NationStates Jolt Archive

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?

So she probably got raped and killed as a result of her stupidity.

It's tragic when innocent people die, but I can't make myself feel sorry for those who bring it upon themselves through sheer foolishness.

She lived like 14 miles away from me :(

*snip*.

Ahhhh so you have never done anything stupid.

Good for you.

Ahhhh so you have never done anything stupid.

Good for you.


As much as I sympathize with her family, I have never nor will I ever do anything THAT stupid.

Ah


As much as I sympathize with her family, I have never nor will I ever do anything THAT stupid.
You haven't lived very long then, have you. Stupid mistakes never seem stupid when we make them. I tried Morphine, thinking once wouldn't hurt. Then I was stupid and did again. I managed to get my life back after many years, and yes, it was series of stupid mistakes that lead me there. But I'm certain I now know a hell of a lot more about staying alive than most people do. Have some empathy, it makes you human.

Ahhhh so you have never done anything stupid.

Good for you.Nothing that stupid. I mean, seriously. Getting into a car with a strange foreigner in a place you're not familiar with... the words "stupid" and "ho" come to mind.

Nothing that stupid. I mean, seriously. Getting into a car with a strange foreigner in a place you're not familiar with... the words "stupid" and "ho" come to mind.
Some people at that age think they will live forever.

I personally don't think she's dead. I suspect that she's been sold into the sex slavery trade and is now overseas somewhere.

Some people at that age think they will live forever.

I personally don't think she's dead. I suspect that she's been sold into the sex slavery trade and is now overseas somewhere.I never thought about that possibility, but yeah, you could be right. Either way, she paid for her stupidity. It's like the Darwin Awards, I guess.

I never thought about that possibility, but yeah, you could be right. Either way, she paid for her stupidity. It's like the Darwin Awards, I guess.
It really wouldn't hurt you to have just a tad more charity, you know.

It really wouldn't hurt you to have just a tad more charity, you know.Well I'm not happy about it by any means, but I can't feel sorry for her. It's like, why should I feel sorry for someone who suddenly decides to taunt a lion, then gets mauled to death?

She was ripped(drunk) and not thinking straight more so that not. I wonder why the hell her girlfriends let her take off alone. I know dealing with a drunk can be annoying.. but I feel if they cared enough they would've stopped her. Also I am aware they were probably not thinking "she's gonna get hurt" by taking off with whomever. They are all young.

Then I think.. just because she was on vacation with them girls.. doesn't mean they were really "friends". So they might not have tried to stop her at all. Not giving a damn.

She made a bad choice and caught that shit end of the stick.

God Bless Her.


I've hoped that she "ran into" some nice guy .. and they took off on his yacht and she's been having a good time. Not likely I know.

The Hell you all talkin' 'bout...

Who?

Well I'm not happy about it by any means, but I can't feel sorry for her. It's like, why should I feel sorry for someone who suddenly decides to taunt a lion, then gets mauled to death?

People like you are the reason we have rape shield laws. You can’t blame the victim. That’s just like saying “Well, she was wearing that short skirt, so she was asking for it.” The sad thing is that rapists, think Koby Bryant, get out of their crimes, because of the thoughts of the Jurors. Everyone thinks they are perfect and everyone else isn’t, so you get some conceited moron on a Jury and they find a person innocent, because they thought the victim deserved it. That is not how the rule of law works.

She was ripped(drunk) and not thinking straight more so that not. I wonder why the hell her girlfriends let her take off alone.


I think that statement is unfair. A bar is a busy place, it's easy for someone to slip away if they wanted. As everyone else said she wasn't being responsible and made a mistake. But you can't expect her friends (who were drinking themselves) to babysit her. They don't know if she went to the bathroom or off with some guy. And they all had the sense not to go off with someone, I'm sure they assumed she did to.

People like you are the reason we have rape shield laws. You can’t blame the victim. That’s just like saying “Well, she was wearing that short skirt, so she was asking for it.” The sad thing is that rapists, think Koby Bryant, get out of their crimes, because of the thoughts of the Jurors. Everyone thinks they are perfect and everyone else isn’t, so you get some conceited moron on a Jury and they find a person innocent, because they thought the victim deserved it. That is not how the rule of law works.That's different. She got into a car with a complete stranger in a foreign country. That's a hell of a lot more stupid than wearing a short skirt.

Also, you're saying that I don't think that her rapist/murderer should be punished. You're wrong-- I do think he should be punished. As a matter of fact, he should be executed.

Alls I'm saying is that she was a stupid whore, and that I don't feel sorry for her.

That's different. She got into a car with a complete stranger in a foreign country. That's a hell of a lot more stupid than wearing a short skirt.

Same logic, though. You feel superior to the victim.

Alls I'm saying is that she was a stupid whore, and that I don't feel sorry for her.

And that is exactly the kind of sentiment that slick lawyers love to play off of. Believe it or not, if you don’t sympathies with the victim, it is a lot harder to condemn a man to, apparently, death.

Same logic, though. You feel superior to the victim.
There's two kinds of victims. Those you empathise with, those you don't.

When it comes to victims of gravity, the Aeroflaut stewardess that fell 7 miles and lived. Getting sucked out of a jetliner and landing in a tree is just plain disagreable. A BASE jumper who's bad at math. Well...it's just not the same thing. Is it?

No one is saying that things turned out as they should have. But it is obvious she could have been a little more careful about how she went about evaluating and assuming potential risks.

And that is exactly the kind of sentiment that slick lawyers love to play off of. Believe it or not, if you don’t sympathies with the victim, it is a lot harder to condemn a man to, apparently, death.


You know, if less people wore slutty attire, got drunk, and went off to have sex with a total stranger...THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN NEARLY AS OFTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You know, if less people wore slutty attire, got drunk, and went off to have sex with a total stranger...THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN NEARLY AS OFTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Of course, but you can’t stop people from doing those perfectly legal things, no matter how much you disagree with them . Yelling at them certainly won’t stop them. I hope you never serve on a Jury. Nothing personal, but if you are going to look down on the victims of crimes, then you shouldn’t be serving on one.

Of course, but you can’t stop people from doing those perfectly legal things, no matter how much you disagree with them . Yelling at them certainly won’t stop them. I hope you never serve on a Jury. Nothing personal, but if you are going to look down on the victims of crimes, then you shouldn’t be serving on one.


They may be legal, but they must be prepared to face the consequences of their actions...and they will get no pity from me if they had it coming.

Nothing that stupid. I mean, seriously. Getting into a car with a strange foreigner in a place you're not familiar with... the words "stupid" and "ho" come to mind.
How old she was? I read about a study which proved that the stupid mistakes and moodswing teenagers do/have have nothing to do with hormones. They really are stupid. Their ability to see the potential risks is very low, lower than it was when they were younger.

Girls leave with stranger, boys drive way faster than they really could (and usually drunk) etc

Her parents weren't neglectful either. She knew the rules, she knew what she did was wrong, and she did it anyway...and now look what her parents are having to go through. I think that, if she's found alive, she should be prosecuted for (insert crime here).

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?
Yeah, damn furrigners, thems all criminals. :rolleyes:
I hitchhiked trough parts of Europe, getting into cars with strangers in foreign countries all the time. I dont think that was stupid, because i dont assume the inhabitants of other countries to be more likely having criminal intent than those of mine. And guess what, if you are open and not paranoid about those alien creatures from abroad, you might recognise them as human beings not very different from you and your neighbours.
Pray tell me where the difference is between going with strangers in your country and doing the same overseas?

You know, if less people wore slutty attire, got drunk, and went off to have sex with a total stranger...THIS WOULDN'T HAPPEN NEARLY AS OFTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First, let me tell you that you are worthy of my contempt and deserve to be called a lot of things i would be banned for.
Second, if people would all be prim and proper, then rapists and muderers would work in different ways but still do the same, now to neat looking, sober women. The fault lies with the criminal alone, get that? Even if a woman was to walk down the street in a whore's attire, or be a whore, the sexual assault is the crime. The clothing, make-up or sobriety levels of the victim do not excuse anything.

First, let me tell you that you are worthy of my contempt and deserve to be called a lot of things i would be banned for.
Second, if people would all be prim and proper, then rapists and muderers would work in different ways but still do the same, now to neat looking, sober women. The fault lies with the criminal alone, get that? Even if a woman was to walk down the street in a whore's attire, or be a whore, the sexual assault is the crime. The clothing, make-up or sobriety levels of the victim do not excuse anything.

Did I say it was excusable? It's still a crime and the rapist should be punished, but the attitude they exhibit makes them more of a likely target. It's partially their fault.

Did I say it was excusable? It's still a crime and the rapist should be punished, but the attitude they exhibit makes them more of a likely target. It's partially their fault.

And that, folks, is why I am glad that we in the US have rape shield laws. It prevents most, if not all, personal information about a rape victim from entering a trial. That way a jury can be impartial, even if this guy is on it.

tell me where the difference is between going with strangers in your country and doing the same overseas?
going with totally strangers is always bad idea, be it 100 or 10000 km from your home. espaically for young women, and this is by the stats.
I don't blame persons that do it, as I don't blame those who bet on their lives or take drugs. I just think that sometimes you had to realize that your acts had some risks or bad consquences. still, I am sorry for those who made fatal mistakes without thought (if they don't harm others by that).

btw, I didn't heard about this case, so I had no opinion about it.

Did I say it was excusable? It's still a crime and the rapist should be punished, but the attitude they exhibit makes them more of a likely target. It's partially their fault.
No, no, no.
It is not their attitude, unless we are talking about those who fall victim to whackos who hear God talking to them in order to erradicate the immoral and indecent. It is that they present a better opportunity, thats all.
The victim is not to blame. Otherwise, e.g., you would have to blame the women who fell victim to the BTK killer for staying at home alone in a dangerous area. If the went out in slutty attire, got drunk and had sex with a stranger at that time, they would not have been alone and never been a prospective victim. Face it, you might not like those things you consider immoral, but that is no excuse to blame the victim. A young woman going out with a group of men does not have the responsibility for being victimised.

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?

So she probably got raped and killed as a result of her stupidity.

It's tragic when innocent people die, but I can't make myself feel sorry for those who bring it upon themselves through sheer foolishness.
Right. So you've never done anything really dumb while drunk have you? You've never woken up the next day and thought 'Oh my God!...Why the hell did I do that?!?'
What a boring life you've lead, if you've never had those thoughts.

Incidently, the police are detaining a 17yr-old Dutch boy (son of a high-ranking Dutch judicial official) who was last seen with her. THey were seen several hours before-hand kissing and making out. So it wasn't really a case of a drunk wandering down out of a bar and jumping into the first car that pulled up, as you're implying. He already had formed a level of trust with her, which, coupled with the drunkeness, is why she was so easy to be talked into going with him.

I reckon all that happened is the usual cliche thing:
They go off. Start getting serious. She sobers up a bit and pushes him away. Asks to be driven back to the hotel. He persists. She insists that he take her back. He gets angry and being the spoilt boy he is (and not used to people turning him down) demands sex and tries to force himself upon her. She gets struggles and hits him. He hits her (possibly raping her at this point). She tries to run away. He freaks out and hits her again (s few times) and this time kills her. Hides the body.

Another possible story could be that he's with some friends and they all rape her when she's drunk and passed out. When she comes to, she says she's going to the police and he freaks and kills her etc etc etc.

Incidently, the police are detaining a 17yr-old Dutch boy (son of a high-ranking Dutch judicial official)

Actually the guys dad is just a low-ranking civil servant with a degree in law. If anything, he is a judge in training. It’s okay though, every major news source got it wrong.

Ryanian says "Alls I'm saying is that she was a stupid whore, and that I don't feel sorry for her."


I really hope that something like this never happens to you or to someone you are close to. This girl made some stupid desicions, as do we all. But the fact remains that a man or a group of men decided to take advantage of someone who was in a condition where she could not resist. She was out having fun with friends, became intoxicated as many people in that situation would. For all we know these guys could have drugged her drink. As many rapists work this way, I would not be suprised if they did. Is that her fault? Is it her fault that she was targeted and picked up by these people? Were stupid choices made by her and her friends? Yes. Was this the punishment that she and her friends (as they have to live forever with this guilt) deserved? Not by far.
So this girl was raped by at least one man, probably more, and now she is likely dead, or sold off into a fate that is worse than anything you have ever suffered through, and you have the courage to call her a stupid whore. Fuck you. Think of what she went through, what her family is going through now. Have some sympathy and next time think of other people before you make such insensitive comments. How would you feel if this happened to your sister and some asshole said 'She is a stupid whore and she deserved it?'

I've been to many resort islands and often observe the locals warm up to young girls on vacation. Wether its just to get laid or for another reason, young girls on vacation + alcohol usually ad up to potential victims.

Whatever ill has befallen this girl-its not her fault. The only thing she can be guilty of is being young and naive. How she was isolated and removed from her friends and chaperones is sad- no one cared enough to interfere?
I wouldnt let a friend go off like that-I want to be a friend for a while, not a witness, or the last person to see my friend.

There's stupid, and then there's blaming the victim.

Next thing you'll say is that she was attractive, wearing a bathing suit and shorts, and deserved whatever happened to her.

Standards of conduct among civilized people require that if I pick up a young woman and give her a ride, then no matter how attractive she is, how she is dressed, or how young and naive she might be, it is not within my rights to rape and kill her. In fact, one might expect me to fulfill my offer of giving her a ride safely and without further bother.

While it may indeed show a lack of judgment on her part, it's interesting that Ryan doesn't seem to hold idiot men who rape and kill to any standard of behavior at all.

Every time I teach a class to women on the use of handguns we go over this concept. The woman is not to blame. There are men in our society who could care less about your life and our society will blame the woman first before blaming the man - it is up to women to learn how to defend themselves and do so with vigor.

Ryanian says "Alls I'm saying is that she was a stupid whore, and that I don't feel sorry for her."


I really hope that something like this never happens to you or to someone you are close to. This girl made some stupid desicions, as do we all. But the fact remains that a man or a group of men decided to take advantage of someone who was in a condition where she could not resist. She was out having fun with friends, became intoxicated as many people in that situation would. For all we know these guys could have drugged her drink. As many rapists work this way, I would not be suprised if they did. Is that her fault? Is it her fault that she was targeted and picked up by these people? Were stupid choices made by her and her friends? Yes. Was this the punishment that she and her friends (as they have to live forever with this guilt) deserved? Not by far.
So this girl was raped by at least one man, probably more, and now she is likely dead, or sold off into a fate that is worse than anything you have ever suffered through, and you have the courage to call her a stupid whore. Fuck you. Think of what she went through, what her family is going through now. Have some sympathy and next time think of other people before you make such insensitive comments. How would you feel if this happened to your sister and some asshole said 'She is a stupid whore and she deserved it?'
Ouch. You said "fuck you." I'm so hurt.

Anyway, she was stupid and brought this on herself. Of course the guy who did it is a horrible human being and is responsible for his actions, but she should have been smart enough not to get into that situation. That's why I feel no sympathy.

Yeah, damn furrigners, thems all criminals.
I hitchhiked trough parts of Europe, getting into cars with strangers in foreign countries all the time. I dont think that was stupid, because i dont assume the inhabitants of other countries to be more likely having criminal intent than those of mine. And guess what, if you are open and not paranoid about those alien creatures from abroad, you might recognise them as human beings not very different from you and your neighbours.
Pray tell me where the difference is between going with strangers in your country and doing the same overseas?Oh please. Don't read so much into that one comment. I did not say, nor did I imply that all foreigners are criminals. Getting into a car with any stranger is stupid. The only reason I said "foreign country" is because you're unfamliar with your surroundings and the culture, and thus are more vulnerable. Grow up and don't be so hypersensitive.

Getting into a car with any stranger is stupid.
No, it aint. What about taxis, do you need a formal introduction to the driver? Oh, wait, taxi drivers are different, arent they? Wrong, btw, there was a serial rapist taxi driver active in my region. Hitchhiking is stupid as well, you get robbed and raped and killed all the time. And how could one ever think that having a one-night stand with a new aquaintance could result in anything else but a gruelsome fate?
Laying blame on the victim is sick, and you disgust me.

Like I said, I hope that something like this never happens to you or someone close to you. But I doubt you will feel any differently about this topic unless something did happen, which is unfortunate. My 'Fuck you' was rude-crime of passion, and I apologize.

There's stupid, and then there's blaming the victim.

Next thing you'll say is that she was attractive, wearing a bathing suit and shorts, and deserved whatever happened to her.

Standards of conduct among civilized people require that if I pick up a young woman and give her a ride, then no matter how attractive she is, how she is dressed, or how young and naive she might be, it is not within my rights to rape and kill her. In fact, one might expect me to fulfill my offer of giving her a ride safely and without further bother.

While it may indeed show a lack of judgment on her part, it's interesting that Ryan doesn't seem to hold idiot men who rape and kill to any standard of behavior at all.

Every time I teach a class to women on the use of handguns we go over this concept. The woman is not to blame. There are men in our society who could care less about your life and our society will blame the woman first before blaming the man - it is up to women to learn how to defend themselves and do so with vigor.


I'll say it again - even if she got into a stranger's car naked, she doesn't deserve to get raped and killed, nor should she expect to. She should have every right to expect to be treated with respect and dignity.

Ryan, do you rape every woman who gets in your car?

Ryan, do you rape every woman who gets in your car?

No, but I do. :fluffle:

There's stupid, and then there's blaming the victim.


And then there's holding people to be responsible, yes, responsible for their own actions. She was not responsible. It's not "blaming the victim" to point this out.


While it may indeed show a lack of judgment on her part, it's interesting that Ryan doesn't seem to hold idiot men who rape and kill to any standard of behavior at all.

Actually he does.


Also, you're saying that I don't think that her rapist/murderer should be punished. You're wrong-- I do think he should be punished. As a matter of fact, he should be executed.

"Rapists should be executed" is a pretty good standard in my book.

How old are you? I am guessing at most 19-20?

Ouch. You said "fuck you." I'm so hurt.

Anyway, she was stupid and brought this on herself. Of course the guy who did it is a horrible human being and is responsible for his actions, but she should have been smart enough not to get into that situation. That's why I feel no sympathy.


You really have no clue about such things. Rapists are not some dirty looking smelling evil laughing monster hiding in the shadows.

People get into strangers cars all the time. Never been out with people, ever have a stranger drive? Ever stay after a party to help clean up for a person you barely know.

I have gone off drinking with stangers in foreign countries. Guess what, some became friends that I still have contact today.

Bad luck happens all the time.

However, it's easy to judge without knowing the facts.

You obviously don't know any girls that have been raped. I do so I can say you don't have a friggin clue and you show yourself to be rather ignorant by your comments.

As Undelia has said the rape shield laws are meant for people like you.


Oh please. Don't read so much into that one comment. I did not say, nor did I imply that all foreigners are criminals. Getting into a car with any stranger is stupid. The only reason I said "foreign country" is because you're unfamliar with your surroundings and the culture, and thus are more vulnerable. Grow up and don't be so hypersensitive.

People aren't hypersensitive. Many of us have been to many different lands and have a greator perspective about things. You on the other hand........

And then there's holding people to be responsible, yes, responsible for their own actions. She was not responsible. It's not "blaming the victim" to point this out.


