Apparently sexual assault just isn't that big a deal in Kentucky

[Ravi]

You're so wrapped up in your idiocy that you can't see that the cop was blaming the woman when he criticized her shorts.

 

[martybegan]

You're so wrapped up in your idiocy that you can't see that the cop was blaming the woman when he criticized her shorts.

I said the cop worded what he was trying to say poorly, most cops are not Rhodes scholars. It still does not make right people saying the police department is blaming the victim by warning them about this perp's triggers, and suggestions on what to do to lower their risk until he is caught. This is not blaming the victim.

I swear you people value PC over truth, and feelings over facts.

 

[Ravi]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

 

[martybegan]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

 

[Ravi]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

Gandhi was against denim pants on women saying they were too provocative. Don't know what he was talking about though...

 

[martybegan]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Its the new TMZ mindset everyone has now. Something happens to someone and some people find a way to make it about the victim and not what happened to them.

Its the most girlish (sorry) thing with todays generation...just a bunch of equivocating assholes

 

[Asclepias]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

"It could be" is a figment of your imagination. The point is he could have simply said to wear pants if at all possible. Instead it reads like the its the victims fault.

 

[Ravi]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

The only thing they "know" apparently is that he targets women wearing skirts. If that part is to be believed.

 

[mudwhistle]

"Violence against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition, and is spelled out very early. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis (19:1-11), the first book of the Old Testament, holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is "a wicked thing." This chapter about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah describes Lot's hospitality to two male travelers (actually two angels) who were housed with him."
Article Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence

US is a defacto Christian nation. Thus much of the Bible's anti-woman, pro-rape rhetoric is perhaps ingrained in US citizens' heads. Yet we continue to claim Christianity is good. Maybe if you ripped out great chunks of it it'd become good, but as is that's the stupidest thing imaginable to claim.

Yeah, it's Jesus's fault.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

"Violence against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition, and is spelled out very early. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis (19:1-11), the first book of the Old Testament, holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is "a wicked thing." This chapter about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah describes Lot's hospitality to two male travelers (actually two angels) who were housed with him."
Article Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence

US is a defacto Christian nation. Thus much of the Bible's anti-woman, pro-rape rhetoric is perhaps ingrained in US citizens' heads. Yet we continue to claim Christianity is good. Maybe if you ripped out great chunks of it it'd become good, but as is that's the stupidest thing imaginable to claim.

Yeah, it's Jesus's fault.

Christianity actually. Jesus had nothing to do with Christianity.

 

[martybegan]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

The only thing they "know" apparently is that he targets women wearing skirts. If that part is to be believed.

and they warned the populace of this deviants supposed target. Your point?

 

[Ravi]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

The only thing they "know" apparently is that he targets women wearing skirts. If that part is to be believed.

and they warned the populace of this deviants supposed target. Your point?

My point was the cop and his department made it about short shorts and short skirts when in fact it is not according to the PD. I really can't believe you are as stupid as you've been posting lately.

 

[martybegan]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

"It could be" is a figment of your imagination. The point is he could have simply said to wear pants if at all possible. Instead it reads like the its the victims fault.

So we decide the whole thing is "blame the victim" based on the improper syntax of one probably blue collar non-bougy" police officer?

 

[martybegan]

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

The only thing they "know" apparently is that he targets women wearing skirts. If that part is to be believed.

and they warned the populace of this deviants supposed target. Your point?

My point was the cop and his department made it about short shorts and short skirts when in fact it is not according to the PD. I really can't believe you are as stupid as you've been posting lately.

They don't know what the perp is thinking, all they know is that their victims were showing leg skin.

The only reason you are keeping this up is you are one of those internet assholes that can't admit they are wrong. So you will continue with your stupidity until I give up and stop posting.

Sad, really sad.

 

[mudwhistle]

The Bible taught us not to fornicate, much less commit sexual-assault or drug trafficking.

 

[mudwhistle]

"Violence against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition, and is spelled out very early. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis (19:1-11), the first book of the Old Testament, holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is "a wicked thing." This chapter about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah describes Lot's hospitality to two male travelers (actually two angels) who were housed with him."
Article Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence

US is a defacto Christian nation. Thus much of the Bible's anti-woman, pro-rape rhetoric is perhaps ingrained in US citizens' heads. Yet we continue to claim Christianity is good. Maybe if you ripped out great chunks of it it'd become good, but as is that's the stupidest thing imaginable to claim.

Yeah, it's Jesus's fault.

Christianity actually. Jesus had nothing to do with Christianity.

That's an insanely dumb statement.

 

[Asclepias]

You're still wrong. The PD did defended this guy and admitted that the perp was targeting women in SKIRTS. Not short skirts, not short shorts. SKIRTS.

Did the police department say they are going to let this guy off because "they are asking for it" Did the PO say he was not going to try to catch the guy "because she was asking for it"

You take a poor way of communicating something, and turn it into a PC bitchfest, meanwhile the fact is these women are increasing their risk when wearing something short because the perp seems to target this.

You, like most progressives, hone in on some minutia and ignore reality.

Again, there is no evidence the length of the skirt is the target. The skirt itself is the target. Jesus Christ you are stupid. Maybe the cops should tell women to only wear long pants and the rapist will stop raping.

it could be the skin he sees as well. They don't know what is going on in this kooks head. What they have is a pattern, and a responsibility to warn the potential target population until the guy is caught.

Its this PARTICULAR criminal, you keep forgetting that part.

"It could be" is a figment of your imagination. The point is he could have simply said to wear pants if at all possible. Instead it reads like the its the victims fault.

So we decide the whole thing is "blame the victim" based on the improper syntax of one probably blue collar non-bougy" police officer?

Pretty much if it came from a blue collar cop.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

"Violence against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition, and is spelled out very early. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis (19:1-11), the first book of the Old Testament, holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is "a wicked thing." This chapter about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah describes Lot's hospitality to two male travelers (actually two angels) who were housed with him."
Article Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence

US is a defacto Christian nation. Thus much of the Bible's anti-woman, pro-rape rhetoric is perhaps ingrained in US citizens' heads. Yet we continue to claim Christianity is good. Maybe if you ripped out great chunks of it it'd become good, but as is that's the stupidest thing imaginable to claim.

Yeah, it's Jesus's fault.

Christianity actually. Jesus had nothing to do with Christianity.

That's an insanely dumb statement.

Only if insanely ignorant about the creation of Christianity. First Christian NT Gospel didn't come along/get written until some 30+ years after Jesus' death. So how exactly did Jesus have anything to do with Christianity if he'd been dead for decades before any manifestation of it came along?