Women need to dress more modestly

I make a motion for a day when real men can appreciate modern women in real modern times, regardless of the clothes real women may be wearing.

 

Okay!

 

I think the same thing when I see an oyster bar. Doesn't stop me.

 

But of course you didn't see too much of that since "rape" was defined by men back then.

 

Are you suggesting that the Second Amendment means we can slash defense and police budgets so MORE money can go to the sluts and lazy welfare bums? Police departments are already on razor thin budgets and they are going up against drug lords who are better armed and financed than the Secret Service.

 

And if they continue to dress in what you call inappropriate, how far do you take the spanking? With a switch on a bare ass of your 17 yr old daughter? Black eyes? How far do you take the physical punishment?

 

Yeah...but I bet for every one of these there is 20 others that when you lift up the Burka you wish you had not!

LOL!!!

AboveAlpha

 

Yeah....and what of it??

You think that guy's who take a shower and get dressed up in their best jeans and leather jacket or best suit and tie when they go out to a Night Club and shave or trim their close stubble and put on good aftershave and cologne are doing anything different????

And when a deemed unatractive girl or woman looks at an attractive male and this male sees her looking at him does not the male avert his eyes??

Give it a break!!!

AboveAlpha

 

He kinda looks like MORK FROM ORK! LOL!!

Nanoo Nanoo!

AboveAlpha

 

In the real world, that's actually not relevant. But to answer your question, the man is engaging in a totally different behavior than the woman. The woman might be playing games, either wanting to feel attractive, wanting to be a (*)(*)(*)(*) tease or wanting to get laid. The guy has one mission, and only one mission: GET LAID. Period. There's a difference. Men are much more honest and basic about their intent.

Depends on how drunk he is. He might just take her a bang her anyway. Men would hump a knothole in a tree if a woman wasn't available.

 

Criminals cannot be criminals if they are being well regulated.

 

Oh yes you did. Rape was defined by law. More than a few got hung wthout of trial and in the West the overwhelming Majority were Caucasian

 

Again....so what?

AboveAlpha

 

It makes my day when someone writes a serious reply to a joke post from me.

 

My apologies. It can be hard to tell a joke from a serious post at times. Again, my apologies.

 

On a more serious note. Woman should be able to dress however they wish, and also be able to accept the inevitable consequences. If they wander around the ghetto in a string bikini (and yes this happens), then they shouldn't be surprised is Tyrone is getting a little more than frisky.

It works the same way for men, or any human. If you walk around in a bad neighborhood dressed like a billionaire but without a bodyguard, you shouldn't be surprised if you get robbed, or shot, or more likely both.

 

None of that makes the victim responsible for the crime. Rape and robbery are still crimes perpetrated by the criminal.

 

Huh?

Well regulated? Seriously?

 

Does the below quote sound familiar?

Tuschman, Avi. Our Political Nature, The Evolutionary Origins of What Divides Us. Amherst, NJ: Prometheus Books, 2013. (H) Page 108

In the ultraconservative Islamic of Iran, immodest dress angers God enough to kill thousands of people, according to Tehran’s Friday prayer leader Hojjat ol-eslam Kazem Sediqi. In a 2012 televised sermon at Tehran University’s campus mosque, the imam warned: “Many women who do not dress modestly lead young men astray and spread adultery in society, which increases earthquakes.” The youth’s “prevalence of degeneracy,” he admonished, required a “general repentance.” If Iran’s youth would dress more CONSERVATIVELY, he argued. Then God would be less likely to cause another catastrophic earthquake.

Emphasis in the original.

Just thought I'd mention it.

 

Yes, seriously. Only the right seems to not understand that simple concept. Is it any wonder we have "wars" on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror.

 

Why are people so caught up with the "responsibility" factor? Who cares? A murder victim is a murder victim. A person isn't any more or less dead/raped depending on who was or wasn't responsible.

The concern is with practical methods of preventing or preempting crime, not getting in some moral debate over whose fault it was.

 

Are you now saying that you approve of crime, drugs, poverty and terror?

Oh, by the way, it was the LEFT who stupidly created a war on poverty. How's THAT workin' out for ya?

 

I am saying it is the right that complains about social spending but not the socialism of the spending on our wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror.

It is just more expensive than it needs to be, person on the right.

 

No thank you. I am not a dress kind of woman anyway. Besides I can't do dressage while riding side saddle