Risk-taking behaviour and personal safety: A debate

Touring Mars · Aug 20, 2013

So last night, I was out with some friends and somehow the conversation moved on to the thorny subject of rape and personal safety. Suffice it to say that I can safely add this topic to the growing list of taboo subjects that should be avoided in friendly company - and it didn't take long for a small difference of opinion to become an intensely awkward situation, that ultimately led to my friend's girlfriend declaring an end to the conversation - but this was easier said than done, not least because I felt like I was being denied the chance to fully explain my point, which was necessary to avoid leaving her with the wholly wrong impression that I somehow advocated 'blaming the victim'...

Basically, my friend and I happened to share the view that it is simply a statement of fact that risk-taking behaviour is a factor in some incidences (but not always), and that one's attitude to risk-taking is influenced by a number of things, including alcohol consumption, awareness/education etc.. However, my friend's girlfriend would not entertain any discussion of this, insisting that 'rape is rape', and that victims of rape are never to blame in any way shape or form. I tried to make it clear that I completely agreed with this point, but that there is a difference between assigning 'blame' or responsibility for a criminal act such as rape, and advocating or taking steps to minimize one's risk of becoming a victim of such an attack. I must admit, I wasn't prepared for the strongly negative reaction that this would provoke, so I'd be interested to hear what others think, not least to see where I went wrong or how to better articulate my own views in the (extremely) unlikely event that this topic ever comes up again :ill:

To summarise, I don't believe that rape victims should be blamed in any way for their attack, but I do believe that it is fair to say that there are steps one can take to minimize one's chances of being a victim of rape in certain circumstances. Obviously, there are plenty of cases where this is not the case i.e. there is no element of risk-taking behaviour on the part of the victim, but in some cases I think there is, e.g. by ignoring advice to avoid dangerous areas, walking home alone, drinking too much etc.

I found this article which closely matches the gist of what I was saying...
http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/advocating-risk-management-is-not-victim-blaming/

Famine · Aug 20, 2013

You're right.

It's interesting that police advise you not to leave valuables on display in your car so you aren't a target for car thieves - but you can't suggest the same of dressing down so you're not a target for rapists.

Of course neither victim is to blame for the crime perpetrated against them - the criminal is - but you'll attract far less sympathy if you left your wallet on the centre console than if you went out on the town naked. For some reason.

Exorcet · Aug 20, 2013

The next time this happens, ask her if it's a good idea to wave a lot of money around in a high crime area, or if she thinks that drivers who don't wear seatbelts have a better chance of surviving an accident.

What you said made perfect sense to me.

ASH32 · Aug 20, 2013

You are not wrong, the problem is some people will not accept that point of view in any way because it does not fit into their black and white thinking. There is no point in trying to convince them they are wrong either as they'll just end up not talking to you.

homeforsummer · Aug 20, 2013

Famine
you'll attract far less sympathy if you left your wallet on the centre console than if you went out on the town naked. For some reason.

And if you go out on the town naked waving your wallet about then you're asking for trouble...

But on a more serious note, I too agree with TM. Without blaming the victim, I can't see why we can't suggest that there are certain things to do to minimise the risk.

No differently than avoiding certain parts of a big city so you don't get stabbed or shot, or avoiding Basra so you don't get captured and have your head cut off. Nobody should be subjected to these things, but it doesn't mean there aren't ways to reduce the risk.

Touring Mars · Aug 20, 2013

ASH32
the problem is some people will not except that point of view in any way because it does not fit into their black and white thinking. There is no point in trying to convince them they are wrong either as they'll just end up not talking to you.

Sadly, that is exactly what happened last night. :indiff:

The main sticking point appeared to be that she felt that discussing 'risky behaviour' (by victims of rape) was a "slippery slope" which ultimately leads to the attitude that rape victims share the blame for their attack. When I said "I completely agree that the blame lies 100% with the attacker, but...", that is where I was cut off and told that by saying 'but', I'm already on my way to shifting the blame on to the victim. In the short time I had to complete my sentence, I said something like "I completely agree that the blame lies 100% with the attacker, but people can reduce the chances of becoming a victim of an attack by avoiding risky behaviour". It's the notion that people put themselves at risk that seemed to cause the most irritation.

Her view was that by emphasizing (or even mentioning) the behaviour of the victim, or describing it as 'risky', one is guilty of perpetuating the myth that rape victims are partially responsible for their attack. My view is that it is actually quite irresponsible not to point out what risk-taking behaviours are and how you might avoid finding yourself in a risky situation.

hfs
No differently than avoiding certain parts of a big city so you don't get stabbed or shot, or avoiding Basra so you don't get captured and have your head cut off. Nobody should be subjected to these things, but it doesn't mean there aren't ways to reduce the risk.

I did my best to make this point too.

Incidentally, we did move on from that discussion, although it really was one of those car-crash conversations that you just wish never happened.

