As I said also, there is now two different subjects.
A second is : Rapes and why they are commited.
The statistics also said that more women are raped by people they already know because they trust these people and do not fear them. So they allow them to enter their houses, and they go with them in places they will never go with people they don't know. It seems so logical. Predators have to came close to their prey in a favourable ground in order to catch them. Most of the time women attacked by unknown are attacked by serial criminal predators.
I agreed also with you : clothes have little to do with rapes as they are more an act to fulfil a need of control than anything else.
The too sexy fashion for women and girls and how this is asocial in some circumstances was the first subject that brings the second.
The danger, if there is one, because we keep saying that rapes do not occur in function of the outfit of the victim, is more in the meaning our society is giving to those clothes. After all, some people in tribes could live half nude and they are not raping each others all day and night long. Why? Because their nudity is not perceive as being sexually provocating in their society while it still is in ours, despite the "sexual revolution". I'm afraid this revolution has produced bizarre results even if it started with the best of intentions. I don't think it is a shame that your generation started it Paula, because, before, bad thinks were done under cover, and now they can be discussed and this gives a chance to people to choose a behavior among many. This is not possible when everything is secret.
Also, all men I knew which are sane like very much to look at women without any intention to rape them. They may want to try to sleep with some, however, but this is not a crime. I think that any woman who dresses sexy should be aware that they may be looked at and chased more often then the others and should not blame men to be "pigs". This is a non sense.
Also I don't see why women and young women could not dress as sexy as they want in their personnal and casual life, this in in schools and workplaces that I find this as asocial (and not as violent) as a rape even if there is no violence in doing so, because this is a truly unwanted sexual attitude that can not be avoid, that is imposed. One could choose his friends, but not the people they are going to school and are working with, so this social dimension - the right to others to their integrity - should be respected and not by passed or refused. This is what I meant.
In any case a child should be dress like this. Parents should be able to draw the line between the idols of the kids and how they are dressing in everyday life. Do they go as far as allowing a 2 years old to dress like a clown every day because he saw clowns on stage and find the costume very nice and want to look like the idol? No. Well, it is the same thing. They may allow kids parties where it is OK to be dress like Brit or I don't now who, but that's it.
To say the truth, it is like if this sexual revolution is stucks at some stage, the opposite of what is was. Maybe it is a necessary step to find the balance.
Rome was not constructed in one day.
I think that if rapes are commited this is because many men still think, somewhere inside, that women have to comply to what they want, they do not see them as equal partners or should not be. Many thinks that patriarcal society came from a inferioritycomplex from men in front of woman capable to give life and enjoying it. So they have to control them in order to benefit or compensate for what women have that they don't. I don't know. I don't the whys and the hows. What I only know is that we come a long way. Despite all bravado running in front of horses, and tutti quanti, women are not totally as equal socially speaking as men are, but in the effort to obtain this social equality, it would be to sad that women do the same mistakes they are victims of. Well... huge question, this one.
I mean, divorces and separations would have been much more less dramatic and a trauma for women and children if women were not so dependant of men to be someone in the society. Before, when the man goes anything goes. While now a woman losts "only" her mate (which is a huge important part, but...). Her social image (divorced and single women were so bad seen socially speaking before) is intact. And money is often not a problem to a working woman.
In Iroquois tribes - some centuries ago - women has a good social status. They possessed goods and when Iroquois get married, the man was living in the long house of his wife. Separations were not a big deal socially speakin, also, for women, as I was told that when a woman wanted to end her union she was putting the shoes of her husband outside and this was the sign that he has to get back to his mother's house. But I'm not sure about the last "fact", however.
Wow. this is going far, now! This discussion. End of the post.
Are you a Mormon? 
