On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 21:03:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 02/01/2014 7:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>> >>Orange.  That's what colour it should be.;)
>>>> >>
>>>> >>
>>> >Now, there is a colour, you could march to.
>>> >(If you are a bigot.):-(
>> Ah, yes, I didn't think about that in the discussion.  Sorry, let's try
>> a different one.
>>
>> Blue.
>>
>>
> There is many an Orange man who is a blue nose as well.

Green? ;)

>> (Aside:  You do know what "bikeshedding" is, yes?)
> 
> Yes and that is why I always spec a bike shed with a penthouse and patio
> doors. That way I might get a shed for bikes.

But the discussion is about what colour it should be. ;)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On 1/2/2014 3:31 AM, Warp wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
>> Uh.. Wrong, wrong, wrong..
>
> Fine. Women should take no precautions *at all* to try to lower the risks.
> Why bother? They are going to get raped anyway.
>
> I'm almost tempted to call you a nasty name.
>
Sigh... Seriously? The problem here isn't that someone should take "no" 
precautions. The problem is taking "imaginary" ones, which do nothing 
but promote the excuses used to both get criminal off the hook, and 
shame women into thinking, "I should have done something different.", 
even when it was impossible to have done anything different. Slut 
shaming is ***NOT*** acceptable, but its exactly what happens, every 
single damn time a rape happens, and some idiots starts rattling off a 
list of things they "might have" done differently, while having no F-ing 
clue what the hell they did, or didn't, do, or based on a laundry list 
of myths and stupid assumptions.

You will note that one "huge" one is, "Don't drink, or get high, it 
increases your risk." Well.. That one doesn't help a whole hell of a lot 
either, in cases where there really is a predator of some sort involved. 
I know someone who has a family history of drinking problems, so knows 
what the risks are, and avoids having more than maybe one drink, who, at 
a concert, was one of about 100 victims of some idiot that decided to 
dump some sort of drug into people's drinks. Her boyfriend at the time 
was the only person, including he father (a man with problems with 
alcoholism), her mother, most of her friend, and complete strangers, who 
all "assumed" she had gotten stinking drunk, not had half a drink, into 
which someone dumped something else. And, even he didn't figure it out 
until halfway home, when he thought back about things and realized that 
a) she never had more than the one drink in her hand, b) he was with her 
the whole entire time, and c) there is no way in hell she should be that 
blitzed from it.

The default assumption, by bloody everyone, was that **she** screwed up 
somehow. But, again, this is one woman, out of hundreds, who reported 
something having been slipped into their drinks, without them knowing 
it. Are you going to tell me that she wasn't careful enough? That she 
was dressed wrong? That she shouldn't have drank anything at all? That 
more than a hundred of women, none of whom saw it get slipped into their 
drinks where all just too stupid to notice? If she had been alone, what 
are the odds you would have just chocked this up as, "Shouldn't have 
been alone, drinking, while wearing what ever it was she was wearing at 
the time."?

You don't want to know what kinds of names I like to call people that 
can't bloody GET THIS.

How are "delusional" precautions helpful? If 2/3 of all rapes are done 
by people they know, what the frak "precautions" do you expect from 
them? If what they wear, where they are, and just about everything 
"other" than intentionally taking higher than normal risks, while drunk 
off their ass, neither increases, nor decreases, their risks, then who 
the hell are you to be judging them for meaningless choices, or claiming 
they "should have taken more precautions"?

Its not about taking "no" precautions, its about actually knowing what 
the fuck the risks really are, and what really, actually does increase 
them, and, at least as importantly, not, unintentionally, playing the 
bullshit game that the rapists, and their apologists, want everyone to, 
and blaming the victim for what happened, but accusing them of having 
too short a skirt, of walking down the wrong road, or some other 
statistically useless, but very useful for some people, excuses.

In short, stop being a useful idiot to these people. Treat the victims 
as smart intelligent people, until/unless there is a damn good reason to 
not, who didn't take some sort of imaginary risks, and, in most cases, 
probably couldn't have done a bloody thing to reduce them, not as, 
somehow, by default, automatically, and, without any need of facts or 
evidence, culpable in what happened.

Post a reply to this message

On 03/01/2014 12:20 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 20:47:00 +0100, andrel wrote:
>
>> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RDlUlTR1xXc/UYBH7JMnrxI/AAAAAAAACFA/
> mEZ4NH6UbYg/s1600/tumblr_mm2mx0hnmy1qzjmo0o1_1280.jpg
>>
>> orange dressed in blue.
>
> I'm not understanding the reference...
>
She is of the House of Orange. The same way our Queen is of the House of 
Windsor. Previously the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.


-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

On 03/01/2014 12:21 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 21:03:14 +0000, Stephen wrote:
>
>> On 02/01/2014 7:20 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>>>>>>> Orange.  That's what colour it should be.;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>> Now, there is a colour, you could march to.
>>>>> (If you are a bigot.):-(
>>> Ah, yes, I didn't think about that in the discussion.  Sorry, let's try
>>> a different one.
>>>
>>> Blue.
>>>
>>>
>> There is many an Orange man who is a blue nose as well.
>
> Green? ;)
>

If you want.