Holding a person responsible for their actions is for when they commit a crime. People go with stangers all the time. The arguments presented here are blaming the victim. Especially since we only have a theory as to what happened. We don't have the details.

How old are you? I am guessing at most 19-20?


Why does his age matter? I'm disgusted by all the ad hominems going around just because he doesn't have the official required amount of 'sympathy' for someone he doesn't know. Don't make yourself an ass by assuming your age prevents you from being an ass. ;)


People get into strangers cars all the time. Never been out with people, ever have a stranger drive? Ever stay after a party to help clean up for a person you barely know.

I have gone off drinking with stangers in foreign countries. Guess what, some became friends that I still have contact today.

Were you a drunk, attractive woman at those times?



As Undelia has said the rape shield laws are meant for people like you.

Wow, harsh. Way to trivialize rape, by calling anyone who disagrees with you on an online forum a rapist. I guess you don't know anyone who actually was raped, or else you wouldn't throw around the term just because you're feeling offended.


People aren't hypersensitive.

I disagree and I hold your name-calling, rapist-accusing, ad hominem making post as an example.

I still have absolutely no idea who you're talking about. Natalee who?

Were you a drunk, attractive woman at those times?



I should start doing things differently because I'm an attractive woman? even drunk sometimes. I should not talk to a stranger because I look better than the girl next to me? Do you have any other brainy suggestions for me? If someone rapes me it's not -ever- my fault. No matter how drunk I'm or how attractive I might be.

Why does his age matter? I'm disgusted by all the ad hominems going around just because he doesn't have the official required amount of 'sympathy' for someone he doesn't know. Don't make yourself an ass by assuming your age prevents you from being an ass. ;)


Now don't be nice. I assume people use naughty words for me all the time. ;)

As to the age question, I have heard his/her comments before and they are usually from the young or the heavily "religous"


Were you a drunk, attractive woman at those times?

Well to the level of drunkeness I have a couple times been; I can't answer that question. :eek:

It does not matter as the person I could have been with could have been a serial killer.

I once talked to an strange couple at the renisance pleasue fair(only went there once I tell you!). My mom later told me "you know who that was??!?!?!?" Larry Lake! If you don't know that name, he would take people into the hills do nasty things to them and then kill them.



Wow, harsh. Way to trivialize rape, by calling anyone who disagrees with you on an online forum a rapist. I guess you don't know anyone who actually was raped, or else you wouldn't throw around the term just because you're feeling offended.

Do you know what the rape shield laws are? I didn't call him a rapist.


I disagree and I hold your name-calling, rapist-accusing, ad hominem making post as an example.

Again, look up the rape shield laws. I didn't label him a rapist.

Of course, but you can’t stop people from doing those perfectly legal things, no matter how much you disagree with them . Yelling at them certainly won’t stop them. I hope you never serve on a Jury. Nothing personal, but if you are going to look down on the victims of crimes, then you shouldn’t be serving on one.

I don't trust a jury in the American system anyway. Twelve people who were too stupid or not imaginative enough to get out of jury duty... I don't want my fate in their hands.

I live in the area Holloway is from. It's getting a lot of coverage here, and lots of people are blaming lots of other people. Personally I think she was stupid for getting drunk and climbing in a car with someone she doesn't know.
Her parents aren't being much more sensible. They're working up a lawsuit to force the Aruban police to turn over all the evidence they have on the case.

"Don't take candy from a stranger."

I should start doing things differently because I'm an attractive woman? even drunk sometimes. I should not talk to a stranger because I look better than the girl next to me? Do you have any other brainy suggestions for me? If someone rapes me it's not -ever- my fault. No matter how drunk I'm or how attractive I might be.

There are obviously some people here who think that you and I are strange in our beliefs that the victim of rape is NEVER at fault.

These are probably the same people who believe that I should stay out of "bad" neighborhoods. Well, what about the innocent people who live in a "bad" neighborhood. Don't they have a right to expect a peaceable existence without rape, robbery, mayhem, or murder?

If a young woman on a tourist island hitches a ride, doesn't she have the right to expect to arrive at the destination unmolested and alive?

I should start doing things differently because I'm an attractive woman?

Yep.

Or maybe you think the rape rate is the exact same for drunk attractive women as it is for sober ugly men? Of COURSE you should model your behavior based on your own self and that little thing you seem to be ignoring called REALITY.

even drunk sometimes. I should not talk to a stranger because I look better than the girl next to me? Do you have any other brainy suggestions for me?

Yeah, if you're drunk and in a foreign country, think twice before hopping into some random strange male's car.

Just like if you're covered in sheep's blood, you might think twice before sleeping outside in the forest.

If someone rapes me it's not -ever- my fault. No matter how drunk I'm or how attractive I might be.

Sigh, no one is saying "it's the fault of the victim," I am saying to behave responsibly. Is that too much? Should we just ignore the fact that there are rapists out there?

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?

So she probably got raped and killed as a result of her stupidity.

It's tragic when innocent people die, but I can't make myself feel sorry for those who bring it upon themselves through sheer foolishness.

You have an interesting perspective, my friend....

So - doing something dumb should be punished by violent sexual abuse and eventual death...?

One assumes you are not employed in a social care position...

I don't trust a jury in the American system anyway. Twelve people who were too stupid or not imaginative enough to get out of jury duty... I don't want my fate in their hands.
Or who simply didn't try to get out of jury duty because they wanted to do their civic duty. And before you start your knee-jerk scoffing, I know lots of people who do this very thing, one of whom was in business for himself and lost over $50,000 in profits because of the length of the trial where he was a juror.

You haven't lived very long then, have you. Stupid mistakes never seem stupid when we make them. I tried Morphine, thinking once wouldn't hurt. Then I was stupid and did again. I managed to get my life back after many years, and yes, it was series of stupid mistakes that lead me there. But I'm certain I now know a hell of a lot more about staying alive than most people do. Have some empathy, it makes you human.

At her age, who knows what I would have done drunk. I would get drunk all the time and eventually referred to myself as "serial killer bait". I was lucky that nothing bad happened to me. And as far as the staying alive part... and some of the other things DV said, I can also relate to. People freak out when I tell them the things I did. They freak because they can't believe I lived through all that. I also managed to get my life back... after many many years and a lot of hell.

One thing I want to mention is that I think it's ridiculous to celebrate high school graduation by going to a foreign country. I believe the parents should not have allowed her to go on this trip. If I was a parent, there would be no way in hell I'd let my kid on a trip like that. They're still too naive at that age, even if they think they're not. That whole trip is ridiculous. I don't know if this was school sacntioned or not, but if it was, a lawsuit will be filed eventually.

I personally believe she is dead. And the justice system in Aruba is ridiculous. My God! I could do a better job investigating and I have no background!

As to the age question, I have heard his/her comments before and they are usually from the young or the heavily "religous"

Yeah, but what is the point of that? So he's young - maybe. So, this woman was young too. Should we dismiss people and words on that basis? No - especially not here, where a majority of people are young already.


It does not matter as the person I could have been with could have been a serial killer.

Yes, but the incidents of rape are far higher than being killed by a serial killer.

Do you know what the rape shield laws are? I didn't call him a rapist.

You said they existed for "people like you." Meaning...? Implying..?

There are obviously some people here who think that you and I are strange in our beliefs that the victim of rape is NEVER at fault.
I'm not one of them. It has been proven time and time again that rape is primarily a crime of violence, not a sex crime per se. How else explain a 27 year old who rapes an 84 year old woman? Just because a woman is gorgeous is no inticator as to whether she's going to be raped or not.

Or who simply didn't try to get out of jury duty because they wanted to do their civic duty. And before you start your knee-jerk scoffing, I know lots of people who do this very thing, one of whom was in business for himself and lost over $50,000 in profits because of the length of the trial where he was a juror.

I thought I'd already covered that.

Yep.

Or maybe you think the rape rate is the exact same for drunk attractive women as it is for sober ugly men? Of COURSE you should model your behavior based on your own self and that little thing you seem to be ignoring called REALITY.
I've hitchhiked thousands of kilometers, I've spend long nights drinking with strangers in foreign countries (and made very good friends) etc. If I would be scared of rape all the time I would have missed half of the brilliant experiences I have. Based on my experience, rape is not reality, not getting raped is much more common.

Most rapist are boyfriends, husbands and ex-boyfriends. I should be much more concerned of my ex boyfriends than any stranger.

You said they existed for "people like you." Meaning...? Implying..?

As I understand it, rape shield laws are to keep the woman's personal background secret in a rape case, so that the jury do not have a bias against her on the basis that 'she was asking for it' or some similar argument.

Thus, he was implying that the laws were invented for people like Ryanania, in case they are ever on the jury in a rape case.

I should start doing things differently because I'm an attractive woman? even drunk sometimes. I should not talk to a stranger because I look better than the girl next to me? Do you have any other brainy suggestions for me? If someone rapes me it's not -ever- my fault. No matter how drunk I'm or how attractive I might be.

You should start doing things differently whether you are more attractive than the woman next to you. That doesn't matter at all. The woman next to you has to do things differently as well. You don't have different rules because you think you're attractive. (Attractive is relative, dear.) You can talk to strangers in bars. Just don't freakin' go home with them!

Rape has nothing to do with attractiveness. You keep bringing up how attractive you are (which is relative I guess and moot). Rules are no different for a supermodel than they are for a average looking woman. It isn't your fault if you're raped... ever, but some common sense and street smarts on your part is required. For instance, don't leave a bar with 3 guys you just met. Hell, talk to them in the bar, whatever, just don't idiotically leave with them. Also, watch your drink. Someone can easily spke a drink, and then you have no control anymore.

Whether you think you're attractive or not, the common sense applies to all women.

I've hitchhiked thousands of kilometers, I've spend long nights drinking with strangers in foreign countries (and made very good friends) etc. If I would be scared of rape all the time I would have missed half of the brilliant experiences I have. Based on my experience, rape is not reality, not getting raped is much more common.

Most rapist are boyfriends, husbands and ex-boyfriends. I should be much more concerned of my ex boyfriends than any stranger.

You have just been very lucky. And most rapists aren't exes...

You should start doing things differently whether you are more attractive than the woman next to you. That doesn't matter at all. The woman next to you has to do things differently as well. You don't have different rules because you think you're attractive. (Attractive is relative, dear.) You can talk to strangers in bars. Just don't freakin' go home with them!

Rape has nothing to do with attractiveness. You keep bringing up how attractive you are (which is relative I guess and moot). Rules are no different for a supermodel than they are for a average looking woman. It isn't your fault if you're raped... ever, but some common sense and street smarts on your part is required. For instance, don't leave a bar with 3 guys you just met. Hell, talk to them in the bar, whatever, just don't idiotically leave with them. Also, watch your drink. Someone can easily spke a drink, and then you have no control anymore.

Whether you think you're attractive or not, the common sense applies to all women.
I'm not the one who brought attractiveness in to this conversation. I'm just saying I don't think women should do anything differently. The rapist are the ones who has to change their behaviour. No one knows around here what I look like. I just said it because someone thinks it somehow increases the potential risk of getting raped.

Of course I would not leave with 3 strangers, Of course I look after my drink. But then again, I'm not 17 anymore. Teenagers are horrible at recognising potential risks.

You have just been very lucky. And most rapists aren't exes...

In the US they are. You're far more likely to be forcibly raped by someone you know than by a stranger.

My solution so far has been to train women to carry concealed firearms.

Okay, so this person is dead, but apparently none of you care enough about this person to provide anything like background, an actual news story, or maybe some sort of timeline.

Third (and last)time I'll ask:

Who is Natalee Holloway? And why are people here choosing to blame the victim of a crime?

Holding a person responsible for their actions is for when they commit a crime.

I strongly disagree. I believe one is responsible for one's actions at all times.


People go with stangers all the time. The arguments presented here are blaming the victim.

Not my arguments.

In the US they are. You're far more likely to be forcibly raped by someone you know than by a stranger.

My solution so far has been to train women to carry concealed firearms.
...wouldn't a better solution be teaching women to respect themselves enough not to get themselves involved with jackasses who are willing to rape them?

You have just been very lucky. And most rapists aren't exes...
Yes they are. In 90% of the cases the victim knows the rapist. But those don't end up in newspapers or court rooms. Less than 15% of all rapes are ever reported.

In the US they are. You're far more likely to be forcibly raped by someone you know than by a stranger.

My solution so far has been to train women to carry concealed firearms.

Possibly "date rape", but not "exes". There are loads of rapes that occur because some woman leaves a bar with a stranger.

All states don't have conceal and carry laws.

Okay, so this person is dead, but apparently none of you care enough about this person to provide anything like background, an actual news story, or maybe some sort of timeline.

Third (and last)time I'll ask:

Who is Natalee Holloway? And why are people here choosing to blame the victim of a crime?

18-rd old young woman who went to Aruba to celebrate her graduation from high school.
Apparently raped and killed.

Okay, so this person is dead, but apparently none of you care enough about this person to provide anything like background, an actual news story, or maybe some sort of timeline.

Third (and last)time I'll ask:

Who is Natalee Holloway? And why are people here choosing to blame the victim of a crime?
Natalee Holloway was a high school student from Alabama. She went on vacation in Aruba with some friends, and is now missing. People suspect she was raped and killed, but nobody really knows what happened, as the body hasn't been found and no one's been proven guilty of anything.

I'm not the one who brought attractiveness in to this conversation. I'm just saying I don't think women should do anything differently. The rapist are the ones who has to change their behaviour. No one knows around here what I look like. I just said it because someone thinks it somehow increases the potential risk of getting raped.

Right, well who's going to change behavior first? Criminals and rapists, or ordinary women?

I guess neither.


My solution so far has been to train women to carry concealed firearms.

And that's a good solution.

But hey, shouldn't we just wait for rapists to stop raping people instead? ;)

...wouldn't a better solution be teaching women to respect themselves enough not to get themselves involved with jackasses who are willing to rape them?
Yeah, you can tell that from miles away :rolleyes:

Yes they are. In 90% of the cases the victim knows the rapist. But those don't end up in newspapers or court rooms. Less than 15% of all rapes are ever reported.

Not 90% in the U.S. and yes, most go unreported.

Also, with conceal and carry, the rapist may have a gun as well.

Possibly "date rape", but not "exes". There are loads of rapes that occur because some woman leaves a bar with a stranger.

All states don't have conceal and carry laws.

35 have "shall issue", which means that as long as you're not a felon, they SHALL give you the permit.

Going home with someone you don't know is a risk. Getting into a car with three guys when the lot of you are drunk is a risk. Those who survive these risks are lucky, not wise.

You can change your behavior, keep an eye out for yourself, or you can trust in a rapist not to rape you. I'm not saying everyone you go home with is a psychopath, but if you expose yourself to risks, you'll be unlucky once in a while, and it only takes once.

Yes they are. In 90% of the cases the victim knows the rapist. But those don't end up in newspapers or court rooms. Less than 15% of all rapes are ever reported.

I've always wondered how they come up with statistics like that. Obviously not by looking at reports. How then?

35 have "shall issue", which means that as long as you're not a felon, they SHALL give you the permit.

Not my state.

Right, well who's going to change behavior first? Criminals and rapists, or ordinary women?

I guess neither.

I should start living in a shell because there's a bad bad world out there? Sorry, but I refuse.

Not 90% in the U.S. and yes, most go unreported.

Also, with conceal and carry, the rapist may have a gun as well.
Highly, highly unlikely. I have yet to hear of any case at all where a rapist had a legally concealed weapon. Given the way the US media would sensationalize such an incident, the lack of any coverage indicates it doesn't happen.

18-rd old young woman who went to Aruba to celebrate her graduation from high school.
Apparently raped and killed.

So people are blaming her for getting raped and killed?

Nice. Really nice.

How about those idiotic (fill-in-the-blank, could be - European Jews? Armenians? Rwandans? Kurds?)? Man, getting themselves brutally victimized, raped and killed...how stupid can you get?


Indeed. How stupid can some people get?

Apparently pretty damn stupid. Stupid enough to blame a victim. That's pretty effin' stoopid.

I should start living in a shell because there's a bad bad world out there? Sorry, but I refuse.

You're free to do whatever you like, just like others are free to consider someone who doesn't account for risks foolish.

Not 90% in the U.S. and yes, most go unreported.

Also, with conceal and carry, the rapist may have a gun as well.
Not in Finland. I might do things differently if I'd live in Aruba or Washington or Johannesburg.

I've always wondered how they come up with statistics like that. Obviously not by looking at reports. How then?
Shelter homes, hospitals...

So people are blaming her for getting raped and killed?

Nice. Really nice.

How about those idiotic (fill-in-the-blank, could be - European Jews? Armenians? Rwandans? Kurds?)? Man, getting themselves brutally victimized, raped and killed...how stupid can you get?


Indeed. How stupid can some people get?

Apparently pretty damn stupid. Stupid enough to blame a victim. That's pretty effin' stoopid.

What some of us are saying is that precautions should be taken... just some common sense things. No one is blaming her. I might have done the same thing at her age. However, and this is not BLAMING THE VICTIM, a woman shouldn't leave a bar and get into a car with three strange guys. That is common sense. No one is blaming her.

I've always wondered how they come up with statistics like that. Obviously not by looking at reports. How then?

The statistic about less than 15% of rapes being reported, you mean? They probably use victim report studies. Basically interviewers go out and ask people anonymously if they've been ever been the victim of certain crimes.

Not in Finland. I might do things differently if I'd live in Aruba or Washington or Johannesburg.

In the US, according to the Department of Justice, 89 percent of forcible rapes are committed using NO WEAPON AT ALL.

You're free to do whatever you like, just like others are free to consider someone who doesn't account for risks foolish.
Yet again. There has been a study which showed that teenagers lack the ability to evaluate potential risks. It's a physical condition. That's why teenagers do stupid things. I don't think that's the only reason as quite many of us continue doing stupid things all our lives. We should protect them not blame them.

In the US, according to the Department of Justice, 89 percent of forcible rapes are committed using NO WEAPON AT ALL.
No wonder. About 60% of people just freeze if something bad is going to happen to them. They don't do anything to protect themselves. This, of course, is not their fault. It's perfectly natural human behaviour.

You're free to do whatever you like, just like others are free to consider someone who doesn't account for risks foolish.

Do you not see what you are doing?

You say that anyone who "doesn't account for risks" is "foolish"... and yet, the very risks you are discussing, are the violent predations of other people...

You absolve the responsibility of the perpetrator, by trivialising their contribution to 'risk'.

The societal flaw isn't about risk, and it isn't about rage or foolishness... it is about selfishness. Every time a girl is raped, we are all responsible for that 'risk'. You know why girls are taught to yell "Fire!" when they are attacked? Because the average person does not respond to a call of 'rape'.

By calling a girl 'foolish' when she goes home with the stranger, you are absolving YOURSELF of responsibility for the suffering of your neighbour. You ARE making a judgement on their choice of behaviour, and you are finding sufficient fault to 'justify' whatever response their actions bring.

Contrary to common belief, teenagers aren't idiots when it comes to risks. There's a difference between unable to understand risk and just not caring. Being fairly recently a teenager, I speak for myself at least. I was a teenager and I didn't get drunk, do drugs, or climb into cars with strange people. Because those things are foolish.

