Victim blaming, or sensible advice

[vwdan]

If you remove this bit:


its called sensible advice.

If you remove the sexual references it becomes identical to advice on how not to get mugged / physically assaulted.

To a degree you're correct, and I was going to say something about that but got waylaid. Essentially, I think what's been underestimated is the sheer amount of blame that victims have to put up with.

Yes, we can all take steps to improve our personal safety, but there is absolutely a culture of belief that the rape victim simply must have been able to do more to avoid being attacked. This stigma doesn't seem to carry over elsewhere. I lock my doors, but if I get burgled it's highly unlikely that I'd have to answer to "How come your fence isn't 6 ft high? Why don't you have barbed wire? How come your anti-personnel mines weren't armed?". Beyond taking some basic steps, the law, my insurance company and my friends will generally view it as a crime I couldn't do anything about.

The pro-human side in me likes to believe this is because most people can imagine having to steal something, whether it justifies the crime or not, but most of us can't imagine ever forcibly raping someone and so we find the concept difficult to grasp. No idea if that's the truth or not, but it does seem that outside of the stereotypical "Dragged off the street at knife point" type of event, people find rape very difficult to see as a crime where all the blame is on the rapist.

[vetran]

There is no excuse for rape, a woman should be free to wear/drink whatever she wants.

Thanks for proving my point. Its a mantra like 'speed kills'.

[mudskipper]

We might as well just go for a "Think rapist" poster with a picture of a man on then.

[Unix]

Thanks for proving my point. Its a mantra like 'speed kills'.

Are you saying there are circumstance in which rape is legitimate?

[vetran]

To a degree you're correct, and I was going to say something about that but got waylaid. Essentially, I think what's been underestimated is the sheer amount of blame that victims have to put up with.

Yes, we can all take steps to improve our personal safety, but there is absolutely a culture of belief that the rape victim simply must have been able to do more to avoid being attacked. This stigma doesn't seem to carry over elsewhere. I lock my doors, but if I get burgled it's highly unlikely that I'd have to answer to "How come your fence isn't 6 ft high? Why don't you have barbed wire? How come your anti-personnel mines weren't armed?". Beyond taking some basic steps, the law, my insurance company and my friends will generally view it as a crime I couldn't do anything about.

The pro-human side in me likes to believe this is because most people can imagine having to steal something, whether it justifies the crime or not, but most of us can't imagine ever forcibly raping someone and so we find the concept difficult to grasp. No idea if that's the truth or not, but it does seem that outside of the stereotypical "Dragged off the street at knife point" type of event, people find rape very difficult to see as a crime where all the blame is on the rapist.

thanks for meeting me half way.

As you say we need to discourage risky behaviour without judging the victim.

I personally see Rape as a crime where the all the blame is on the rapist, however I see 'non consensual sex / penetration' as a different type of offence. mixing the two offences is a bad idea in my opinion.

dragging off the street is rape.
forcing yourself on someone repeatedly is rape.

Forcing yourself on someone you know is rape - difficult to prove if its one word against the other? How do we prove it to the same level as above without circumstantial or forensic evidence?
overstepping the mark could be rape?
Previously granted consent being removed is rape?
Alcoholic consent is rape?

When many of these may be avoided by taking a 'chaperone' to the first date, not going home with someone when you first meet them, setting clear boundaries or getting drunk in an unsafe situation shouldn't we encourage these precautions? Without judging the victim.

its all a bit grey and it seems many of the offences that fail to get convictions probably fall into this category. I'd like to see more convictions and less crimes. I'm happy for people to be charged with a lesser offence if it makes sense.

[vetran]

Are you saying there are circumstance in which rape is legitimate?

are you saying there are circumstances where speed is not relevant?

I'm saying its complicated and we should deal with it sensibly not with shouting & screaming rapist, rapist.

[Unix]

are you saying there are circumstances where speed is not relevant?

I'm saying its complicated and we should deal with it sensibly not with shouting & screaming rapist, rapist.

The analogy with speeding is fatuous, driving is a normal activity and if a drunk guy walks in front of you then it's an accident. How is rape anything like that, it's 100% the rapists fault, there is nothing complicated it's either consensual or not. Let us hear your circumstances where rape is legitimate?

[mudskipper]

thanks for meeting me half way.

As you say we need to discourage risky behaviour without judging the victim.

I personally see Rape as a crime where the all the blame is on the rapist, however I see 'non consensual sex / penetration' as a different type of offence. mixing the two offences is a bad idea in my opinion.

dragging off the street is rape.
forcing yourself on someone repeatedly is rape.

Forcing yourself on someone you know is rape - difficult to prove if its one word against the other? How do we prove it to the same level as above without circumstantial or forensic evidence?
overstepping the mark could be rape?
Previously granted consent being removed is rape?
Alcoholic consent is rape?

When many of these may be avoided by taking a 'chaperone' to the first date, not going home with someone when you first meet them, setting clear boundaries or getting drunk in an unsafe situation shouldn't we encourage these precautions? Without judging the victim.

its all a bit grey and it seems many of the offences that fail to get convictions probably fall into this category. I'd like to see more convictions and less crimes. I'm happy for people to be charged with a lesser offence if it makes sense.

Alcoholic consent is not rape.

Having sex with someone who does not want to have sex with you (and has indicated that in some way, or is unable to indicate it due to being passed out) is rape regardless of the degree of violence or drunkenness involved.

[vetran]

The analogy with speeding is fatuous, driving is a normal activity and if a drunk guy walks in front of you then it's an accident. How is rape anything like that, it's 100% the rapists fault, there is nothing complicated it's either consensual or not. Let us hear your circumstances where rape is legitimate? Utter cretin!

Drunken consent legally doesn't count. so if like many first hook ups one or both parties are too drunk to consent then technically its rape.

If she sticks her finger or tongue in my mouth while I'm drunk then technically its sexual assault even if I agree (she can't commit the offence of Rape unless she has a Penis).

So what you are saying is if a drunk participant says yes - its a heinous crime that will ruin any man's life but if a drunken pedestrian walks in front of a car its an accident? not sure how that makes sense.

Precisely the point I'm trying to make we need to educate both sides to behave differently and avoid the confusion.

Who is an utter cretin now?

[SueEllen]

thanks for meeting me half way.

As you say we need to discourage risky behaviour without judging the victim.

I personally see Rape as a crime where the all the blame is on the rapist, however I see 'non consensual sex / penetration' as a different type of offence. mixing the two offences is a bad idea in my opinion.

What you don't seem to understand clearly both are rape.

There is no lesser or greater crime. It also doesn't matter on the victim's age or gender , or whether the perpetrator knows the victim or not.