StrangeSox

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 02:59 PM) Neither is having "password" for a password, but we know it makes you more likely to have your identity stolen, so we tell people not to do so. I'm struggling to see why you think these examples are equivalent to telling young women not to go to parties where alcohol is served i.e. normal college-age activities they should be able to freely and safely participate in. The solution for college campus sexual assault isn't for women to lock their doors and go to bed at 9PM on a Saturday night.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 02:54 PM) If Kasich was asked by a young man how to feel safer from muggings, and Kasich had ended his reply with "and avoid dark alleys late at night", I don't think he'd be facing any of the backlash he is now. There's not a long history of victim-blaming in that case, though. You cannot ignore that context.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 02:53 PM) Not really. More accurately would be don't drink and drive. We know that driving after drinking involves a higher rate of accidents. We tell people not to drink and drive all of the time. We also tell people not to get into a car with drunk driver, and we sure don't consider it victim shaming to do so. But driving drunk in and of itself is bad. Going to a party is not similar to how driving a car isn't inherently bad and to be avoided. There's nothing wrong with young women wanting to go to bars or parties and even consume some alcohol.

So it's not the detector itself that's making the beeping noise? I haven't installed or replaced connected CO2/smoke detectors myself, but I didn't think there would be anything in the ceiling other than wires that could even make a noise. If it seems to be location-dependent, you could try measuring the voltage of the wires feeding that location if its 120V. Make sure wire nuts are still tight etc.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 02:45 PM) What an asshole! He's basically saying "get back in the kitchen where you belong!" Right? Ugh. Disgusting. Women have a right to go to school just like us, am I right? Seriously though, I hope if/when you guys have daughters you never tell them to "be careful" or "be smart" or "make good choices." That's obviously just blatant victim-shaming and rapist-supporting talk. He didn't say those things, though. He suggested that the solution to sexual assault is for women not to go to parties where there is alcohol. It's about as useful as suggesting that the way to avoid a car accident is to never get into a car.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 01:45 PM) Can you elaborate on your acquittals statement? Has there been a case where a woman was definitely raped, but the defendant was acquitted because the jury blamed the victim for her decisions? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/18/m..._n_4811890.html not an acquittal but reduced sentences and still awful victim-blaming http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-36...lame-raped.html British study on attitudes towards sexual assault victims but similar attitudes in this country http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/...e-case/8955585/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/cri...g-too-much.html http://www.xojane.com/issues/attorney-rape...closed-her-legs http://lawstreetmedia.com/blogs/world-blog...laming-consent/ and of course some of the more repugnant stuff like "legitimate rape" It's obviously going to be hard to google up specific examples of "X was acquitted because of victim-blaming," but examples pop up over and over again in courts and there's lots of literature on the hurdles that sexual assault and rape victims face in even getting their cases taken seriously in the first place, let alone going through a trial and getting a conviction. Victims of rape or sexual assault being blamed for their own assaults has been researched for decades, e.g.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 01:25 PM) It's already on the assaulters. That's why their actions are crimes that can result in severe penalties. There's no one advocating for rape legalization here. But the discussion of sexual assault is always centered around what the victims, usually women, were doing 'wrong'. "Don't wear short skirts, don't drink, don't go out to bars etc." The discussion isn't with young men on how to avoid potentially becoming the assaulter, about them not going to parties where alcohol is served, about "no means no." This can actually be a pretty tricky line! I don't have a clear-cut answer here, but I will cop-out and say I know when something is victim-blaming and Kasich responding to a question about what he'd do to improve safety by telling young women to not go to parties pretty clearly crosses that line. It is literally a text-book example of how victim-blaming plays out and assaulters get acquittals.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 01:11 PM) Her question was framed as that of a college student, so as a college student alcohol is the pretty dominant factor in sexual assaults. Also, Kasich isn't telling her she has to change her life, he is answering her question about how she can feel safer. If she follows his advice, she probably will feel safer, but she is an adult and can choose whether or not to follow that advice, and whether or not she follows that advice should have no bearing on how she is treated if she unfortunately does become a victim. She'd feel safer if she wore a burka to completely avoid risking exciting nearby men and never left the house. That would also be s***ty advice similar to telling college-aged women not to go to routine social functions. Whether or not the advice of "don't go to parties, college-aged women!" should negatively impact views of sexual assault victims isn't really relevant when everything we know about how sexual assault victims are treated by the justice system says that it does. Kasich has been a national politician for decades, so I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that he's somehow naive. This also makes no sense. He's answering a question from some random person that he knows nothing about. I'm not sure how you could take it as an answer to this one particular woman and that he didn't mean it to be applicable to college-aged women in general. And, even then, the advice of "don't go to parties" is still crap and still puts the responsibility on the woman. Do we tell people hit by drunk drivers "well, you really shouldn't drive if you want to reduce the chance of getting in a car accident"

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 01:05 PM) Yes, he should be held accountable. He should be commended for making sure that young women have as much information as possible before making decisions, rather than not saying it because hypocrites on the left will yell and scream about it. I'm glad that John Kasich was there to tell women where sexual assaults occur and advise them to avoid parties with alcohol. Otherwise, they would never have known! This paternalistic attitude definitely does not play into the same issue. Also, "hypocritical," what? And again with the accusations of outrage! yellings! shoutings! going crazy!!!!

