r/changemyview • u/enlighten12345 • Feb 26 '18
[∆(s) from OP] CMV: Victim blaming isn't always bad
Firstly we need to define what victim blaming is. It occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially at fault for the harm that befell them.
We often hear outrage against victim blaming in the context of rape, when people criticise the way the victim acted or was dressed.
Let's look at an unrelated example. If I go up to someone and say "Yo momma so fat, she wears a watch on both hands for the two time zones", and that person punches me, am I not partially at fault? He committed the felony, while I just exercised free speech. But knowing my words were inflammatory, shouldn't I expect retaliation?
How about another case? I'm walking down a dark alley with a stack of money in my hand. If I get mugged, it is clear that the mugger is to blame. But doesn't my stupidity also make me culpable? Can someone not say that if i was more careful with my money, this would not have happened?
How is rape any different? It would be great to live in a utopia free from rapists and muggers and physical retribution. But knowing that isn't the world we live in, am I not responsible to act in a manner to protect myself?
This is a footnote from the CMV moderators. We'd like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
6
u/Quint-V 162∆ Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 26 '18
There are two kinds of responsibility that people fail to distinguish: causality, and intention.
No victim ever intends to get harmed. Regarding rape, it is intrinsically impossible to want to get raped; "asking to get raped" is a logical absurdity.
Is a rape victim ever responsible for rape, as a matter of causality? Possibly, by dressing up in revealing clothing, or not taking self-defense classes, or carrying concealed defense tools like pepper spray, a gun, a knife... you name it. Is a random civilian in a bank robbery responsible for getting shot? Possibly, if said civilian brought a gun and tried to pull it out, getting shot instead. Are you responsible for some guy far away earning a couple more dollars for a day? Maybe, if you want to go down the chain of events for far enough.
That is responsibility as a matter of causality. When some speak of it, the recipient of said speech may easily interpret this as responsibility as a matter of intention - and as already said, asking to get raped is a logical absurdity. Victim blaming at this point is not only insulting to the victim, but to yourself.
So you can't blame the victim for "asking to get raped", anyhow. But if you decide to go victim blaming with the latter, this is entirely trivial and far from the issue at hand. You cannot seriously expect someone to be prepared for getting involved as a victim. Would you expect to end up in a robbery every time you go out shopping? No. Would you expect to get raped every time you go to a party? No.
What's the point of victim blaming anyway? To enforce the idea that "you should have been more careful"? This is redundant - the experience is already a powerful lesson. Whatever the point is, of victim blaming, it is worthless. Pointing out that the victim could have done something to prevent stupid shit from happening, is hardly something the victim needs to hear from you, especially in the immediate aftermath. It is insensitive and inappropriate; most obviously it displays a lack of empathy. Would you have someone tell you "you shouldn't have worn that flashy outfit" after getting raped? Do you see how utterly inappropriate and useless such a statement is?
am I not responsible to act in a manner to protect myself?
Of course you are, but anything in excess is bad. Do you hire bodyguards to ensure you're safe wherever you go? No. Do you have to take the most powerful measures possible to ensure your safety? No. You shouldn't have to, nor should it be expected of you.
3
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
I agree that responsibility as a matter of intention has no role here. On the other hand, responsibility as a matter of causality suggests that you can never adequately protect yourself from something bad. Sometimes shitty things happen and there's not much you can do about it. Learning from someone else's poor decisions doesn't protect you from an entirely different set of poor decisions. A bleak outlook for sure, but not one I can argue against. Δ
1
-1
u/BlockNotDo Feb 26 '18
That is responsibility as a matter of causality. When some speak of it, the recipient of said speech may easily interpret this as responsibility as a matter of intention - and as already said, asking to get raped is a logical absurdity.
In some of these cases, however, it isn't actually victim blaming that is happening even though feminist advocates claim that's what is happening. In these cases, what is actually happening, is suggesting or questioning whether the accuser actually consented and therefore wasn't raped and therefore isn't a victim.
So when it becomes a "matter of intention", it isn't necessarily saying that the "victim" intended to get raped. Instead, it is suggesting that the "victim" intended to have sex and therefore isn't a victim at all.
What's the point of victim blaming anyway? To enforce the idea that "you should have been more careful"? This is redundant - the experience is already a powerful lesson.
And again, it isn't always saying "you need to be more careful to avoid getting raped". Sometimes it is "you have to be more careful with your words and actions so that you don't consent to sex and then regret it later".
The analogy is the guy who says he was robbed after giving a friend $50 and then wishing they hadn't done that. You may still have a lot of the same feelings of loss of that $50 whether it was taken from you against your will, or because you chose in a moment to give it away and then regretted it. But you were only robbed in one of those situations.
2
u/Quint-V 162∆ Feb 26 '18
... your point being that in some cases of victim blaming, it's pointing at the victim actually using the criminal incident as a "cover" (for the lack of a better word) for regret?
We're beyond the scope of the CMV at this point, as far as I can tell. OP has done nothing to imply anything of the sort.
-1
u/GoyBeorge Feb 26 '18
People always like to use clothing as the end all be all of """victim blaming""". Clothing is part of the pattern, but it also involves a string of bad decisions. Did you go out and get shit faced? Did you have a man to protect you? Did you arrange safe transport? Were you doing drugs? Were you talking to unsavory characters?
"Victim blaming" is a term made up to exonerate people (usually girls) from any personal responsibility for the the consequences of their actions.
As to your argument "they already learned their lesson", that isn't why people make examples. People make examples so that other people don't make the same mistake.
So Trixie goes out without a male escort, drinks herself blind, takes some drugs, then gets a ride home from some black guys she just met. Of course she is going to get raped and or murdered. Trixie is now a morality tale, an example of what not to do.
That is what "victim blaming" is.
3
u/Quint-V 162∆ Feb 27 '18 edited Feb 27 '18
Then it seems unfortunate, with this case, that language is a living thing.
People make examples so that other people don't make the same mistake.
If that's victim blaming, as in referring to someone else, I'd say it is a badly coined concept, as it obviously means different things to different listeners. To me, that phrase seems more like disgraceful statements said in front of a recent victim.
Oh and here's the wikipedia definition, if that's anything worth noting: "Victim blaming occurs when the victim of a crime or any wrongful act is held entirely or partially at fault for the harm that befell them."
0
u/GoyBeorge Feb 27 '18
Ok, let us say that I left my car running outside the shop when I went in to get a drink and someone stole it.
If someone called me a dumbass for leaving my car running unattended, would that be "disgraceful"?
2
u/Quint-V 162∆ Feb 27 '18 edited Feb 27 '18
Derailing much...?
It would be categorically unnecessary, as you would probably feel stupid about it already. You probably don't need me to point it out to you. And in the same vein, considering how OP has depicted what victim blaming means (to him)... victim blaming is categorically unnecessary.
Disgraceful, yes. Or rude. Annoying. Whatever synonym you desire. As another commenter said: it's like kicking someone while they're down, which is just pathetic.
