Shouldn’t women take responsibility in certain assault situations? (woman, parent, people)

[AnnaGWS]

Originally Posted by Remington Steel

I ask myself the question about the actors going to the producer’s hotel room also....smh. But in today’s society if you even dare ask that or question the acts of the female, you are accused of being insensitive to the “plight”. I understand the plight, but everyone in every situation has to take a little responsibility for their actions, even if it means the other party was totally in the wrong and proven guilty in a court of law.

It is not that you ask or that people should not act prudently, it is when asking becomes "well, what did you expect would happen when you went to their hotel room?" Or in Bill Cosby's case "to their house." Well, obviously the women did not expect to be raped or sexually assaulted during a business meeting.

[PassTheChocolate]

Originally Posted by Sassybluesy

I've kept up with this thread pretty much.

There have been plenty who think it's a woman's fault.

Where? Plenty shouldn't be hard to come up with.

Yet, I haven't seen ANYONE who said or even implied they wanted to see more rapes. You're obfuscating the issue when you imply that anyone here wants to see more rapes.

You quoted me and somehow missed that my comment was specifically in response to someone else wrt to cases that are closed due to a lack of evidence.

We should also not assume that the accused are all guilty either. Insufficient evidence has often been because no rape actually took place.

We really should be focused on there being less victims, not more. And there are people in this discussion who would be happy with more.

Less victims, meaning not creating any where they may not exist (i.e.- when there is a lack of evidence) and, again, insisting that victims are being called "stupid", have "asked for it" and are "culpable" when that hasn't happened either.

[Sonic_Spork]

PassTheChocolate, may I ask something?

Suppose a woman has an experience. Like she goes to a party where she believes she should be safe, but somehow gets roofied or something, wakes up alone in a bedroom, her clothing removed but not damaged, and feeling sore. No memory of what happened. She only knows that there was no one at that party she would have, in a sound state of mind, consented to have sex with. No intention of any such activity. Let's say this party wasn't some kind of frathouse shindig, but like a house party where colleagues, respectable people as far as she knew, were invited. No reason to have suspicions.

So she wakes up alone in a room.

Maybe someone did things to her. Maybe they used barriers, so there is no physical evidence. She goes immediately to the hospital, but there is no conclusive evidence of anything but the fact that she was penetrated.

There is evidence of sexual activity, but no evidence of whether it was consensual, except for her complete lack of knowledge of who did it or what happened, and lack of any intent at all to have sex with anyone there. She feels violated, though. Has nightmares. Unable to face her colleagues, she can't go back to work. Later, an acquaintance from work makes contact with her, says that everyone thought she'd just gotten so drunk she passed out. The host had carried her to a guest room to sleep it off. He claims he left her there and returned to the party. No one knows who might have come into the room later, or if he is lying...

Is she a victim?
Was there a rape?

The no evidence argument sounds a bit like "if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear, did it make a sound?" to me...

And truly the entire thing is problematic. Because our justice system is based on "presumed innocent until proven guilty" and in these specific kinds of cases, while you can sometimes prove sex, you often cannot prove lack of consent. I truly believe that there are vastly more guilty consent violators of various degrees of severity, than there are lying accusers. Vastly. It's a matter that cannot be proven statistically either way, and I know that no one will be changing anyone's mind here, about this. But that is what I believe.

[Mikala43]

Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate

No, hun, it is you who doesn't know the difference between asking for it and being proactive in your own safety. No one here has held any victims responsible, accountable or culpable for a rapist's actions. Victims pay a price for not being more careful, yes. Often. But not for rape. We convict and jail rapists, not victims.
[/list]

Well hun, of course I do.

You were arguing the use of my words, which is why I posted the dictionary definitions which showed they are all synonyms.

My answer is "no" women should not take responsibility for being assaulted (title).

Should they take action to be as safe as possible? Of course. BUT that is a movable line, you do an action 99 times and be safe and the 100th and end up assaulted. That can happen walking to you your car or what not.

My question still stands (it was in general, not to you), exactly what does "taking responsibility" look like?

Most crimes are just the wrong place, wrong time and wrong person. You can't run through life being paranoid, because that's a whole other set of problems.

When you start saying victims should have not done what they did, that is victim blaming.

[PassTheChocolate]

I actually went back to the beginning of the thread to see if the OP tried to clarify on his original post. He did.

Originally Posted by Adrian75

When you know there are horrible sexual predators out there, why would you go to a strangers house and also drink something he gave you, not knowing what’s in it. I would think you would have to claim some responsibility for putting yourself in harms way especially these days when there is so much evil out there.

I’m not saying he isn’t responsible but I still feel the woman should take some responsibility for her own safety.

I know that but it’s all about being responsible for your actions and your safety.

Of course it doesn’t but a woman shouldn’t let herself become so impaired she can’t make informed decisions.

She shouldn’t be getting incapacitated in the first place. Know your limits and don’t drink anything given to you by someone you don’t know (besides the bartender or waitress).

This was just on the first 3 pages. Willful disregard and demonization of this is not in the best interests of victims.

[Sassybluesy]

Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate

Where? Plenty shouldn't be hard to come up with. Go back thru the thread. There have been several.



You quoted me and somehow missed that my comment was specifically in response to someone else wrt to cases that are closed due to a lack of evidence. Nope, I quoted you when you said there were people who wanted more rapes. No. The only people who want more rapes would be rapists.


The issue is hard enough to have a sane discussion on. Accusing anyone or implying that anyone has said they WANT rapes is just not true. It's hard enough to talk to the people who think victims were asking for it in one way or another, or were somehow responsible for being raped.



Less victims, meaning not creating any where they may not exist (i.e.- when there is a lack of evidence) and, again, insisting that victims are being called "stupid", have "asked for it" and are "culpable" when that hasn't happened either.

But 'those' people haven't said "what this world needs is more rapes." Which is what you said.

[TabulaRasa]

Originally Posted by PassTheChocolate

Please read what you quoted. People who want there to be rape where there may be none. People who insist that victims are being accused of being "stupid" and "asking for it" when they're not. They step right on in once the rapist is done and create more victimization. More pain. More trauma.

Nobody wants there to be rape where there may be none.

Nobody wants more people to be more traumatized,

Nobody wants revictimization, which is exactly what victims get when they dare to say, "This was wrong," only to be blasted by people saying, "Yeah, well, maybe so...BUT, you caused it with your bad choices/instincts/judgment."

[Nicci6Squirrels]

My uncle's words to me when he found out I'd been sexually assaulted by a biological family member I'd just met for the first time when I was 15: "Well, you should have known better. That guy's a dick."
Apparently I was surrounded by dicks.

[PassTheChocolate]

Originally Posted by Sassybluesy

Nope, I quoted you when you said there were people who wanted more rapes.

Accusing anyone or implying that anyone has said they WANT rapes is just not true.

But 'those' people haven't said "what this world needs is more rapes." Which is what you said.

There is no such quote. I never claimed anyone said "what this world needs is more rapes". Let's add that to the list of victim blaming language that seems to just roll off your tongues/fingers with no effort. I explained what I actually said in small words, in plain English. If you have to lie to make a point, you probably don't have one that's worth a fig.

Go back thru the thread. There have been several.

I asked you for examples. You'll have to forgive me if I don't just take your word for it considering your obvious contempt for the truth.

[PassTheChocolate]

Originally Posted by TabulaRasa

Nobody wants there to be rape where there may be none.

Nobody wants more people to be more traumatized,

Nobody wants revictimization

Sure they do. It makes them feel morally superior to accuse people of attacking victims when they're not, which traumatizes and victimizes even further. If they don't want it, then why do they do it?