I have no opinions on the matter. (See everyone, it can be said. :-) )


>>> (Aside:  You do know what "bikeshedding" is, yes?)
>>
>> Yes and that is why I always spec a bike shed with a penthouse and patio
>> doors. That way I might get a shed for bikes.
>
> But the discussion is about what colour it should be. ;)
>

Why? Is it a religious thing? It is in Northern Ireland and the West 
coast of Scotland.

The school that I went to was an urban school and it was near the 
junction of two main thoroughfares. Cycling was a contra survival thing, 
hence we had no bike shed. The bogs were the place to go, to smoke and 
be tough.

So to keep in the spirit, I will say.
Large red sandstone blocks, blackened with age, and white porcelain tiles.




-- 
Regards
     Stephen

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> > I'm almost tempted to call you a nasty name.
> >
> Sigh... Seriously? The problem here isn't that someone should take "no" 
> precautions. The problem is taking "imaginary" ones, which do nothing 
> but promote the excuses used to both get criminal off the hook, and 
> shame women into thinking, "I should have done something different.", 
> even when it was impossible to have done anything different. Slut 
> shaming is ***NOT*** acceptable, but its exactly what happens, every 
> single damn time a rape happens, and some idiots starts rattling off a 
> list of things they "might have" done differently, while having no F-ing 
> clue what the hell they did, or didn't, do, or based on a laundry list 
> of myths and stupid assumptions.

Ok, I'm so tempted that I can't resist it anymore: You are fucking moron.

Someone trying to be helpful is not "slut shaming". Go fuck yourself.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom> wrote:
> I know someone who

Btw, how about we start citing sources rather than just relaying
personal anecdotes? I'll start:

http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/campus/Pages/increased-risk.aspx
http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/rape-sexual-violence/campus/Pages/decrease-risk.aspx

"In particular, certain actions reduce the risk of rape more than
80 percent compared to nonresistance."

Your sources, please?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 04:32:07 -0500, Warp wrote:

> Ok, I'm so tempted that I can't resist it anymore: You are fucking
> moron.

That's really mature, Warp.  Way to go.

<slow clap>

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 09:09:51 +0000, Stephen wrote:

>> Green? ;)
>>
>>
> If you want.
> 
> I have no opinions on the matter. (See everyone, it can be said. :-) )
> 

LOL

> 
>>>> (Aside:  You do know what "bikeshedding" is, yes?)
>>>
>>> Yes and that is why I always spec a bike shed with a penthouse and
>>> patio doors. That way I might get a shed for bikes.
>>
>> But the discussion is about what colour it should be. ;)
>>
>>
> Why? Is it a religious thing? It is in Northern Ireland and the West
> coast of Scotland.

I guess you don't know what it is....

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bikeshedding is a good summary. :)

> The school that I went to was an urban school and it was near the
> junction of two main thoroughfares. Cycling was a contra survival thing,
> hence we had no bike shed. The bogs were the place to go, to smoke and
> be tough.
> 
> So to keep in the spirit, I will say.
> Large red sandstone blocks, blackened with age, and white porcelain
> tiles.

That's the way to do it. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 06:09:07 +0000, Stephen wrote:

> On 03/01/2014 12:20 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
>> On Thu, 02 Jan 2014 20:47:00 +0100, andrel wrote:
>>
>>> http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-RDlUlTR1xXc/UYBH7JMnrxI/AAAAAAAACFA/
>> mEZ4NH6UbYg/s1600/tumblr_mm2mx0hnmy1qzjmo0o1_1280.jpg
>>>
>>> orange dressed in blue.
>>
>> I'm not understanding the reference...
>>
> She is of the House of Orange. The same way our Queen is of the House of
> Windsor. Previously the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

Ah, I see.  I don't tend to notice stuff like that. :)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 03 Jan 2014 04:38:26 +0200, Patrick Elliott <kag### [at] gmailcom>  
wrote:


> In short, stop being a useful idiot to these people. Treat the victims  
> as smart intelligent people, until/unless there is a damn good reason to  
> not, who didn't take some sort of imaginary risks, and, in most cases,  
> probably couldn't have done a bloody thing to reduce them, not as,  
> somehow, by default, automatically, and, without any need of facts or  
> evidence, culpable in what happened.

I can agree with that. You get people raping babies and grannies - that  
has nothing to do with dress code.
Another problem concerning this is fake rape claims where a girl claims  
some-one has raped them only later to recant and say they just didn't like  
his attitude or something or wanted to pat him back for something silly. I  
have heard many accounts of girls claiming their teacher has raped them  
and recant afterwards. And again the innocent one's life is destroyed.
On the other hand, because of things like this a rape victim has to  
produce proof and keep reliving the ordeal in order to prosecute - if she  
ever finds the strength to do it. Many are just too scared or ashamed.
-- 
-Nekar Xenos-

Post a reply to this message