Hun200kmh · Aug 20, 2013

I think the problem lies in what is acceptable / accepted as risk taking behaviour. In some societies a woman going out to the street with her face uncovered is risky. So you can easily be told - quite foolishly, make no mistake I agree with you - something like "you start by telling me what to dress, you'll end up telling me everything about what I do, where I go, with whom do I speak, etc etc. In the end, I will be a prisoner of my own sex, when a simple NO should be enough"

The problem is (and my reply to such reasoning would be) ... you can push forward for changes in the society you live in, you can advocate them, you can be bold and even take some risks ... BUT ... you can do it wisely and survive to witness the changes, or you can be just another victim of what is wrong.

Danoff · Aug 20, 2013

When you're dealing with a mind that is unaccustomed to disciplined thought, you get a confusion of issues and a refusal to consider different aspects of the same incident. The law has no trouble with this, but many people do. What she is doing is just as bad as blaming the victim.

To blame a rape victim for the crime is a refusal to assess the guilt/responsibility for an action separately from circumstances that might influence the statistical likelyhood of a crime. If you blame the victim, you are claiming that the attacker had no freedom to choose whether or not to perpetrate the crime in light of the environment the attacker was in.

However, if any consideration of circumstances leading up to the attack is seen as a shifting of blame toward the victim, that also is a refusal to assess the guilt/responsibility for an action separately from circumstances that might influence the statistical likelyhood of a crime.

- Getting in a car increases your chances of being killed by a drunk driver.
- Riding a bike increases your chances of being killed by a drunk driver.
- Doing drugs increases your chances of being killed by a drug dealer.
- Walking in a crowded area increases your chances of being pickpocketed.
- Leaving your purse in your car increases your chances of having said purse stolen.
- Vacationing in Jerusalem increases your chances of being blown up.

All of these activities are (or should be) legal, and there is nothing inherently wrong with them, and yet one can consider whether they want to take the increased risk that they become the victim of someone else's wrongdoing.

Choosing not to be on the road at 2am on New Year's day because you don't want to be killed by a drunk driver is not the same as calling you guilty of getting in the accident (obviously), and yet it is an activity that increases your own risk, and you should be aware of that an assess it. To not do so is to refuse your own tools for self preservation.

Now, what behavior increases your likelihood of being raped? Dressing provocatively? I'm not so sure, many rapists seem to go after women that seem shy and unlikely to report them. Being excessively drunk? That seems like it would be correlated.

photonrider · Aug 20, 2013

In a perfect world your friend's GF could have been right - there should be no risk of defilement from a fellow human. But that's utopian.

In the 'real' world - or whatever we realise it to be - differences in perception lead to differences in perceived danger, and therefore to different norms; for instance, in some countries it would be normal to carry a gun when you walk around, or even stock an arsenal at home - not having a gun would be risky. In another place that might be taken as a form of aggression towards the resident citizenry. Same with being in the 'wrong place at the wrong time'. Or - in the case of a woman - going out with your face uncovered (as has already been pointed out) may be considered taking a risk by some cultures, yet another culture might find it oppressive. Or even humourous.

In the end there are no real rules to this but common sense - which of course seems to also vary from locality to locality depending on the type of survival programming that bred the particular population.

Your point, TM, that while the rapist is 100% responsible for the choice, there are also other factors that are responsible for bringing about the situation is true. What brought the rapist and raped together? What you're saying is "Don't give them a choice." Which is good advice - though circumstances sometimes lay waste to even the best laid plans of mice, men and women, too.

FoolKiller · Aug 20, 2013

I wonder what she would think if you produced literature that showed victims of past/childhood sexual abuse are more likely to be a victim in the future.
http://jiv.sagepub.com/content/15/5/489

It seems fairly obvious that repeat offenders can pick out victims. In that light, avoiding risky behavior may mean not appearing to be a victim, whatever that may mean.

This is different from cases of date rape or similar, but it does bring about questions of why a guy who will date rape does it with whom and when he does.

Sexual assault has many different faces. What makes a victim in each case differs. The knee-jerk reaction is to scream rape is wrong and refuse any further discussion. The fact is, a perpetual victim is stuck in that cycle until it is addressed. Refusing to discuss it only continues the cycle.

The only thing you can try is to explain that a victim is a victim, no matter how they got there, but until we can detect the attackers in advance the best thing to do is for society to figure out what makes a victim and what people can do to prevent becoming one.

At the same time, that discussion is one that can be hard for current victims. That doesn't mean it isn't needed.

Ardius · Aug 20, 2013

I think the issue here is that people treat some actions as so despicable that they cannot even allow the tiniest amount of suggestion that any blame or responsibility should be placed anywhere else but the criminal.
Even though you are not saying the criminal isn't 100% to blame...people tend to see any "but" as a suggestion that he is not completely to blame at all.

It's all related to people perceiving such discussions as downplaying or excusing.

I have this problem almost every day, any time I start to explain my argument that in any way slightly touches the controversial...people always, always, always jump down my throat jumping to the conclusion that because I'm not 100% on one side of an argument that I'm 100% on the other side of the argument.

A similar reaction happens when discussing politics with either people that are left or right wing. Any suggestion that either might be slightly better than the other or might have a good point is frequently shouted down very aggressively.