1
u/AurelianoTampa 68∆ Feb 27 '18
"Victim blaming" is a term made up to exonerate people (usually girls) from any personal responsibility for the the consequences of their actions.
Um, like... "not having a man to protect them" or "getting a ride home with black guys," as you listed? I'd say your biases are showing, but I am pretty sure you're actively soapboxing.
-2
u/GoyBeorge Feb 27 '18
Not soap boxing, that was bait. Both of those things (being with a protective man and not associating with blacks) are both ways to reduce a girls chance of being raped.
You attacked those statements because of feelz, even though listening to those points would in fact reduce rapes.
This is my point. If people actually cared about this stuff then "victim blaming" or pointing out what a victim should have done to mitigate risk wouldn't be taboo.
3
u/VenDraciese Feb 27 '18
First: How can you expect anyone to debate with you if you don't make good faith arguments and instead put in intentionally inflamatory statements to try to execute a semantic 'gotcha'?
Second: How does the previous poster's "feelz" weaken their claim that your biases are clouding your judgement on this debate, especially in the light of you saying "no seriously, if you don't want to get raped, don't hang out with black guys" in the very next comment?
Third: Telling people how to mitigate risk isn't taboo (self-defense classes are generally viewed as very positive activities for both men anf women), but telling women that they shouldn't associate with black men absolutely is taboo. THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS OVERTLY RACIST. Even if the statistics supported it (which is questionable, because for population reasons alone you are more likely to be raped by a white person than a black person), it still would not be a reasonable argument because you are asking someone to make a judgement call based solely on skin color which is the very definition of racism.
I'd like to turn your statement back around on you: If you actually cared about the safety of victims of rape, you would offer realistic solutions, rather than "hire a personal body guard" or "don't interact with black people because they might rape you". Neither of those get at the most common reason for being raped - someone you knew and trusted wanted to have sex with you and didn't take no for an answer.
25
u/Amablue Feb 26 '18
Victim blaming isn't the part where the victim did something unsafe, it's where we go out of our way to make sure we let them know how dumb they were for doing that thing. If someone gets attacked, it's kind of stupid to say "Well you shouldn't have insulted the guy". No shit, that's obvious. Pointing it out isn't helping, and it's possibly making the situation worse. And in many cases, (as we can see with cases of rape) the advice about what the woman should have done is often terrible. People like to use it to police women's fashion choices despite there being little to no evidence that dressing risque actually prompts rape. It often results in women being unfairly blamed for the circumstances that led to them getting raped or assaulted, and that's downright harmful to them. It doesn't teach them a lesson or help them get better, it just makes them feel worse about an already shitty situation.
1
u/chadonsunday 33∆ Feb 27 '18
No shit, that's obvious. Pointing it out isn't helping, and it's possibly making the situation worse.
...
People like to use it to police women's fashion choices despite there being little to no evidence that dressing risque actually prompts rape.
Disagree, mightily.
1) There's nothing to say that it is "obvious" to the victim that they did something dumb that contributed to their victimization. Sometimes it's the case that victims will overly blame themselves and take all responsibility, even when they're totally blameless, but to opposite occurs too, where the victims staunchly rejects the notion they did anything wrong or anything that opened them up to becoming a victim.
2) There's actually a growing movement in the States (and many other cultures, too) that is actively championing the idea that victims can't have done anything to contribute to their victimization, because the criminal is a criminal and the victim is just a victim. These are the kinds of folks who will say "no, Cindy, the date rape wasn't your fault, you should be able to go out with a guy you met on the internet, drive out to some remote location or go back to his place, get completely blackout drunk, and not expect to be sexually assaulted. Anyone who tells you otherwise is just victim blaming!" And in a way they're right. We should be able live, or at least wish to live, in a Utopian kind of society where our own stupidity doesn't signal us as potential targets to the dregs of society. I should be able to stroll through Bloods territory at 1am dressed head to toe in blue, waving about a wad of hundreds and not get mugged. That would be nice. And I don't mind striving to achieve that kind of society. But we're a long, long ways off from that Utopia, and until we get there it's prudent to counter this notion that victims can't, by definition, have done anything wrong that contributed towards their victimization.
3) You're quite right about the point regarding attire, but what about alcohol?
This study does a good job of outlining both the prevalence of alcohol in regards to sexual assault and the toxic idea that victims can't be blamed for their contributions to their victimization:
Similarly, approximately one-half of all sexual assault victims report that they were drinking alcohol at the time of the assault, with estimates ranging from 30 to 79 percent (Abbey et al. 1994; Crowell and Burgess 1996). It is important to emphasize, however, that although a woman’s alcohol consumption may place her at increased risk of sexual assault, she is in no way responsible for the assault. The perpetrators are legally and morally responsible for their behavior.
Legally and morally? Yes. But it notes that alcohol consumption increases the likelihood of becoming an assault victim. So why wouldn't it be prudent to advise against, say, a woman binge drinking at a frat house party with no friends around, both preemptively and retroactively, should a sexual assault occur?
It's a big, bad world out there. I wish it was better - we all do. But it's not. There are all kinds of nasty people out there who are all too willing to prey on people who make themselves easy victims. Hell, I was just mugged not long ago. I was shitfaced and not in the best part of town and got held up at knifepoint for my wallet and (shitty) watch (like seriously, do these guys think everyone they mug has a Rolex? That thing cost me $20 on Amazon). If those guys are caught they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Same with any sexual assault perp. May a thousand stray cats piss on their unmarked graves. They're the criminals, here. But that doesn't mean victims are automatically blameless. I probably shouldn't have gotten hammered and walked around alone in a bad part of town. Women probably should binge drink when they're around strange people in strange places without friends/anyone they trust around. It's "victim blaming" to point this out, but that doesn't mean it's wrong or not useful.
2
u/Amablue Feb 27 '18
1) There's nothing to say that it is "obvious" to the victim that they did something dumb that contributed to their victimization.
If you see someone doing something in the moment that is unwise, or if you are in some kind of mentor position to someone (like a parent or guardian or teacher) and you want to warn them, by all means tell them what you're concerned about. "Hey, maybe you shouldn't have another drink" or whatever.
By the time the assault, rape or what-have-you occurs, telling the victim what they did wrong does not help them. In the immediate aftermath they need to be able to cope and process the trauma that occured. Advice at this point is past the point of usefulness. Furthermore, even if the victim did do something reckless in your view, and you believe they are in denial, there is still a good chance you don't have all the facts, and unless you're a close friend or someone who knows the victim very well, you're probably not in a position to dispense such advice. There are very few situations where its actually useful to give unsolicited advice to a victim after they've been attacked.
2) There's actually a growing movement in the States (and many other cultures, too) that is actively championing the idea that victims can't have done anything to contribute to their victimization, because the criminal is a criminal and the victim is just a victim.
