Flirting may not be lying but it is giving an unclear message. If it is meant to communicate a ‘certain level of interest’ then what is that level of interest? Surely it is a sexual interest. I don’t know anyone who flirts with someone they do not find sexually attractive unless it is for dishonest reasons. Flirting says I find you sexually attractive and I may like to have sex with you or I definitely will not have sex with you. A person who has no intention of having sex with someone may still flirt with them. So how can anyone know the difference unless they can read the mind of the flirter? The flirter is giving a message that can be interpreted either way until the object of their desire runs up against the barrier of the level of interest. The flirter must take responsibility for giving an unclear message that could be very reasonably be misinterpreted.

Why give an unclear message when it is just as easy to give a clear one? Is the flirter trying to meet some other need?

Giving an unclear message is no excuse for sexual assault. Ambiguous messages must remain the responsibility of those who give them. This is not ‘blaming the victim’ for sexual assault it is blaming them for playing with the ambiguity of flirting in order to meet their own egotistical needs or their need for power and control

Scary, truly scary some of the comments.

Am I the only one who is gobsmacked at the oxymoronic opinion of the 'power of women' that needs to be wielded carefully otherwise she might get raped? Women powerful-men powerless? Perhaps there is something in the wearing of a burqa after all, lest the 'power of our sexuality' makes a man loose his head and he is evilly tempted by that wicked female into committing a crime.

I'm glad I do not personally know any men who agrees with any of the comments that a woman bears any responsibility whatsoever for her rape.

Sex is a TWO WAY THING. Which means, that when ONE party is not interested in going further- a TWO WAY THING just ain't going to happen. Sex you have TOGETHER. Get it? TOGETHER. Ejaculating into a vagina is not having sex.

Flirting is not lying. It is the silliest, most inane and pathetic opinion. Flirting is done equally by both genders. Men are as good at flirting as are women. It signifies: You look appealing, I like the look of you, do you like the look of me? It is a way where you can check out the other, test the waters, so to speak. It may or may not lead to anything more. It can lead to anything from: you are so absolutely the father/mother of my babies, to: it is really fun to chat and joke with you.

It does not signify: Hey mate, you've lucked out: a free and easy sexual encounter (sorry, OLO won't allow me to use the more forthright four letter word) without any/much effort on your part-guaranteed or call me a lier.

Actually flirting as such isn't the problem: it is the message that hormone addled male brains get from flirting that is the problem.

The message taught to young women really should be:

"Do not trust males, they only want one thing, they do not respect you, they do not understand the word 'no', they do not understand the concept of consent and will take any advantage that they can over you. Men are predators, treat them as you would any predator"

The fault here is not with young women, they cannot be blamed for society telling them that males are okay, when it is clear, from the statistics quoted in the article at the head of this thread indicates that a large enough proportion of males are so bad so that they comprise a major risk to females.

The fault is not with young women: do not blame them. The fault is with men, young, middle aged and old. The only other fault can be laid at the people who have told young women that men can be trusted, when it is clear that they cannot be.

Young men in our society have been instilled with the idea that they have value, some idea of worth, when they have not. The classic example being those football players who think that just because they are paid a large amount of money for acting like animals on a football field then they can act like animals when it comes to mating.

Previous generations have seen men as what they are, expendable (how many million in WW1)and not worth as much as women (ie 'women and children first'), so perhaps men need to learn that they, and their animalistic drives, are worthless.

Forget negotiation as it is argued here, you cannot negotiate with hungry predators, instead they need to be supressed, and if they cannot be controlled, put down.

Anansi - you put that so well.

Dougthebear - Yikes. It's going to take me a while to think about what you've written. Some pretty confronting stuff.

There are men that I love more than my own life. They give me confidence that there ARE progressive men who care about others and the idea of not having those good blokes around is - oy, awful. I also know some women who, if I never saw them again, I would die a happy woman. Nevertheless, I have never met, and can't imagine meeting, any person (male or female) who deserved to be raped.

I see some wishy washy fellows here who endorse rape promoting notions; they are despicable and I think your post addresses that pretty powerfully.

Oh sorry Anansi, I meant to also say regarding:

<"Perhaps there is something in the wearing of a burqa after all...">

Except that women who wear those are not free of rape either - and yet they are still the ones who get blamed and punished when they are raped.

As dougthebear points out, taking the risk of overtly trying to initate the actual physical act of sex, is largely a male activity.

Castrating males before pubity would see the rates of sexual assault plummenting. Problem solved.

As dougthebear points out men are expendable.