The Student Room Group

Is this acceptable?

Are these images acceptable?

One could say they are apologising for thieves and blaming the victim for expressing their freedom of expression and private property rights. Surely, having a right means we must exercise it to its full capacity, no? Hiding/securing your valuables in public is an act of cowardice worthy of derision; it is effectively empowering those who do not respect those rights and giving their position potency.

I think we should leave our wallets and laptops outside in protest, as it is our right to do so and we should not self-limit that right because others don't respect it. That said, is the government wrong for publishing this material?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by saywhatm8
Are these images acceptable?

One could say they are apologising for thieves and blaming the victim for expressing their freedom of expression and private property rights. Surely, having a right means we must exercise it to its full capacity, no? Hiding/securing your valuables in public is an act of cowardice worthy of derision; it is effectively empowering those who do not respect those rights and giving their position potency.

I think we should leave our wallets and laptops outside in protest, as it is our right to do so and we should not self-limit that right because others don't respect it. That said, is the government wrong for publishing this material?


Depends if you're willing to accept the risk of people stealing your stuff because you didn't secure it properly. Thievery, just like all crime, has been condemned throughout all of documented history and yet it still happens. Do whatever you want, but I'm not going to leave my house unlocked just to prove a point. The government is simply advising you; you have no obligation to follow the advice of the posters but you'd be stupid not to.
Original post by saywhatm8
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://jasonhindley.blogspot.com/2010/02/dont-advertise-your-stuff-to-thieves.html" target="_blank">Are these images acceptable?</a><br />
<br />
One could say they are apologising for thieves and blaming the victim for expressing their freedom of expression and private property rights. Surely, having a right means we must exercise it to its full capacity, no? Hiding/securing your valuables in public is an act of cowardice worthy of derision; it is effectively empowering those who do not respect those rights and giving their position potency.<br />
<br />
I think we should leave our wallets and laptops outside in protest, as it is our right to do so and we should not self-limit that right because others don't respect it. That said, is the government wrong for publishing this material?


I see where you're coming from but it's like saying that you should be allowed to walk around naked without anyone looking at you differently and if you do, it's an invasion of your privacy, it's not, even if you may be expressing yourself
Reply 3
What a sad world we live in when the government needs to launch a campaign on what is bloody common sense.

Yes crime is bad. But it happens. It will probably always happen. Therefore the logical thing to do is to take steps to prevent yourself from becoming a victim of crime.
Reply 4
It's quite funny how this is seen as okay but if you used a few pictures on scantly clad females on a poster and made the same kind of warning about rape there'd be outrage


Posted from TSR Mobile
Essentially, the OP is saying it is a cowardly act to look at ways of minimising your chances of being a victim of crime. Not only that, it is worthy of derision!

Is this a wind up?

The only thing worthy of derision is the outright stupidy contained in this thread.

Grow up.
Reply 6
Original post by Heliosphan
Essentially, the OP is saying it is a cowardly act to look at ways of minimising your chances of being a victim of crime. Not only that, it is worthy of derision!

Is this a wind up?

The only thing worthy of derision is the outright stupidy contained in this thread.

Grow up.


I'm fairly sure the OP is drawing a 'subtle' parallel to revealing clothes and rape.
You're free not to take the advice but then you're more likely to be a victim of crime, if you are willing to lose a phone just to prove a point that's your choice.

You find it weird that this is a victim-blaming campaign, I find it weird that this is a campaign at all. This is bloody common sense.
Original post by pjm600
I'm fairly sure the OP is drawing a 'subtle' parallel to revealing clothes and rape.


This is a campaign to raise personal awareness in order to reduce opportunistic crime. You can see it working for some people.

Would a campaign advocating some kind of dress code for women actually reduce instances of rape? If so, precisely what type of clothing would it advise against?
Original post by Heliosphan
This is a campaign to raise personal awareness in order to reduce opportunistic crime. You can see it working for some people.

Would a campaign advocating some kind of dress code for women actually reduce instances of rape? If so, precisely what type of clothing would it advise against?