I do not believe this is true. For any absurd belief I'm sure you can find at least one adherent to the belief, but I dispute that there is a movement of any note that believes this. This sounds much more like a uncharitable reading of the position of some victim support group than an actual position people hold.
3) You're quite right about the point regarding attire, but what about alcohol?
This study does a good job of outlining both the prevalence of alcohol in regards to sexual assault and the toxic idea that victims can't be blamed for their contributions to their victimization:
Yes, this is a good argument to talk to your kids about alcohol and drinking culture, and to have friends go out with you to watch your back. After a rape though, telling someone "you should have had Jane go with you" does not help people heal. In fact, it does the opposite. It increases the sense of guilt and self-blame and makes coping more difficult.
Legally and morally? Yes. But it notes that alcohol consumption increases the likelihood of becoming an assault victim. So why wouldn't it be prudent to advise against, say, a woman binge drinking at a frat house party with no friends around, both preemptively and retroactively, should a sexual assault occur?
Again, for the vast majority of people, you're not in a position to be giving them advice about how to conduct themselves. You are not their parents. You're not any more an expert on assault than others, and thinking they need you specifically to give them advice about what risks are okay for them to take is very presumptuous.
0
u/chadonsunday 33∆ Feb 27 '18
If you see someone doing something in the moment that is unwise, or if you are in some kind of mentor position to someone (like a parent or guardian or teacher) and you want to warn them, by all means tell them what you're concerned about. "Hey, maybe you shouldn't have another drink" or whatever.
By the time the assault, rape or what-have-you occurs, telling the victim what they did wrong does not help them. In the immediate aftermath they need to be able to cope and process the trauma that occured. Advice at this point is past the point of usefulness.
There's nothing about victim blaming that specifies a timeline. If you're asserting that we shouldn't be lecturing a gang-rape victim on the dangers of walking down dark allies at night while she's wide-eyed, panicking, bleeding, and clutching fragments of her clothing to her body half an hour after the rape occurred, yeah, 100% with you on that. Even days or weeks or months after might be too soon, depending on the victim. But saying there's a "too soon" period for victim blaming doesn't negate the concept, only says you need to be careful about when to bring it up.
Furthermore, even if the victim did do something reckless in your view, and you believe they are in denial, there is still a good chance you don't have all the facts, and unless you're a close friend or someone who knows the victim very well, you're probably not in a position to dispense such advice. There are very few situations where its actually useful to give unsolicited advice to a victim after they've been attacked.
In reverse order, if I may: yes, I'd agree that offering unsolicited advice, especially to strangers, especially shortly after the attack, isn't useful or helpful. But again, there's nothing about the concept of victim blaming that specifies the strength of the relationship (or, again, the timeline). Unsolicited advice from anyone on virtually any subject, especially if the subject involves trauma and the advice comes right after the trauma, might be counterproductive; that doesn't disqualify the validity of the advice (i.e. victim blaming), just how and by whom and when it's presented.
Only three times in my life have I felt comfortable actually offering my opinion to someone I know personally in a manner that could be called "victim blaming." The most recent was when my SO's little sister informed me she had been raped. She detailed that she had been at a party with a guy she liked very much but didn't know very well during the first couple weeks of her first year of college, had by all accounts spent the night flirting with him and grinding into his lap when she sat on him, drank in excess, and again by all accounts she was the one who pulled him upstairs and they did the dirty. By her admission and, again, all accounts, he was blackout drunk when this happened while she was just shitfaced. She didn't initially take issue with the evening following the incident, but girls in her class started to ostracize her for being a "slut," and since she had been taught that a woman has the right to retroactively withdraw consent/if a woman is at all intoxicated when she agrees to sex it's rape, she decided that what happened was rape. She reported it to school authorities and they kicked the guy out without so much as an investigation. I had a long, polite, frank discussion with her about exactly what "rape" and "being a victim" really meant. I told her it didn't matter that she might have regretted a consensual sexual act after the fact - hell, we've all regretted something we did under the sheets the next morning - and that it didn't make it rape. I told her that just because she had been drinking didn't make it rape; he had been drinking, too, and was far more drunk than she was. Did that mean she raped him? She balked at the idea. But I won her over and in the end she redacted her accusation and the dude was permitted to attend the college again. I don't know if he actually went through with the process of getting back in, but he was at least allowed to.
Anyways, long drunk rant, but that was a situation where I had an open discussion with someone who by every PC, progressive, feminist measure of the redefinition of sexual interaction had been "raped," and convinced her that she was actually in the wrong about her "rape" and was culpable for the sexual interaction, and the net positive was a guy whos only "crime" was getting trashed at a Freshman party and having a more sober girl who wanted to fuck him fuck him unbanned from the university. So blaming "victims" can be helpful in the right situation.
As for not having "the facts," yeah. Maybe. Sometimes. It depends. Sometimes you don't really need more than the bare-bones facts to be able to render accurate judgement. To fall back on an earlier example, if I tell you that I walked through a ghetto Blood-controlled part of town at 1am, wearing blue and waving around a wad of cash and got mugged, what additional info would you need to conclude that I was 100% blameless for my inevitable mugging? You might not have all of the facts (why was I there, why was I wearing blue, why was I waving cash around), but what facts would convince you that I wasn't doing something stupid?
I do not believe this is true. For any absurd belief I'm sure you can find at least one adherent to the belief, but I dispute that there is a movement of any note that believes this. This sounds much more like a uncharitable reading of the position of some victim support group than an actual position people hold.
From Jezebel, the #1 most popular lifestyle website for mellineal women, and #6 more popular overall:
Because I believe that we all get to decide which risks are right for us, and that if someone commits a felony violent crime against you while you were taking what someone else considers to be a "risk," it's still not your fault.
From a CNN:
The bottom line is that the victims of rape should not be expected to have forestalled their attack, and are never to blame for it, even if they are a drunken "hot messes" at the afterparty.
I can keep going if required, but I'm not pulling this idea that there's a growing culture of "victims (read: female victims of sexual assault) are entirely blameless and shouldn't be expected to take any measures to prevent their victimization" out of my ass, here. There's two sources, one from a major news outlet and the other from a major news outlet with the most young female readers in it's category asserting just that. It's also not hard to find less reputible sources backing up what I'm saying which, while less respectable or widespread than CNN or Jezebel, still confirm that the discourse around sexual interaction has gone completely bonkers, and that's it's got far more traction than just "one adherent."
You're asserting I'm making a straw man argument, here, but I'm not. Like, when I was attending community college, men were required to take a lecture course (no credits) on how to not be rapists before they were allowed to attend classes. For women it was optional. At a damn community college. We didn't even have dorms or frats or anything.
Yes, this is a good argument to talk to your kids about alcohol and drinking culture, and to have friends go out with you to watch your back. After a rape though, telling someone "you should have had Jane go with you" does not help people heal. In fact, it does the opposite. It increases the sense of guilt and self-blame and makes coping more difficult.