To the above, frankly living in a world with things like rapists and murderers and NOT taking them into account is foolish. They don't go away because you refuse to believe you'll be a victim. If you want to stay safe, you'll do what you can to avoid putting yourself in a position where you can become a victim. If you jump out of a plane without a chute, it's not my fault you hit the ground at terminal velocity.

Yet again. There has been a study which showed that teenagers lack the ability to evaluate potential risks. It's a physical condition.

Oh, "a study" showed that eh? Must be true! ;)

When I was a teenager I could evaluate potential risks just fine. And I would strongly object to dismissing all teenagers as somehow being physically unable to use criticial thinking, common sense or personal responsibility.

Contrary to common belief, teenagers aren't idiots when it comes to risks. There's a difference between unable to understand risk and just not caring. Being fairly recently a teenager, I speak for myself at least. I was a teenager and I didn't get drunk, do drugs, or climb into cars with strange people. Because those things are foolish.

I'm not saying they don't see the risks, they just think that the risks are much smaller than they actually are. In other words, they don't care enough.

What some of us are saying is that precautions should be taken... just some common sense things. No one is blaming her. I might have done the same thing at her age. However, and this is not BLAMING THE VICTIM, a woman shouldn't leave a bar and get into a car with three strange guys. That is common sense. No one is blaming her.

Not blaming... perhaps not consciously... but there is blame being levelled.

You are saying "a woman shouldn't leave a bar and get into a car with three strange guys"... you say this is "not common sense".

That is your value judgement... that it is an unacceptable level of risk.

Implicit, is the fact that, if one DOES take that 'unacceptable risk', they are somehow responsible for any tragedy which follows.

Again - the perpetrator is being absolved of responsibility, by the allowance of blame to be transferred to the victim.

No wonder. About 60% of people just freeze if something bad is going to happen to them. They don't do anything to protect themselves. This, of course, is not their fault. It's perfectly natural human behaviour.

I've always thought that rapists are unarmed 89 percent of the time because they can't concentrate on holding a weapon and still keep an erection.

This is my second post and probably my last, but I just had to say something when I saw this thread.

Yes, what Natalee did was stupid, and pretty dangerous. But to say that you don't feel sorry for her is absolutely rediculous. Just because she decided to get drunk, possibly for the first time in her life for all we know, she doesn't get your sympathy for being raped? What about that cub scout who got lost in the woods? If he had died, would you say it was his fault and he shouldn't have wandered away from the campsite? Kids, including me, do really stupid shit sometimes, but to say that Natalee is responsible for getting killed on an island which, by the way, is much safer than anywhere in the US (this would be their 3rd murder this year) is absolutely rediculous. I used to be good friends with Natalee's brother, and he still goes to my school, and I'd hate to see what he would think if he saw a thread like this. Think about that before you make a stupid-ass comment that the whole world can see.

Oh, "a study" showed that eh? Must be true! ;)

When I was a teenager I could evaluate potential risks just fine. And I would strongly object to dismissing all teenagers as somehow being physically unable to use criticial thinking, common sense or personal responsibility.
Well good for you. Nothing happened to me neither. But I do know more than enough young boys who have died because they have taken risks too big. Or girls who got pregnant. Or teenagerd who ended up in hospital with alcohol poisoning.

I've always thought that rapists are unarmed 89 percent of the time because they can't concentrate on holding a weapon and still keep an erection.
I don't know :) That 60% had nothing to do with rapes. It was just a little interesting fact I read about (how people act in (life) threatening situations.)

I met a woman last year who literally yanked off the penis of the man who was about to rape her. It was captured on surveillance camera.

Oh, "a study" showed that eh? Must be true! ;)

When I was a teenager I could evaluate potential risks just fine. And I would strongly object to dismissing all teenagers as somehow being physically unable to use criticial thinking, common sense or personal responsibility.

You are welcome to object... but it is a biological truth that the teenage brain is 'different' to the mature brain, especially in those areas that allow for asssessment of risks, etc.

Obviously, there is no hard 'line in the sand' that delineates HOW this applies to any given individual, but the 'science' is pretty sound.

"Yes, teenagers do have brains, but theirs don't yet function like an adult's. With the advent of technologies such as magnetic resonance imaging, neuroscientists have discovered that the adolescent brain is far from mature. "The teenage brain is a work in progress," says Sandra Witelson, a neuroscientist at McMaster University in Ontario, and it's a work that develops in fits and starts.

Until the past decade, neuroscientists believed that the brain was fully developed by the time a child reached puberty and that the 100 billion neurons, or nerves, inside an adult's skull–the hardware of the brain–were already in place by the time pimples began to sprout. The supposition was that a teenager could think like an adult if only he or she would cram in the necessary software–a little algebra here, some Civil War history there, capped by proficiency in balancing a checkbook. But the neural circuitry, or hardware, it turns out, isn't completely installed in most people until their early 20s.

http://www.lcsc.edu/ps205/inside.htm


"Dr. CHARLES NELSON: We've known for a long time that what we actually call the pre-frontal cortex, the part that sits behind your forehead, is involved in planning behavior, your use of strategies, a technical term we call cognitive flexibility, which is can you change your mind and do you have sort of a fluid way of going about solving problems?

Dr. JAY GIEDD: The part of the brain that is the so-called CEO or the executive of the brain is still being built during the teenage years. Teens are capable of enormous intellectual and artistic accomplishments. But that basic part of the brain that gives us strategies and organizing and perhaps warns us of potential consequences isn't fully on board yet.

Dr. CHARLES NELSON: Adolescence has always been a period of high risk. We know that teenagers engage in risky behavior and they have always engaged in risky behavior. There's nothing new about that now. And because the child - the 13 or 14 or 15-year-old - still has an immature frontal cortex, they often do not make the most responsible, reasoned decisions.


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/teenbrain/etc/script.html

i would first like to mention that there are many more children and adults that go missing daily. i just wish every case got the attention that this one has.

i dont feel that the blame should lie with ms. hollaway. or her friends, thats just ridiculous. when young people drink, there is a huge risk involved, because they arent aware how they are going to react to the introduction of alcohol into their systems. it could have prevented though. that trip had 7 chaperones for over 120 teenagers. even though many of the kids are 18, that number is far too low. taking kids to a country where the drinking age is 3 years lower than it is in their home country is a serious undertaking. that trip should have been better staffed with responsible parents. our senior trip to mexico involved one adult to every 6 students. we had to check in hourly,and could not go to other resorts or to the beach at night with out our chaperone in attendance. you may say we could have slipped out of the bar, but there is no way. we had to be checked in at the bar/restaurant at our hotel by 8 pm. that was were all the kids on the trip gambled, danced, drank, etc. and the parents that went along were consistently patrolling the exits. it was quite safe, and supervised. i can guarantee we did a LOT of drinking, met a LOT of strangers, but it was all contained. i feel the trip planners, and the parents that sent their kids on the trip should have really thought things out more.

Well good for you. Nothing happened to me neither. But I do know more than enough young boys who have died because they have taken risks too big. Or girls who got pregnant. Or teenagerd who ended up in hospital with alcohol poisoning.

Yes, and they should have known the risks. Being young is no excuse! It absolves them of personal responsibility. In a way it blames humanity itself for the stupidity of one person. One is responsible for one's own actions.

Anyway, I'm tired of beating and raping this dead horse. ( :eek: ) ;) I make my exit now from this thread, gracefully.

I met a woman last year who literally yanked off the penis of the man who was about to rape her. It was captured on surveillance camera.


OW!! (picturing that item bagged and tagged as evidence.)

I never heard this one-was it in the US ? We need more exposure of stories like this- encourage more people to defend themselves and more people to think again before commiting the crime.

Yes, and they should have known the risks. Being young is no excuse! It absolves them of personal responsibility. In a way it blames humanity itself for the stupidity of one person. One is responsible for one's own actions.

Anyway, I'm tired of beating and raping this dead horse. ( :eek: ) ;) I make my exit now from this thread, gracefully.

Actually - 'being young' is 'excuse'.

Way to avoid logic, reason and presented evidence.

This is a good time to leave the thread, I feel... before you have to defend the claims that have already been discredited.

Contrary to common belief, teenagers aren't idiots when it comes to risks. There's a difference between unable to understand risk and just not caring. Being fairly recently a teenager, I speak for myself at least. I was a teenager and I didn't get drunk, do drugs, or climb into cars with strange people. Because those things are foolish.

To the above, frankly living in a world with things like rapists and murderers and NOT taking them into account is foolish. They don't go away because you refuse to believe you'll be a victim. If you want to stay safe, you'll do what you can to avoid putting yourself in a position where you can become a victim. If you jump out of a plane without a chute, it's not my fault you hit the ground at terminal velocity.


Very well said. This is just saying that there are things you can do to try and protect yourself. Not that anything is a victim's 'fault'. Being a woman, I wouldn't leave a bar with a strange man (anymore). I used to when I got really drunk and that was just stupid of me. I was drunk to the point that nothing seemed a risk. It finally got to the point that I would have a "babysitter" come out with me to make sure I didn't do anything stupid. I don't drink much anymore.

Walking alone down a dark desolate street at 1:00am. One of my friends refused to drive me home early, so I had to walk, to make a long story long, I was chased by a man in a car who passed by me, did a u-turn and chased me w/his car while I ran. I ran into a bar about to close. There were four people there and I ran and sat next to them and said, "pretend to be my friends, this guy's chasing me...tried to chase me down in his car.". He came right into the bar and sat on the other side and stared at me. These people were great and pretended they knew me well and they gave me a ride home.

However, when we got in the car to leave, this guy got in his car and just sat there waiting for us to leave so he could follow me. After about 20 minutes of sitting in a car in the parking lot, he finally left and the others drove me home. I wonder what would have happened if he had caught me. If some creep is that persistant, and this guy looked terrifying, you know what's going to happen isn't going to be good.

I shouldn't have walked alone. That is something I could have avoided to reduce risk. I should have just sat at the bar and waited for my roommate even if it was a drag.

Yes, and they should have known the risks. Being young is no excuse! It absolves them of personal responsibility. In a way it blames humanity itself for the stupidity of one person. One is responsible for one's own actions.

Anyway, I'm tired of beating and raping this dead horse. ( :eek: ) ;) I make my exit now from this thread, gracefully.
I just hope you read what Grave_n_idle wrote.

Thanks Grave_n_idle :) I couldn't find the study I mentioned.

i would first like to mention that there are many more children and adults that go missing daily. i just wish every case got the attention that this one has.

i dont feel that the blame should lie with ms. hollaway. or her friends, thats just ridiculous. when young people drink, there is a huge risk involved, because they arent aware how they are going to react to the introduction of alcohol into their systems. it could have prevented though. that trip had 7 chaperones for over 120 teenagers. even though many of the kids are 18, that number is far too low. taking kids to a country where the drinking age is 3 years lower than it is in their home country is a serious undertaking. that trip should have been better staffed with responsible parents. our senior trip to mexico involved one adult to every 6 students. we had to check in hourly,and could not go to other resorts or to the beach at night with out our chaperone in attendance. you may say we could have slipped out of the bar, but there is no way. we had to be checked in at the bar/restaurant at our hotel by 8 pm. that was were all the kids on the trip gambled, danced, drank, etc. and the parents that went along were consistently patrolling the exits. it was quite safe, and supervised. i can guarantee we did a LOT of drinking, met a LOT of strangers, but it was all contained. i feel the trip planners, and the parents that sent their kids on the trip should have really thought things out more.

I get the impression this was a naive young girl from a small town-not really street wise at all yet. Too trusting.
No matter what the case- its not her fault.

I sincerely hope this ends like the "Runaway Bride" story and she turns up somewhere-safe.

I also hope people will watch out for each other a little better. I wouldnt have let my friend go off alone at that age.
And my own daughter, when she grows up, will have as much common sense as I can awaken in her as possible, and I will still be very involved. She wont even be aware at how close I will be watching.

I just hope you read what Grave_n_idle wrote.

Thanks Grave_n_idle :) I couldn't find the study I mentioned.

Most welcome.

Unfortunately, most people seem to refuse to retire a well-maintained assumption, no matter what the evidence to the contrary...

I strongly disagree. I believe one is responsible for one's actions at all times.


Well it's easy to judge after the fact. She made a judgement call and unfortunatly it was a bad one.

Instead of blaming her we should wait till the answers are found.


Not my arguments.

Unless you are Ryania, then I wasn't talking about you......

Very well said. This is just saying that there are things you can do to try and protect yourself. Not that anything is a victim's 'fault'. Being a woman, I wouldn't leave a bar with a strange man (anymore). I used to when I got really drunk and that was just stupid of me. I was drunk to the point that nothing seemed a risk. It finally got to the point that I would have a "babysitter" come out with me to make sure I didn't do anything stupid. I don't drink much anymore.

Walking alone down a dark desolate street at 1:00am. One of my friends refused to drive me home early, so I had to walk, to make a long story long, I was chased by a man in a car who passed by me, did a u-turn and chased me w/his car while I ran. I ran into a bar about to close. There were four people there and I ran and sat next to them and said, "pretend to be my friends, this guy's chasing me...tried to chase me down in his car.". He came right into the bar and sat on the other side and stared at me. These people were great and pretended they knew me well and they gave me a ride home.

However, when we got in the car to leave, this guy got in his car and just sat there waiting for us to leave so he could follow me. After about 20 minutes of sitting in a car in the parking lot, he finally left and the others drove me home. I wonder what would have happened if he had caught me. If some creep is that persistant, and this guy looked terrifying, you know what's going to happen isn't going to be good.

I shouldn't have walked alone. That is something I could have avoided to reduce risk. I should have just sat at the bar and waited for my roommate even if it was a drag.


I'm glad to hear those people helped you out- its sounds like the guy had bad intent.
It shows you can find good in total strangers (the ones that helped you), but you should still be prepared to deal with the worst and try not to wind up in a bad position in the first place. Alone and drunk is a bad position.
We make a lot of our own luck.

Glad you made it out of that one ok.

OW!! (picturing that item bagged and tagged as evidence.)

I never heard this one-was it in the US ? We need more exposure of stories like this- encourage more people to defend themselves and more people to think again before commiting the crime.

No, it happened on the campus of Carleton University in Ottawa...I met her at a summer Pagan retreat, she regaled us with the whole story over a campfire one night.

Apparently if you exert enough pull on the shaft, you can tear apart the connective tissues. He was armed, I know that - with a big nasty knife. He had already unzipped/buttoned his pants, with his erection hanging out, and when he looked over his shoulder to see if the coast was clear, with his victim pushed down to the ground before him, she made the most of his distraction, and pulled as hard and as quickly as she could. There was blood everywhere.

Capturing him was no trouble at all. She went directly to the campus cops, who went directly to the city cops, who sent a few officers immediately to the local hospitals, where they found the perpetrator, who had himself gone directly to hospital to seek medical attention.

These sexists, blaming women for rape. It's like blaming murder victims for murder if you ask me.

Actually - 'being young' is 'excuse'.

Way to avoid logic, reason and presented evidence.

You've given no logic, reason or evidence that convinces me I should dismiss all young people as mindless automatons incapable of evaluating risks in any way. Sorry, showing that the brain is different at different ages doesn't do it.

The brain shows differences between men and women too - perhaps I should say, hey, it's not the RAPISTS fault, it's that dastardly biology again at work! No, I don't think so.


This is a good time to leave the thread, I feel... before you have to defend the claims that have already been discredited.

Nah, before people like you start trying to claim that I am, myself, pro-rape.

I'm surprised so few claims of that nature have been levelled so far.

And I've decided to keep responding as long as I'm bothering with this forum. Wouldn't want you to get the mistaken impression that you can drive me away through repetition.

Adolescence has always been a period of high risk. We know that teenagers engage in risky behavior and they have always engaged in risky behavior. There's nothing new about that now. And because the child - the 13 or 14 or 15-year-old - still has an immature frontal cortex, they often do not make the most responsible, reasoned decisions.

Oh ho! We went from talking about 'young people' - like the 19 year old in this case - to talking about "children." Is it your reasoned contention that 19 year old women do not have fully developed brains AND that this means they cannot be reasonable?

Would you suggest that 19 year old women should not be allowed to vote? After all they are impaired (according to you) and therefore cannot be trusted to make reasonable decisions.

An immature frontal cortex may mean one does not necessarily "make the most responsible, reasoned decisions," but you know what other condition has that exact effect? Being human.

Well it's easy to judge after the fact. She made a judgement call and unfortunatly it was a bad one.

Instead of blaming her we should wait till the answers are found.


*sigh*

I AM NOT BLAMING HER.

I believe EVERYONE is responsible for their own actions or inactions. Including the rapist. Including her. Including you. Including me. That does not amount to "blame." Christ, people.

I'm glad to hear those people helped you out- its sounds like the guy had bad intent.
It shows you can find good in total strangers (the ones that helped you), but you should still be prepared to deal with the worst and try not to wind up in a bad position in the first place. Alone and drunk is a bad position.
We make a lot of our own luck.

Glad you made it out of that one ok.

TY :)

Walking alone down a dark desolate street at 1:00am....
Ok, let me get this straight, you tell us a scary story which ends with you being saved by strangers and driving in their car with them?
Dont you know that you deserved to be raped for doing sich a foolish thing?

Ok, let me get this straight, you tell us a scary story which ends with you being saved by strangers and driving in their car with them?
Dont you know that you deserved to be raped for doing sich a foolish thing?

Hey, I'm not admitting it was smart. I've walked that area before and never had a problem. Deserved to be raped, no. The likelyhood of it happening because of my foolish decision to walk alone at night went way up.

It seemed to me that the main problem was alcohol. Being an 18-yr-old Valedictorian with straight A's meant she probably never had a drink before. Then she went to Aruba where suddenly it was legal to drink, and she got smashed because she had no idea what her limit was.

Also her friends sucked. They saw her being driven away by three strangers the morning they were supposed to leave and they didn't do anything.

aruba is safer than any city in the united states. "downtown" oranjestaad is as safe at 2 am as chicago is at noon.

my point?

it lulls you into a sense that nothing wrong can ever happen there. you have to keep reminding yourself that there are bad people everywhere, even in aruba. no one looks threatening. there are no shady bad men hanging out on the corners. not even groups of gangish looking teens to freak out the old tourists.

so when miss holloway met a nice 17 year old dutch boy in carlos 'n charlies, it doesnt surprise me one bit that she might decide to go off with him to see the lighthouse in the moonlight. what could be more romantic on her last night in aruba?

she did the same thing that millions of women do all over north america every weekend. she met a man in a bar and left with him. are you really so young that you nave NEVER picked up a woman in a bar? (or been picked up) its not unusual. its not even considered wrong by most people these days.

she just went off with the wrong man. shes 18 years old. she didnt remind herself that there are bad people everywhere, even in aruba. i have great sympathy for her and her family.

It seemed to me that the main problem was alcohol. Being an 18-yr-old Valedictorian with straight A's meant she probably never had a drink before. Then she went to Aruba where suddenly it was legal to drink, and she got smashed because she had no idea what her limit was.

Also her friends sucked. They saw her being driven away by three strangers the morning they were supposed to leave and they didn't do anything.

I thought her friends left and she decided to stay at the bar with these guys. Perhaps I'm wrong....

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?

So she probably got raped and killed as a result of her stupidity.

It's tragic when innocent people die, but I can't make myself feel sorry for those who bring it upon themselves through sheer foolishness.