I don't wish for people to take a middle ground view on everything, but I certainly wish people would be more willing to listen to the opposite point of view more often.

eran0004 · Aug 21, 2013

Most rapes happens at home and are never even reported because they are part of a wider pattern of domestic abuse.

The problem when discussing risk-minimizing is that it often comes down to this:

Women shouldn't do things that men are allowed to do.

For example:

· Women shouldn't drink alcohol. At least not a lot.
· Women shouldn't walk around alone, they should have company all the time, preferably by a male friend or brother.
· Women shouldn't try to be attractive.
· Women shouldn't be sexually outgoing.

Can you see how this limits the freedom for half of the population?

While at the same time, nobody mentions this:

Boys should be taught to treat women with greater respect.

For crying out loud, just look at any random web forum (like GTPlanet), women are rarely even mentioned unless there is a sexual context, like "your mother" jokes, or "that's what she said", or "cars are like women" or whatever it is. The language is derogatory and suppressing and it's a mirror of the ideas that are dominant in the society: a patriarchal structure where men have power over women; where men are entitled to women; where the male is the subject and the female is the object.

Can you see that problem? That the discussion on rape focuses on what women should and shouldn't do, and doesn't stop to think:

"Hey, maybe there's a bigger structural problem here that has got to do with how the male view is constructed and how it treats women? Maybe each rapist isn't an insane monster by nature, but instead his acts are a product of the society in which he has been raised? Perhaps, then, it's not enough to punish the perpetrator and look down on the women who doesn't live within the confined space of a traditional female role (which only provides minimal protection against sexual crime) perhaps we need to change the perceived ideals of manliness and the traditional ideas about what a man is and what a woman is?"

Anyone see what I'm talking about?

ASH32 · Aug 21, 2013

Women can do all those things but they have to accept that if they do then they are at an increased risk, in an ideal world they shouldn't be but that world does not exist and will never exist.

You can't "fix" a lot of these scumbags who rape/abuse/murder, etc as a lot of them know full well what they are doing is wrong, they just don't care.

Exorcet · Aug 21, 2013

I think the above (thanks ASH32 for getting in the way) is what Touring Mars might be talking about. Your points on society make sense. But no one is telling women to do anything. Women in general don't have much to do with this particular thread even. Mars' friend wouldn't acknowledge that people have some control over their risk for having something happen to them. This is true regardless of all the other factors that may be present (and there are many).

Focusing on rape, you can say that women need to be treated with more respect, but that won't make walking around alone at night in a high crime area a better idea than avoiding the place entirely.

Maybe each rapist isn't an insane monster by nature, but instead his acts are a product of the society in which he has been raised?

For one thing, women can rape.

Secondly even if society has some bad influence, it's still the rapists' decision to violate rights.

Danoff · Aug 21, 2013

eran0004
For example:

· Women shouldn't drink alcohol. At least not a lot.
· Women shouldn't walk around alone, they should have company all the time, preferably by a male friend or brother.
· Women shouldn't try to be attractive.
· Women shouldn't be sexually outgoing.

Can you see how this limits the freedom for half of the population?

It's not about what women should or shouldn't do. It's a personal choice for each woman what behavior she wishes to engage in and what risks are associated with that behavior. Ignoring reality isn't going to help anyone.

Men deal with a lot of the same issues on subjects that both men and women deal with. For example, men deal with drunk driving risks, and theft risks as discussed at length in this thread. Men just don't get raped very often outside of prison. But put men in a situation where they are more likely to get raped and all of the same rules apply - behavior to minimize the likelyhood of rape becomes more important - and still a personal choice - for men as well. And yet that still doesn't confer any guilt on a man who is a victim of rape.

eran0004
Can you see that problem? That the discussion on rape focuses on what women should and shouldn't do, and doesn't stop to think:

"Hey, maybe there's a bigger structural problem here that has got to do with how the male view is constructed and how it treats women? Maybe each rapist isn't an insane monster by nature, but instead his acts are a product of the society in which he has been raised? ..."

It's the only part of the rape discussion where there is any dissent - which is why it gets focused on. Everyone agrees that the rapist is wrong.

eran0004
Perhaps, then, it's not enough to punish the perpetrator and look down on the women who doesn't live within the confined space of a traditional female role (which only provides minimal protection against sexual crime)...

Nobody is looking down on women who don't behave in a certain way. This is a recognition of statistical fact, not a passing of judgement. Don't confuse the two.

eran0004
– perhaps we need to change the perceived ideals of manliness and the traditional ideas about what a man is and what a woman is?"

Anyone see what I'm talking about?

Yes, you're talking about attempting to change culture into a Utopian society - which is a completely separate topic than the one at hand.

Villain · Aug 21, 2013

Especially in the case of rape, it is not the victim's responsibility to alter the way they are dressed, the way they act, etc. No means no, and I don't believe that it is right to blame the victim.

That being said, of course there are things to be said about putting yourself in harm's danger, etc. but that doesn't change the fact that no one is asking for it or deserves it by virtue of being dressed in provocative attire, etc.

