If the victim says you did it then "I didn't do it" is an attack on the victim's credibility.
-
Features
Mayor blames 4 year old for her own molestation
- Thread starter Underseer
- Start date
If the victim says you did it then "I didn't do it" is an attack on the victim's credibility.
Malintent
Veteran Member
Actually I meant to imply that "I didn't do it" meant that someone else did it.. .a case of mistaken identity. The other defense, "Not a crime" is where victim blaming comes in, in my opinion... the idea that wearing a short skirt or drinking too much is "consent".
Malintent
Veteran Member
I think I can summarize what I am trying to say here...
The accused cannot engage in "Victim Blaming"... they can defend themselves, and in the course of their defense the alleged victim is painted in a less-than-perfectly-innocent light. This is about mitigating some or all of the blame, because no one is a perfect little angel (except that 4 year old, maybe - at that age, they haven't even learned how to tell a good lie). good or bad, take it or leave it, that is just how our legal system works.
The important bit is how Society reacts. that is what changes minds, policy, and law. When Society reacts in a way that puts the responsibility for avoiding rape entirely on the woman, THAT is where the expression "Victim Blaming" comes from and what it is used for.
Using it to describe the former weakens the power of the term for the latter.
Words can be powerful things (the pen is mightier than the sword), but not if you gimp them with over-broad use.
Eventually, when people here "victim Blaming", more and more people will not be concerned with it being representative of a real problem....
"victim Blaming? Oh that's no big deal.. that is just another way of saying that he didn't do it... everyone says that... it doesn't mean anything.
The accused cannot engage in "Victim Blaming"... they can defend themselves, and in the course of their defense the alleged victim is painted in a less-than-perfectly-innocent light. This is about mitigating some or all of the blame, because no one is a perfect little angel (except that 4 year old, maybe - at that age, they haven't even learned how to tell a good lie). good or bad, take it or leave it, that is just how our legal system works.
The important bit is how Society reacts. that is what changes minds, policy, and law. When Society reacts in a way that puts the responsibility for avoiding rape entirely on the woman, THAT is where the expression "Victim Blaming" comes from and what it is used for.
Using it to describe the former weakens the power of the term for the latter.
Words can be powerful things (the pen is mightier than the sword), but not if you gimp them with over-broad use.
Eventually, when people here "victim Blaming", more and more people will not be concerned with it being representative of a real problem....
"victim Blaming? Oh that's no big deal.. that is just another way of saying that he didn't do it... everyone says that... it doesn't mean anything.
laughing dog
Contributor
It is not blaming the victim - which is the point.
KeepTalking
Code Monkey
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2010
- Messages
- 4,641
- Location
- St. Louis Metro East
- Basic Beliefs
- Atheist, Secular Humanist, Pastifarian, IPUnitard
While I better understand your position now, I still do not agree. This seems like a case of special pleading where you are in effect saying "anyone can engage in victim blaming, except for the accused".
That's a lesser attack but you're still attacking her if you say she got the wrong person.
And "not a crime" doesn't mean wearing a short skirt. Rather, it means she said yes rather than no and changed her mind later.
I don't see anyone trying to do this, though. Of course we want rapists prosecuted. However, some of us recognize that there are steps she can take to lessen the risk of rape. We don't find a failure to do these things as mitigating circumstances, however.
What I think might be going on here is people who have been reckless with personal safety tend to get a lot less sympathy if something bad happens as a result.
He also claims that "When Society reacts in a way that puts the responsibility for avoiding rape entirely on the woman, THAT is where the expression "Victim Blaming" comes from" and that is entirely false.
It does not matter who is doing the blaming, nor does it matter how much of the blame/responsibility is being apportioned to the victim.
That said, I did note from my very first post in this thread, and multiple times since, that it is to be expected that a rapist will almost certainly engage in victim-blaming. Depending on what kind of rapist we are dealing with, many of them even believe their own claims - child molestors like the rapist in the OP being one example.
Well, this is exactly the dilution that Loren is trying to accomplish.
And I see the exact opposite--you're trying to use "victim blaming" to shut down reasonable discussion.
Underseer
Contributor
That means you are "persecuting men" because all men are rapists. You are therefore a feminazi.
There is no "reasonable" discussion that says a 4-year old "initiated" a sex act. Trying to claim that she did is victim-blaming. This is not shutting down a discussion. This is stating something that should be obvious even to you.
And I see no victim blaming involved.
I find it quite possible that she initiated a game. I do not see that it transfers one iota of responsibility to her, though. 4 year olds do plenty of things they have to be stopped from doing.
laughing dog
Contributor
The pastor said she initiated the sex act. The pastor did not say "She initiated a game which led to sex". The pastor did not say "She initiated a game which I mistook for an invitation to sex". As usual, since there is no evidence to support your position, you are making up scenarios to justify your position. In this particular case, these fantasy excuses are sickening.
True, but irrelevant until you provide some actual evidence to support your claim.
fromderinside
Mazzie Daius
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,945
- Basic Beliefs
- optimist
Even if Loren Pechtel supports his claim he's got to get over the higher bar of a four year old is a moraless, impuisive, unguided by rationality at all, being.
Yes, Loren. We are well aware that you are unable to see that you are attempting to transfer responsibility to a 4 year old child when you claim that she started it.
fromderinside
Mazzie Daius
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,945
- Basic Beliefs
- optimist
Instance. Four year old girl gets four year old son to play "I'll show mine ..." gets caught doing it. Son is is put outside in 104 degree sun. Aid who put son in sun gets fired. That's how things work! OK.
Malintent
Veteran Member
Yes, I guess that is what I am saying in a nutshell... but it's not that you CAN'T... people know what you mean.. it's that you really SHOULDN'T, because it harms the power of the word... in my opinion.
I respect that you have a differing opinion, though.
Malintent
Veteran Member
Why is the accused "blaming the victim" as part of their legal defense a bad thing?
Is it bad that people discussing rape cases say things like, "Well, she was asking for it by wearing a short skirt"?
Which one of the above do you think should have a "nasty label for SJWs to use"?
What happens when a "nasty label for SJWs to use" also has an entirely different meaning that is completely innocuous?
What if we call what pedophilia rapists do "Baby Kissing"... they go around "Baby Kissing". Prolly want to find a different label.. one without an innocuous use that can only serve to dilute the intended use.
laughing dog
Contributor
YES.
Ya, I agree. It's pretty damn bad.
Now, that doesn't mean that it's not therefore a valid part of a legal defense. If one is trying to make the case that the sex was consensual and they feel that this argument would influence the jury enough to plant reasonable doubt about whether or not there was consent, it's fine to use it. You are, however, a bad person if you use this strategy.