Not that I really know much about it, but isn't it just possible that she was given a "date-rape" drug?

I thought her friends left and she decided to stay at the bar with these guys. Perhaps I'm wrong....

Her friends were interviewed and said they saw her leaving with the three guys at 1:00am the night before everybody was supposed to be on a plane to leave Aruba. And then they said they "thought nothing of it" :headbang:.

Her friends were interviewed and said they saw her leaving with the three guys at 1:00am the night before everybody was supposed to be on a plane to leave Aruba. And then they said they "thought nothing of it" :headbang:.

"thought nothing of it" :rolleyes:

Not that I really know much about it, but isn't it just possible that she was given a "date-rape" drug?

Well as some would say "She should have taken responcibility for herself then!" :rolleyes:

It's hard to say. Untill they find her, that answer will not be found if ever.....

I should start living in a shell because there's a bad bad world out there? Sorry, but I refuse.
Who said that? But you should make an effort to control the risk you assume or you may suffer the consequences of your poorly considered choices. It's that simple.

Misfortune didn't ambush its way into her life, she invited it in having mistaken it for opportunity. She gambled and lost. The tragedy is the stakes were high and the reward was negligable. There is a world of difference between the person struck by a bolt from the blue and a person who eletrocutes themselves for lack of proper care. No one should, and no one wants to die like that. The only part anyone has control over is how much risk they assume for how much reward.

Now that doesn't mean the ass-clown(s) that stole so much from her should be absolved. What was done was done, and there probably isn't any explaination. Society deserves the penence it chooses to exact, upon proof. But she didn't have to provide the opportunity. It doesn't diminish what other people did, or what other people might have failed to do. But it is better to escape grave misfortune than be a victim of it. She did have a choice, that she no doubt greatly regreted.

Personally, I've only got so much pity. I'll save it for the people who are suffering misfortunes beyond their control.

You've given no logic, reason or evidence that convinces me I should dismiss all young people as mindless automatons incapable of evaluating risks in any way. Sorry, showing that the brain is different at different ages doesn't do it.

The brain shows differences between men and women too - perhaps I should say, hey, it's not the RAPISTS fault, it's that dastardly biology again at work! No, I don't think so.



Reason says that the 'experience reserve' likely increases with the amount of experiences experienced. Thus - the younger a young individual, or the less experience that person has had - the less basis for a reasoned response, the less scope for an accurate risk assessment. Wouldn't you agree?

Nowhere did I say, suggest, or hint at - the idea of mindless automatons. This is an excellent strawman for you to construct, but is pure logical fallacy, and has no relation to the discussion.

I cited sources which you may, or may not, have read... which clearly show that the teenage brain is fundamentally less suitable for making value judgements and/or risk assessment.

This does not make teenagers mindless... it just means there is a reason why we so often observe 'dumb' behaviour on the parts of teenagers... they are literally thinking in a different manner.

Are you trying to say that there are noticable differences in the capacity to evaluate risk between the male and female brains? If not - you are introducing irrelevent material. If you ARE saying that, cite a source, please.

I think you are deliberately obfuscating the issue. I assumed that you would read the sources I provided, and read around the subject if you doubted the veracity of those sources...

What I have found instead is a combination of irrelevence, and what appears to be an appeal to ridicule as a debating tool.

The sources are there, take them or leave them...

The evidence clearly argues against your assertion, and you bring nothing to the table by way of refutation.

Believe what you will, I have presented the evidence, whether or not you chose to use it.

I live in the area Holloway is from. It's getting a lot of coverage here, and lots of people are blaming lots of other people.


I'll say, remember how JT had to go on The O'Reilly Factor to refute a lot of the claims?

So people are blaming her for getting raped and killed?

Nice. Really nice.

How about those idiotic (fill-in-the-blank, could be - European Jews? Armenians? Rwandans? Kurds?)? Man, getting themselves brutally victimized, raped and killed...how stupid can you get?


Indeed. How stupid can some people get?

Apparently pretty damn stupid. Stupid enough to blame a victim. That's pretty effin' stoopid.



Another stupid thing is getting drunk and getting in the car with 3 strangers when you're an attractive female. But, according to you, I'm stupid for NOT doing that. Is this your way of saying "Go get raped"?

i dont feel that the blame should lie with ms. hollaway. or her friends, thats just ridiculous. when young people drink, there is a huge risk involved, because they arent aware how they are going to react to the introduction of alcohol into their systems. it could have prevented though. that trip had 7 chaperones for over 120 teenagers. even though many of the kids are 18, that number is far too low. taking kids to a country where the drinking age is 3 years lower than it is in their home country is a serious undertaking. that trip should have been better staffed with responsible parents. our senior trip to mexico involved one adult to every 6 students. we had to check in hourly,and could not go to other resorts or to the beach at night with out our chaperone in attendance. you may say we could have slipped out of the bar, but there is no way. we had to be checked in at the bar/restaurant at our hotel by 8 pm. that was were all the kids on the trip gambled, danced, drank, etc. and the parents that went along were consistently patrolling the exits. it was quite safe, and supervised. i can guarantee we did a LOT of drinking, met a LOT of strangers, but it was all contained. i feel the trip planners, and the parents that sent their kids on the trip should have really thought things out more.



Ughh, they weren't chaperones. They were just there to take care of passports and other legal issues. The kids were pretty much on their own. The "chaperone" things is one of the myths propagated in the media.

These sexists, blaming women for rape. It's like blaming murder victims for murder if you ask me.


Oh....my.....goodness.....I >>AM<< a woman!!!!! I just have common sense unlike a certain 18 yr old teen in Aruba...

Actually Aruba is part of the US.

Actually Aruba is part of the US.


It's Dutch.

Oh....my.....goodness.....I >>AM<< a woman!!!!! I just have common sense unlike a certain 18 yr old teen in Aruba...

Wow good for you. Glad to hear it. I guess common sense also dictates that you speak ill of the dead or the misfortunate?

I am really happy that you have NEVER done anything stupid in your life.

I bow before you perfection.

:rolleyes:

---edit---

As I think of it. How old are you?

Another stupid thing is getting drunk and getting in the car with 3 strangers when you're an attractive female. But, according to you, I'm stupid for NOT doing that. Is this your way of saying "Go get raped"?

No its just his way of saying it's pretty crass to cast dispersions against the dead.

Not blaming... perhaps not consciously... but there is blame being levelled.

You are saying "a woman shouldn't leave a bar and get into a car with three strange guys"... you say this is "not common sense".

That is your value judgement... that it is an unacceptable level of risk.

Implicit, is the fact that, if one DOES take that 'unacceptable risk', they are somehow responsible for any tragedy which follows.

Again - the perpetrator is being absolved of responsibility, by the allowance of blame to be transferred to the victim.


i still dont understand after reading 4 pages of this,that people still think certain people are blaming the victim and absolving the perp.

rapists and vultures are blamed for there behaviour,thats what courts and prisons are for.i havent read 1 post saying...woohoo...it wasn't your fault mister rapist..it was hers for getting drunk and going with you.

what has been stated repeatedly,not absolving the crimminal,is that if you put your self in that situation(drunk,leaving with strangers,making out in a car with a stranger or strangers,in a country that you are unfamiliar with)well golly gee.you just might have something bad happen to you.

put another way,scumbag rapist is lurking in bar,looking for a victim.
girl A.not drinking heavily,with friends,dressed somewhat normally.
girlB.drinking heavily,flirting with strangers,dressed like a tramp half naked.

i wonder who the scumbag oppurtunist rapist is going to target?

i know a rape is generally a crime of violence,not about sex.however,alot of rapes or sexual assaults are not committed by the"rapist" most think of(the guy who breaks nto a womens home and attacks her..ie.violence)but of some drunk guy who is horny and looking to get some.and that guy is thinking unclearly as well...should that absolve him of his behaviour?should he not be held responsible for his actions since he was drunk,or does that only apply to a girl bein drunk,and not resposible for her behaviour?
not trying to compare a girl drunk flirting,and a drunk guy raping her...not at all,just trying to show that each bear there own responsibilities for there actions.obviously,the drunk guy bears enormous amounts of respon. foe his actions and should be held accountable..legally and morally.
however,the girl does bear some fault for her behaviour.not to the extent of being raped obviously,but her actions certainly led to her problems.

i was in new orleans with my 17 year old daughter last year.we were in a bar drinking hurricanes with my brother and sister and some friends.
i warned my daughter(honor student)about drinking to many in the day,she ignored me of coarse and i wasn't paying too much attention.
she starts talkin to 2 guys and comes up to me and says..can i meet you at the hotel tonite,i'm gonna hang out with these guys.
after i got off the floor laughing,i said hell no!1 of the punks says,lighten up dude..it's cool.my brother comes over and says..walk away now partner or you will be visiting the hospital..so they leave,my girl is givin me the fuck you looks rite up until she starts yakking.i have to cut my time with family so i can take her to the hotel.
the next day she doesnt even remember what happened,doesnt believe me until my sister said yes ,thats what happenned.
moral of the story..if i hadnt been there...she more then likely would have been at the least raped.that town is dangerous,and teens have no clue what kind of asshats are out there.
they are just finding there sexuality and dress like they have exsperience,rightly or wrongly...alot of "men" take that like they want it and get them lubed up so they cant resist.

well she learned a valuable lesson that day i think...sad to imagine how many innocent girls wanting to show off there bodies and act mature and drink,learn the hard way.

again,not to absolve the sexual predator,but if i wasnt there,and my girl was hurt...i would hunt down said scum and kill them,and ALSO completely flip on my kid for being so stupid.of coarse i would console and help her deal with it,but i would feel she was partially responsible for what happenned,due to her stupid behaviour.
in a perfect world,girls could get drunk and walk around naked un molested,but last i checked..the world is far from perfect.

sorry for the novel,but this issue pisses me off to no end. :headbang:

This is my second post and probably my last, but I just had to say something when I saw this thread.

Yes, what Natalee did was stupid, and pretty dangerous. But to say that you don't feel sorry for her is absolutely rediculous. Just because she decided to get drunk, possibly for the first time in her life for all we know, she doesn't get your sympathy for being raped? What about that cub scout who got lost in the woods? If he had died, would you say it was his fault and he shouldn't have wandered away from the campsite? Kids, including me, do really stupid shit sometimes, but to say that Natalee is responsible for getting killed on an island which, by the way, is much safer than anywhere in the US (this would be their 3rd murder this year) is absolutely rediculous. I used to be good friends with Natalee's brother, and he still goes to my school, and I'd hate to see what he would think if he saw a thread like this. Think about that before you make a stupid-ass comment that the whole world can see.


yes i feel very sorry for her and her family..it would destroy me.however she was very foolish and unfortunately paid a very high price for it..would have been better if she just got scared and learned a lesson.hopefully others may learn from her mistake.
oh,and they should kill whoever is responsible.

Reason says that the 'experience reserve' likely increases with the amount of experiences experienced. Thus - the younger a young individual, or the less experience that person has had - the less basis for a reasoned response, the less scope for an accurate risk assessment. Wouldn't you agree?


Of course. But since we are also agreeing that experience, not just age, is a factor, her age is not enough to justify or excuse her poor decision making. Furthermore one doesn't need age or experience to recognize some things as bad ideas - one can always learn from others experiences, or so-called book knowledge.


Nowhere did I say, suggest, or hint at - the idea of mindless automatons. This is an excellent strawman for you to construct, but is pure logical fallacy, and has no relation to the discussion.

Very well. Then what was your point in bringing up the whole 'young people have immature brains' argument, exactly?

I cited sources which you may, or may not, have read... which clearly show that the teenage brain is fundamentally less suitable for making value judgements and/or risk assessment.

Your sources are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, because it is my assertion that *I* was physically capable of making reasoned decisions at her age, and therefore she should be as well. Your sources do nothing to contradict my own experience, and they don't show her as physically incapable of making reasonable decisions and more than they convince me I was similarly incapable.

This does not make teenagers mindless... it just means there is a reason why we so often observe 'dumb' behaviour on the parts of teenagers... they are literally thinking in a different manner.

..and there is a reason one observes dumb behavior in adults as well. Neither of these generalizations helps here, and as she is was in fact a legal adult in the USA, I see no reason to treat her as otherwise here.

I think you are deliberately obfuscating the issue. I assumed that you would read the sources I provided, and read around the subject if you doubted the veracity of those sources...

I think you are doing the same in light of how little weight these sources have with me. Of course, you may be arguing for an audience, in which case the sources will score bigger.

What I have found instead is a combination of irrelevence, and what appears to be an appeal to ridicule as a debating tool.

The sources are there, take them or leave them...

I left 'em. As for ridicule... that can't be helped, you see ... it's the fault of my brain's condition and not my free will or reason. :)

The evidence clearly argues against your assertion, and you bring nothing to the table by way of refutation.

I've brought my own experience for one, and you won't easily convince me that I am wrong with some online medical sources. Perhaps others, but I believe in personal responsibility first. I've known plenty of young women who don't and wouldn't put themselves into her position. What do your sources say of them? Why is it this particular woman acted quite unreasonably when so many others do not? It is my assertation that there is a difference in character and upbringing here, not brain function, which is most relevant.

My only beef with this issue is that Natalee got front page press in my home town newspaper -- while a local girl, who disappeared between third and fourth periods at Stanwood High School just north of where I live (her name is Gabrielle Mercedes) got zip. So a girl whose family had the means to send their princess to Aruba gets extensive coverage and Gabrielle gets nothing. Why? Well, Natalee is pretty. Gabrielle is not and is also "mentally challenged", or whatever the hell they're calling it now.

The lesson my hometown paper inadvertently taught its readership (especially the younger and more gullible of them)? You get national attention for being pretty and irresponsible. Not so much if you're plain and learning disabled.

I hope they find Natalee alive and that those responsible for her abduction are brought to justice (even if it is an Aruban judge -- weird development there). I hope the fact that they've just arrested the girl's father doesn't mean he had anything to do with it (though I confess to having had a sickening feeling in my gut when I heard that story).

However, I also hope The Everett (WA) Herald realizes how slighted the Mercedes family must have felt to see the glamour pictures of Natalee all over the front page for every day of her absence while Gabrielle was either relegated to the back of teh B section or omitted altogether.

Priorities.

While the subject is parental/filial responsibility, anyone here heard about Brennan Hawkins, the 11-year-old Utah Boy Scout who was lost in the Uitas Mountains for four days? They found him and it all turned out for the best, but there was one thing that, after hearing it, has stuck in my head and I can't let it go. This kid was conditioned by his parents to stay on the trail if he was to ever become separated or lost. He did that.

Unfortunately, the kid was also conditioned to believe that under NO circumstances of ANY kind should he talk to or even approach a non-uniformed stranger. The practical upshot of that latter advice was this: during his lengthy unintentional camping trip, this boy stayed on the trail -- BUT LEFT THE TRAIL TO HIDE IN THE WOODS WHENEVER ANYONE CAME BY AND STAYED HIDDEN UNTIL THEY PASSED. Apparently, he dodged ATV riders, folks on horseback and others more than once in order to follow the "stranger" edict.

The cognitive dissonance in that kid must have been cataclysmic! "I'm out here with no food, water, shelter or means of communication -- I need help. Oh SHIT! Here come some STRANGERS! Mama said I better hide!" Why the planet of Hell didn't this kid's parents teach the kid that strangers are preferable to being abandoned to die of exposure, starvation, bear attack, etc.?!? It seemed to me that his ordeal would have been less than half as long had he just asked one of the ATV folks for a bleeding RIDE to the nearest phone!

:headbang:

'Splain it to me Loocie!

It is my assertation that there is a difference in character and upbringing here, not brain function, which is most relevant.

Ahhh ok. Do you have children?


I have seen things in dorms that would make most parents cringe. You can talk about upbring, character and other crap like personal responsibility; however, until people are faced you never can tell what will be the result.

Nice slam against her parents BTW.

Women really are in a no-win situation here--if they carry the pepper spray and never go anywhere they're not supposed to, if they suppress their own sexuality, then they're considered stuck up bitches. If they do the opposite, then they were asking for it in the eyes of far too many.

And guys, we ought to be pissed at people who act as though we're knuckle-draggers looking to rape at any opportunity--but the problem is that we're usually the ones perpetuating the stereotype. Guys "get so horny they can't stop" or "are olut there trying to hit everything they can." Huh? How is that the least bit flattering? Do you really want to be thought of as nothing but a cock and balls? But we do it to ourselves, we joke and play around like we want nothing more than to nail anything in a skirt, and then have the audacity to say that when a woman shows a little sexual aggressiveness, she's a slut, or she was asking for it. Are there guys like that? Sure--but they're a small part of the population, and the rest of us ought to make that clear.

Guys can do far more to stop rape than women will ever be able to, simply because we can intervene with our peer groups.

I should start doing things differently because I'm an attractive woman?
snip*....No matter how drunk I'm or how attractive I might be.sorry...you are not attractive enough...even if you are the last woman on a desert island...I pass...

even if you are drunk I would not touch you...try the guy next door.

And that, folks, is why I am glad that we in the US have rape shield laws. It prevents most, if not all, personal information about a rape victim from entering a trial. That way a jury can be impartial, even if this guy is on it.most likely rape shield laws would NOT apply in this case.

we joke and play around like we want nothing more than to nail anything in a skirt, and then have the audacity to say that when a woman shows a little sexual aggressiveness, she's a slut, or she was asking for it. Are there guys like that? Sure--but they're a small part of the population....small?

at the local High School we were a ruling majority.

small?

at the local High School we were a ruling majority.
Not exactly something to be proud of there.

Women really are in a no-win situation here--if they carry the pepper spray and never go anywhere they're not supposed to, if they suppress their own sexuality, then they're considered stuck up bitches. If they do the opposite, then they were asking for it in the eyes of far too many.

And guys, we ought to be pissed at people who act as though we're knuckle-draggers looking to rape at any opportunity--but the problem is that we're usually the ones perpetuating the stereotype. Guys "get so horny they can't stop" or "are olut there trying to hit everything they can." Huh? How is that the least bit flattering? Do you really want to be thought of as nothing but a cock and balls? But we do it to ourselves, we joke and play around like we want nothing more than to nail anything in a skirt, and then have the audacity to say that when a woman shows a little sexual aggressiveness, she's a slut, or she was asking for it. Are there guys like that? Sure--but they're a small part of the population, and the rest of us ought to make that clear.

