Could it not be that the stats are down because of the vigilance of parents?
e.g. When smoke alarms reduce the numbers of fatalities from fires - that doesnât mean that smoke alarms are unnecessary - it proves their effectiveness.
Could it not be that the stats are down because of the vigilance of parents?
e.g. When smoke alarms reduce the numbers of fatalities from fires - that doesnât mean that smoke alarms are unnecessary - it proves their effectiveness.
Exactly.
For every silly girl who gets themselves in a bad spot there are 20 smart girls who avoided scumbags like this.
They listened to people who warned them and had a good level of character assessment or emotional intelligence to get themselves out of potentially dodgy situations
Thats a good question and there is likely something in it but its probably gone too far over the other side.
However i do note a slight readjustment with the newer parents who seem to be learning from the parents of the say present 12-30 year olds.
The fear doesnât match the reality i suppose is what i am saying
You ascribed contributory negligence to the rape victim Hook was talking about.
No I didnt. I referenced contributory negligence to flattys pal who had the car robbed which insurance didnt cover. I then said this was essentially the point Hook had tried to makeâŚ
I didnt attribute anything to any victim
oh dear oh dear
Translation: âThe victim of a serious crime has a responsibility to not be the victim of a serious crime.â
She did not act ârecklesslyâ.
Consensual sex is not ârecklessâ.
Rape is reckless.
You imply it.
Again you imply sheâs to blame.
You havenât answered the question I previously put to you:
Should all women assume they will be raped when they go to a bedroom in the company of a man?
Again, more implied blame.
im physically sick reading this
you wrote all that you dangerous man, you have defended Huimphries from Day 1
That sounds like victim blaming to me
Lay off the meat loaf.
Are you not completely contradicting yourself there?
You say she isnât to blame and in the very next sentence you say she left herself vulvernable?
Youâre a poster with a consistent track record of misogyny, racism, and whatever other bigotry youâre having yourself, having been banned for such multiple times, and have proven in your time on this forum that youâre an actual danger to women and whoever else crosses your path, not least your kids.
That youâre reduced to digging up a couple of childish jokes from six and a half years ago sums up the level youâre at.
Would you ever fuck off?!
child abuse is not a joke, you wrote those words, you are a dangerous man full of contradictions you writes so much shit you have fouled yourself in spectacular fashion here.
you are a very dangerous man.
Youâve just done it again.
âessentially the point Hook tried to makeâ - ie. contributory negligence.