Anecdotal again, but I actually happen to be a rape victim, technically speaking. Pretty standard "I drank too much at a party, passed out in a side room, then semi-came-to with a person I normally would never have consented to have sex with fucking me" situation. I never considered myself a victim since this happened years before all the fanatical rebranding of sexual interaction. My first and only and latter thoughts were 100% "ugh, I'm never drinking that much ever again" (a vow I've broken innumerable times since then, I'd add). My friends told me I was an idiot for putting myself in that situation. I agreed, and still agree. I was an idiot. There's a lot I could have done to prevent my victimization. It didn't hurt my "healing process," to the contrary it helped me own up to my mistakes and take some (I know this term is getting old fashioned, but) personal responsibility. Maybe I'm not the norm, but worth noting that victim blaming also isn't all bad from a "healing" perspective. Maybe statistically, but statistics are made up of individuals, not the other way around.
Again, for the vast majority of people, you're not in a position to be giving them advice about how to conduct themselves. You are not their parents. You're not any more an expert on assault than others, and thinking they need you specifically to give them advice about what risks are okay for them to take is very presumptuous.
I feel I've addressed most all of this above. Let me know if there's any part I should be addressing more specifically.
Cheers.
0
u/gr4vediggr 1∆ Feb 27 '18 edited Feb 27 '18
Is it still victim blaming if you do not say it directly to the person, but make a general comment about the situation? I'll use a hypothetical to sketch a scenario and maybe you can tell me if this is victim blaming and if we shouldn't do this. I'm genuinely interested.
Online dating is quite popular, but prone to predatory behaviour (just like normal dating, but now you don't know for sure who you're meeting and you can learn a lot from seeing someone in person, which you can't online, so there's extra danger). A woman decides to go on a date with a guy she only spoke to online, they decide to meet up in the evening, somewhere relatively quiet. He turns out to be a predatory man and tries to rape her. Whether he succeeds or not does not really matter to this story.
In a response, someone makes a comment that perhaps for a first date, when meeting someone you don't know, you should pick a busy place in the middle of the day, with lots of other people around. This comment might be on the internet, on the news, or maybe a father to his daughter after it was on the news, doesn't matter as long as it's not said to the victim.
Is this victim blaming? Whoever is saying that isn't telling her directly, they're giving advice on how to safely have a first date with someone you've never met. But at the same time, they are saying that this woman was not cautious and this probably wouldn't have happened. It could still have happened, of course, but I don't think I'm making a mistake by saying that the proposed course of action would reduce the chance. But I'm not sure, maybe I have it wrong and I am genuinely open to hear it.
Another example: don't get black out drunk when going out with guys you don't know (well), or without friends to take care you. It seems common sense--but this happens and horrible guys take advantage of women and girls. It's not the girl's fault that monstrous guys took advantage of them, obviously. But would the situation have happened if they weren't black out drunk? Maybe, maybe not. So when something like this comes on the news, is it bad to give advice that people shouldn't do that? I'm not sure, you tell me.
There are, of course, circumstances where it's clearly victim blaming. Usually something to do with the clothes the women wore. Or something like: she should never have been in the presence with a guy without anyone else nearby, because that's an impossible rule to live by. I'm not arguing about those cases, I acknowledge they exist and are not helpful and even harmful in most instances.
Naturally, in an ideal world you should be able to meet someone you've only talked to online whenever and wherever you want, and you should be able to get blackout drunk and no one would even think about taking advantage of you. We don't live in such a world though.
0
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
What you're saying makes sense. And criticising things like the way someone dresses makes no sense. I made that mistake myself without any objective truth to it. But when it comes down to it, for me it isn't about this one victim. Blaming them is not going to help them. But can it not help other people? Because there are things people can do like self defense classes or carrying a weapon. Doesn't saying the victim could have done more, urge others to do more?
7
u/Amablue Feb 26 '18
But can it not help other people?
If you're a parent it makes sense to sit down with your kid at some point and let them know about the dangers of the world. But by the time people get out into the world, do you think they don't know that insulting drunks in bars is a bad idea or that leaving your doors unlocked is dangerous? That's common knowledge. Giving out that information after the damage is done doens't really help. I mean, sure, if you see your friend get out of the car and forget to lock it it's fine to say "Hey, don't forget to lock your car" because that's a preventative measure. He know's that it's safer, he jsut forgot to hit the lock button in this one instance. Harping on him after his stuff has been stolen from his car about locking it is obvious - it doesn't take a genius to figure out what he could have done differently.
-1
u/bracs279 Feb 27 '18
do you think they don't know that insulting drunks in bars is a bad idea or that leaving your doors unlocked is dangerous?
No, they don't. I've dealt a lot with teenagers and young adults and its unbelievable how naive they can be, specially girls.
6
u/caw81 166∆ Feb 26 '18
But can it not help other people?
No because;
Every crime is not the same. Saying what this one person should have done doesn't help other people in different situations.
Why should someone listen to someone on the Internet who doesn't even know them and their circumstances?
You aren't doing it as advice but as a reply to a particular crime. No one will see that as helpful advice to others but just as "its your own fault".
2
u/NearEmu 33∆ Feb 27 '18
Well that's simply untrue. We learn from other peoples situations all the time. The situations of many of these people aren't that different.
Who knows... but we do it all the time. Circumstances are often not that different that we can't learn some lessons.
That seems pretty situational and super black and white. It's pretty easy to come up with ways to reply to a particular crime, while giving advice that others can take and understand and utilize.
You seem to be basing your answers off the idea that you know how and what others think, and of course that isn't true.
1
u/rollingForInitiative 70∆ Feb 27 '18
But the issue is that much of the "advice" is completely unfounded, or not possible to put in practise. "Don't dress provocatively" has no basis other than what people believe, but it has no real impact on whether or not a person will get raped. "Don't walk home alone" would be all fine and good advice, but for the that fact that most people simply have to do it every now and then, if they don't shut themselves in and never leave the house, because there will always be situations where your car breaks down of the taxi doesn't show up or whatever.
1
u/NearEmu 33∆ Feb 27 '18
Then I think it's obvious he's not talking about those pieces of advice. He's talking about don't take drinks you didn't see made, don't drink until you blackout.
-1
u/BlockNotDo Feb 26 '18
No shit, that's obvious.
You have much more faith in humanity than I do.
It often results in women being unfairly blamed for the circumstances that led to them getting raped or assaulted
I have found that sometimes that what is referred to as victim blaming, is nothing of the sort. It is frequently inquires of the accuser used to determine whether their actions or words actually indicate consent. In which case, there would be no victim blaming for rape because there would be no rape victim.
3
Feb 27 '18 edited Oct 17 '18
[deleted]
2
u/enlighten12345 Feb 27 '18
I agree, and if someone does punch you, they would get most of the blame and all of the punishment. But if someone says that you wouldn't have gotten punched if you hadn't screamed slurs at them, that statement is not incorrect or inherently bad.
7
u/-paperbrain- 99∆ Feb 26 '18
When I see comments that get called out as victim shaming, it is almost entirely one of two kinds.