Guys can do far more to stop rape than women will ever be able to, simply because we can intervene with our peer groups.


what you just said is the exact thing the sophistacated oppurtunist will say to a girl...to get the desired result.

what planet are you from...from about 14 till god knows when..men are nice to women for 1 reason..yea..i'm a chauvinistic pig..lol...but you cant argue with biology and the need to procreate.

ever wonder why women..attractive women..will go out with a ugly mug that is rich,why women trade up on boyfriends?

we are programmed to be what we are.men acquire wealth and power to attract women,and women...like peacocks...preen and pretty to attract men.men of power..it goes back to cavemen.

i know it is shallow and mean..but that is life.flame away and call me a pig..i prefer an intelligent women over beauty,and i am sure i am not alone..but the vast majority are driven by primortal impulses.

which also goes along way to explain violence towards women by men who feel powerless over people they feel are less then them.imagine a good looking guy,strong...in love/lust with an attractive girl...but she goes with a guy that is obviosly his lesser appearance wise and strenght wise.but has the ability to provide security for her.
it is as old as time,the need for women to nest and create a safe enviro for there offspring...and that is accomplished by finding the most powerfull male available.
do i think it is right..no..but that is how it is..we just are more adept at masking it.

as an example(hollywood bs aside)you get an attractive female,then get 2 exactly alike men(personality,sensitivity,intell,and the feeling betwwen all that they are on the same page)then make 1 fat bald and ugly,the other a tom cruise look alike..who is the girl gonna pick,same goes in reverse.

it is patently obvious what is at work here.

men want sex and a "pretty mate"and women want a good looking provider..(provider first)call me a liar.

wow..way off topic...my take is the poor girl wanted her day in the spotlight with an exotic guy who obviously had some semblence of wealth,and she bit off more then she could chew..him being accustomed to getting what he wants..got angry..and the rest is sad.

anyhow..just an aside or a word of advice...to all the peacocks.be careful what you wish for.

i see girls here at the beach,in the bar,wearing thongs with a dime covering there nipples,only one reason for that attire(to attract the male species)and then get offended when the "wrong guy"looks at them..lol..but trust me..the guy they think is the right one will sometimes be the wrong one.they will wiggle and giggle to him till they get to the beach..and then mister right turns into mister wrong.

and obviously..i am not saying wearing provocative clothes is an invite to rape or worse,just saying...think...men are men most times..aside from the hippie cat ascared of women,men will take it as a signal..right or wrong.

what you just said is the exact thing the sophistacated oppurtunist will say to a girl...to get the desired result.

what planet are you from...from about 14 till god knows when..men are nice to women for 1 reason..yea..i'm a chauvinistic pig..lol...but you cant argue with biology and the need to procreate.

ever wonder why women..attractive women..will go out with a ugly mug that is rich,why women trade up on boyfriends?

we are programmed to be what we are.men acquire wealth and power to attract women,and women...like peacocks...preen and pretty to attract men.men of power..it goes back to cavemen.

i know it is shallow and mean..but that is life.flame away and call me a pig..i prefer an intelligent women over beauty,and i am sure i am not alone..but the vast majority are driven by primortal impulses.

which also goes along way to explain violence towards women by men who feel powerless over people they feel are less then them.imagine a good looking guy,strong...in love/lust with an attractive girl...but she goes with a guy that is obviosly his lesser appearance wise and strenght wise.but has the ability to provide security for her.
it is as old as time,the need for women to nest and create a safe enviro for there offspring...and that is accomplished by finding the most powerfull male available.
do i think it is right..no..but that is how it is..we just are more adept at masking it.

as an example(hollywood bs aside)you get an attractive female,then get 2 exactly alike men(personality,sensitivity,intell,and the feeling betwwen all that they are on the same page)then make 1 fat bald and ugly,the other a tom cruise look alike..who is the girl gonna pick,same goes in reverse.

it is patently obvious what is at work here.

men want sex and a "pretty mate"and women want a good looking provider..(provider first)call me a liar.

wow..way off topic...my take is the poor girl wanted her day in the spotlight with an exotic guy who obviously had some semblence of wealth,and she bit off more then she could chew..him being accustomed to getting what he wants..got angry..and the rest is sad.

anyhow..just an aside or a word of advice...to all the peacocks.be careful what you wish for.

i see girls here at the beach,in the bar,wearing thongs with a dime covering there nipples,only one reason for that attire(to attract the male species)and then get offended when the "wrong guy"looks at them..lol..but trust me..the guy they think is the right one will sometimes be the wrong one.they will wiggle and giggle to him till they get to the beach..and then mister right turns into mister wrong.

and obviously..i am not saying wearing provocative clothes is an invite to rape or worse,just saying...think...men are men most times..aside from the hippie cat ascared of women,men will take it as a signal..right or wrong.

also..i realise it is a double standard...why is that..that women are perceived as sluts or asking for it,and men are just being men?same as the old saying..i want a nun on the street and a freak in the sheets.women cant get away with that,but with guys,honest guys..they will all nod in agreement

i have no interest in reading this entire thread, as it is rather late at night, and i do not have the energy for this kind of vitriol. ryanania, or however one is to spell that, i just have this to say. that is one high fucking horse you're riding, friend. tallest i've seen in a dog's age. perhaps you should come down off of it, and join us in the real world. the world in which people hook up in bars, even in *gasp* foreign lands! in which young, stupid people make young stupid mistakes, usually ending in heartbreak and semen, rarely ending in blood and pain. one never assumes the latter. ever. your reaction disturbs me on a very fundamental level.

i have no interest in reading this entire thread, as it is rather late at night, and i do not have the energy for this kind of vitriol. ryanania, or however one is to spell that, i just have this to say. that is one high fucking horse you're riding, friend. tallest i've seen in a dog's age. perhaps you should come down off of it, and join us in the real world. the world in which people hook up in bars, even in *gasp* foreign lands! in which young, stupid people make young stupid mistakes, usually ending in heartbreak and semen, rarely ending in blood and pain. one never assumes the latter. ever. your reaction disturbs me on a very fundamental level.


She knew better than to get drunk and go off with three men whom she didn't even know well at all. And you know it as well.

granted, but are we really going to so visciously condemn her to rape and death for being too trusting, as seemed to be the point of the first page of this? perhaps he retracted some of what he said later, i don't know, but a lot of that shit rubbed me the wrong way.

granted, but are we really going to so visciously condemn her to rape and death for being too trusting, as seemed to be the point of the first page of this? perhaps he retracted some of what he said later, i don't know, but a lot of that shit rubbed me the wrong way.


We never said rape and murder was right, however she was, in part, responsible for allowing it to happen. The killer would have been much less likely to rape her if she were in the presence of friends and was sober.

It's Dutch.
Hey, it's on the list now. Give us time.

She knew better than to get drunk and go off with three men whom she didn't even know well at all. And you know it as well.
oh for gods sake, its not like she went off with some 45 year old ex-con. she left with a 17 year old dutch boy. im sure that even sober he would have seemed as safe as going with anyone at her highschool

a woman puts herself in danger EVERY TIME she is alone with a man. EVERY TIME. how does she know when she accepts a date with the cute boy on the debate team that he is not going to rape her as soon as they are alone?

she doesnt, there is no way to know. the most innocent and trustworthy seeming people can do some horrible things. a woman takes a calculated risk whenever she accepts a date with a man. as it turns out, the vast majority of men wouldnt ever rape a woman. so women feel free to accept dates with men who have a high likelihood of not being dangerous. like cute 17 year old boys living in aruba.

she didnt do a terrible thing. she did what millions of women do on any given weekend all over north america. she left the bar with a man she thought was safe. would it be MORE sensible if she had been in orlando at the time? or toronto?? does being in the carribean make it more wrong? i dont think so

something went terribly wrong. we dont know what yet. we dont know that these men were predators. we dont even know for sure that she is dead or that they are responsible for her disappearance.

until then, she is just an 18 year old who got mixed up in some bad circumstance.

Ahhh ok. Do you have children?



No. Now tell me how this is in any way relevant.

I have seen things in dorms that would make most parents cringe. You can talk about upbring, character and other crap like personal responsibility; however, until people are faced you never can tell what will be the result.

Ah yes, personal responsibility is "crap?"

I've seen things in dorms that would make most parents cringe too. Like rapists and date rapists taking advantage of those who, like yourself, believe personal responsibility is crap.


Nice slam against her parents BTW.

It is not a slam to say that upbringing is one thing (though of course not the only thing) that leads to the development of personal responsibility, or that the lack of the latter was a factor in this particular incident. Please quit trying to put words in my mouth.

Ahh because those of us that are parents now get to ignore most of what you say about child upbringing.

Until you have actually done it, your comments mean little.



Ad hominem, and ridiculous assertions. As I thought.



Sorry kiddo, "personal responsibility" is something most people have.

You sit in moral judgement and like judging others.

Wow! Blatant hypocracy as well. You get to dismiss everything I say because I don't have kids, but *I* am somehow the one who "likes judging others."

You're fucking hilarious. Wait, you do mean this as a joke, right? No one could possibly insert so much self-contradictory BS into one post and actually mean it.


They don't fit your code of morality, then they are either deficient or it's due to bad upbringing by their parents.

Morality has nothing to do with it. I guess you really haven't been reading anything I wrote.




You said it, I didn't.

Nice try. I did not "slam her parents." YOU said I did. Now you're just insisting that you know what I mean, better than I do - when you clearly don't.

You don't know how she was raised. You don't know what her parents taught her.

You operate from ignorance as you judge her and her parents.

Ahh well. Even the ignorant have a right to spout off.

Good day to you.

Oh, now I'm "ignorant" and "spouting off."

Way to add flame to flame to flame. I guess this signals the end of even the pretense of intelligent arguments from your end. Got anything further to say? Perhaps some reasoned discussion about my mother? How about a comparison of me to Hitler?

She knew better than to get drunk and go off with three men whom she didn't even know well at all. And you know it as well.


Sure sweety you just know everything. You know why she did it. Wow..

Good for you.

We never said rape and murder was right, however she was, in part, responsible for allowing it to happen. The killer would have been much less likely to rape her if she were in the presence of friends and was sober.
Sorry, but that's precisely what you're saying--that murder and rape is alright if you're drunk and horny and a knuckle-dragging male who can't control his sexual urges. I don't care how fucked up you are--rape and murder is not acceptable, period, end stop, and the victim bears absolutely no blame in this. The fact is that a woman, any woman, ought to be able to be in the company of any male or group of males without having to worry about whether or not she's going to be raped, because--and listen carefully here--men shouldn't be raping women.

How hard is that to understand?

Because that's the basic premise underlying all this "she should have been more careful" bullshit--that men should somehow have the right to rape a woman who isn't careful about where she goes or who she hangs out with. No--a woman shouldn't have to worry about being raped, and any man who plays that "she should have known" bullshit card ought to realize that they're defending rape. I don't--Natalee Holloway is a victim in all this, and bears absolutely no responsibility. The rapists and murderers bear all of it--every singly fucking iota of it.

Got anything further to say? Perhaps some reasoned discussion about my mother? How about a comparison of me to Hitler?

After thought:

Sorry kiddo but I never speak ill of anybodies mother.

Comparing you to Hitler? :rolleyes: Keep digging.

I know it's hard for you to understand but the facts are simple.

It's easy to judge about parenting. Very easy.

It's a whole different thing when you have to do it yourself.

Everybody has their own viewpoints before they have children, and manytimes those viewpoints change when they have to apply them.

Sorry but you haven't done it so your viewpoints are just talk. Nothing more.

One doesn't need direct personal experience in parenting to discuss the effects of parenting. Sorry, it doesn't fly.

By that same token, anyone cannot discuss politics unless they're a politician, women unless they're female, men unless they're male, abortion unless they've had an abortion, welfare unless they've been on welfare, Islam unless they're Muslims, God unless they're a prophet, the English language unless you're Merriam-Webster, economics unless they're a businessman, food unless they're a chef, news stories unless they're journalists, or dinosaurs unless they're 65,000,000 years old. ;)

But hey don't let me rip up one of your lovely ad hominems to SHREDS or anything.





You don't see me casting judgements about her and her parents upbringing of her.

You are judgemental. It's part of who you are are. It's ok. Everybody has their quirks.

Oh would you get the fuck off your fucking high horse. Thank you.

Please cite an example of me "casting judgement" anyway. And I'll cite an example of you doing the exact thing - this post, and your last post, and the one before that....

I am not the one talking about "personal responcibility" now am I. What responsibility is that? What do you define as being responsibile? What codes do you define as responsible? Hmmm? Codes? Moral code.

Call it what ever you want. Personal responsibility is just your way of saying morality.

*sigh*

You don't understand anything, and I'm not going to bother explaining since you're clearly more interested in being a condescending hypocrite.

And frankly, the fact that you (claim to) (apparently) had a child doesn't mean a damn thing in regards to any of my arguments - it's irrelevant. Period. Yes, I don't have a kid. No, that doesn't invalidate anything I've said. Period. No statement I've made is dependent on my having had kids to be true. Period.

I'm done with you, "kiddo." Unless you want to just degenerate this topic into a flame war. In which case I'm happy to oblige. Just let me and the mods know.

Because that's the basic premise underlying all this "she should have been more careful" bullshit--that men should somehow have the right to rape a woman who isn't careful about where she goes or who she hangs out with.

"she should have been more careful" is common sense.

It is NOT the same as "men should have the right to rape a woman who isn't careful."

Let's see if you can understand the concept of analogy.

A man is walking through a bad neighborhood. He's wearing expensive clothing and has an obvious, expensive gold watch. If we say about him, "he should be careful," is that the same thing as saying "people should have the right to rob or kill rich people?" No. It is a correct ascertaining of the risks of the real world and a recommendation for attempting to avoid the risks of the real world when possible.

That you should argue so vehemently against something like "being more careful" is perplexing.


No--a woman shouldn't have to worry about being raped, and any man who plays that "she should have known" bullshit card ought to realize that they're defending rape. I don't--Natalee Holloway is a victim in all this, and bears absolutely no responsibility. The rapists and murderers bear all of it--every singly fucking iota of it.

Absolutely no responsibility for her own actions? I suppose it was the rapist who made her drink. I suppose it was the rapist who made her accept to get in his car. No, I am not defending rape - surprise surprise that accusation comes out, as inevitably as Godwin's Law is invoked - and it is not defending rape to point out that the world is not as it "should be." Yes, women shouldn't have to worry about being raped. Also, people shouldn't have to die of dehydration. Is that an excuse for me to go hiking in the desert with no water? There's a big difference between how the world SHOULD BE and how it actually IS.

Natalee Holloway was acting purely on how the world SHOULD BE. Look where it landed her. Neo Rogolia and other women who don't do STUPID THINGS like she did, are cognizant of how the world actually IS. It is not DEFENDING RAPE to say that there exist rapists, and date rapists.

Actually it kind of does. You see something another parent does or some "silly" rule a parent has decreed and you say I would never do that.


Kind of? Well we're making progress. Kind of.

You're still implying direct knowledge is the only way to be able to legitimately discuss things. If anyone operated on that basis on this forum, there would be perhaps three threads. And they'd be boring threads, too.


Discussing politics is one thing. Having to define and apply laws is something else. Talk is easy. Having to do it is something else.

Luckily, I am arguing here, and not raising a child, so my skill at arguing is far more relevant than my skill at raising children. This IS talk.

And you know, the fact that you SAY you've raised a kid doesn't lend weight to your arguments any more than your ad hominems did. People can and do lie, especially about matters of 'personal experience' trumping that of others.



What have your shreded? Fact remains: You can talk about it all you want. Opinions change when you have to do it.

My opinion will not ever change.

Arguments like "your opinion/argument WOULD change if..." or "all knees shall bow to Jesus" do not really work. Saying "one day you'll believe in God" to an atheist does not work. It's not reasonable either, it's elitist assertion.


Actually I do. I have a girl.

And yes being a parent means a great deal more then talking about being a parent. Again, you have your viewpoints and I can tell you some if not many will change when/if you become one.

I am not talking about being a parent. I mentioned that upbringing is a factor. Are you, in your experience as a parent, saying that upbringing has no bearing on anything?

*snip*

That's ok. SB.

You go your way and I will go mine.

TTFN..

"she should have been more careful" is common sense.

It is NOT the same as "men should have the right to rape a woman who isn't careful."

Let's see if you can understand the concept of analogy.

A man is walking through a bad neighborhood. He's wearing expensive clothing and has an obvious, expensive gold watch. If we say about him, "he should be careful," is that the same thing as saying "people should have the right to rob or kill rich people?" No. It is a correct ascertaining of the risks of the real world and a recommendation for attempting to avoid the risks of the real world when possible.

That you should argue so vehemently against something like "being more careful" is perplexing.



Absolutely no responsibility for her own actions? I suppose it was the rapist who made her drink. I suppose it was the rapist who made her accept to get in his car. No, I am not defending rape - surprise surprise that accusation comes out, as inevitably as Godwin's Law is invoked - and it is not defending rape to point out that the world is not as it "should be." Yes, women shouldn't have to worry about being raped. Also, people shouldn't have to die of dehydration. Is that an excuse for me to go hiking in the desert with no water? There's a big difference between how the world SHOULD BE and how it actually IS.

Natalee Holloway was acting purely on how the world SHOULD BE. Look where it landed her. Neo Rogolia and other women who don't do STUPID THINGS like she did, are cognizant of how the world actually IS. It is not DEFENDING RAPE to say that there exist rapists, and date rapists.I understand the concept--what I also understand is that as long as men come up with the weak ass excuse that women need to be more careful about where they go, some men will continue to use that as an excuse for rape, epsecially date rape.

When you make statements that blame the victim, whether you mean to or not, you say that rape is acceptable behavior in some circumstances. It isn't--it never is, and it's insulting to those men among us who manage to go their entire lives as sexual beings without raping people to act as though it is.

I understand the concept--what I also understand is that as long as men come up with the weak ass excuse that women need to be more careful about where they go, some men will continue to use that as an excuse for rape, epsecially date rape.

When you make statements that blame the victim, whether you mean to or not, you say that rape is acceptable behavior in some circumstances. It isn't--it never is, and it's insulting to those men among us who manage to go their entire lives as sexual beings without raping people to act as though it is.
2 excellent posts, nazz.

when a young woman does something that is in fact not all that stupid or dangerous ... going off to smooch with a boy her own age... and is reviled as some kind of idiot for not knowing that disaster was waiting for her, it IS blaming the victim. a way of distancing ones self from the twists of fate that might kill any one of us.

SURE a woman could wear a burhka and only go out in the company of her male relatives. she could be banned from drinking in public. she could be allowed to date only those men approved and chaperoned by her father.

but then how would the disapproving boys on this forum ever get laid?

but then how would the disapproving boys on this forum ever get laid?

They probably don't. ;)

I understand the concept--what I also understand is that as long as men come up with the weak ass excuse that women need to be more careful about where they go, some men will continue to use that as an excuse for rape, epsecially date rape.

When you make statements that blame the victim, whether you mean to or not, you say that rape is acceptable behavior in some circumstances. It isn't--it never is, and it's insulting to those men among us who manage to go their entire lives as sexual beings without raping people to act as though it is.

Well said. You get a brownie! :)

Well said. You get a brownie! :)
Thanks--I could use a brownie. :D

I understand the concept--what I also understand is that as long as men come up with the weak ass excuse that women need to be more careful about where they go, some men will continue to use that as an excuse for rape, epsecially date rape.

When you make statements that blame the victim, whether you mean to or not, you say that rape is acceptable behavior in some circumstances. It isn't--it never is, and it's insulting to those men among us who manage to go their entire lives as sexual beings without raping people to act as though it is.

I don't believe that is blaming the victim. I believe the circumstances around a rape are irrelavent. I also believe that people can do things to protect themselves... lessen the possiblity lets say. That doesn't absolve ANY responsibility from the rapist, nor put any on the victim. It's like wearing a hardhat at a construction site... Just a precaustion.

Using an excuse like "she shouldn't have or should have done this or that" is a moot statement, and doesn't absolve or reduce the seriousness of the crime. It doesn't matter what she did. A rape is a rape.