It is the individual's responsibility to control their own natural impulses. If seeing a woman in very revealing clothes makes you want to rape them, then you need to either find a way to control that impulse, get professional help, or be separated from the rest of society until it is shown that you are capable of controlling your own behavior.

FoolKiller · Aug 21, 2013

eran0004
Most rapes happens at home and are never even reported because they are part of a wider pattern of domestic abuse.

What my wife does to me in the privacy of our home is no one's business.

The problem when discussing risk-minimizing is that it often comes down to this:

Women shouldn't do what men are allowed to do.

Click to expand...

For example:

· Women shouldn't drink alcohol. At least not a lot.
· Women shouldn't walk around alone, they should have company all the time, preferably by a male friend or brother.
· Women shouldn't try to be attractive.
· Women shouldn't be sexually outgoing.

Can you see how this limits the freedom for half of the population?

Limiting freedom is a questionable way to put it. It's not illegal. But that's just semantics.

To your point, there are a lot of risk aversion things that apply to men that they never think to follow because we like to think we can take on a thug. Men have testosterone and that fuels an ego. No man should walk home drunk, through a dark alley, at 3:00 AM. That's a good way to get mugged or dead. No one should do those sorts of things.

The other aspect that needs to be realized when it comes to being attractive or sexually outgoing is that there is a definite difference in how men and women think. A man who dresses up and is sexually outgoing is doing it because he wants sex. If he sees a woman doing it his mind thinks, "She wants sex. Why else would anyone dress or act like that?" Women don't necessarily work on that same wavelength. They might just be hoping to attract a guy to get his number or a few free drinks. This leads to a mentality in guys that says, "If I were wearing a police uniform but told you I wasn't a police officer, you would be confused."

See, if a guy could stop long enough to say, "She wants attention, but behind that I need to be careful," it would go a long way. But at the same time, a woman who knows enough to know to use sex to attract men should know enough to know that using sex to attract men and then taking away the sex can have bad results. That doesn't justify rape, but it is something that should be kept in mind. There would be a lot less trouble if both sexes realized we are different. Unfortunately, society has been working hard to say the sexes are the same.

While at the same time, nobody mentions this:

Boys should be taught to treat women with greater respect.

Click to expand...

They don't? Really?

I hear it all the time from politics to personal discussions.

That said, you are correct that women are not respected enough in the interpersonal world. I stayed up with my daughter her first night home from the hospital, after a 32 hour labor and two days of refusing to nurse, and my brother asked me why. I couldn't believe we grew up in the same house. Teach men to respect women and that would go a long way toward fixing domestic abuse. But in a larger view, there is a lot of broken family support as a whole out there that contributes to this.

For crying out loud, just look at any random web forum (like GTPlanet), women are rarely even mentioned unless there is a sexual context, like "your mother" jokes, or "that's what she said", or "cars are like women" or whatever it is. The language is derogatory and suppressing

Maybe its just an Infield thing, but I seem to have conversations about wife and kids here more then anything. Granted, there is a lot of "why can't my wife do this right?" or "I tried to show my wife how to..." but lets be honest: That is because men and women are different. There is also a degree of "Why is all my stuff in the attic?" talk. I had a woman tell me the other day about her husband's new man cave. Then she asked why there isn't a woman cave. I asked her if she saw the rest of her house.

See it works both ways in marriage. For every "make me a sandwich" is a "let's go look at curtains."

and it's a mirror of the ideas that are dominant in the society: a patriarchal structure where men have power over women; where men are entitled to women; where the male is the subject and the female is the object.

I think you have a one-sided view here. I've quit watching sitcoms because I've grown tired of the fat/stupid husband with the attractive/smart wife bit. Society attacks both sides these days. Women are made into objects and men are made into Neanderthals.

Can you see that problem? That the discussion on rape focuses on what women should and shouldn't do, and doesn't stop to think:

"Hey, maybe there's a bigger structural problem here that has got to do with how the male view is constructed and how it treats women? Maybe each rapist isn't an insane monster by nature, but instead his acts are a product of the society in which he has been raised? Perhaps, then, it's not enough to punish the perpetrator and look down on the women who doesn't live within the confined space of a traditional female role (which only provides minimal protection against sexual crime) perhaps we need to change the perceived ideals of manliness and the traditional ideas about what a man is and what a woman is?"

Anyone see what I'm talking about?

Yes, but you ignore a lot about physical body chemistry that no amount of appreciation or respect will ever overcome. You'll have to neuter men to make men and women the same. I suggest looking up a woman named Simone Bienne. She is a relationship therapist that talks a lot about the differences between men and women and how it affects our relationships and interactions.

And ignoring basic safety is stupid. A woman is likely to be raped when a man would just be robbed and beaten, simply due to physical compatibility. And no amount of understanding makes leaving a car running with the doors unlocked a smart idea any more than it makes walking home alone at night a good idea...for anyone.

eran0004 · Aug 22, 2013

Exorcet
I think the above (thanks ASH32 for getting in the way) is what Touring Mars might be talking about. Your points on society make sense. But no one is telling women to do anything.

