Crusader 8 (princelypublictimeline)'s status on Wednesday, 12-Mar-14 12:35:17 UTC
-
@snowcone you understand that any attempt to explain that Y's behavior cause X to do such-and-such to Y is still saying it's Y's fault? You may not intend it to be that way, but that's how it ends up being. Suppose Y did not do the things one claims "raised her chances", would X still act against Y? If yes, then the correlation is unfounded, if no, then you are saying her actions caused it and shifting causation to the victim. If what she does can't be helped, but neither can he, only one of them is doing harmful and thus the aggressor is still solely to blame. Or if she can't help her mixed signals, but the man can still choose and does so, it is still solely his fault and she's done nothing wrong. Trying to deliberate body language and things that raise or lower chances misses the point that the aggression resulting is irreversible and largely unpunished, and surprisingly defended by our society.