Whether you take precautions or not, a rape is a rape even if the woman was walking down the street naked.

I have also heard something about one of the "daterape" drugs put into her drink. That's horrible. Men, no, BOYS who do this sort of thing, rape, use daterape drugs, etc. (I don't care how old they are, they aren't men) make me want to puke, and nothing makes me angrier than watching a defense attorney try to put blame on the victim. :mad: And the term "date rape" drug and "date rape" also infuriates me. A rape is a rape and is just as serious as if the rapist was her date or a stranger.

And never forget rape is a crime of VIOLENCE. Everyone seems to lose sight of that.

i still dont understand after reading 4 pages of this,that people still think certain people are blaming the victim and absolving the perp.

rapists and vultures are blamed for there behaviour,thats what courts and prisons are for.i havent read 1 post saying...woohoo...it wasn't your fault mister rapist..it was hers for getting drunk and going with you.

what has been stated repeatedly,not absolving the crimminal,is that if you put your self in that situation(drunk,leaving with strangers,making out in a car with a stranger or strangers,in a country that you are unfamiliar with)well golly gee.you just might have something bad happen to you.

put another way,scumbag rapist is lurking in bar,looking for a victim.
girl A.not drinking heavily,with friends,dressed somewhat normally.
girlB.drinking heavily,flirting with strangers,dressed like a tramp half naked.

i wonder who the scumbag oppurtunist rapist is going to target?

i know a rape is generally a crime of violence,not about sex.however,alot of rapes or sexual assaults are not committed by the"rapist" most think of(the guy who breaks nto a womens home and attacks her..ie.violence)but of some drunk guy who is horny and looking to get some.and that guy is thinking unclearly as well...should that absolve him of his behaviour?should he not be held responsible for his actions since he was drunk,or does that only apply to a girl bein drunk,and not resposible for her behaviour?
not trying to compare a girl drunk flirting,and a drunk guy raping her...not at all,just trying to show that each bear there own responsibilities for there actions.obviously,the drunk guy bears enormous amounts of respon. foe his actions and should be held accountable..legally and morally.
however,the girl does bear some fault for her behaviour.not to the extent of being raped obviously,but her actions certainly led to her problems.

i was in new orleans with my 17 year old daughter last year.we were in a bar drinking hurricanes with my brother and sister and some friends.
i warned my daughter(honor student)about drinking to many in the day,she ignored me of coarse and i wasn't paying too much attention.
she starts talkin to 2 guys and comes up to me and says..can i meet you at the hotel tonite,i'm gonna hang out with these guys.
after i got off the floor laughing,i said hell no!1 of the punks says,lighten up dude..it's cool.my brother comes over and says..walk away now partner or you will be visiting the hospital..so they leave,my girl is givin me the fuck you looks rite up until she starts yakking.i have to cut my time with family so i can take her to the hotel.
the next day she doesnt even remember what happened,doesnt believe me until my sister said yes ,thats what happenned.
moral of the story..if i hadnt been there...she more then likely would have been at the least raped.that town is dangerous,and teens have no clue what kind of asshats are out there.
they are just finding there sexuality and dress like they have exsperience,rightly or wrongly...alot of "men" take that like they want it and get them lubed up so they cant resist.

well she learned a valuable lesson that day i think...sad to imagine how many innocent girls wanting to show off there bodies and act mature and drink,learn the hard way.

again,not to absolve the sexual predator,but if i wasnt there,and my girl was hurt...i would hunt down said scum and kill them,and ALSO completely flip on my kid for being so stupid.of coarse i would console and help her deal with it,but i would feel she was partially responsible for what happenned,due to her stupid behaviour.
in a perfect world,girls could get drunk and walk around naked un molested,but last i checked..the world is far from perfect.

sorry for the novel,but this issue pisses me off to no end. :headbang:

First - if your daughter HAD gone with a stranger, and ended up having intercourse.... that wouldn't automatically be rape. She may well consent, and alcohol may help that.

Later regret doesn't change the fact of consent.

Second - You say you would 'flip on your kid for "being so stupid" if she got hurt'. Exactly the same value judgement we saw earlier... that the 'reason' for the 'getting hurt' is the 'stupidity' of the victim.

I understand the concept--what I also understand is that as long as men come up with the weak ass excuse that women need to be more careful about where they go, some men will continue to use that as an excuse for rape, epsecially date rape.

Oh come ON. That's not an EXCUSE. It's a GOOD RECOMMENDATION given the circumstances of the real world we live in. A world where there are rapists. The fact that there are rapists is not caused by me or my excuses - I like the attempt at blame though.

When you make statements that blame the victim,

I haven't BLAMED THE VICTIM.

Period.

you say that rape is acceptable behavior in some circumstances.

I IN NO FUCKING WAY SAID THAT.

Get it yet? YOU are saying that. Nowhere have I said or implied acceptability. I have implied that this is a world where there are *gasp* rapists. It's REALITY.

It isn't--it never is, and it's insulting to those men among us who manage to go their entire lives as sexual beings without raping people to act as though it is.

Strawman, since although you'd like me to be a pro-rapist supporter of man's right to rape women, I'm not. You are insulting my intelligence with these idiotic and not very well veiled attempts to win your argument by claiming I'm somehow for rape or that I think it's acceptable.

And really, do you think rapists go to www.nationstates.net, read through my posts, interpret them as saying "rape is OK," and then go out and rape someone thinking "aha, Santa Barbara said rape is OK!"??? Give me a fucking BREAK.

Of course. But since we are also agreeing that experience, not just age, is a factor, her age is not enough to justify or excuse her poor decision making. Furthermore one doesn't need age or experience to recognize some things as bad ideas - one can always learn from others experiences, or so-called book knowledge.


You said that 'reason' indicated nothing... hence this comment. 'Reason' does indeed suggest that she would not be able to make as good a judgement, a fact which I think you are agreeing with... whilst simultaneously trying to make your point about it NOT JUST being about age.


Very well. Then what was your point in bringing up the whole 'young people have immature brains' argument, exactly?


The fact that science implies (whether you like to admit it, or not) that perhaps the lady in question was less 'stupid' than she is being painted... and more a product of her adolescent lack of judgement.

Which is sufficient reason, perhaps, for some of those on the forum to be a little less judgemental.


Your sources are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, because it is my assertion that *I* was physically capable of making reasoned decisions at her age, and therefore she should be as well. Your sources do nothing to contradict my own experience, and they don't show her as physically incapable of making reasonable decisions and more than they convince me I was similarly incapable.


You, one assumes, are not the subject of the debate.

Thus, your 'experiences' are irrelevent.

On the other hand, a scientific study that might explain WHY the situation in question COULD arise, is entirely relevent...


..and there is a reason one observes dumb behavior in adults as well. Neither of these generalizations helps here, and as she is was in fact a legal adult in the USA, I see no reason to treat her as otherwise here.


Some 'dumb' behaviour in adults is, I will agree, almost certain to be caused by brain structure.

But, I get the feeling that isn't what you were trying to say.

Her legal 'status' does not determine her physical functionality.... I'm sure you know this.


I think you are doing the same in light of how little weight these sources have with me. Of course, you may be arguing for an audience, in which case the sources will score bigger.


I see that mere 'facts' are not going to get in the way of your robust opinion.


I left 'em. As for ridicule... that can't be helped, you see ... it's the fault of my brain's condition and not my free will or reason. :)


Okay.


I've brought my own experience for one, and you won't easily convince me that I am wrong with some online medical sources. Perhaps others, but I believe in personal responsibility first. I've known plenty of young women who don't and wouldn't put themselves into her position. What do your sources say of them? Why is it this particular woman acted quite unreasonably when so many others do not? It is my assertation that there is a difference in character and upbringing here, not brain function, which is most relevant.

Your experience is irrelevent. You are not 'her'.

Your assertions of what is 'reasonable' are subjective, and thus, also not relevent.

She knew better than to get drunk and go off with three men whom she didn't even know well at all. And you know it as well.
Is this 'Neo Rogolia the Telepath' speaking?

The fact that science implies (whether you like to admit it, or not) that perhaps the lady in question was less 'stupid' than she is being painted... and more a product of her adolescent lack of judgement.

Hmm, since the source I read was concerning the brains of children much younger than this young woman, I concluded it was irrelevant. Maybe I should have read the other sources as well but why bother? If you cite one irrelevant source you're likely to cite practically anything, as long as you can try to beat me over the head with appeals to authority of the 'science agrees with me' sort. Science made no studies about Natalee Holloway did they.


You, one assumes, are not the subject of the debate.

Thus, your 'experiences' are irrelevent.

On the other hand, a scientific study that might explain WHY the situation in question COULD arise, is entirely relevent...

Who says only scientific studies are relevant? You? Too bad, my experiences are damn relevant to me and they MIGHT explain why not everyone her age gets into cars with strangers.

I'll consider ignoring it if you concede your scientific studies about 12 year olds are also irrelevant.

Sometimes poor judgement is just poor judgement, not the result of "being too young." I don't believe in blaming poor judgement on overwhelming external forces like 'age.'

Some 'dumb' behaviour in adults is, I will agree, almost certain to be caused by brain structure.

But, I get the feeling that isn't what you were trying to say.

Her legal 'status' does not determine her physical functionality.... I'm sure you know this.

No, but her legal status is supposed to reflect her functionality - of which decision making is hardly something one can attribute to pure physicality. If as you seem to be implying, she isn't to be held responsible for her own actions, she should be excused of being expected to be able to vote or drive cars and other things. It follows from the concept of not being able to make decisions.

The truth is she WAS able to make decisions, as is anyone that age, and she didn't happen to make the right one.

Now watch, they're going to call me a rapist again for that...


Your assertions of what is 'reasonable' are subjective, and thus, also not relevent.

Everything is subjective, and thus irrelevant!

You don't get anywhere by saying to the person whose opinion you are attacking, your experiences are irrelevant to your opinion. So... fine. It's irrelevant to you, then don't bother replying.

Is this 'Neo Rogolia the Telepath' speaking?


I live near her and am well aware of her parent's method of upbringing. So, wouldn't it be safe to say that, yes, I know what I'm talking about?

Hmm, since the source I read was concerning the brains of children much younger than this young woman, I concluded it was irrelevant. Maybe I should have read the other sources as well but why bother? If you cite one irrelevant source you're likely to cite practically anything, as long as you can try to beat me over the head with appeals to authority of the 'science agrees with me' sort. Science made no studies about Natalee Holloway did they.


I just presented the first two sources I found that discussed the specific issue of teenage brain development, in the specific context.

I had not realised you would opt to only review one of them, or that you would assume that the situation was limited to a one-year age band.

What you are missing is that your experience is ONLY pertinent to you, whereas my sources show a situation that happens to an extent in every human brain.

So - if ONE of those two 'factors' is going to be extrapolated onto Natalee's behaviour, the 'science answer' is much more likely to be relevent.


Who says only scientific studies are relevant? You? Too bad, my experiences are damn relevant to me and they MIGHT explain why not everyone her age gets into cars with strangers.

I'll consider ignoring it if you concede your scientific studies about 12 year olds are also irrelevant.

Sometimes poor judgement is just poor judgement, not the result of "being too young." I don't believe in blaming poor judgement on overwhelming external forces like 'age.'


Your experiences might explain why YOU would not get into a car with someone, but what has that to do with person x in Aruba?

You must concede that not everyone has the same experiences, and not everyone will (or can) make the same conclusions even when they SHARE experiences.

This is magnified in the teenage brain, for the reasons cited.

I am not 'blaming' poor judgement on age... I am saying there are other factors at work - and it isn't as cut-and-dried as you seemingly wish it were.


No, but her legal status is supposed to reflect her functionality - of which decision making is hardly something one can attribute to pure physicality. If as you seem to be implying, she isn't to be held responsible for her own actions, she should be excused of being expected to be able to vote or drive cars and other things. It follows from the concept of not being able to make decisions.

The truth is she WAS able to make decisions, as is anyone that age, and she didn't happen to make the right one.

Now watch, they're going to call me a rapist again for that...


Decision making isn't PURE physicality, but neither is 'television' PURE screen. And yet, if the screen is faulty, the 'television' is impaired, no?

I agree with you about how 'arbitrary' voting and driving seem to be.

She WAS able to make her own decisions... there is no debate over that. But her ability to make those decisions has a lag-factor, in the 'teenage brain'.

Once again, you seem to be somehow shifting the focus from what may have happened to Natalee, to how it was her fault.


Everything is subjective, and thus irrelevant!

You don't get anywhere by saying to the person whose opinion you are attacking, your experiences are irrelevant to your opinion. So... fine. It's irrelevant to you, then don't bother replying.

Your experience is totally relevent to your opinion.

Just do not presume that it has any relevence to ANOTHER person. I assume you are not 'Natalee'... thus, YOUR 'experiences' have no bearing on HER situation.

I live near her and am well aware of her parent's method of upbringing. So, wouldn't it be safe to say that, yes, I know what I'm talking about?

No. Not safe to make any such assumption.

For several reasons. One: You claimed to know what both Natalee AND the other poster 'know'. You are not claiming to know both of them, are you?

Two: I have no reason to believe you have any proximity to Natalee, at all...

Three: Even if you lived in the same street... that would have no bearing on whether or not you could say with assurance you 'knew she knew better'.

Four: What do you think you know about her upbringing? And how would you prove your opinion to be true?

I could go on....

Excellent posts, Nazz and Ashmoria. Black Forest, not a slouch yourself.

Sure the girl was engaging in risky behavior. Any teenager not brought up in a convent does. Teens and up until the thirties do this a lot. No one with sense thinks that young people have the same level of wisdom and maturity as the same person at middle-age. Sure, at 19 she's more mature and responsible than most 12 year olds. But it's a gradual thing. Judgement is not magically bestowed at the age of 18.

Young people take a lot more risks. Part of it is their failure to truly realize their own vunerability. Another is their need for excitement and stimulation. And their overestimation of their ability to take care of themselves.

So you never did something that risky? Tell me where this official risk assessment guide is and we can pass it out at high schools and colleges.
Did you ever sneak out at night?
Did you ever drive too fast?
Did you ever get drunk?
Pick a fight with another group of kids?

You didn't get killed? Well, lucky you.
Fortunately, I got away with most of my risky behavior. Most of us do.
Were you perfect, never taking any of these risks? Then you're not invited to my party. You're a boring prig.

Sure the girl was engaging in risky behavior.

I'm glad at least someone agrees with me.

I'm glad at least someone agrees with me.
I doubt many people disagree that it was risky. They just don't think most teens would see it as unreasonably risky when they were out partying.
I don't think it makes her blameworthy. Just one of those unfortunate enough to have relatively normal youthful behavior catch up to her.

Yeah, damn furrigners, thems all criminals. :rolleyes:
I hitchhiked trough parts of Europe, getting into cars with strangers in foreign countries all the time. I dont think that was stupid, because i dont assume the inhabitants of other countries to be more likely having criminal intent than those of mine. And guess what, if you are open and not paranoid about those alien creatures from abroad, you might recognise them as human beings not very different from you and your neighbours.
Pray tell me where the difference is between going with strangers in your country and doing the same overseas?

It's not that foreigners are bad, it's the fact that being in a foreign country makes it more difficult to get police help, especially if you don't speak the language. Plus, hitchhiking is illegal is many places, and the fact that you're in a foreign country makes it even more difficult.

Since people are trying to carry this thread on in other threads, I'm going to ressurect it.

Saying that I have no sympathy for her is not the same as saying that she deserved to get raped. For those of you who are slow, I'll put this in bold: I DO NOT THINK SHE DESERVED TO GET RAPED. NO ONE DOES. Saying that I have no sympathy for her is the same as saying I have no sympathy for someone who throws a rock at a beehive and gets swarmed by bees. Here's an example:

1. *man walks into the middle of a pride of lions, then trys to ride the alpha male*

2. *man gets mauled to death and then eaten*

Now he wasn't very smart, was he? In fact, you might even say that he brought it on himself.

Since people are trying to carry this thread on in other threads, I'm going to ressurect it.

Saying that I have no sympathy for her is not the same as saying that she deserved to get raped. For those of you who are slow, I'll put this in bold: I DO NOT THINK SHE DESERVED TO GET RAPED. NO ONE DOES. Saying that I have no sympathy for her is the same as saying I have no sympathy for someone who throws a rock at a beehive and gets swarmed by bees. Here's an example:

1. *man walks into the middle of a pride of lions, then trys to ride the alpha male*

2. *man gets mauled to death and then eaten*

Now he wasn't very smart, was he? In fact, you might even say that he brought it on himself.


Ha ha, you totally suck dude. You tell me not to be sarcastic, then you call a poor girl who was probably raped and murdered a whore. You totally suck! Ha ha ha!

Ha ha, you totally suck dude. You tell me not to be sarcastic, then you call a poor girl who was probably raped and murdered a whore. You totally suck! Ha ha ha!
so because she was raped and murdered means she wasnt a whore anyway?

Your experience is irrelevent. You are not 'her'.I am not her...but I can still think she was a horny white girl looking to have action with the locals...a whore disregarding her own security..

In my opinion she deserves much less sympathy than most raped women.

Ihatevacations']so because she was raped and murdered means she wasnt a whore anyway?Don't bother arguing with him. He's just a troll, as is made evident by the fact that instead of responding to my post, he just said "Haha, you suck!!!1"

Don't bother arguing with him. He's just a troll, as is made evident by the fact that instead of responding to my post, he just said "Haha, you suck!!!1"

Yeah, you are right, Ryanania. I was very rude to have said those mean things did. I thought about it last night as I was trying to sleep, and decided that I needed to apologize to you for my childish and very immature behavior. I am sorry for being an asshole to you and saying those things. I can either leave them up so people can see how rude I was, or delete them if you don't want them up. Just let me know.

Ihatevacations']so because she was raped and murdered means she wasnt a whore anyway?

I have no idea. But neither does anyone else, so why call her one? It is irrelevant anyway.

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?

So she probably got raped and killed as a result of her stupidity.

It's tragic when innocent people die, but I can't make myself feel sorry for those who bring it upon themselves through sheer foolishness.

I'm not going to read through this whole thread, so if I'm repeating another poster, please pardon me. First of all, Aruba is famous for being safe. Joran van der Sloot, the most likely suspect, is from a well known and respected family in Aruba. Reports from other teens who know him is that he is arrogant and a lady's man, but basically a good kid. Supposedly, he is pretty popular among his peers. In Natalee's defense...she is from a small affluent suburb of Birmingham, Alabama. Unlike most other areas, in the south it is common for people to be open and friendly with complete strangers. We are noted for our hospitality and outgoing personalities. We also tend to have a trusting nature and accept people as they appear to be until they prove they are otherwise. It would have been quite natural for Natalee to have become involved in a vacation romance with someone of similar age and social/economic status. It's not like she picked up a beach bum...but connected with a popular local kid.

My best guess...Joran probably tried a date rape drug and, combined with the alcohol in her system, Natalee's heart stopped. Not an intended murder, but the sad results of a stupid stunt.

Ryanania,

By your antagonistic tone, I can see that you're trying to get an outraged response. If you don't feel sorry about it, and yet don't feel all that good about it, then why the use of rough language when talking about her? Why not just have no comment? Obviously you have some sort of interest in the case.