Men and women are constantly told what to do and what not to do. Whenever someone steps out of the accepted gender roles they're subject to sanctions and bullying, sometimes violence. It's the society trying to enforce its tacit rules.

Exorcet
Mars' friend wouldn't acknowledge that people have some control over their risk for having something happen to them.

Is that really the case? Or is it that once again the discussion of rape is focused on what women should and shouldn't do? Which, no matter how good the intentions are, does limit the freedom of women (by telling them what they should and shouldn't do) and puts some blame on the victim.

Exorcet
Focusing on rape, you can say that women need to be treated with more respect, but that won't make walking around alone at night in a high crime area a better idea than avoiding the place entirely.

I see your point, but you should also be able to see that it's a bit like going to Israel and saying "you know guys, perhaps you should simply stop going by public transport."

Exorcet
For one thing, women can rape.

That's not really an issue. If we're talking about someone getting raped in the streets in the middle of the night by a stranger you wouldn't find very many documented cases where a woman is the perpetrator.

In domestic situation I guess it would be more plausible though.

Exorcet
Secondly even if society has some bad influence, it's still the rapists' decision to violate rights.

It is. But monkey see - monkey does. Society is telling boys that they can take what they want, that the female body is an object that the male view is entitled to, that the man is superior and the woman is inferior. It's not as explicit as that, but that's what it all boils down to in the end. Most people doesn't take this to the extremes, but it's the same story that's being told. Tell a different story and I'm sure it would have effects.

Danoff
It's not about what women should or shouldn't do. It's a personal choice for each woman what behavior she wishes to engage in and what risks are associated with that behavior. Ignoring reality isn't going to help anyone.

And yet women are blamed because they didn't act the way they should have. It happens all the time. A community where a young man was convicted of raping a young woman - the community all took the side of the man and said that the woman had provoked him because of the ways she acted. That she was a slut and that she had ruined the man's life now that she had sent him to prison.

Also this:

I don't believe that rape victims should be blamed in any way for their attack, but...

Regardless of the first part, that but is effectively putting some blame on the victim.

Danoff
Men deal with a lot of the same issues on subjects that both men and women deal with. For example, men deal with drunk driving risks, and theft risks as discussed at length in this thread.

So why is the discussion about rape, when the problem apparently seems to be more related to general crime than to men's violence against women? And why are the advices of the "don't do" kind instead of "take classes in feministic self-defense", "get a pepper spray or an assault alarm" or even "get your gun"? Why are the proposed solutions of the "surrender your freedom" kind instead of "defend your rights"?

It's the only part of the rape discussion where there is any dissent - which is why it gets focused on. Everyone agrees that the rapist is wrong.

Everyone agree that the rapist is wrong, but everyone doesn't agree that society plays a role in raising new rapists.

Nobody is looking down on women who don't behave in a certain way. This is a recognition of statistical fact, not a passing of judgement. Don't confuse the two.

Women who doesn't behave in the ways that are expected of them are looked down upon all the time. And harassed. And abused. I'm not saying that you are, but the society as a whole does that.

Yes, you're talking about attempting to change culture into a Utopian society - which is a completely separate topic than the one at hand.

No, I'm talking about the discussion, that it's maintained at a level where it strips women of freedom and that it is what is so provocative about it. That is most likely the reason why that friend's girlfriend wanted to put an end to the discussion in the first place.

FoolKiller
...a woman who knows enough to know to use sex to attract men should know enough to know that using sex to attract men and then taking away the sex can have bad results.That doesn't justify rape, but...

I don't buy that. A woman who let's a man know that she is interested in sex has not by default agreed to any kind of sex with any men at any time on any conditions and that should be perfectly clear to any man with a piece of brain between his ears. If it isn't then:

"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."
Hamlet, Act I, scene IV, line 99.

DK · Aug 22, 2013

eran0004
And yet women are blamed because they didn't act the way they should have. It happens all the time. A community where a young man was convicted of raping a young woman - the community all took the side of the man and said that the woman had provoked him because of the ways she acted. That she was a slut and that she had ruined the man's life now that she had sent him to prison.

There's been a couple of recent cases where that's happened in Ireland. In 2009, a priest led a group of locals to shake the hand of a convicted sex offender right in front of the victim. A sex offender convicted this March was supported by a prominent sports manager.

Famine · Aug 22, 2013

eran0004
Regardless of the first part, that but is effectively putting some blame on the victim.

No it isn't. Unless you want to read it like that - but then what you infer from someone else's remarks are your problem, not theirs.

As I mentioned earlier, few people would have much sympathy if your phone's nicked from your car if you leave it on the centre console when it's parked up somewhere - in fact the victim might even go as far as to blame themselves and their own stupidity for leaving it on display. The victim isn't to blame - the criminal is. But, the opportunist criminal chose them as a victim because they gave them the opportunity to commit the crime. That doesn't mean the victim giving them the opportunity is to blame for the crime, because they're not.

