Why is telling girls to be careful rape apologistic

[Cyclone]

I know which parts of the city not to walk through at night. I shouldn't have to be careful, but that's the world we live in.

 

Why do we lock our doors at night? Because there are bad people around, so we take precautions.

 

No one is saying that it's the FAULT of the rape victim, but in many cases it could have been avoided had they been more careful.

 

I've been out of my tree so much on one or two occasions that i can't remember getting home. Anything could have happened to me. I've learned my lesson and try to be more sensible when drinking so that i am less likely to come to any harm. Why? Because i know there are dodgy people who will take advantage. So, i try not to put myself in that position.

 

Advising someone to be careful, sensible and responsible is not victim-blaming.

 

It often is in reality victim blaming though, because telling girls how to behave results in the ones who are attacked being held responsible because they didn't do as they were told.

You actually see judges in court tell girls that they were partially responsible because they were wearing a low cut top and short skirt.

[leviathan13]

It often is in reality victim blaming though, because telling girls how to behave results in the ones who are attacked being held responsible because they didn't do as they were told.

You actually see judges in court tell girls that they were partially responsible because they were wearing a low cut top and short skirt.

 

It's a tough one because yes, anyone should be allowed to dress without fear of physical harm. But, a person is still responsible for their own actions. So a girl wears a short skirt, fine, but it's not wrong to advise her that it's better to take a taxi home at 2am than walk home alone. She should be able to, but that isn't the world we live in. Same reason i wouldn't walk through certain parts of Sheffield at 2am - there is a good chance i may be attacked, so i get a taxi to ensure my safety.

[Andy1976]

It often is in reality victim blaming though, because telling girls how to behave results in the ones who are attacked being held responsible because they didn't do as they were told.

You actually see judges in court tell girls that they were partially responsible because they were wearing a low cut top and short skirt.

 

Sadly that's nothing unusual. I've seen Judges say literally stupid things over the last 20 years, far worse than saying someone shouldn't have worn a short skirt. Some Judges, like some people, are idiots. Those Judges are generally old and their equivalent of social media is sadly Court. That's where they express their views.

 

There is (or certainly was last time I was there), for example, a Judge in Leeds who takes her cat to work, and it sits in her chambers with her, when hearings are taking place. She talks about the cat in hearings. It goes in the official transcript.

 

That's what we're dealing with.

[Flanker7]

I think we are talking about 2 different things.

 

If you get run over on a zebra crossing no-one would suggest that anyone but the driver was guilty.

However, if a car is approaching the crossing and the driver is obviously not going to stop it would be stupid to step out just to prove a point.

The driver would still be guilty but you would be still be run over.

The driver may come up with all sorts of defences and would still be guilty but some courts may give him the benefit of the doupt.

 

.......and you would still be run over.

 

Sensible precautions are just that , sensible.

[Cyclone]

It's a tough one because yes, anyone should be allowed to dress without fear of physical harm. But, a person is still responsible for their own actions. So a girl wears a short skirt, fine, but it's not wrong to advise her that it's better to take a taxi home at 2am than walk home alone. She should be able to, but that isn't the world we live in. Same reason i wouldn't walk through certain parts of Sheffield at 2am - there is a good chance i may be attacked, so i get a taxi to ensure my safety.

 

It is wrong to suggest that if she's attacked it's because she chose to dress a certain way.

It's also wrong to suggest that if she's attacked it's her fault for walking home.

[RootsBooster]

It often is in reality victim blaming though, because telling girls how to behave results in the ones who are attacked being held responsible because they didn't do as they were told.

You actually see judges in court tell girls that they were partially responsible because they were wearing a low cut top and short skirt.

I went out drinking for the first time in ages last weekend, my wife told (asked) me not to get too drunk or get into any trouble. If I did, would that mean she was victim blaming?

 

Was my wife telling me how to behave?

[Cyclone]

Are you asking me to read your wife's mind? You were there, not me.

[Andy1976]

It is wrong to suggest that if she's attacked it's because she chose to dress a certain way.

It's also wrong to suggest that if she's attacked it's her fault for walking home.

 

This argument goes on and on and on, but no one is disagreeing.

 

Everyone agrees that the fault lies with the person committing the crime. Of course it does.

 

No one, ever, would disagree with that.

 

What people are saying is that it's not wrong to give sensible advice.

 

- Don't walk in dodgy areas alone

- Don't leave your house unlocked and go on holiday

- Don't leave your keys in your car

- Don't accept drinks from strange men

- Don't wear a Wednesday scarf and go drinking in the Cricketers or somewhere on a United home match day

 

In all of those situations, if anything happens of course it's the fault of the attacker/burglar/car thief/rapist/chav thug. Of course it is, but the above remains sensible advice, just as much as 'Don't eat too much fatty food' does.

[Cyclone]

And what other people are saying is that well meaning advice is a precursor to victim blaming.

 

The analogy is false, fatty food is not an actor or 3rd party, it doesn't make you gain weight, your consumption makes you gain weight.

 

Some advice must be okay, I concede, and some is not, exactly where that line sits is a subjective opinion. I guess some of the things to consider regarding that line are factors like;

are you giving advice to all women, or someone you know?

Would you accept such advice yourself?

Does the advice fundamentally restrict the freedom of the person if it's followed?

Is the advice welcome?

Is the advice likely to be something they didn't know?

 

For example, if someone tells me not to get drunk because of the risk of being assaulted. I'd politely tell them to do one. Not their business, up to me, acceptable risk, and still not my fault if I AM assaulted.

If someone advises me not to walk into a particular area of a strange city wearing my rolex and drunk and alone, then I'd probably thank them and make a mental note. Still not my fault if it happens, but the advice is clearly well meaning and allows me to manage my own safety with information I didn't previously have.

 

On that basis, telling women how to dress is clearly not appropriate. They already know the potential risks, they shouldn't HAVE to change themselves to avoid those risks, society should do something else to fix the problem.

[RootsBooster]

Are you asking me to read your wife's mind? You were there, not me.

 

I'm asking you what the difference is between;

 

1. A poster advising women not to get too drunk and to be careful

2. My wife advising me not to get too drunk and to be careful

 

Either they're both good intentioned advice or they're both victim blaming, unless you can explain otherwise.