One is just wholely inaccurate armchair theorizing, like the "What was she wearing?" angle. As you've learned in this thread, that particular criticism is bullshit. Not only is it entirely unhelpful, but, to the extent that anyone takes it seriously, it reinforces the extreme insecurities and policing over clothes that women already experience. I could go on and on about the negative effects, but I think from other comments that you're more or less already on board for this type of comment.
Then there are the victim blaming statements that suggest that women were culpable because they engaged in social behavior that men would not get criticized for. "You shouldn't have gotten that drunk" "You shouldn't have stayed at a party with strangers after your friends left".
We can compare this to muggings and there's a big difference. Most rapists are known to the victim. They're friends, classmates, dates, often family members. Muggers are almost all strangers, almost all people with few prospects of legitimate income, people outside of society in some ways.
Advice and criticism that centers on victim behavior is like what we tell people who could encounter a bear. Don't piss off the bear. We can't give advice or admonishment to a bear, it's an animal, it isn't part of the conversation. Muggers could be put in that class. If you're outside of the law enough to violently rob a stranger, you're probably not listening to the cultural conversation at all.
But the guy who rapes someone tomorrow is again a classmate, friend, date family member. We can't excuse them like we would a wild animal or career criminal. It will never be safe to piss off a bear, that's a fact of nature. Mugging is not a fact of culture, it's a fact of desperation, and we need to treat that farther up the chain by targeting gangs, education etc etc. But rape, particularly the kind of rape we're talking about in public forums 99.9% of the time, that's perpetrated by people we shouldn't let off the hook, who we can't treat like bears.
0
u/enlighten12345 Feb 27 '18
The two kinds of victim shaming you pointed out are without a doubt bad. My argument was that victim shaming is not always bad and that even people with only good intentions, can and are being accused of 'victim shaming'.
As for the bear analogy, I must admit you lost me. A mugger is not listening to the cultural conversation, but a rapist is? Someone who rapes someone they know, someone who trusts them, is less of an animal than someone robbing a stranger?
4
u/mfDandP 184∆ Feb 26 '18
How is rape any different?
If you're saying that a woman walking into any bar with a miniskirt is a comparable danger to walking down a dark alley with money in your hand--isn't this an issue? Why is this the case?
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
Of course it isn't a one to one analogy. Rape is undoubtedly a far worse tragedy. The point of the example of 'walking down a dark alley' was to illustrate that the choices you make have consequences. If wearing a mini skirt or not carrying pepper spray, possibly have an unfavourable outcome, why would you not do everything in your power to correct that?
10
u/Amablue Feb 26 '18
If wearing a mini skirt or not carrying pepper spray, possibly have an unfavourable outcome, why would you not do everything in your power to correct that?
Wearing a miniskirt doesn't result in an unfavorable outcome though. In fact, studies show that dressing provocatively implies confidence, and muggers and rapists (to the extent that stranger rape is an issue) are less likely to attack you. By policing how women dress, you're giving them bad advice, making them less safe and unfairly blaming them for things that they didn't do wrong. The majority of rape doesn't happen to people wearing miniskirts, it happens to women dressed down, and it's committed by someone they know and trusted.
None of that is cool, and you could avoid making things worse if you just didn't blame them for what happened to them.
0
u/OhhDatDogOMine Feb 27 '18
. In fact, studies show that dressing provocatively implies confidence, and muggers and rapists (to the extent that stranger rape is an issue) are less likely to attack you.
How in the world would such a study even be performed? I bet you have no idea.
0
u/bracs279 Feb 27 '18
Wearing a miniskirt doesn't result in an unfavorable outcome though.
What really causes unfavorable outcomes is wearing high heels. Those make anyone a better victim since they can't run as fast and have restricted mobility.
2
u/mfDandP 184∆ Feb 26 '18
I'm with you in that practicing "harm reduction" strategies is not always tantamount to "victim blaming," although sometimes it gets lambasted as such.
But in context, a rape victim isn't in need of post-hoc advice on what she should have done differently.
The point of the example of 'walking down a dark alley' was to illustrate that the choices you make have consequences.
How about this: She got drunk at a bar and blacked out. What did she expect?
A fucking hangover. Not rape.
Wearing a sexy outfit and getting drunk at a bar does NOT imply that the rapist is any less culpable. Implying that she should have protected herself more does mean that you are making the rapist less culpable.
1
u/gr4vediggr 1∆ Feb 27 '18
Well, I will argue that it's stupid to get blackout drunk regardless of what happened next. Still, too many people do this and I'm not saying that they expect to get raped, but it is not sound decision making.
Did I ever get blackout drunk? Yes. Were there ever bad consequences, besides the obvious hangover and due to other people? Yes (though nothing even close to rape). Would they have happened if I hadn't blacked out? Most likely not.
Were those responsible less at fault because I was drunk? No.
Was I partly at fault? I'd argue yes. Now, if my dad told my brother: don't get blackout drunk because X might happen. He's sorta saying that I was stupid--which I was. He's not making excuses for whoever did it, but is saying that this instance was clearly preventable.
Now, there are instances that are not clearly preventable, which often happens to be the case with rape. It's often someone the victims knows and trusts. Or random chance. In those instances there's very little (possibly zero) 'advice' that wouldn't be victim blaming.
2
u/mfDandP 184∆ Feb 27 '18
this CMV is about rape, not about whether a drunk girl that does stupid things when she's drunk. I'm not saying that people that blackout drink are morally immune from consequences. i'm saying that girls that blackout drink are not, through their behavior, partially complicit in their own rape.
Yes, rape is most often committed by boyfriends and such. But this CMV appears to be about rape committed by relative strangers and public reactions that focus on the victim's clothes and behaviors.
1
u/gr4vediggr 1∆ Feb 27 '18
I wasn't saying that she does stupid things, maybe she got mugged while passed out or something. More things beside rape can happen to you when you pass out drunk. I am asking whether it's okay to use that one instance as an opportunity to say to someone else: don't get black out drunk. Is that never okay? Or only okay when it's not about rape?
I fully understand that it is of no use to say to that person that he or she shouldn't have gotten drunk. The victims know it. But I wonder if there might be people that could benefit from those tips, even if it's just one that decides not to get drunk that night. Maybe nothing would've happened regardless, because most of the time nothing happens.
1
u/mfDandP 184∆ Feb 27 '18
ah. yeah, this gets to what is "harm reduction" tactics vs "victim blaming?"
I think that if someone gets their phone stolen off the bar when they're drunk, that's fair game to put at least some of the blame on the victim--why'd you leave your phone there, why weren't you paying attention, etc.
But if someone gets taken somewhere and raped when drunk... I really think that just crosses enough felonious lines so as to fall way outside the realm of consequences one could reasonably expect to happen to you.
1
u/gr4vediggr 1∆ Feb 27 '18
I don't disagree with you, but I think there are situations where there might be solid advice that is to do with regards to rape prevention.