Sure the young woman probably made a mistak. You have done something just as stupid (riding a motorcycle without a helmet, bunjee jumping, unprotected sex,) it's just that you've gotten away with it.

You might have no respect for the living, but have a little for the dead.

besides, in a month or so, all the morbid jokes will be old. Be ahead of the curve.

Natalee met Joran and they were attracted to each other. After a couple of days of flirting, Joran wanted to have sex, but Natalee didn't. Keep in mind, Natalee came from a small town, excellent student, and had a full scholarship with medicine as her intended major. This indicates a young lady that pursued her priorities rather than spend her time "whoring" around. She was also popular and well thought of in her school as opposed to being regarded as a "slut". Joran took Natalee to the beach but they had differing ideas on exactly what "romance" included. He might have come prepared with a dose of a date rape drug. Chances are she wouldn't remember anything and he would be able to maintain his self-image of a stud. The drug mixed poorly with the alcohol Natalee had drunk and her heart stopped. From there it is unknown how, who, or what was done with Natalee, except to assume her body was disposed of by Joran and 1 or more of his friends.

IMO, Joran's family's reaction to the search for Natalee is indicative of an effort to protect their son no matter the suffering of others. If someone had a missing child in our area, and especially if a loved one was suspected of involvement in that disappearance, we would offer our support and assistance in the search for their child. Instead, the van der Sloots ignored Natalee's family and the island-wide search. Though, to their credit, the van der Sloots did graciously invite Natalee's mother into their home and talked with her when she appeared at their house with Gretta van Sustern. Perhaps their withdrawing is a natural reaction to worry about their son. Either way, both kids were probably spoiled, Joran didn't like to be told "no" and tried to force his will on Natalee without understanding that it could be fatal to her.

All of this is just supposition on my part based on my limited knowledge. I really don't think either of the kids were "bad", but through ignorance, more than one life will be ruined.

By your antagonistic tone, I can see that you're trying to get an outraged response. If you don't feel sorry about it, and yet don't feel all that good about it, then why the use of rough language when talking about her? Why not just have no comment? Obviously you have some sort of interest in the case.

Sure the young woman probably made a mistak. You have done something just as stupid (riding a motorcycle without a helmet, bunjee jumping, unprotected sex,) it's just that you've gotten away with it.

You might have no respect for the living, but have a little for the dead.

besides, in a month or so, all the morbid jokes will be old. Be ahead of the curve.

Oh lord...you weren't responding to me were you? I certainly didn't intend to portray an antagonistic tone!! Rough language...no...not me.

My apologies. Sloppy on my part. The lapse has been corrected.

My apologies. Sloppy on my part. The lapse has been corrected.

whew!! I was about ready to go take another hormone pill.

i agree with you zooke

ms holloway did nothing out of the ordinary. nothing inherently more dangerous than any other date that any woman around the world goes on. i dont think that it was reasonable for her to assume that a nice 17 year old boy would be a rapist/murderer. (if that is what happened). its extremely rare for a 17 year old to be a predatory sex offender.

shes a pretty, popular girl. im sure she has had to fight off over eager boys in her time. an 18 year old isnt necessary worried about date rape drugs and almost certainly isnt worried that she might end up DEAD. she is worried, maybe, that he refusal will cause him to drop her. she might be worried that she'll go too far. she isnt worried that he is going to kill her and drop her body into the carribean. its not reasonable to expect that she would be.

i agree with you zooke

ms holloway did nothing out of the ordinary. nothing inherently more dangerous than any other date that any woman around the world goes on. i dont think that it was reasonable for her to assume that a nice 17 year old boy would be a rapist/murderer. (if that is what happened). its extremely rare for a 17 year old to be a predatory sex offender.

shes a pretty, popular girl. im sure she has had to fight off over eager boys in her time. an 18 year old isnt necessary worried about date rape drugs and almost certainly isnt worried that she might end up DEAD. she is worried, maybe, that he refusal will cause him to drop her. she might be worried that she'll go too far. she isnt worried that he is going to kill her and drop her body into the carribean. its not reasonable to expect that she would be.

Exactly. It is no different than any date with a new person in your life. The possibility of a threat is always there. I wouldn't have allowed one of my kids to travel to Aruba on a class trip without my being along. The best kid, out in the world on vacation alone for the first time, can make some mistakes they normally would never have considered. Add to that the romantic island setting, a tall, good looking foreign guy, and I would be more surprised if a romance didn't blossom.

Has anyone mentioned the possibility that she was neither raped, nor murdered and that this kid may be telling the truth?

So far she is only disappeared and there is no evidence of foulplay.

Has anyone mentioned the possibility that she was neither raped, nor murdered and that this kid may be telling the truth?

So far she is only disappeared and there is no evidence of foulplay.
thats why i wrote of her in the present tense. its still possible that she may have run up against a different kind of trouble and still be alive in venezuela

Tragedy always results from someone's stupidity. It's not as if these situations have never happened before; I have absolutely no idea what Holloway was thinking, and no idea how such an intelligent girl could make such a silly decision.
Makes me think more than twice about the quality of public education in America.


EDIT: I should also note that this is exactly the type of society many 18 year olds wish for. Absolute freedom to have as much sex and booze as possible, with minimal interference by adults, preferably in a strange and exotic place.
Then they wonder why incidents like this occur. :rolleyes:

Since people are trying to carry this thread on in other threads, I'm going to ressurect it.

Saying that I have no sympathy for her is not the same as saying that she deserved to get raped. For those of you who are slow, I'll put this in bold: I DO NOT THINK SHE DESERVED TO GET RAPED. NO ONE DOES. Saying that I have no sympathy for her is the same as saying I have no sympathy for someone who throws a rock at a beehive and gets swarmed by bees. Here's an example:

1. *man walks into the middle of a pride of lions, then trys to ride the alpha male*

2. *man gets mauled to death and then eaten*

Now he wasn't very smart, was he? In fact, you might even say that he brought it on himself.

Curious - in your beehive, and lion-rider allegories... you seem to be implying that the lion-rider and the stone-thrower are getting what they deserved...

The other curious thing, of course, is that your allegories both feature 'violence' perpetrated by mere beasts with no capacity to 'know better'.... so, incapable of being responsible for their own actions.

My argument is, I think, vindicated.... you parallel the rapist with the beast incapable of restraint. Thus, your allegorical rapists truly are NOT responsible for their actions... and you really ARE placing all blame on the victims.

I am not her...but I can still think she was a horny white girl looking to have action with the locals...a whore disregarding her own security..

In my opinion she deserves much less sympathy than most raped women.

So 'horny' is bad? 'White' is bad? 'Girl' is bad? Curious that you chose to mention 'white' as part of your character assassination... and possibly very telling that you equate 'horny' with 'whore'.

You can THINK all of that, and you might be right about some of the details (I'm pretty sure that we are discussing a 'girl', for example). But the rest of it... the mudslinging attacks on morality, and the judgemental attitude... are (fortunately) entirely a matter of your opinion.

Tragedy always results from someone's stupidity. It's not as if these situations have never happened before; I have absolutely no idea what Holloway was thinking, and no idea how such an intelligent girl could make such a silly decision.
Makes me think more than twice about the quality of public education in America.


EDIT: I should also note that this is exactly the type of society many 18 year olds wish for. Absolute freedom to have as much sex and booze as possible, with minimal interference by adults, preferably in a strange and exotic place.
Then they wonder why incidents like this occur. :rolleyes:
you mean you have NEVER gone to a more private place to smooch with a boy or girl who you dont know very well?

thats all she did.

I haven't seen this thread in a while. Has there been some recent news?

What's the first thing we learn from all our favourite cartoon characters and TV show friends and parents and grandparents and teachers?

DON'T get into a car with a stranger!

Compound that with being drunk and in a strange country.

Of course it's the perpetrators' fault, but this girl obviously wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. I don't think it's appropriate to blame her, but it's also much, much harder to sympathise for her as much as, say, someone who was shot up at their workplace or even someone who was sober and was abducted by a family member.

This girl did something very, very stupid.

This girl did something very, very stupid.

I am assuming that you were not actually 'there'... am I right?

So, how can you know for sure what the circustances were?

Did she do something 'stupid' if she had been slipped a date-rape drug?

I am assuming that you were not actually 'there'... am I right?

So, how can you know for sure what the circustances were?

Did she do something 'stupid' if she had been slipped a date-rape drug?

If evidence surfaces that she had been drugged, I will retract my statement. Right now I'm dealing with what is presented. A girl gets drunk and gets into a strange car with a stranger.

If evidence surfaces that she had been drugged, I will retract my statement. Right now I'm dealing with what is presented. A girl gets drunk and gets into a strange car with a stranger.

So - you honestly think it a logical and valid philosophical platform, to argue from ignorance?

You have made your decision, based entirely on assumption.

So - you honestly think it a logical and valid philosophical platform, to argue from ignorance?

You have made your decision, based entirely on assumption.

What is the other option? To assume that she was drugged? We are all working on assumptions here. Thinking better of someone or thinking worse of that same someone doesn't really matter at all. A person who has zero bearing on my life or the life of anyone I know is in a bad position now, possibly due to her own ignorance and/or the nefarious designs of others. Why sympathy should come into play is beyond me.

I may be discrediting this young woman, but it's just the other side of the coin for all those people who are propping her up as some kind of martyr.

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?Maybe not a good idea, but reason to get killed? I always feel sympathy for rape victims, thank you. Are you in any way implying that she "asked for it"? We should not have to live our lives in fear. We should be able to have fun with a stranger on vacation without consequence. If you feel no sympathy for her, it is not because she was stupid, but because you have no soul.
Hoser.

What is the other option? To assume that she was drugged? We are all working on assumptions here. Thinking better of someone or thinking worse of that same someone doesn't really matter at all. A person who has zero bearing on my life or the life of anyone I know is in a bad position now, possibly due to her own ignorance and/or the nefarious designs of others. Why sympathy should come into play is beyond me.

I may be discrediting this young woman, but it's just the other side of the coin for all those people who are propping her up as some kind of martyr.

I don't think anyone has claimed mayrtyrdom for the girl in question. Many have stated that it is inappropriate and insensitive to claim that she somehow 'deserved' to get raped and/or killed. Some have argued that we lack enough information to even be sure what happened, let alone draw conclusions.

Others have argued that her actions (if they are described accurately) not jibing with some of the poster's personal morality, are NOT sufficient grounds to call her 'stupid' or a 'whore'. Some might argue she was unfortunate... but, again, we don't even know THAT, for sure, since we STILL don't know what the ultimate result was.

She was an idiot. I say "was" because it's safe to assume that she's dead. She was last seen in the back seat of a car, making out with some Aruban.

Since when has getting into a car with a stranger in a foreign country been a good idea?

So she probably got raped and killed as a result of her stupidity.

It's tragic when innocent people die, but I can't make myself feel sorry for those who bring it upon themselves through sheer foolishness.
You're a fucking moron. Hva you been living in a shell your whole life? Not allowed to talk to strangers? If a girl you liked offered to drive you to the beach or hotel or whatever would you turn them down?

What's the first thing we learn from all our favourite cartoon characters and TV show friends and parents and grandparents and teachers?

DON'T get into a car with a stranger!

Compound that with being drunk and in a strange country.

Of course it's the perpetrators' fault, but this girl obviously wasn't the sharpest knife in the drawer. I don't think it's appropriate to blame her, but it's also much, much harder to sympathise for her as much as, say, someone who was shot up at their workplace or even someone who was sober and was abducted by a family member.

This girl did something very, very stupid.

The boy wasn't a stranger as they had been seeing each other throughout her vacation in the company of her classmates. I view her leaving with him on a par with a first date with someone you have recently met and hit it off with. If we only dated people we knew well and for an extended period of time we would have a lot of kids with 6 toes.

Also consider that Aruba has a small population and this boy was well known and liked among his peers...the local kids that Natalee and her classmates had been associating with on the trip.

you mean you have NEVER gone to a more private place to smooch with a boy or girl who you dont know very well?

thats all she did.

Nope. I think with my real head, not the one with no logic in my pants. Especially when dealing with strange people.

Look at it this way: a young woman in a short skirt on vacation gets drunk and then climbs into a car with a stranger whose clothes are bloody and who is carrying a chainsaw.

"It shouldn't matter what she was wearing or how drunk she was, the blood-drenched man with the chainsaw had NO RIGHT to rape and kill her!"

How silly does that sound?

Look at it this way: a young woman in a short skirt on vacation gets drunk and then climbs into a car with a stranger whose clothes are bloody and who is carrying a chainsaw.

"It shouldn't matter what she was wearing or how drunk she was, the blood-drenched man with the chainsaw had NO RIGHT to rape and kill her!"

How silly does that sound?
interesting example

what does it have to do with natalee holloway?

.... are (fortunately) entirely a matter of your opinion.
A girl loking to have sex with a few guys she just met...

is that a whore?

what would be your definition?

Or perhaps being a sex slave has been the best thing ever for Natalee. She'll get what she craves, 24/7. ;)

interesting example

what does it have to do with natalee holloway?

It has to do with the arguments that say she should bear no responsibility for the stupidity of her actions or their consequences. It shouldn't have happened to her. She also shouldn't have put herself into the situation. I don't know how this particular set of events unfolded, I am talking about the general idea that one may never question the actions of the victim, that somehow anything they did was a-okay and we are trying to "blame the victim" if we say "ahem, excuse me, what was she doing climbing into a car with a stranger?". By making the stranger in the car a more obvious threat, you bring to light the foolishness of the argument that ALL RESPONSIBILITY rests with someone else, in all cases.

going with totally strangers is always bad idea, be it 100 or 10000 km from your home. espaically for young women, and this is by the stats.
I don't blame persons that do it, as I don't blame those who bet on their lives or take drugs. I just think that sometimes you had to realize that your acts had some risks or bad consquences. still, I am sorry for those who made fatal mistakes without thought (if they don't harm others by that).

btw, I didn't heard about this case, so I had no opinion about it.

By the stats? In what country? In America, you are more likely to be victimized by someone you know by a considerable margin.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict_c.htm

The per capita murder rate in Washington DC is 66X that of Aruba.

To those that have accused the victim: This girl could have been more careful, obviously, but this was NOT her fault. Faulting the victim is sick. I don't care if she took money to make a movie with these boys or she said she would have sex for crack or they gave her rufies and dragged to the car. None of that matters. They were criminals and she was the VICTIM. Those of you dancing on her grave and calling her names and suggesting she's a fault are deplorable. You should be ashamed.

Side note: You all make a lot of assumptions. I have left a party with someone I had just met with no intention to have sex or even engage in sexual activities. Because she left with those boys does not mean she intended to have sex with them, and as she can't tell her side of the story, I'm not going to speculate on her activities or her moral fiber.

The point is that none of this would have happened if

A. She hadn't gotten into a car with a bunch of strange men
B. Those strange men hadn't either
1b. Killed her
2b. Sold her into slavery

I rest my case.

I don't have any sympathy for the girl for a couple reasons.

1. Her mom has shown enough sympathy on national television (she even trumped the damn G8 coverage on FOX).

2. The National media has shown enough sympathy for the girl.

3. The Dutch Marines are looking for the girl...even though they couldn't go look for Osama...

Oh come ON. That's not an EXCUSE. It's a GOOD RECOMMENDATION given the circumstances of the real world we live in. A world where there are rapists. The fact that there are rapists is not caused by me or my excuses - I like the attempt at blame though.
You make the recommendation of avoiding strangers to avoid rape. You do realize that this would not stop the majority of rape. I posted the statistics above. Women are much more likely to be vicimized by people they know. She was a victim of a crime. That is all that needs to be said.

The point is that none of this would have happened if

A. She hadn't gotten into a car with a bunch of strange men
B. Those strange men hadn't either
1b. Killed her
2b. Sold her into slavery

I rest my case.

A. They weren't strangers. She'd known them for a week. She'd met their friends and families. They were well-known on a fairly tiny and extremely safe island. It happens dozens of times every day in the US and other countries are these woman are more likely to die in a car wreck than become the victim of a crime.

B. You don't know that she wasn't drugged prior to ever leaving with those young men.

C. The only person responsible for a crime is the perpetrator and those that assisted them. This woman is in no way responsible. Nothing would have happened if whoever victimized her hadn't victimized her. That's all there is to it.

Your case is weak, based on assumption and an incredible lack of understanding of the nature of crime.

By the same logic that the victim is in NO WAY responsible for whatever it is that happened, America should not worry about illegal immigrants crossing into the country, because if any terrorism happens, it's not America's fault.

I live near her and am well aware of her parent's method of upbringing. So, wouldn't it be safe to say that, yes, I know what I'm talking about?

You know her parents? I lived near Jesse Ventura when he was Governor, but I'd be presumptuous and full of crap if I suggested I know what goes on in his home.

By the same logic that the victim is in NO WAY responsible for whatever it is that happened, America should not worry about illegal immigrants crossing into the country, because if any terrorism happens, it's not America's fault.
Your logic is sadly lacking. America worries about illegal immigrants for other reasons.

America takes precautions to prevent terrorism. In the end though, much like violence on a young woman, care does not prevent victimization.

More importantly, you know little or nothing about how much care this young woman took, because you weren't there and the only ones who know the story are fairly likely to be the criminals.

Your logic is sadly lacking. America worries about illegal immigrants for other reasons.

America takes precautions to prevent terrorism. In the end though, much like violence on a young woman, care does not prevent victimization.

More importantly, you know little or nothing about how much care this young woman took, because you weren't there and the only ones who know the story are fairly likely to be the criminals.
I know (because fucking CNN and Fox won't put real news on my TV) that she got in the car with 3 guys (and no one that she knew REALLY well) at 1 AM, and refused to follow the advice of all her friends that where at the place they were leaving, and get at the car, and go back to the hotel with them. Seems pretty dipshitty to abandon anyone that you know even moderately well to go hang out with 3 strangers (even if she'd known them since the first day she arrived on the island...if she had that much trust in them, she's a dipshit).

Seriously.

I don't know what exactly did happen to here after the last time anyone HONEST saw her, but still, her actions are pretty dipshitty.

Or maybe you think the rape rate is the exact same for drunk attractive women as it is for sober ugly men? Of COURSE you should model your behavior based on your own self and that little thing you seem to be ignoring called REALITY.

Reality, huh? The reality that she's more likely to be victimized by someone who's not a stranger?

Now this reality you're describing, can you actually show evidence for it? Can you show that being attractive has anything to do with rape? I'll concede that women are more often the victim, but I'll not offer the same concession that attractiveness has anything to with it.

As has been pointed out many times, many of us get into situations where we are alone with people we know less than this woman knew these men. The fact that she was alone with them DOES NOT make her at fault.

Attractiveness has less to do with it then oportunity probably. The most attractive women in the world do not have much to fear if they do not create opportunities for a rapist to assault them.

You can't say that this would have still happened had she followed her friends' advice and NOT gone with the entourage of strangers...so obviously, while the boys (assuming they did it) are guilty of whatever happened, you can't say they'd still be guilty if she did not put herself in that opportunity.

And by the way, just because lots of other people put themselves in that position and nothing bad happens doesn't mean that people should expect to be completely safe in the presence of strangers they know nothing about. It simply means that not everyone is an evil opportunist...

Ryanania its called Liberalism deal with it!

