blokes, would you be willing to accept restrictions on your behaviour...

[el-ahrairah]

... in order to more effectively protect women and children from male sexual violence?

if, for example, you were mistakenly considered a threat to children*, but it couldn't really be proved anyway, would you shrug and say, well, i wasn't planning on hanging around in schools anyway? or would you consider it to be indicative of a failed system and campaign for system to be changed?

or perhaps there are more nuanced ways of doing things - i'd be interested to hear some ideas, both real world and theoretical.

secondly, how do we balance the need for strong evidence with the lack of strong evidence in sexual violence cases and still protect women and children. evidence is clearly a requirement in justice, but at the same time, our current system means that we have millions of rape victims but a surprising lack of actual rapists. many feminists take the position that rape is basically legal, and only stupid or unlucky men actually get caught. how do we fix this?

this ties in a lot with some other threads that have been going on recently, but because i've been a bit combatative in some of them, i thought i'd start a thread where in people can discuss it without me calling them names whilst still getting some answers to think about!

so i'm going to stay away from this until later and use this thread to get some ideas to consider, rather than to have a fight on if there's stuff i disagree with.


----

* case in question is a bloke whose credit card was used to by child porn. police didn't take it further as he claimed his card had been cloned. but they advised that he shouldn't be allowed in schools, he's throwing a tantrum.

 

[ska invita]

theres a lot of depends how there...

once i was waiting outside a friends house and he lives next to a primary school and it was playtime...i dont spend any time with kids tbh and i was watching them play and it was amazing watching their interactions and so on... not a minute passed before a teacher came up to me asked me what i was doing and told me in no uncertain terms to move on... there are already social norms that make natural situations no gos. Being a lone adult in an owl sanctuary, or whatever that story was the other day.

I wouldnt want the state to step in any more than it already does - this is the kind of thing best left to social convention/community policing as it were.



rape cases and the law is a whole other thing - no easy answers there i doubt

 

[Gromit]

Let be very clear on one thing. Rape is not legal.

There are many crimes that are hard to prove because conclusive evidence is hard to obtain. They are still illegal too.

It is dangerous to suggest otherwise.

 

[Quartz]

We have this thing called presumption of innocence. Let's not forget certain cases where people have jumped to the wrong conclusion or the police have lied or planted evidence. Jeffrey Yates and Bijan Ebrahimi are just two names amongst very many.

 

[ska invita]

Let be very clear on one thing. Rape is not legal.

There are many crimes that are hard to prove because conclusive evidence is hard to obtain. They are still illegal

It is dangerous to suggest otherwise.

who suggested that?

 

[BandWagon]

We have this thing called presumption of innocence. Let's not forget certain cases where people have jumped to the wrong conclusion or the police have lied or planted evidence. Jeffrey Yates and Bijan Ebrahimi are just two names amongst very many.

This. Once you start providing sanctions without proof of wrong-doing, you are on a very slippery slope. You could look at the prison population, figure out the profile of those most likely to offend and then start jailing people based on that.

 

[Gromit]

who suggested that?

our current system means that we have millions of rape victims but a surprising lack of actual rapists. many feminists take the position that rape is basically legal, and only stupid or unlucky men actually get caught.

 

[Santino]

Oh, Gromit.

 

[Greebo]

<snip> case in question is a bloke whose credit card was used to by child porn. police didn't take it further as he claimed his card had been cloned. but they advised that he shouldn't be allowed in schools, he's throwing a tantrum.

Does he ever need to drop off or collect children (not necessarily his, maybe those of a friend or neighbour) from school? Does this exclude him from one of the few jobs he'd have a chance of getting?

If so, IMHO it's an unreasonable limit placed on what he can do. Worse, because it sounds as if the *advice* assumed guilt without trial.

 

[weltweit]

The spectre of child abuse and peadophilia means I am very wary when I am out with my camera. So yes, I do accept restrictions to my behaviour.

 

[lizzieloo]

Blokey types, if ever you're walking along at night, it's quiet and there is a lone woman ahead of you on the pavement please cross over to the other pavement (if poss) so that you're no longer walking along behind her, it'll make her feel better if she has noticed you and is feeling a bit

 

[ShiftyBagLady]

I don't think it would be effective, let alone fairness and ethics and just thinking of the effectiveness of this, to restrict people based on suspicion or profiling because the people who might lose a real threat would simply learn to operate around it. So in effect you would be persecuting innocent men while real offenders would simply learn to evade detection or suspicion.
I think the answer is vigilance, awareness and empowerment rather than paranoia.

 

[Quartz]

Blokey types, if ever you're walking along at night, it's quiet and there is a lone woman ahead of you on the pavement please cross over to the other pavement (if poss) so that you're no longer walking along behind her

Do it if the person ahead is a man too.

 

[lizzieloo]

Do it if the person ahead is a man too.