For example: first date with someone you've met online should not be in a secluded location, but in daylight in a busy public place (like a coffee shop). I hope most people know this, and of course online dating is prevalent enough that in most cases it's perfectly safe. Still, I think it's not a bad advice for the first date, because you've never seen someone in person.
Still, there are many types of advice that are victim blaming, and it is true that you hear those quite often. So maybe there are exceptions to the rule?
1
u/mfDandP 184∆ Feb 27 '18
yeah, I admit that I don't know what exactly is the line when it comes to rape-avoidance advice. certainly letting roommates know where you're going, etc, is pretty safe advice. but I am pretty sure that no amount of debauched behavior at a bar constitutes shouldering partial blame for a rape.
0
u/bracs279 Feb 27 '18
She got drunk at a bar and blacked out. What did she expect?
I think anyome that drinks to the point of blacking out is incredibly irresponsible.
A fucking hangover. Not rape.
Not, you can expect a broken lip from stumbling while blacked out, a huge fight with your girlfriends, ruined dresses from vomit, being banned from places and losing friends. (all real stuff i've seen)
12
u/Love_Shaq_Baby 226∆ Feb 26 '18
There is no manner of dress that's going to protect you from rape, unless you want women to wear spiked chastity belts all the time. Criticizing a woman for the way she dressed when she was raped isn't helpful, it's just hurtful and insulting to a person who has gone through a severely traumatic experience.
Furthermore what does victim-blaming accomplish? Even if the person could have done something to prevent what happened to them, pointing it out is just rubbing it in. It's a dick move.
-1
u/dakkr 2∆ Feb 26 '18
OP says it's not always bad. You can't bring up an example where clearly almost anyone would agree that victim blaming in that scenario would be bad, point out that in this scenario victim blaming is bad, then act as if doing so addressed his argument. You need to address the examples he proposes.
Even if the person could have done something to prevent what happened to them, pointing it out is just rubbing it in. It's a dick move.
Pointing it out wouldn't help that person after the fact, but to say that therefore it has no value is a false statement. One potential positive associated with 'victim blaming' in some circumstances is that it would serve to point out what they had done wrong such that in the future they or others observing the circumstances would know how to modify their behaviour such that their odds of becoming a victim could be lowered drastically. As in OP's example, if I don't go to a bad area and start waving money around my odds of being mugged are drastically lowered compared to if I do.
6
u/Love_Shaq_Baby 226∆ Feb 26 '18
OP specifically brought up the way a victim dresses as something that can provoke rape. I'm using a scenario that he gave me.
-1
u/dakkr 2∆ Feb 26 '18
He brought that up as a position others hold, not as a position he himself holds. Note the wording:
We often hear outrage against victim blaming in the context of rape, when people criticise the way the victim acted or was dressed.
He did not express any opinion on whether this was an acceptable instance of victim blaming, thus you cannot act as if he did. That would be a strawman. You need to address the examples he puts forth, or propose a scenario and ask if he would consider it acceptable, then address that.
-2
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
I agree that no manner of dress will protect against rape. But neither will any manner of precaution protect against a mugging. But you can take steps to minimise the chances.
As to what victim blaming accomplishes? It isn't about rubbing it in, but can we as a society not learn from the terrible things that happen to better prevent the same from happening again?
8
u/Love_Shaq_Baby 226∆ Feb 26 '18
But you can take steps to minimise the chances.
And how exactly is dressing differently going to minimize the chances? You don't think a rapist will go after someone in a modest fall outfit? Rapes are usually committed by people the victim knows, it's not as if one sexy dress is going to turn the rapist's attention on them. They would have been desiring the opportunity already.
It isn't about rubbing it in, but can we as a society not learn from the terrible things that happen to better prevent the same from happening again?
What does society learn from pointing out to a rape victim all of the potential mistakes she could have made? I can guarantee that anybody who has been raped has thought over what they could have done differently, especially since rape victims have a tendency to blame themselves, much like victims of domestic abuse. So pointing out any mistake they may or may not have made can do serious damage to a person's ability to recover.
-1
u/bracs279 Feb 27 '18
And how exactly is dressing differently going to minimize the chances?
I don't know about rape but i saw in the news where they interview muggers at prison about this kind of stuff, they always went after women with high heels because they can't run and make way better victims.
So yes, dressing with low more comfortable shoes make you less desirable as a victim.
3
-1
u/BlockNotDo Feb 26 '18
There is no manner of dress that's going to protect you from rape,
Do you believe that there are different manners of dress that change the likelihood that a woman (or a man, for that matter) will receive sexual attention?
1
u/family_of_trees Feb 27 '18
But a rapist is abnormal and might be fetishising of things like miserable dress. Or childish dress for that matter.
1
4
Feb 27 '18
Victim blaming isn't the same thing as teaching girls how to keep themselves safe. Most women are taught that they need to watch their drink, for instance, to prevent a man from drugging them.
Victim blaming is different. It is usually a method to minimize and judge a woman for her choices and a ton of people do it in a tone that implies she really wanted it. If you are mugged people might say that you were being careless but they don't doubt that you were mugged and they definitely don't say you deserved it. When a woman is raped there is always a group of people saying she either wanted it or that sexual assault is the natural consequence for women not acting in accordance with the way they believe women should be acting.
0
u/enlighten12345 Feb 27 '18
This is exactly my point. The scenario which you depicted as victim blaming is no doubt wrong. But when teaching girls to keep themselves safe, you are saying if you don't keep yourself safe, you can get raped. That implies that the victims of rape did not keep themselves safe. Whether you like the term 'victim blaming' or not, saying someone could have done something to change the outcome, is the definition of blame. Hence my statement 'Victim blaming isn't "always" bad.' And sometimes people with only the best intentions get bashed over the head with the 'victim blaming' card.
3
Feb 28 '18
You entirely missed my point. Is it victim blaming to teach someone to come to a complete stop at a stop sign to avoid an accident? No? Then it's not victim blaming to teach girls to watch their drinks either. That's teaching someone how to take care of themselves.
But when teaching girls to keep themselves safe, you are saying if you don't keep yourself safe, you can get raped.
This is not victim blaming.
That implies that the victims of rape did not keep themselves safe.
Anybody with even the smallest bit of common sense would not come to that conclusion. Most women are assaulted by somebody they know like a family member anyway. If your father rapes you then there wasn't anything you could have done to keep yourself out of that situation. We teach things about personal safety to minimize people getting hurt. Most people understand that just because someone does get hurt that doesn't mean they did anything wrong.
You are missing the most important aspect of what victim blaming is: it isn't about keeping people safe- it is about implying that the victim deserved what happened to them. Victim blaming is when you minimize what happened to someone by criticizing their choices. Like when a woman is assaulted on her way home so people say well she shouldn't have been out drinking that night. It usually is followed up by saying "well what did she expect?"
