Concerning Something I Read on the Interweb during the Adolescent Hours of the Morning

   Yesterday morning, after I had come back home from doing my overnight shift, I read a story online about an Italian woman who had been raped back in the '90s and how the court would not convict as guilty the man who assaulted her because the woman was wearing skinny jeans (which were presumably "sexy," although I don't know anything about jeans being sexy. They've always seemed more practical and/or fashionable rather "sexy."). The story was decrying the injustice of the verdict. I've heard similar stories before, and it got me to thinking. Was is completely the sick bastard man's fault. I'm inclined to say that if it were divided into percentages, he would be 90-95% guilty in the event that she had been wearing she had not been wearing jeans. But I don't really think that. 

   Still, I have to admit that modesty and immodesty play a huge role in the stimulus of the male specimen. I would in no way have said the man was not guilty. It's clear that he indeed was, regardless of what the Italian court ruled. But I do wonder wether or not the same incident would have occurred if she had been dressed modestly, which I'm not entirely convinced that she wasn't. Jeans, after all, are simply not that arousing. But I'm a louse too and know what it's like to be a Samson. I see Philistine; I say get her for me, Dada and Mama. They say, "But no! It would be better that you take one of the daughters of Israel!" I say, "No! Give me what I want" Oh dear, I'm spiraling down into deconstructionist drivel now. Consider this story, though. How much of a part do you think modesty plays in regard to the general stability of male-female relationships in a society? Is it even easy to generalize? I definitely think so. But that's the perennialist in me shining forth.