Thursday, 17 March 2011

Results of Poll on: Responsibility and Behaviour

In our last poll, we inquired:

New Poll: Responsibility and Behaviour

A police officer in Toronto was recently
reprimanded for telling an audience of female
university students that they should avoid
dressing in a provocative manner in order not
to be victimized. “In fact, this is completely
contradictory to what officers are taught,” a
Toronto police spokeswoman said. “They are
taught that nothing a woman does contributes
to a sexual

What do you think?

A. The perpetrator is 100% responsible -
therefore no woman need be concerned about
her mode of dress. Let's never blame the

B. The perpetrator is 100% responsible for
the crime - but why INVITE criminal behaviour?

C. It is true the criminal is responsible for
his crime. Yet the woman can also be responsible
for her dress. While 2 wrongs don't make a right
- dressing in an enticing manner is still "wrong".

D. Perpetrators are attracted to certain vibes.  
Victims often DO invite attack albeit on an
unconscious level. While there are exceptions,
any immodest dress is manifest evidence of an
unconscious desire to stimulate desire.

Which One Do You Favour?

 Your Responses (total 15)
Choice 1 - 13% (2)
Choice 2 - 40% (6)
Choice 3 - 34% (5)
Choice 4 - 13% (2)

Rabbi Wolpoe
Re: Purim, Haman is an unqualified Rasha BUT nevertheless the Jews were held accountable for the evil decree. Similarlly, Par'oh was a Rasha, yet Israel or Avraham was responsible for the decree of slavery. Thus, we see as per Hazal, that the evil of the rapist is no excuse for immodest behaviour. Torah Values are not politically correct values
Rabbi Hecht
The vast majority of respondents would seem to recognize that life is not lived in a vacuum. Our actions are results of the dynamics of living. This, in line with the largest sub-group, does not necessarily mean that one is less culpable but, nonetheless, it is a reality to consider.

No comments: