I guess I did too. It reads to me they’re one of the ones engaging in sensationalism and pure hyperbolic nonsense.
Yes, well put. This is the “woman as gatekeeper” school of thought. Men (rapists) would not rape if not provided with the opportunity: a passed out young woman at a party is just Too Much and Men Can’t Help Themselves. Bad Zoot!, Naughty, Wicked Zoot! She must pay the price…!
:rolleyes:
It’s a straightforward question of relevance.
Either it’s OK for a woman to go to a bar, to go on a date with a guy she’s met recently, to be out in the city at night, and to have an active sex life, or it isn’t. If it is OK, then the fact that those things bear an inherent risk of victimization when compared to, for instance, sitting at home with a shotgun all weekend isn’t relevant to a discussion of the differences in perceptions of males and females.
Except as an inadvertent confirmation of the opposite point of view, that is.
Look at it this way - stipulate that a certain woman who gets raped wouldn’t have gotten raped if she had been more careful. So? What’s your next move, exactly? You’re either using that argument as the obvious blame-shifter that it looks like, or you aren’t. If you aren’t, what’s your fucking point? Why bring up the risks that a woman may have failed to completely safeguard against, in a conversation where the risks have already been made real by a real criminal action by another real person, if you aren’t going to make the next logical step and mitigate the responsibility of the rapist by reference to her assumption of the risk? What’s the relevance, if not the connection to assigning shares of responsibility to both rapist and victim?
This paragraph sums it up nicely. I don’t think anyone honestly believes that there aren’t situations where the risk of rape is higher than in others. I don’t think anyone honestly thinks that women shouldn’t be aware that some situations are dangerous. But once the criminal act has occurred, there’s simply no reason to talk about those risks except to try to lessen the guilt of the criminal and blame the victim.
nm, **Jimmy **said it better than me.
Exactly. "Oh, it’s completely his fault. Except of course that it wouldn’t have happened if you hadn’t been there. No, no, this isn’t blame. Just accept responsibility for making it possible for someone to rape you. "
You *will *wind up with dicks drawn on your forehead in sharpie, though. I mean that’s just a fact of life.
Only simpletons with a political axe to grind are doing that. Due to the presence of a brain in my head, the understanding of the separateness of events and decisions, and the ability to parse cause and effect without confusing all the variables I can say that certain types of crime happen very commonly under certain circumstances. These statistics to not account for all instances but they are frequent enough that they should not be ignored. I can use my experiences and the experiences of others (such as rape victims’ statistics) to make an estimate of how much risk I am taking by engaging in particular actions. I understand that I cannot change the criminal mentality of others, leaving me with decisions I can make to protect myself. Despite my integration of all this data in making decisions, the fact that people’s intentions are not perfectly knowable, I can still be the victim of a crime, but less likely to be so.
For example, I used to leave my car at a parking lot and take a bus to the airport before leaving on extended trips lasting 2 -3 weeks. One time I returned to find my car broken into. Some asshole robbed me, destroyed my window, and took a stereo that is probably worth less than $20. Given that experience, would you think I might be a little stupid to park there again after replacing my stereo and going on my next trip?
Peeta Mellark, I understood the stupid in the comment perfectly well, but thanks for trying to help me with it.
What’s the answer to my question, then, o brainy one? Of what relevance is the victim’s ‘stupidity,’ please?
God yes.
I was just asking for it, sleeping there all “draw on me! draw on me!” Did you see the way I was dressed? I practically had markers in my breast pocket.
In response to Jimmy:
Every detail about the victim’s circumstance prior, during, and after being victimized is relevant in helping others to understand what they might do to avoid a similar situation, and to catch the perpetrator.
When I was victimized by having my stereo stolen the only way in which I screwed up was by not reporting the crime. Continuing to park at that lot would be stupid.
Anyway, the point you were making was in reference to nothing at all; no opinion that has been uttered seriously for probably more than 3 decades in this country.
You guys can squawk about “blame the victim” all you want, but I would prefer to see women not getting raped in the first place (which is what I’m talking about - I agree that after the fact, yes, it is 100% the rapist’s fault).
What you are saying is like saying either you will display a lot of cash if you go out to a seedy area, or stay at home with a crossbow. Any other option is meaningless because to acknowledge that would be to take some of the responsibility.
What I’m saying is that you don’t have to take any responsibility for the crime but can still reflect on your own choices to learn from it.
Example: You may drink too much and lose your way home and get lost, end up in a seedy area and get mugged.
Your reaction: I can’t just sit at home you know, that’s misogynist. Mugger is 100% responsible!
My reaction: Yes he is 100% responsible. But, if you hadn’t drunk so much or called a friend, you could have avoided this.
I think another problem is that it isn’t clear cut what situations are “bad ones” for women. People talk about not getting drunk but does that mean you never drink when you’re alone with a guy? Do you make sure you’re only in a public place with a man until a certain point when it’s safe? It’s just not that clear to me what exactly constitutes a situation where rape is a certainty, especially when statistically those we have most to fear from are people we know and trust.
No it does not render it “meaningless” by any stretch, any more than any prudent precautions against a high risk scenario is rendered “meaningless” by pointing out that disaster can happen even in low risk scenarios. Trying to apply ad absurdum as a valid argument against risk management because random bad shit happens even in low risk situations is poor logic, and IRL quite dangerous to boot.
For better or worse a person with, or without, a vagina does have a duty to themselves to manage the risk where possible in their daily lives. Random bad shit can obviously happen, but to claim that people making foolish, high risk decisions should have no responsibly imputed to them if that bad stuff happens is unreasonable.
I understand the extreme difficulty of determining where that crossed line of responisbility for self care is in many cases, but it does not mean it does not exist.
I wouldn’t change a thing.
I think people like these have a very important role to play in society. To be example to others of what not to do. People have a short memory and need constant examples to be reminded that its a dangerous world, and these people are the martyrs. We need them. (Assuming they really don’t believe in taking precautions in real life, which I doubt)
That’s a good point, Freudian Slit. The “stranger danger” in regards to a lot of crimes is greatly exaggerated and a quick look at the statistics makes that clear. To avoid the highest risks, a woman really would have to never interact with men she knows because that’s where she is most likely be attacked. According to this report from the Department of Justice (PDF), 90% of college women who are rape victims knew their assailants.
To act as though the issue is solely about not getting drunk with strangers is ignoring the realities of how rape actually happens. It serves little purpose except to make people feel better because, gosh darn it, they found something to blame.
A blind belief in statistics is a great way to be confused in life.
All right, now you’re just being a troll.
Does this mean you rest your case and don’t want to discuss it any further?