If you have unprotected sex with a stranger and contract an STD, does the fault lie entirely on the stranger because s/he did not insist on using protection nor inform you that s/he had an STD?

Or can you be partially to blame too, for not insisting that protection be used?

I know (because fucking CNN and Fox won't put real news on my TV) that she got in the car with 3 guys (and no one that she knew REALLY well) at 1 AM, and refused to follow the advice of all her friends that where at the place they were leaving, and get at the car, and go back to the hotel with them. Seems pretty dipshitty to abandon anyone that you know even moderately well to go hang out with 3 strangers (even if she'd known them since the first day she arrived on the island...if she had that much trust in them, she's a dipshit).

Seriously.

I don't know what exactly did happen to here after the last time anyone HONEST saw her, but still, her actions are pretty dipshitty.

Ever rode in a cab? She wasn't a dipshit. She was trusting of a well-known young man. I often show as much trust in strangers. I also sometimes walk down the street in rough neighborhoods. I'm crazy like that. See, when I see that a crime has occurred, I generally assume that it, being a crime and all, is the fault of the perpetrator. I'm crazy like that too. it's not your fault for being in a bad neighborhood. Or drinking too much. Or being too attractive. Or having too much money. Or anything at all. It's just plain not your fault when you're the victim of a crime.

It's highly likely that you'll be the victim of a crime in your lifetime. I hope for your sake that people will be more sympathetic to you and, if necessary, your family than you are being for this woman and hers.

Attractiveness has less to do with it then oportunity probably. The most attractive women in the world do not have much to fear if they do not create opportunities for a rapist to assault them.

You can't say that this would have still happened had she followed her friends' advice and NOT gone with the entourage of strangers...so obviously, while the boys (assuming they did it) are guilty of whatever happened, you can't say they'd still be guilty if she did not put herself in that opportunity.

And by the way, just because lots of other people put themselves in that position and nothing bad happens doesn't mean that people should expect to be completely safe in the presence of strangers they know nothing about. It simply means that not everyone is an evil opportunist...

The part you miss is that she could have done this every day for years straight with gentlemen she knew less time than these gentlemen and still not have been victimized. If I get hit by a drunk driver is it my fault for being on the road at the same time as when the bars close?

Eh, I'm not trying to blame this woman

1. as much as most people on this thread are...

2. as much as you'd like to think I am...


However, it is ignorant to think that this crime still would have happen if she'd listened to the advice of her friends and NOT gotten in the car and drove off with 3 strangers. I don't care how long she'd known them...she hadn't been on that island long enough to know them well enough.

That said, the main reason I'm even in this discussion is because I'm pissed off at how much the damn media is hyping the piss-poor story. Seriously. This does not deserve near this much attention. Why don't they focus on people who go missing IN THE UNITED STATES...or better yet, why not focus on stuff of national significance...but in case you haven't been watching the news, Aruba, a nation that didn't even exist to Americans BEFORE this incident, has been the center of the national media's attention for the past however long ago she went missing.

Again, if you believe this is not the girls fault AT ALL, then you believe that nothing she did caused this to happen, which means you believe that if she did something differently (like not gone with the boys in the middle of the night), then the crime would have still happened. Do you honestly believe that had she gone to the hotel with her friends (as they advised her) that this crime would have happened? Do you SERIOUSLY believe that? If not, then sound logic shows that this is partially the fault of a bad judgment call on her part.

I'm not trying to argue that a teenage girl getting in a car with three teenage men she has limited knowledge of will always result in a case like this, but would this have happened if she wouldn't've gone with the boys? It's not like the boys made her go...

The part you miss is that she could have done this every day for years straight with gentlemen she knew less time than these gentlemen and still not have been victimized. If I get hit by a drunk driver is it my fault for being on the road at the same time as when the bars close?
and the part that YOU miss (yes, you're missing a part) is that it doesn't matter how many times you do it and get away with it, it doesn't change the fact that she's still putting herself in a position for something bad to happen.


If a skateboarder comes up with and perfects a stupid stunt, and does it thousands of times without hurting himself, does this mean he'll never get hurt? And when he does get hurt the next time he tries the stunt, who's fault is it? After all, by your logic, he's done it thousands of times and never been injured, so that means it's perfectly safe...right?

Eh, I'm not trying to blame this woman

1. as much as most people on this thread are...

2. as much as you'd like to think I am...


However, it is ignorant to think that this crime still would have happen if she'd listened to the advice of her friends and NOT gotten in the car and drove off with 3 strangers. I don't care how long she'd known them...she hadn't been on that island long enough to know them well enough.

That said, the main reason I'm even in this discussion is because I'm pissed off at how much the damn media is hyping the piss-poor story. Seriously. This does not deserve near this much attention. Why don't they focus on people who go missing IN THE UNITED STATES...or better yet, why not focus on stuff of national significance...but in case you haven't been watching the news, Aruba, a nation that didn't even exist to Americans BEFORE this incident, has been the center of the national media's attention for the past however long ago she went missing.

Again, if you believe this is not the girls fault AT ALL, then you believe that nothing she did caused this to happen, which means you believe that if she did something differently (like not gone with the boys in the middle of the night), then the crime would have still happened. Do you honestly believe that had she gone to the hotel with her friends (as they advised her) that this crime would have happened? Do you SERIOUSLY believe that? If not, then sound logic shows that this is partially the fault of a bad judgment call on her part.

I'm not trying to argue that a teenage girl getting in a car with three teenage men she has limited knowledge of will always result in a case like this, but would this have happened if she wouldn't've gone with the boys? It's not like the boys made her go...

You're 'sound' logic is faulty. Again, if I'm killed by a drunk driver, it can't happen if I'm in my bed asleep. I could have done something differently and been still alive. This doesn't make it my fault to any degree. What she did was reasonable and there was no reason for her to suspect she was in any danger whatsoever, and you have know evidence to suggest that any evidence existed that should have discouraged her. It's not like anyone made me drive at the time when the bars were closing...

Most crimes are committed against people who have made some kind of mistake. Criminals prey on people who are doing something foolish. Ever been the victim of a crime? Usually it's because you didn't lock the door, or you rented the house in the bad neighborhood, or you ducked down the alley on your way home, or you pulled out a fat wad of cash at the 7-11. There are little mistakes like these that lead to muggings, home robberies and carjackings, and then there are huge mistakes, like making lewd comments about a drug dealer's momma or wearing a white power t-shirt in Compton that lead to big crimes. Getting in a car with a bunch of horny, young, foreign men in an unfamiliar place is a colossal mistake that leads to a colossal crime.

You expect me to explain to you my side of your analogy about being killed by a drunk driver, while you don't explain to me your side of either of the two analogies I argued to you.

You also don't respond to my point that this crime wouldn't've happened had she FOLLOWED HER FRIENDS' ADVICE.

If her friends' didn't think it was a good idea for her to go with those guys...then don't you have to suspect something was not to be 100% trustworthy about them? And are you arguing that going with them was a good idea, even with the hindsight that it obviously wasn't?

and the part that YOU miss (yes, you're missing a part) is that it doesn't matter how many times you do it and get away with it, it doesn't change the fact that she's still putting herself in a position for something bad to happen.


If a skateboarder comes up with and perfects a stupid stunt, and does it thousands of times without hurting himself, does this mean he'll never get hurt? And when he does get hurt the next time he tries the stunt, who's fault is it? After all, by your logic, he's done it thousands of times and never been injured, so that means it's perfectly safe...right?

No matter how much you try to change this around you can't effectively place blame on the victim. There is no evidence that had she known these boys for ten more years that she would be any less likely to have been victimized by them. Every interview of people who knew the boys suggested that there was no reason to expect this. You have no evidence that the amount of time she knew these boys played a factor in this at all. You can always say that a crime would not have happened if the victim hadn't been there or if the victim wouldn't have associated with the victimizer or any of a million things you can analyze after the fact had been different, but the victim wasn't armed with that knowledge. The only people who have all the knowledge and ability to avoid a crime are the criminals. It's really quite simple.

You expect me to explain to you my side of your analogy about being killed by a drunk driver, while you don't explain to me your side of either of the two analogies I argued to you.

You also don't respond to my point that this crime wouldn't've happened had she FOLLOWED HER FRIENDS' ADVICE.

If her friends' didn't think it was a good idea for her to go with those guys...then don't you have to suspect something was not to be 100% trustworthy about them? And are you arguing that going with them was a good idea, even with the hindsight that it obviously wasn't?

Your std analogy is faulty because you can protect yourself from being a victim of std's but you cannot prevent becoming the victimized in the way this girl is. People are victimized in the same way by people they've known all their life.. I know with hindsight that she made a bad decision, but she didn't have the knowledge that we have. I didn't say it was a good idea. I said she is not a dipshit. Unless you live in a very small town or are very sheltered, I guarantee you have been alone in a car with a stranger before. Perhaps even a bit drunk. This doesn't make you a dipshit. As has been pointed out, it is completely reasonable to expect people not to murder or rape you.

No, I don't know that this would or would not have happened had she known these people for a long time. That's not the point I'm making about strangers.

Hanging out with strangers just isn't generally a good idea. And she hadn't known these boys long enough for them to be considered anything more...

But why is hanging out with strangers a bad idea...especially at 1am, when these "strangers" consist of 3 male teenagers and you are 1 female teenager?

Because you don't know what to expect, you have no idea what could possibly happen. She willfully placed herself in a situation where she could have no good idea of what to expect.

When things like this happen between people who aren't strangers, I'm not so quick to place the blame on the victim...but seriously. Why do people automatically assume everyone they meet, unless they look dirt poor and have bad breath and smell like alcohol, is someone they can automatically trust completely and entirely?

And how many times must I tell you that her friends' advised her not to go with the boys before you understand that her friends' advised her not to go with the boys?

Your std analogy is faulty because you can protect yourself from being a victim of std's but you cannot prevent becoming the victimized in the way this girl is. People are victimized in the same way by people they've known all their life.. I know with hindsight that she made a bad decision, but she didn't have the knowledge that we have. I didn't say it was a good idea. I said she is not a dipshit. Unless you live in a very small town or are very sheltered, I guarantee you have been alone in a car with a stranger before. Perhaps even a bit drunk. This doesn't make you a dipshit. As has been pointed out, it is completely reasonable to expect people not to murder or rape you.
There is a reason I do not drink.

Alcohol impairs judgment. If you make a bad decision while under the influence of alcohol that you willingly consumed, you should still be held responsible.

No, I don't know that this would or would not have happened had she known these people for a long time. That's not the point I'm making about strangers.

Hanging out with strangers just isn't generally a good idea. And she hadn't known these boys long enough for them to be considered anything more...

But why is hanging out with strangers a bad idea...especially at 1am, when these "strangers" consist of 3 male teenagers and you are 1 female teenager?

Because you don't know what to expect, you have no idea what could possibly happen. She willfully placed herself in a situation where she could have no good idea of what to expect.

When things like this happen between people who aren't strangers, I'm not so quick to place the blame on the victim...but seriously. Why do people automatically assume everyone they meet, unless they look dirt poor and have bad breath and smell like alcohol, is someone they can automatically trust completely and entirely?

And how many times must I tell you that her friends' advised her not to go with the boys before you understand that her friends' advised her not to go with the boys?

They were not strangers. Most women know a man for less than a week before going on their first date. If she had seen these boys once a week for seven weeks instead of each night for seven nights, you would be looking at this differently. It's not uncommon for people to be talking about a very serious relationship after seven times going out. She had met more of his friends and family than would be common before the first time a woman is alone with a man.

Again, in order for you to make any assumptions about whether her being with men you feel she didn't know well enough, you have to show that it played a part in the crime. You haven't. You can't. You could just as easily say if someone hits me in a car that it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't been driving or if someone robs a bank and I get shot that it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't been banking. People like to pretend like strangers are so much more dangerous than the people we know, but the statistics don't support this.

You make assumptions about me as well as this woman. One, you don't know whether or not they actually did advise her. It's not uncommon for women to suggest they tried to protect their friend in a situation like this. The alternative is to admit they didn't look out for their friend. However, even if they suggested she not go, they had no more knowledge about the boys than she did. Just because in hindsight they were right doesn't make their position any more reasonable than hers.

There is a reason I do not drink.

Alcohol impairs judgment. If you make a bad decision while under the influence of alcohol that you willingly consumed, you should still be held responsible.

You have yet to establish that this decision was unreasonable, based on her being drunk, or would have been different had she had any more knowledge about these boys (other than being clairvoyant and knowing she would die). Your knowledge after the fact doesn't play at all into whether or not this woman made a sound decision.

Ryanania its called Liberalism deal with it!...
What is? Rape?

a comment or 2.....

First off, I hope they find this girl and that she's ok. I feel terrible for whats happened to her and countless other victims. Rapists are scum and should be castrated and have a baseball bat inserted into their posterior. (detest rapists....)

Although she cannot be blamed for being attacked, she can be partially blamed for putting herself in the situation.

When you go out, you have to keep an eye on your drink to decrease the chance of it being tampered with.
If you bring anything with you, ie backpack, handbag, etc... you must not let it out of your site.
If you need to take a taxi, take a registered one, no someone shouting taxi! at you when you come out of the bar.
If your usual friends are leaving, and your given the choice of going with some new found friends, go with your usual friends. You went out with them, go home with them.
If your friends been drinking and is going to drive, both of you grab a cab instead.

These always apply. They might not prevent bad things from happening, but they lower the chances of it happening by quite alot

ok let me try one more time

obviously miss holloway made a bad decision that night. we dont know for sure what happened to her but its almost certain that it has lead to her death. let me stress that this doesnt mean that the men she went away with deliberately killed her. that they stalked her, picked her out of a crowd as vulnerable that they targeted her for rape and murder. sometimes bad things happen unplanned and then people cover them up. it is very possible that miss holloway died "by accident" (as in by something someone DID but did not intend it to kill her)

the offensive part is when people suggest that her bad choice springs from obvious stupidity or lack of moral character. that if she wasnt a fool or a whore she would be alive today. her behavior is the same as almost any woman in the western world. she left the bar with a man she knew. if you find this morally outrageous ask your MOTHER if she ever left the bar with a man she knew but hadnt gone to the bar with. the majority will get a "yes" answer.

i consider her decision analagous to that poor cyclist who got eaten by a mountain lion last year in california. thousands of people bike in the hills of california every day. there were more than a million cycling outings done in california last year. one guy got eaten by a mountain lion. does that make him and every other cyclist total idiots? we can say that he made a bad decision that day. he should have stayed home. but does his eventual fate make him a fool?

miss holloway did what millions of women do every year. obviously she made the wrong choice. does this really make her responsible for what happened to her?

this thread keeps on making me think of a repeating theme from the ...way way long ago...

The situation where someone takes some pills (ecstacy, speed, etc..), normally nothing bad happens, but [insert name] had a bad reaction to it tonight a died.
Who's fault is it?

1. the dealer? yes, selling illegal drugs, tut, tut...
2. [insert name]? yes, maybe he/she has taken it before, but its known to be dangerous.
3. friends? depends on whether they were involved or not.

If someone takes a drug that millions of people take, yet can be potentially harmful, then they are not blameless if something happens.

But then again, she might have left a very nice sheltered existance, and expected only kindness and friendship from strangers. Who knows? :confused:

This woman made a probably stupid decision… we can all agree on that… but really, did she deserve what she got? EVERYONE's done stupid things - a few years back, I got hit by a car because I decided not to cross at the zebra crossing, for some strange reason. Her probable fate was not deserved at all from the silly decision she made.

This woman made a probably stupid decision… we can all agree on that… but really, did she deserve what she got? EVERYONE's done stupid things - a few years back, I got hit by a car because I decided not to cross at the zebra crossing, for some strange reason. Her probable fate was not deserved at all from the silly decision she made.

agreed.

A girl loking to have sex with a few guys she just met...

is that a whore?

what would be your definition?

My definition of 'whore', would be someone that has sex for profit.

How is that relevent?

Where did you get the 'have sex with a few guys' bit from?

We STILL have no actual reason to suspect she was planning on having ANY sex with ANYONE... much less with multiple partners.

You are letting your own assumptions blur your vision of the issues.

this thread keeps on making me think of a repeating theme from the ...way way long ago...

The situation where someone takes some pills (ecstacy, speed, etc..), normally nothing bad happens, but [insert name] had a bad reaction to it tonight a died.
Who's fault is it?

1. the dealer? yes, selling illegal drugs, tut, tut...
2. [insert name]? yes, maybe he/she has taken it before, but its known to be dangerous.
3. friends? depends on whether they were involved or not.

If someone takes a drug that millions of people take, yet can be potentially harmful, then they are not blameless if something happens.

But then again, she might have left a very nice sheltered existance, and expected only kindness and friendship from strangers. Who knows? :confused:

The difference is that overdose and death are reasonable side effects of drugs that are unregulated and not always the same (we know that that they are often cut with poisons to increase the high). It's a sad world if we consider death to be a reasonable side effect of going somewhere alone with a boy. She knew this boy's friends and family. She'd known this boy for a week. I think any guy here would be upset if a woman was afraid to be alone with us after being out with us seven times. Many of my friends would have and will do the same thing in similar situation, and I'll almost guaranteed never know anyone who meets the same fate. However, I had several family members addicted to drugs and each of them has half a dozen friends or so die from overdose or drug-related problems.

My definition of 'whore', would be someone that has sex for profit.

How is that relevent?

Where did you get the 'have sex with a few guys' bit from?

We STILL have no actual reason to suspect she was planning on having ANY sex with ANYONE... much less with multiple partners.

You are letting your own assumptions blur your vision of the issues.

It's the old Mike Tyson argument. "She went up to his room, what do you think he was expecting?" Little note to some of you out there, most men do not think all women are whore who just can't be alone with us without stripping down and doing the horizontal tango. Most women, rightfully so, think it should be reasonable to be alone with a man and expect to be safe from harm whether or not she is interested in sex.

The difference is that overdose and death are reasonable side effects of drugs that are unregulated and not always the same (we know that that they are often cut with poisons to increase the high). It's a sad world if we consider death to be a reasonable side effect of going somewhere alone with a boy. She knew this boy's friends and family. She'd known this boy for a week. I think any guy here would be upset if a woman was afraid to be alone with us after being out with us seven times. Many of my friends would have and will do the same thing in similar situation, and I'll almost guaranteed never know anyone who meets the same fate. However, I had several family members addicted to drugs and each of them has half a dozen friends or so die from overdose or drug-related problems.

ok lets see. she'd known him for a week? Curious, was she seeing him everyday? (i don't know). If not, yes, should not have been that stupid. AGAIN, its not her fault, those bastards did what they did.
You know no-one thats been raped? interesting, i know no-one harmed by drugs, yet a few that have been attacked.

Also, some stats, provided earlier by someone, said that most rapes were committed by people they know and acquaintances (sp?). Would he not be an acquaintance?

It's the old Mike Tyson argument. "She went up to his room, what do you think he was expecting?" Little note to some of you out there, most men do not think all women are whore who just can't be alone with us without stripping down and doing the horizontal tango. Most women, rightfully so, think it should be reasonable to be alone with a man and expect to be safe from harm whether or not she is interested in sex.

Unfortunately... it seems to be popular on the forum, at the moment, for people to try to defend the Mike Tyson mentality.... :(