In some other threads about female condoms that are designed to injure people who ‘penetrate’ females who inserted the device (ment to quickly end a rape), one post was:
My question is why is it not her responsibility to protect herself? If it is not her responsibility, who is responsibile for her protection?
(btw this device seems to be a hoax, but that is besides the point here)
The woman is on the defense. The rapist is on the offense. Do you really think the person being acted upon is just as responsible as the person taking action?
No, but I think his point is that just because it’s not their fault doesn’t mean they shouldn’t take precautions. A person who doesn’t lock their doors isn’t at fault if they get robbed, but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have locked their doors.
Many people assume that if you suggest people should take responsibility to protect themselves that means you’re placing the blame on them, when really you might just be trying to offer practical advice.
All that said, suggesting women wear condoms to injure anyone who penetrates them seems a tad extreme.
For the same reason it is not our responsibility to protect ourselves from terrorist by avoiding crowded places and national landmarks. The same reason why it’s not Black people’s responsibility to protect themselves from waking up with a cross burning on their lawn by staying in Black neighborhoods and not becoming public figures.
We don’t accept changing our lives because of targeted violence.
Men have no idea how much women already restrict their lives. Rape affects what jobs we take, where we live, how we get around, what times we leave the house, what hobbies we have, where we go and countless other little things. More than one woman has turned down a great job that would propel them up the career ladder because it would mean a night bus commute through bad areas of town. It’s a challenge not to let this threat intrude too much on our lives already. “Reasonable precautions” would essentially mean house arrest for large chunks of time, or giving up independence to do basic things like go shopping (dark parking lot at night, you know…) independently. That’s not an acceptable trade off. Women need lives, too.
There were some assaults in the small college town I used to live in. The police issued a statement saying “We advise women to avoid walking downtown alone and avoid the streets at night.” I’m sorry, but that is not an acceptable reactions. If there were, say, neo-nazis assaulting random Black people around town, if they put “We advice Black people to avoid walking downtown alone…” they’d get run out of town. At that point we’d expect police patrols, security cameras, whatever it takes to get rid of the threat without making a segment of society live lesser lives.
This is not practical. If you can cough up the money to have constant patrols in all areas where people walk in the cities, you’re wiser than pretty much every police force ever made.
Even on college campuses, where there is often a very high police/area ratio, rape is real risk. Ultimately, no one can watch every alley and path. The perpetrators are almost invisible. They don’t have any distinctive clothing or ideology. They may strike anywhere, at any time.
Allow me to share a story. Some years ago, a woman was raped at UT. This occured, IIRC, in an oft-used alley between two major dorms. I was only about a block away, myself. I don’t believe they ever caught the rapist.
This gets into the pretty blinkered problem people have with the concept of responsibility. For some reason, people seem to think that responsibility is zero sum and position indepedent. It’s neither. You can consider responsibility holding the acts (and responsibility) of others as a constant. And there is no percentage responsibility for an event: there’s as much room for responsibility as there are knowingly choosing actors who can effect the outcome in all sorts of different ways.
Yes, rapists are 100% responsible for choosing to rape. Also, women, knowing that there are rapists out there (and holding their actions and intentions as constants), are responsible for taking precautions against this known danger. Society is responsible for reducing rape in general. And so on. It’s really not a hard concept.
even sven, your whole post seems slippery-slopish to me.
You’re right, it’s not our responsibility to not go outside or not live in our home. However, I would advise against an American tourist wandering into an Al Qaeda training camp, or a black person moving next door to a known Klan rally site. Should you be able to do those things? Sure. Does that make them a good idea?.
And you have that right. But as I’m sure you realize that may increase your chances of being raped.
This whole paragraph is the slippery-slope I’m talking about. You don’t have to be under house arrest to not walk down long dark alleys, carry mace, or park in a well lit area.
Why can’t they both issue warnings and increase police presence for both? If the police warned black people against walking around alone in the short term so they don’t get beaten AND via increased patrols, cameras, etc. were trying to make it safe for them to be alone in the long term, I don’t see what the problem is.
I agree with your statement that women should not have to take any precautions to avoid rape. But the reality that there are rapists out there means that they should. Yes, many of these “reasonable precautions” will be restricting, however slightly, and that’s not fair, but the alternative is an increased risk of being raped. And I think that actually being raped is far more unreasonable than being responsible for taking reasonable precautions to not be raped.
And just so there’s no misunderstanding, regardless of what precautions a woman does or does not take it is not her fault in any way if she is raped.