Rape culture: British Style

[Toni]

Simple: The feminist notion that everything's the man's fault.

I keep forgetting: rape is the woman's fault because she acted too sexy or too uppity. Or both.

[...]

Each of the signs are a warning. They do not blame the victim. They both suggest behaviours that may reduce your victimhood potential (be aware, or don't get drunk). Whether you think these suggestions demand too much of potential victims is a different debate. But they do not blame the victim.

[...]

Then why does every defense lawyer in a rape case use these exact same arguments to produce a "she asked for it" defense for their clients?

They use the "she asked for it" defense because people genuinely believe that women who dress in certain ways or behave in certain ways deserve to be raped, and they think these things using the exact same arguments you are defending.

Huh? Haven't she-asked-for-it defenses long since banned?

(Distinct from she-said-yes defenses.)

There is no such distinction. Certainly not in media and in society.

 

[Togo]

All I've ever wanted to do is point out that informing potential victims about ways they might mitigate their risk is not blaming the victim, any more than travel warnings put out by national governments are blaming the victim.

And yet you're still being misunderstood. This is clearly a widespread problem on the internet, where such misunderstandings are tragically common. Obviously we need a rational solution.

One thing that occurs to me is that there is a clear risk factor here - people who disagree with other posters get misunderstood far more often. So one possible way of reducing this tragic occurrence is for you to stop disagreeing. If you don't post anything that people might object to, your risk of being misunderstood is far lower. I feel I should be clear that I'm not blaming you in any way for other people not understanding you - that's clearly on them. But it would reduce the occurrence, and clearly posters informing you, and only you, of one way you might mitigate your risk is a sensible approach.

So where should the posters, warning Metaphor and others like him not to be disagreeable, be put?

 

[Tigers!]

At the start of every thread.
Perhaps a mod warning?

 

[Metaphor]

except that the don't be that guy posters have worked to lower sexual assault cases. So what are you skeptical of?

If those statistics have been presented and I missed them, I apologise. Were they?

And if hard core rapists are as determined as you say, I could argue that sobriety will not save anyone. But I don't believe that because this is how I think this goes down. A bad guy has decided he isn't taking no for an answer. I am sober, but the woman down the bar from me is not. The rapist chooses her not me. I don't get raped but a rape still occurs. In order to get the rape stats to go down, we have to concentrate more, not all, but more on the actions of potential rapists. Should men and women behave responsibly? Yes. They, both genders, should.

If sobriety only shifts the criminal activity to another victim, that's unfortunate for society overall but it still makes sense for each individual to try to lower their risk.

I think it's completely unfair that women would need to modify their behaviour to mitigate their risk, but that does not negate brute facts. If it's a brute fact that women who are drunk are more vulnerable to rape, then it's a brute fact.

To let you know where I'm coming from, it's a brute fact that I'm more likely to be assaulted just for walking while gay compared to a heterosexual man. There is no doubt in my mind that there are safe neighbourhoods and less safe neighbourhoods for gay people. Every single assault on a gay person is the fault of the assaulter, but it would still be prudent to warn us about how to mitigate our risk.

Both posters go up, one side gets to offer their heartfelt advice to women and the other gets to remind good guys to be good.
It's a solution where everybody gets what they want, all of what they want.

And yet the argument continues, past a solution that will work and both sides get what they want.

This makes no sense to me.

I didn't object to a poster targeting potential rapists; I just expressed skepticism about its efficacy.

But even if both posters went up, side by side, it wouldn't quell the blaming the victim outcry in the slightest. If you already think pointing out to people how to mitigate their risk is blaming the victim, then of course you're still going to think that no matter what other posters go up alongside it.

 

[Metaphor]

All I've ever wanted to do is point out that informing potential victims about ways they might mitigate their risk is not blaming the victim, any more than travel warnings put out by national governments are blaming the victim.

And yet you're still being misunderstood. This is clearly a widespread problem on the internet, where such misunderstandings are tragically common. Obviously we need a rational solution.

One thing that occurs to me is that there is a clear risk factor here - people who disagree with other posters get misunderstood far more often. So one possible way of reducing this tragic occurrence is for you to stop disagreeing. If you don't post anything that people might object to, your risk of being misunderstood is far lower. I feel I should be clear that I'm not blaming you in any way for other people not understanding you - that's clearly on them. But it would reduce the occurrence, and clearly posters informing you, and only you, of one way you might mitigate your risk is a sensible approach.

So where should the posters, warning Metaphor and others like him not to be disagreeable, be put?

Perhaps there's a digital museum somewhere full of posters where warnings to 'victims' of imaginary crimes (the crime of misunderstanding someone) are placed. It's certainly true that if I highly valued being a part of an echo chamber, such advice would be valuable.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

If those statistics have been presented and I missed them, I apologise. Were they?