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:58 PM) No, it's not just being literal. As a statement of prevention it's common sense. It's good advice, and I don't buy your argument that his statement impacts how people view and treat victims of sexual assault. People who do that do it because they are horrible people, not because of anything John Kasich said. John Kasich not saying that one line or even replacing that line with a long diatribe about how poorly victims are sometimes treated isn't going to make the assholes any less assholic. The existence of victim-blaming sexual assault and rape victims is pervasive and well-documented in our justice system and society as a whole. It's not just limited to "horrible people" and "assholes" but is influenced throughout our culture. No, Kasich saying or not saying a thing isn't going to change the whole world, but that doesn't mean he shouldn't still be held accountable for the things he says. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:58 PM) The goal here is to reduce sexual assault, and one thing (among many) that helps do that is to warn women about situations where sexual assaults occur. We are doing a disservice to women if we just stick our heads in the sand until after they get assaulted and then do something about it. Kasich didn't just warn women that sexual assaults occur at parties (as if they are not already aware of this!). He advised women not to go to parties where alcohol is served. What other common social activities should women avoid in order to reduce sexual assaults? What clothing should or shouldn't they wear? How much alcohol should they consume? How many people, minimum, should they go out with? Why is it on women to change their lives and not engage in otherwise normal activities rather than on the assaulters?

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:53 PM) It's not controversial. It's also not what anyone is arguing about. The argument is whether or not Kasich blamed women for their own sexual assaults in the first place. Telling women not to go to parties (or drink, or go to clubs, or dress certain ways) puts at least some of the responsibility on the victims whether Kasich intended to or not. And when it comes to sexual assaults, the focus far too often is on what the victims did 'wrong' rather than on what the perpetrators did wrong.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:46 PM) It's not controversial. The idea of taking a statement that isn't at all saying that and believing it to mean that is what is controversial. He suggested that, in order to avoid sexual assault, women shouldn't go to parties with alcohol. If this is widely believed to be good advice and a woman chooses not to heed it, how does she not get viewed negatively and at least partially responsible? The pattern of exactly that happening in pervasive. To borrow a line, you can call it not-victim-blaming all you want, but reality is that this is exactly how it works in practice. It's not always explicit and intentional, but it's driven by repeating the sort of 'advice' Kasich gave.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:45 PM) Kasich isn't responsible for the level of skepticism and scrutiny that is applied to victims of crime (except in his state while he's governor). He's not responsible for what others do and think. He's responsible for what he said, which was a standard victim-blaming line. Like I said before, you're just being hyper-literal here. If it's victim-blaming to tell a woman who was assaulted afterwards "well, you shouldn't have gone to a party that had alcohol," it's victim-blaming to say the same thing to a woman before she's assaulted. When the statement is made doesn't change how it plays into the routine way that sexual assault victims are scrutinized for their own actions far more than victims of other crimes. If it's good advice to tell women to not go to parties where there's alcohol before anything bad happens, it will impact how a woman who still chooses to go to a party and is assaulted is viewed and treated. How sexual assault victims are treated by our justice system isn't some sort of mystery, this pattern is well-documented.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:42 PM) Next time someone wants me to reduce my carbon footprint to stop global warming, I will just accuse them of victim blaming. yeah great comparison, excellent point. Who knew that the idea of "don't blame women for their own sexual assaults because they went to a party with alcohol (gasp!)" would be so controversial?

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:26 PM) You can call it victim-blaming all you want. It's reality. It's victim-blaming. Do we "advise" victims of theft or assault that they shouldn't go to parties, police how they dress etc.? Or do sexual assault victims tend to get a lot more skepticism and scrutiny than victims of other crimes? No, victim blaming was not being responsible. Like I said a while back, the problem isn't that he couldn't offer some magical solution as president to prevent sexual assaults, it's that he engaged in a standard victim-blaming trope. I'm "outraged" and I "went crazy on" the tweet by posting a pretty simple one-sentence post? There wasn't more research to be done. That line is victim-blaming bulls*** and he shouldn't have said it. It doesn't matter if it was surrounded by 1000 words of good thoughts on sexual assault and its prevention, it still deserves to be called out for furthering the victim-blaming culture surrounding sexual assault victims.