Yet turn it into a teenage girl being raped by a stranger in a secluded woodland she chose to walk through and the emotional response overwhelms people. She isn't to blame for being raped - the rapist is. But suggest that the opportunist stranger rapist (which is not the most common form of rape, as repeatedly pointed out but not strictly relevant) chose them as the victim because they gave them the opportunity to commit the crime and suddenly you become a sexist dinosaur who can't control his own penis and wants to subjugate women. Which is partially depressing and partially amusing, because it was actually a teenage boy that was raped by the stranger - reconcile that one into being a woman-hater.

It's flat out impossible to have a sensible, rational discussion on this when certain crimes are held to a different standard and when any concept of risk-management is instantly dismissed as [x]ist*.

The fact is that opportunist crimes are committed opportunistically, by opportunists who select victims that they think give them the opportunity to commit the crime. The person who commits the crime is always to blame for the crime being committed and the victim is never even partially to blame for it. The fact you give them the opportunity isn't appointing you part of the blame because it was their choice to commit the crime and they shoulder the entirety of the blame.

If criminals didn't exist, opportunity to commit crime would be irrelevant as no crimes would occur. It's only the actions of criminals that are relevant and thus they're entirely to blame.

*I have an extremely feminist acquaintance. I suggested the other day that there was no conceptual difference between threatening someone with violence for their opinion and threatening someone with violence for their opinion. This was based on two separate cases (though there have been many more), one where two women were threatened over Facebook and Twitter with rape, mutilation and murder for their opinion that Jane Austen should be on a banknote - which got an incredible amount of press - and the other where writers and editors were threatened over Facebook and Twitter with mutilation, murder and terrorist acts for their opinion that Harry Styles from One Direction liked going out of an evening to meet women after an interview with him. This went largely unreported.

The feminist acquaintance remarked that anyone who couldn't see the difference between threats of blowing up GQ's offices and castrating their writers for an article and threats of raping and throwing acid in the faces of women for an opinion was ":censored:ing stupid".

Really. This is how blind people get when you mention rape.

eran0004 · Aug 22, 2013

Famine
No it isn't. Unless you want to read it like that - but then what you infer from someone else's remarks are your problem, not theirs.

Yes it is, it's effectively saying "you shouldn't have gone out by yourself, you shouldn't have been wearing that kind of clothes" etc.

As I mentioned earlier, few people would have much sympathy if your phone's nicked from your car if you leave it on the centre console when it's parked up somewhere - in fact the victim might even go as far as to blame themselves and their own stupidity for leaving it on display. The victim isn't to blame - the criminal is. But, the opportunist criminal chose them as a victim because they gave them the opportunity to commit the crime. That doesn't mean the victim giving them the opportunity is to blame for the crime, because they're not.

Yet turn it into a teenage girl being raped by a stranger in a secluded woodland she chose to walk through and the emotional response overwhelms people. She isn't to blame for being raped - the rapist is. But suggest that the opportunist stranger rapist (which is not the most common form of rape, as repeatedly pointed out but not strictly relevant) chose them as the victim because they gave them the opportunity to commit the crime and suddenly you become a sexist dinosaur who can't control his own penis and wants to subjugate women. Which is partially depressing and partially amusing, because it was actually a teenage boy that was raped by the stranger - reconcile that one into being a woman-hater.

Again, that (bold part) is basically a way of stripping women of their freedom and I'm sure you see too why that is a problematic approach.

It's flat out impossible to have a sensible, rational discussion on this when certain crimes are held to a different standard and when any concept of risk-management is instantly dismissed as [x]ist*.

Flip the coin though and you'll see a discussion on what women should or shouldn't do, camouflaged as a discussion about crime. This "women shouldn't be outdoors because they can get raped" is no different from "women shouldn't do sports because they may get injured" or "women shouldn't watch the news because they get so upset" or "women shouldn't vote because they get hysterical about any issues".

If we were to look at statistics, the one best advice to avoid rape would be:

Do not marry.

Famine · Aug 22, 2013

eran0004
Yes it is, it's effectively saying

"Effectively saying" is the problem. It's interpretation.

Try "actually saying". That's reading.

eran0004
Again, that (bold part) is basically a way of stripping women of their freedom and I'm sure you see too why that is a problematic approach.

No it's not. Keep reading that paragraph and you'll note the victim is male...

And it's not stripping anyone of their freedoms. It's the criminals that are doing that.

Advising me not to leave my valuables on display in my car while it's parked up in a high crime area isn't a violation of my rights. Having them nicked as a consequence is a violation of my rights. And the criminal that nicked them is to blame.

Ever seen a "Beware: Pickpockets operate in this area" sign at a railway station? Was your first thought "Where's my wallet and phone" (followed by a telltale pat that lets the pickpocket know where they are) or "That sign strips me of my freedoms!"?

eran0004
Flip the coin though and you'll see a discussion on what women should or shouldn't do, camouflaged as a discussion about crime. This "women shouldn't be outdoors because they can get raped" is no different from "women shouldn't do sports because they may get injured" or "women shouldn't watch the news because they get so upset" or "women shouldn't vote because they get hysterical about any issues".

Which no-one is saying. No-one is saying that women shouldn't do anything - we're saying that no-one should have their rights violated. And my* victim was a teenage boy.

eran0004
If we were to look at statistics, the one best advice to avoid rape would be:

Do not marry.