Yup but I was thinking of the context of this thread

 

[ShiftyBagLady]

Blokey types, if ever you're walking along at night, it's quiet and there is a lone woman ahead of you on the pavement please cross over to the other pavement (if poss) so that you're no longer walking along behind her, it'll make her feel better if she has noticed you and is feeling a bit

I think we've had this discussion before on urban but I personally wouldn't expect that or feel comforted by it. I anything it would make me feel more of a target; as though others had picked me out as vulnerable.
I'm raising my boy with an awareness of these things but I would never suggest to him that he should actively avoid women in the street.

 

[lizzieloo]

I think we've had this discussion before on urban but I personally wouldn't expect that or feel comforted by it. I anything it would make me feel more of a target; as though others had picked me out as vulnerable.
I'm raising my boy with an awareness of these things but I would never suggest to him that he should actively avoid women in the street.

I wouldn't be phased by it, my mind doesn't work like that but a whole lot of women would be frightened in that situation

 

[Gromit]

Does he ever need to drop off or collect children (not necessarily his, maybe those of a friend or neighbour) from school? Does this exclude him from one of the few jobs he'd have a chance of getting?

If so, IMHO it's an unreasonable limit placed on what he can do. Worse, because it sounds as if the *advice* assumed guilt without trial.

Our legal system has a presumption of innocence but people don't.

No smoke without fire is what a lot of people think.
Or at the very least better safe than sorry.
The police are thinking better safe than sorry to protect children. Who can blame them.
At the same time though they are adding smoke to this guy's already smudged reputation. The problem is that for those that deserve that smoke because they've 'gotten away with something' there are others who genuinely are innocent.

But there is a reason why we have courts to decide this. Not because they are the most effective foolproof means but because they are the most civilised way to manage a society. For better or worse the court decided. The police should accept this.

 

[Quartz]

The spectre of child abuse and peadophilia means I am very wary when I am out with my camera. So yes, I do accept restrictions to my behaviour.

We all put restrictions on our own behaviours - after all we don't all head off to put Cameron's head on a pike, do we? No, we oust him the democratic way. But self-imposed restraint is very different from having restrictions imposed upon us. For those we have the socially agreed mechanisms of courts which can issue restraining orders and ASBOs.

 

[DotCommunist]

its not self restraint that stops me gutting cameron with a spoon, its all the heavily armed people who work for him

 

[8ball]

I already refrain from inflicting sexual violence on women and children.
Behaviour restriction - done!

 

[Gromit]

Blokey types, if ever you're walking along at night, it's quiet and there is a lone woman ahead of you on the pavement please cross over to the other pavement (if poss) so that you're no longer walking along behind her, it'll make her feel better if she has noticed you and is feeling a bit

What if the woman ahead is travelling to a destination on the other side of the road and hasn't yet crossed when you cross?
Now the scary bloke is on the side she wants to get to.
Does he know this? Has he been stalking her and knows where she was heading and is trying to get ahead of her to ambush her? Is he walking faster to head her off or because he doesn't want her to think he is following her .
If she crosses over should he cross back over again? What would that suggest to the nervous female? Why did he cross the first time if he is crossing again? What is he upto?
Even if she doesn't cross and he now finds he is on the wrong side of the road to where he needed to be and has to cross back over what message does that send?

I've been involved in these awkward situations before.

Its all a minefield. Which is why when i'm walking behind women now late at night i softly the sing 'Daisy Daisy (give me your answer do)' so that they know where i am at all times and am reassured that i'm a nice bloke because i;m sing such a lovely song.

 

[Gromit]

its not self restraint that stops me gutting cameron with a spoon, its all the heavily armed people who work for him

Seen the video of the jogger who bumped into him? Security expert declared his security as crap.

 

[8ball]

Which is why when i'm walking behind women now late at night a softly the sing 'Daisy Daisy (give me your answer do)' so that they know where i am at all times and am reassured that i'm a nice bloke because i;m sing such a lovely song.

We have to hope they haven't watched '2001: A Space Odyssey' too recently...

 

[8ball]

Seen the video of the jogger who bumped into him? Security expert declared his security as crap.

I'm not sure he had enough time to gut Cameron with a spoon, though.

 

[Gromit]

We have to hope they haven't watched '2001: A Space Odyssey' too recently...

They might have so if i then quote the film they would be further reassured yes?

I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I'm a... fraid.

 

[8ball]

They might have so if i then quote the film they would be further reassured yes?

I'm afraid. I'm afraid, Dave. Dave, my mind is going. I can feel it. I can feel it. My mind is going. There is no question about it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I can feel it. I'm a... fraid.

Good call, that'll sort it.

 

[weltweit]

All my spoons are blunt!

 

[8ball]

All my spoons are blunt!

Ideally, so will DC's be.

 

[Gromit]

All my spoons are blunt!

Have you seen a doctor?

 

[weltweit]

Have you seen a doctor?

Yes, but not for that!