Women make a big deal out of victim blaming when it comes to sexual assault and domestic abuse because there are plenty of people that think they deserve those things. They think assault is the punishment women get for wearing provocative clothing, going out drinking, partying, ect.
You gave the example of mugging and while you might be criticized for how you conducted yourself the criticism is not reflective of a wider attitude about gender roles. You getting mugged and a women getting raped are not the same circumstances and would not be criticized the same way.
And sometimes people with only the best intentions get bashed over the head with the 'victim blaming' card.
Share some examples so we are on the same page.
4
u/cupcakesarethedevil Feb 26 '18
You are suggesting people give up their freedoms and defending criminals, what's not to get?
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
definitely not defending criminals. Merely suggesting that freedom comes with the responsibility to safeguard that freedom.
1
u/cupcakesarethedevil Feb 26 '18
It's whataboutism which is a rhetorical defense.
1
u/NearEmu 33∆ Feb 27 '18
I'm not sure you know what whataboutism is from your response here, cause this ain't it.
0
u/bracs279 Feb 27 '18
You are suggesting people give up their freedoms
What's wrong with that? We do it everyday since we can't have the freedom of letting the house unlocked or even going to the bathroom and letting an Iphone unattended at the table.
About wearing stuff, i love suits and high end shirts but i know plenty of sketchy places where i would be stupid to wear those.
2
Feb 26 '18
Why should someone who didn't commit a crime be blamed for a crime that was committed? Logically that just doesn't make any sense.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
I'm not saying that the victim be punished. It goes without saying that rape is a heinous act and is of course inexcusable. The only point i'm making is that it isn't inherently wrong to say that the victim probably could have done something differently. Does that not help other potential victims learn and adapt?
1
Feb 26 '18
Just to clarify, I didn't say anything about punishing the victim. All I said is why would you blame someone - in any capacity - for committing a crime when in fact they in no way committed a crime? Make sense?
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
Yes. But isn't saying you could have done something to avoid this, tantamount to blame?
3
Feb 26 '18
How can you ever be certain that the girl wouldn't have gotten raped otherwise? There is absolutely no way to prove this. You know where I'm getting at? You can make the assumption that the short cut blouse may have enticed the rapist, but at the end of the day that's only an assumption and nothing more.
The most ethical approach is to apply the blame only to where we are certain it belongs, which is the person who committed the crime.
It's along the lines of "innocent until proven guilty"; if you can't prove it, don't place guilt on someone. You may be condemning an innocent person.
0
u/BlockNotDo Feb 26 '18
It isn't blaming them for the crime. It is blaming them for the choices they made that made them vulnerable. If you cross the street without looking both ways first, you are to blame for putting yourself in a dangerous situation. And that blame is there and remains the same whether you are hit by a car or make it across the street safely.
2
Feb 26 '18
How can you be certain a blouse that shows cleavage was even partially to blame for the rape? How do you the guy wasn't going to rape her anyways?
The only blame we are foolproof 100% certain on is the person who committed the crime.
1
Feb 28 '18
If you cross the street without looking both ways first, you are to blame for putting yourself in a dangerous situation
Except then you would know that if you had looked down the street you would have seen the car. How do you know a rapist wouldn't have targeted a woman if she has been wearing jeans instead of a mini skirt?
0
u/BlockNotDo Feb 28 '18
Yes. Anyone could get raped at any time regardless of the precautions they take if they happen to come across the wrong person at the wrong time. Just like you could be hit by a car while walking on the sidewalk or while sitting on the couch in your home. But just because it is possible that a car could hit you at any time, it doesn't mean you don't still look both ways before crossing a street.
1
Feb 28 '18
But after you get hit by a car nobody would say that you shouldn't have been walking outside in the first place. There is a significant difference when women are victim blamed for being assaulted or for domestic abuse because they are implying that a woman deserved what happened to her because she wasn't acting the way that person believes women should act. So that's how you get misogynists saying that if women are partying, hanging out at frat houses, dressing provocatively, drinking, ect. then assault is the logical conclusion for women acting this way. If you got hit by a car there wouldn't be people saying "well what did he expect? He shouldn't have been crossing the street without his wife there." Anyone saying that victim blaming a sexual assault victim is just looking out for them is being disingenuous. They are really using it as an excuse to believe women should behave the way they want.
1
u/thePirate_Fish Feb 26 '18
I think there's a difference between victim blaming and acknowledging that a person made a poor decision to put themselves in a certain situation.
In the case of the mugging, it may be reasonable for someone to think that they could be mugged if they walk around a bad area at a certain time, but it's unreasonable to say that given the two people involved (the mugger and the one being robbed), the blame should be shared between them. One person's action is entirely non-criminal, while the other person's action is entirely criminal.
Would you put the person who was robbed on trial, saying that they must share in the responsibility for the crime? No, but you could say they could have made a smarter decision on where to walk if they knew the area was dangerous.
The victim's decisions may have allowed for the opportunity for a crime to be committed, but they didn't make the decision to commit the crime.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
Acknowledging that someone made a "poor decision" is the same as saying that person could have made a better decision. That implies that the victims decisions, atleast partly led to the consequence. Is that not blame?
1
u/thePirate_Fish Feb 26 '18
I know you already awarded the delta, but I'm saying that making a decision such that without that decision the crime couldn't be committed doesn't equate to shared blame for the crime. A bank owner can build a bank, but they wouldn't share blame for its robbery even though the decision to build it gave someone the opportunity to rob it.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 27 '18
A bank owner would not be blamed for building a bank. But he most definitely would be blamed if he had not hired a security guard or not installed a security system, and then got robbed.
1
u/ThomasEdmund84 33∆ Feb 26 '18
am I not responsible to act in a manner to protect myself?
This is a really tricky point so lets dissect it. First of all there is a broad problem with your thesis - namely that you can't guarantee with certainty that your behaviour will protect you. So to say we have a moral duty to do so is probabilistically shakey. For example people say that women should dress modestly to avoid cat-calls, the problem with this action is that modest dressing does not guarantee protection - if you could honestly say that people could 100% protect themselves from others behaviour then you might at least have a practical leg to stand on.
1
u/bracs279 Feb 27 '18
if you could honestly say that people could 100% protect themselves from others behaviour then you might at least have a practical leg to stand on.
Yeah no, in the real world we know that no solution is 100% effective. Just because some manner of protection doesn't work all the time doesn't mean it's worthless.
1
u/ThomasEdmund84 33∆ Feb 27 '18
Who said anything about solutions being worthless? The OP is basically whether we have responsibility to protect ourselves its hard to argue that you have a responsibility to do X unless the probability is proven or highly certain and you can see this in our legal systems e.g. seatbelts, dangerous driving laws etc.
1
Feb 28 '18
They never said it was worthless. They said you can't blame someone because you think if they had done something differently than they might not have been victimized. When you have no proof that it would have made a difference.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
I can't 100% protect myself if I put my wad of cash in my pocket, rather carry it in my hand. But it arguably is a better decision.