It's this sort of stuff that comes to mind when someone says women shouldn't go to parties with alcohol as a solution to sexual assault: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-33...omplainant.html http://www.youredm.com/2016/03/22/miami-ju...music-festival/ A longer paper on the challenges sexual assault victims face in court, includes specific references to victim-blaming via "s/he shouldn't have been drinking/at that party" It's part of a long, terrible history with sexual assault victims, not just "outrage" at one particular statement.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 11:58 AM) There is some point in between where it gets tough. Just pick the one closest at that point, I guess. If you're male and decide to be female, you've already been using the men's room forever. Just keep doing so until the surgical, physical changes are done, then switch. Again, I think we are overcomplicating something that doesn't need to be. All because some people really, really want to show the world they are allowed to be jerks, so they pass laws like this and we have to discuss extreme corner cases that have always existed and aren't really problems. Not everyone who transitions genders gets surgery, though. I agree that trying to codify this overcomplicates things.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:05 PM) No, YOU are projecting that attitude onto Kasich and inciting others to be outraged by it. He didn't say what he didn't say. He offered the "advice" on sexual assault that women shouldn't go to parties with alcohol. Kasich didn't invent that line of thinking, but it goes back with decades of victim-blaming for sexual assault and rape. Rape and sexual assault are treated differently from other crimes with a lot of the scrutiny going into what the victims or potential victims do that's 'wrong' like how they dress or if they drink alcohol. QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 12:09 PM) It's too late. StrangeSox and bmags have already decided exactly what he meant by that. Anything further he says would just be pandering for votes and not actually clarifying what he meant. The only acceptable answer Kasich could have given is that all straight, white Christian males are awful disgusting human beings and should all be thrown in jail just for being who they are. Any other answer is bigoted in some shape or form. Nice meltdown! Alternatively, he could have given the rest of the answer he gave without that last line and it would have been fine.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 11:23 AM) It doesn't put blame on them at all. It just points out an action that can be taken to help avoid being victimized. Is any advice geared towards crime-avoidance a case of victim-blaming? When the advice comes in the form of telling an entire gender not to participate in common social activities rather than focusing on the perpetrators and their behavior, it is victim-blaming.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) Telling women not to go to parties where there will be alcohol is NOT victim blaming. Telling women they shouldn't have gone to a party where there was alcohol is victim blaming. I was a math major, maybe a liberal arts major can come along and elaborate on the difference. Whether you say it before or after, it's a crap argument that puts the blame for sexual assault on women, similar to "well, you shouldn't dress/dance that way" Why not tell the men that they shouldn't go to parties with alcohol? edit: if you're making this a hyper-literal argument about the fact that she's not yet a victim if you tell her before she goes to a party/drinks/dances/dresses a certain way, you're missing the forest from the trees. It's still putting the responsibility on women and absolving the sexual assaulters.

Telling women not to go to parties where there will be alcohol is textbook victim blaming.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 10:51 AM) I bet they do, but I don't know for sure. And wouldn't you need to have differences between bathrooms because of the urinal issue? None of the bathrooms in my office have urinals even though they're marked male/female (they're all one-or-two toilet bathrooms). But some quick googling seems to indicate that yeah, for office spaces there needs to be separate, gendered bathrooms.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 07:58 AM) It was a dumb answer, but which of the following is he supposed to say instead? 1) Unconstitutionally castrate any males who look like they might be sexual predators 2) Unconstitutionally change the legal standard for conviction from "beyond reasonable doubt" to "he seems guilty" for sex crimes 3) Increase the deficit by $30 trillion in order to have a federal agent following every woman to keep her safe That's the problem with Americans. We think politicians are supposed to do everything for us instead of taking care of ourselves. If a sexual assault occurs, the government can prosecute to the fullest extent of the law, but that contributes far less to "a feeling of safety" than using common sense. When my daughter becomes a teenager, I'm sure as hell not going to tell her, "do whatever you want and rely on the government to keep you safe." Kasich has teenage daughters, and I'm guessing he doesn't tell his daughters that either. The problem is the victim-blaming, not that he didn't have a solid answer for what the President would do regarding sexual assault.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 10:44 AM) This doesn't need to be complicated. It's functional. You go to the bathroom with the equipment that best matches your own equipment. What you were before is irrelevant. No laws need to change. And let's be honest, the only reason the laws are being changed is bigotry. There is zero evidence of any likelihood of risk to people in this situation, and despite the fact that trans people have been doing exactly what I suggest for a long time, how many reports of issues have there been? These laws are a solution looking for a problem that doesn't exist. It's just another way for closed-minded people to lash out. Like the fights against gay marriage, after a while, these efforts will fade away or be struck down in court. What if you're transgendered and outwardly appear to be one sex, but you haven't undergone the surgery? Should a person with female genitalia who presents himself and looks very much like a man use the women's restrooms, or vice-versa? But as you said, these laws are looking for a problem that doesn't exist. If some man wanted to dress as a woman to enter women's restrooms to leer at other women, there's nothing stopping them from doing that now and this law changes nothing.

QUOTE (JenksIsMyHero @ Apr 18, 2016 -> 10:43 AM) I don't think engineers/planners would agree with you. They calculate the number of bathrooms that are necessary for the anticipated capacity of the building/floor/unit. Getting rid of 2 bathrooms for "other" messes with those plans. You're basically making a multi-use bathroom a single use bathroom. In some instances it would be an easy fix, but not in all cases. Do building codes require gendered bathrooms though? I don't see why you couldn't have every bathroom be non-gendered.