Rapists generally target women with easily removable clothing; miniskirts and suchlike.
Original post by napkinsquirrel
Rapists generally target women with easily removable clothing; miniskirts and suchlike.


Rapists generally target people they know, irrespective of what they're wearing.

That aside, a tight miniskirt isn't any easier to remove than say a flowing knee-length skirt or a dress for instance. Would you advocate trousers instead of skirts as a means of reducing rape?
Original post by Heliosphan
Rapists generally target people they know, irrespective of what they're wearing.

That aside, a tight miniskirt isn't any easier to remove than say a flowing knee-length skirt or a dress for instance. Would you advocate trousers instead of skirts as a means of reducing rape?


Okay but in terms of strangers a la thievery in a public place, rapists generally look for women whose clothes they can remove with minimal effort and time.
Original post by napkinsquirrel
Okay but in terms of strangers a la thievery in a public place, rapists generally look for women whose clothes they can remove with minimal effort and time.


So you would suggest an advertising campaign that suggests women ought to wear trousers/jeans or basically anything that is difficult to remove in order to reduce rape?
Original post by Heliosphan
So you would suggest an advertising campaign that suggests women ought to wear trousers/jeans or basically anything that is difficult to remove in order to reduce rape?


Yes; how many women will claim to be fearful of sexual assault when they walk down the street? If you wear revealing clothing that is easy to remove you will most likely be prioritised as an easy victim.
Original post by napkinsquirrel
Yes; how many women will claim to be fearful of sexual assault when they walk down the street? If you wear revealing clothing that is easy to remove you will most likely be prioritised as an easy victim.


Women, you heard it here first: if you want to avoid rape, wear trousers.

So what is revealing clothing? Are you saying, for instance, that a woman with a gorgeous backside should avoid tight skirts? Should a large breasted woman only wear baggy jumpers?

I'm trying to understand what a campaign to reduce rape would look like in relation to what women wear.
Original post by Heliosphan
Women, you heard it here first: if you want to avoid rape, wear trousers.

So what is revealing clothing? Are you saying, for instance, that a woman with a gorgeous backside should avoid tight skirts? Should a large breasted woman only wear baggy jumpers?

I'm trying to understand what a campaign to reduce rape would look like in relation to what women wear.


It's not a law or a systematic oppression of your expression or rights to free will, it's just sorta common sense; of course it's your choice what you wear but you reduce your chances of being selected as a victim if you wear more restrictive items of clothing. I wouldn't leave my house door unlocked just because it's my right and I refuse to be oppressed; I'm doing it because I don't want to get burgled.
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by napkinsquirrel
It's not a law or a systematic oppression of your expression or rights to free will, it's just sorta common sense; of course it's your choice what you wear but you reduce your chances of being selected as a victim if you wear more restrictive items of clothing. I wouldn't leave my house door unlocked just because it's my right and I refuse to be oppressed; I'm doing it because I don't want to get burgled.


Telling women to avoid wearing specific things won't reduce rape, that's my point. There is no parallel between that and the campaign to which the OP refers.

A parallel does exist around self awareness, whether that be personal safety or security of belongings.
Original post by Heliosphan
Telling women to avoid wearing specific things won't reduce rape, that's my point. There is no parallel between that and the campaign to which the OP refers.

A parallel does exist around self awareness, whether that be personal safety or security of belongings.


You started the discussion about what clothing the campaign would purportedly advise women against wearing in order to reduce rape cases (when clubbing and drunk specifically); you tell me.
Original post by napkinsquirrel
You started the discussion about what clothing the campaign would purportedly advise women against wearing in order to reduce rape cases (when clubbing and drunk specifically); you tell me.


It's called "playing devils' advocate".
Original post by Heliosphan
It's called "playing devils' advocate".


Rather disingenuous, no? The aim of a discussion is to change my views of a topic based upon a reasoned discussion, something you have not yet provided.

Quick Reply

Latest