will indulge me, just imagine everybody having a red button at their disposal, you know, like the one Obama has?)

I agree with your bit on anarchy though.

A gun is a reasonable option, as in you'll shoot them?
Yes, if a family regards me as a slave, and the law does not, I will shoot them (If the law does, I will work to change that).

Fine.

What if you can't leave easily?
Because they are initiating force or for some other reason? Name it.

I take back this part of the argument.
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/20/2011 2:47:58 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What if it is?
Then don't puss out if it's all that enjoyable.

That was not my point anyway. Do you believe that one should do anything and everything one wants (unless it's illegal), and no such thing as sensible, unnecessary, anti-social, or any such adjective foisted upon you by any other should matter or be a factor?
One should prioritize one's wants. Sex is pretty high up on the list.

Everything is unnecessary, and I don't care what's social.

Note that the marginal risk of rape from dressing in revealing ways is still probably pretty low.



Have you ever looked inside a girl's handbag? You seriously think there's space there for a gun???
Yes and often yes.
Is that a norm or a deviation? :)
I think it a norm that there is room for a gun. Or pepper spray for that matter.




Yes, you make a decision as to whether it's a good trade-off. Is attracting attention really that important?
I'm not female, but I'd certainly take on greater risks to get laid than to go to a movie.
Attractive girls need hardly take any risk to get laid.
True. They are, on the other hand, pickier. :P
There are two types of picky. One when there is no other option, and one where there are lots of options. Risk is involved only in the first case, you agree? The pickiness you state is the second one, right?
Risk often comes about from seeking the best option.

Life is all about taking risks incidentally.

Getting guns is rational in many situations, I don't specialize in common sense.
Alright, but does that mean there is no other option?
There's realizing that the risk is fairly low anyway.
There's learning hand to hand combat-- rape puts the rapist in a vulnerable position. Groin exposed and a larger target and all that.

They will alter their lifestyles of course. Only the stakes will now be much higher. Just like the stakes are now higher because North Korea/Pakistan is nuclear. India and Pakistan are both nuclear. That didn't stop them from fighting a war.
Is peace so sweet as to pay in chains?

That's preferable. But it's preferable to not be in that situation, yes?
Yes, however it's not preferable to sacrifice a significantly enjoyable activity to marginally reduce the risk of such a situation by a miniscule amount.

Individuals cannot be expected to behave rationally.
I haven't tracked you down and punched you in the face yet have I?

Are you willing to take a chance that everybody you know will? (If you will indulge me, just imagine everybody having a red button at their disposal, you know, like the one Obama has?)
Red buttons are not useful on a personal scale, hence there is no reason to tolerate their risk.

Guns, on the other hand...

(It is precisely because I cannot trust everyone that a world permitting guns is necessary. The least trustworthy folk would have all the guns in a world that did not permit them).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.