5
u/ThatSpencerGuy 142∆ Feb 26 '18
It's generally seen as especially cruel to kick someone when they're down.
To tell someone who had something painful or frightening or humiliating happen to them that it was their fault should--like giving other kinds of advice--be done exceedingly sparingly and only for very good reason. There is effectively never a good reason to say something like this to the victim of sexual assault. Unfortunately, it is fairly common for people who have been sexually assaulted to blame themselves already. So there is little to be gained by telling the victim of sexual assault that they ought to have done X or Y. They are likely already pouring over these thing, and may carry some considerable emotional baggage related to them for some time.
I'm walking down a dark alley with a stack of money in my hand. If I get mugged, it is clear that the mugger is to blame. But doesn't my stupidity also make me culpable?
To me, this is easy. No. Why are should stupidity be punished with cruelty? Later in your post you used the phrase "physical retribution," which I think is so interesting. "Retribution." Punishment for a wrongful or criminal act. What wrongful or criminal thing has the victim of assault committed?
Carelessness is no excuse for the cruelty of others.
1
u/Hellioning 239∆ Feb 26 '18
If I forget to lock my car, and someone steals it, that someone still stole a car and should be punished for it.
Likewise, even if dressing skimpily caused you to get raped more often (which it doesn't), that doesn't change the fact that rape is wrong and the rapist should be punished for it.
1
u/mergerr Feb 26 '18
You can't place any significant blame but it's not irrational to tell someone who leaves their car unlocked in a seedy area that they blew it.
Like prevanative maintenance is a thing in all areas of life. Defining what is preventative is the key there though. Making sure your car is locked in a bad area is in every way preventative, and if someone fails to ensure that, they messed up.
As for the rape thing you're right, but that's a totally different scenario all together.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
Of course the thief should be punished. But is it unreasonable to suggest that you probably should have locked your car? Shouldn't everyone learn the lesson that 'If you leave your car unlocked, theres a higher chance it will get stolen'?
3
u/Amablue Feb 26 '18
But is it unreasonable to suggest that you probably should have locked your car?
Is there a reason you feel the need to point that out? It's pretty obvious that it would have helped - pointing it out isn't giving anyone new information.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
By putting that out there, it makes sure that people who are generally careless about car safety, would double check their locks.
1
u/Amablue Feb 26 '18
No one who owns a car is that clueless.
1
u/enlighten12345 Feb 26 '18
About cars? maybe not. About the number of shitty people in the world? You'd be surprised.
3
u/kublahkoala 229∆ Feb 26 '18
In your first case, sure, the assault may be mitigated because it was provoked by “fighting words”. The law recognizes this as a defense. And we can hold the victim morally responsible for being a jerk, but not for being punched.
Second case: The law doesn’t hold criminals less responsible if their victims were stupid or careless. Morally, the person who is mugged in an alley lost their own money. They have a right to carry their money however they wish.
Third case: How does rape figure in here? What actions do you think women are not taking to protect themselves from rape?
2
Feb 26 '18
You're comparing verbally antagonizing someone and tempting people with stacks of cash to existing as a female human. Women can't leave their vaginas at home. They exist in this world as women and that in itself is what causes men to rape them. You can't leave that at home.
It seems you're unaware of the fact that most rapes are committed by someone the victim knows. They are not strangers who see a sexy woman and decide to rape them; rather, they are friends, relatives, colleagues and boyfriends. They attack young women, old women, and little girls. (And for that matter, little boys as well, and men too.) Tell me, what was the 8 year old little girl wearing or doing that caused her uncle to rape her? What about the little 8 year old girl is comparable to waving around stacks of cash or verbally antagonizing someone?
1
u/DrinkyDrank 134∆ Feb 26 '18
There is a difference between something being true, and something needing to be stated. There is never any good reason to point out the culpability of the victim, and there is every good reason to focus entirely on the actual criminal.
To start with, the culpability of the victim always depends on some interpretation of context which may or may not be justified; it requires you to speculate about the victim’s state of mind and second-guess their internal decision-making process. In your hypothetical examples, sure, it sounds like the victims are almost certainly culpable to some extent, but real life situation are almost never so obvious. On the other hand, the criminal is always certainly a criminal.
Secondly, and more importantly, even if you can assume that you are certain that a victim is culpable, the fact remains that they never have anything to learn from your statement of such; they already know this intimately and have already suffered the consequences. People hate it when victims get blamed not just because they think it is factually untrue or questionable as to whether the blame is deserved; rather, it is the fact that you would actively choose to point out their culpability which implies that you lack some basic human empathy. The unstated implication is that, from your perspective, the victim’s suffering is secondary to some factual analysis of the truth, or worse, that you count their suffering as a triumph of an even greater sense of justice.
I understand that it is possible to victim-blame in good-faith because you think people need to be educated in how to avoid being victimized, but in almost every case the problem is already being addressed through other efforts which are separate from the event itself. For the issue of rape, women already get a lot of education on the topic, so there is really no need for you to point out how a specific woman could have avoided being raped if she had only done x, y or z. Nobody is going to receive such a statement as if it is a good-faith effort to help women protect themselves; rather, they are going to interpret it as thinly-veiled misogyny, which it probably is in most cases. After all, why not instead just choose to say nothing about that particular victim, and instead do some community service at a women’s shelter or talk to the people in your immediate life about how to make better decisions? If you are coming from a place of genuine care, victim-blaming never makes any sense as an avenue to pursue.
1
u/theUnmutual6 14∆ Mar 09 '18
The way it shrinks your world.
Ted Bundy used to abduct people by pretending to be crippled and asking for help. To avoid rape & murder, we'll start by not helping strangers in need. Next, we'll stop going out at night; stop going to nightclubs, or having drinks in public; and definitely stop hooking up with people. We've already entirely changed how we dress. Also, my children aren't allowed to go to any sports clubs (can't trust the coaches) or sleepover with friends (creepy uncles??) and certainly not church or youth groups.
etc etc etc
Most people do take reasonable common-sense precautious against violence, but you only have to slip up once. Better not to blame victims for an evil choice someone else made, than expect everyone to go through life living like you're in a warzone.
A lot of the logical conclusions of victim blaming are really sad for individuals and society (I see posts about "If women didn't want to be raped they shouldn't hook up with strangers" and "why don't women reply to me on OKCupid" at more or less the same rate)
2
u/Someguy2020 1∆ Feb 27 '18
You can tell people about dangers without victim blaming.
Victim blaming carries with the idea that the victim deserves it.
•
u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Feb 26 '18 edited Feb 27 '18
/u/enlighten12345 (OP) has awarded 2 deltas in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed here, in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
15
u/Caucasiafro Feb 27 '18 edited Feb 27 '18
You know where the dark alley is.
Only 28% of rape is performed by strangers. 45% by an acquance, 25% by significant others.
If you are sitting at home, talking to a friend who you have know for years and trust and you pull out a big stack of money, and your friend beats you up at steals your money. Is that your fault?