And the best advice to avoid any crime is:

Do not be alive

Rape isn't a special crime. It's no different than any other form of rights violation. The violator is to blame and the victim is not. Advice on how to avoid having my rights violated is not stripping me of my freedoms - but having my rights violated by a criminal is.

*As in the one in the story, not the one I raped. For clarification.

Exorcet · Aug 22, 2013

eran0004
Men and women are constantly told what to do and what not to do. Whenever someone steps out of the accepted gender roles they're subject to sanctions and bullying, sometimes violence. It's the society trying to enforce its tacit rules.

And this is very different from being told what puts you at risk for something or not.

Is it bullying to tell someone overweight not to eat certain things while someone who is fit can basically eat what they want without much concern? No, one person is at higher risk for damage, but both are free to do what they want.

Is that really the case? Or is it that once again the discussion of rape is focused on what women should and shouldn't do? Which, no matter how good the intentions are, does limit the freedom of women (by telling them what they should and shouldn't do) and puts some blame on the victim.

Yes that was the case. If you don't want to die from a high speed car crash, don't go to a track day. Stay out of your car. It will reduce the risk of that happening, but if you want to go to the track day, you are free to do so. Just understand that your chances of dieing just went up.

I see your point, but you should also be able to see that it's a bit like going to Israel and saying "you know guys, perhaps you should simply stop going by public transport."

No, it's like saying "if you use a frequently targeted method transport, you're more likely to be injured, but you can do whatever you want"

Informing someone is not the same as instructing them.

It is. But monkey see - monkey does. Society is telling boys that they can take what they want, that the female body is an object that the male view is entitled to, that the man is superior and the woman is inferior. It's not as explicit as that, but that's what it all boils down to in the end. Most people doesn't take this to the extremes, but it's the same story that's being told. Tell a different story and I'm sure it would have effects.

Society is pretty hard on rape though, and to be honest, there are plenty in the way of messages to respect women as well, but old stereotypes and other things still leak through.

Society is an influence and something that needs to be looked at, but it can never be an immediate cause. The immediate cause is always individual choice. Society says many things, I personally don't care about a lot of them. Some other people I know feel the same. I don't see why men need to lead households, why women need purses, why men can't be overly loving to their kids, why women can't teach their sons sports because they happen to be better than their husbands, etc.

FoolKiller · Aug 22, 2013

eran0004
Is that really the case? Or is it that once again the discussion of rape is focused on what women should and shouldn't do? Which, no matter how good the intentions are, does limit the freedom of women (by telling them what they should and shouldn't do) and puts some blame on the victim.

Safety advice is limiting freedoms? Explain. Last I checked, "she was asking for it," has never been a legal defense for rape.

If you want to go down the road of "limiting" freedoms I will be happy to. There is no law that prevents a woman from being unsafe. I've lived in a city with a law banning leaving an unattended car running to prevent auto theft. That limited freedom and blamed the victim. My mom telling me leaving my car running while I went into a store is a bad idea is not limiting my freedoms. It is advice that can only be seen as offensive or limiting freedom if you are looking for it to be, the same as telling a woman not to go jogging in a park alone at night because there are bad people out there.

You seem to be trying to make women into victims from birth by saying that advice on how to avoid becoming a victim is an assault. It reminds me of when my three-year-old daughter wanted to help me cook and reached for a hot pan. When I told her to stop and be careful because she could get burned she started crying and said, "I don't want to be careful. Leave me alone!" Was I being agist and placing societal age roles on her? Or did I recognize that there are physiological differences between us that make her far more likely to become a burn victim than me and just try to warn her of the danger? Is she the victim of my societal ingrained whatever or the target of natural instinct to protect her?

There's a thought. Perhaps we should also look at the physiological and psychological differences that lead everyone to be more protective of some more than others. I bet we could find more than just societal gender roles come into play. But why risk letting science muddle things when we can just claim boys need to be fixed?

So why is the discussion about rape, when the problem apparently seems to be more related to general crime than to men's violence against women? And why are the advices of the "don't do" kind instead of "take classes in feministic self-defense", "get a pepper spray or an assault alarm" or even "get your gun"? Why are the proposed solutions of the "surrender your freedom" kind instead of "defend your rights"?

Where are you from where that stuff isn't suggested. My wife has pepper spray on her key ring. I still tell her not to find herself alone in a dark alley. She tells me I shouldn't take a shower in a thunderstorm, drive fast when it rains, or any other risky behaviors that make her roll her eyes and mumble something about men. She is such a freedom-stealing sexist.

Everyone agree that the rapist is wrong, but everyone doesn't agree that society plays a role in raising new rapists.

No, we just don't think that everything you claim is creating new rapists is involved. Giving a woman safety advice is not creating rapists.

Women who doesn't behave in the ways that are expected of them are looked down upon all the time. And harassed. And abused. I'm not saying that you are, but the society as a whole does that.

And men, nerds, religious groups, age groups, etc. Yes, we live in a society that encourages conformist behavior. No, it is not just about women. If that is your issue then the gender issue you see is a symptom of a much larger problem. You won't fix it by picking a special interest group.

I don't buy that. A woman who let's a man know that she is interested in sex has not by default agreed to any kind of sex with any men at any time on any conditions and that should be perfectly clear to any man with a piece of brain between his ears.

I didn't say she agreed to sex. Maybe if you didn't ignore the whole bit where I explained about men and women's minds working differently you would understand what I was saying. They each think differently and want different things. Each knows enough to bait the other with their wants. Occasionally this leads to conflict. Unfortunately the woman is in a physiological position to get the worst part of the conflict if it becomes physical.

If both sides recognized that the other most likely has completely different goals then there would be far fewer conflicts. Men and women are different on a chemical level that generally creates different thought processes and motivations. Those differences can conflict.

Telling people how to best avoid those conflicts is not limiting their freedom. It's giving advice.

Danoff · Aug 22, 2013

Famine is, of course, presenting the case perfectly. Nobody is saying that the victim is to blame. Entirely separate from that statement is this one: to shut off our brains to risks associated with particular behaviors is not helping anyone. Anyone who does not wish their rights to be violated should pay attention to the risk associated with their specific situation. That is regardless of whether they have a penis or not, regardless of whether their attacker has a penis or not, and regardless of whether or not a penis was used in the attack.

homeforsummer · Aug 22, 2013

eran0004
If we were to look at statistics, the one best advice to avoid rape would be:

Do not marry.

I'm pretty sure that's also the best way to avoid sex of any sort.

LeMansAid · Aug 23, 2013

This is a far more complex topic than most of you are making it out to be. People's behaviours are being described as if their thoughts are singular and without any potential for conflict within self. Also, I'm surprised that no-one has brought up those whom I would describe as "predatory victims".

It could be somewhat crassly likened to hunting a dangerous animal, where the hunter could well become the hunted. Many sports people and musicians would know it well. A fan may spend copious amounts of time seeking out, and pursuing their "hero", potentially leading to an ultimate end that both parties both wanted, and didn't want.

Hypothetical (but all too common) situation:
- Young girl loves sports star, and gains access to a party where he is present.
- Girl spends hours trying to chase him down and isolate him, despite him showing little interest throughout the night.
- Both conflicted, (he doesn't want to betray his wife but in that moment wants sex, she doesn't want sex per say but wants the "prestige" of having bedded him) they have sex.
- Girl, the day after claims to have been raped.

So, they both did and didn't want it, but she was the predator. Is that indeed rape? If so, should she take some blame? If so, we have a grey area. Oh nooooo!!

Nicksfix · Aug 23, 2013

LeMansAid
Hypothetical (but all too common) situation:
- Young girl loves sports star, and gains access to a party where he is present.
- Girl spends hours trying to chase him down and isolate him, despite him showing little interest throughout the night.
- Both conflicted, (he doesn't want to betray his wife but in that moment wants sex, she doesn't want sex per say but wants the "prestige" of having bedded him) they have sex.
- Girl, the day after claims to have been raped.

So, they both did and didn't want it, but she was the predator. Is that indeed rape? If so, should she take some blame? If so, we have a grey area. Oh nooooo!!

He claims consensual, she claims rape. Who do you believe ... really ?
The lawyers present their case, then it's up to the court to decide. This does not necessarily mean that the outcome is an honest one (this has been known to happen). It's a tough call, and it is grey. It pretty much comes down to who did their homework in a such given case. But, just because Lawyer A did his homework better than Lawyer B, and his client wins the case, does not necessarily mean the outcome in the case was correct ... does it ?

It kinda sucks .... the justice system at work for you again.

Just for kicks ....
Lets say that the mentioned girl above was your very own daughter. How would you react to this when it is revealed to you ? You'd side with her, it's the obvious choice as a parent. Now you as a parent are working in conjunction with a lawyer in railroading an innocent man. Kinda sucks for the man in question, but it also does happen.

FoolKiller · Aug 23, 2013

LeMansAid
Also, I'm surprised that no-one has brought up those whom I would describe as "predatory victims".

Because that goes into the "is it rape" category. It doesn't apply since the discussion involves situations that we all agree is some form of sexual assault.

Omnis · Aug 23, 2013

It's a gender equality thing. It must be hard for a man to get raped. Also difficult. So we men can engage in practices and behaviors without having to worry about being raped (but we don't go bend over at gay billiards clubs). Women want to live in a world where they can be equally unconcerned with sexual assault, even though statistically, historically, and by primal nature that world is not part of reality.

Risk-taking behaviour and personal safety: A debate

ツーリング マルス

GTP Editor, GTPEDIA Author

Bonbonbonbons!

ツーリング マルス

Don't be a fool.

Ludicrous Speed

Don't be a fool.

No-one's having an A1 day

GTP Editor, GTPEDIA Author

GTP Editor, GTPEDIA Author

Don't be a fool.

Bonbonbonbons!

OSU Buckeyes baby !!!

Don't be a fool.

Not Even A Real Mod

Similar threads

ツーリングマルス

ツーリングマルス