And if hard core rapists are as determined as you say, I could argue that sobriety will not save anyone. But I don't believe that because this is how I think this goes down. A bad guy has decided he isn't taking no for an answer. I am sober, but the woman down the bar from me is not. The rapist chooses her not me. I don't get raped but a rape still occurs. In order to get the rape stats to go down, we have to concentrate more, not all, but more on the actions of potential rapists. Should men and women behave responsibly? Yes. They, both genders, should.

If sobriety only shifts the criminal activity to another victim, that's unfortunate for society overall but it still makes sense for each individual to try to lower their risk.

I think it's completely unfair that women would need to modify their behaviour to mitigate their risk, but that does not negate brute facts. If it's a brute fact that women who are drunk are more vulnerable to rape, then it's a brute fact.

To let you know where I'm coming from, it's a brute fact that I'm more likely to be assaulted just for walking while gay compared to a heterosexual man. There is no doubt in my mind that there are safe neighbourhoods and less safe neighbourhoods for gay people. Every single assault on a gay person is the fault of the assaulter, but it would still be prudent to warn us about how to mitigate our risk.

Both posters go up, one side gets to offer their heartfelt advice to women and the other gets to remind good guys to be good.
It's a solution where everybody gets what they want, all of what they want.

And yet the argument continues, past a solution that will work and both sides get what they want.

This makes no sense to me.

I didn't object to a poster targeting potential rapists; I just expressed skepticism about its efficacy.

But even if both posters went up, side by side, it wouldn't quell the blaming the victim outcry in the slightest. If you already think pointing out to people how to mitigate their risk is blaming the victim, then of course you're still going to think that no matter what other posters go up alongside it.

no I don't think that, but I do think you would be hard pressed to find anywhere where I said that mitigating risk was blaming the victim. In fact I just explained a few posts up how I think sobriety works as a factor in not getting raped.

I want rape stats to go down not just for the smart men and women who take precautions but for everybody and that means concentrating more efforts on the perpetrator side of the problem.

a few years ago, a cousin of mine was shot and killed in front of a lesbian bar she and her date had just left. She wasn't in a bad neighborhood for gays, she wasn't doing anything wrong, just waling on. The sidewalk and the car came around the corner and the shots were fired.

When the guys responsible were rounded up, the two on the passenger side of the car couldn't explain why they had gone along on this ride. They said they didn't want to do it, but their friends talked them into it and really they were supposed to "just scare the dykes" and no one was supposed to get killed. Had they been offered a way out, been reminded to do the right thing, maybe they would have not gone and maybe that would have taken some of the wind out the sails of the other two guys and they wouldn't have gone and Monica would still be alive.

But one thing is certain. Nothing she could have done on that sidewalk or moments before or days before was going to stop that bullet.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...saults-by-10-per-cent-in-2011/article1359241/

Link to the article on the don't be that guy campaign.

 

[ksen]

And yet you're still being misunderstood. This is clearly a widespread problem on the internet, where such misunderstandings are tragically common. Obviously we need a rational solution.

One thing that occurs to me is that there is a clear risk factor here - people who disagree with other posters get misunderstood far more often. So one possible way of reducing this tragic occurrence is for you to stop disagreeing. If you don't post anything that people might object to, your risk of being misunderstood is far lower. I feel I should be clear that I'm not blaming you in any way for other people not understanding you - that's clearly on them. But it would reduce the occurrence, and clearly posters informing you, and only you, of one way you might mitigate your risk is a sensible approach.

So where should the posters, warning Metaphor and others like him not to be disagreeable, be put?

Perhaps there's a digital museum somewhere full of posters where warnings to 'victims' of imaginary crimes (the crime of misunderstanding someone) are placed. It's certainly true that if I highly valued being a part of an echo chamber, such advice would be valuable.

Maybe there's a museum of smugfarts you could hang out at.

 

[The Paul]

Oh dear. You've misperceived the situation so dramatically, I feel slightly embarrased for you.

You want to dwell on this, huh? Works for me.

What makes you think all rapists are the same? Do you think all murderers are the same? Some people kill as a 'crime of passion'. Some people are serial killers. A serial killer will find another victim. A crime of passion killer won't.

Here you claim that a rape might be a "crime of opportunity" but are implying that there is some critical window in which the opportunity must present itself, or else the rapist will not act: That they will not simply wait for another night when the intended victim is intoxicated or find a better victim.

You compare the situation to murders and serial killers. Some murders would only take place as a "crime of passion" if there is an intersection of opportunity to kill and the few minutes or hours where the killer wants to kill. That's true, sure, but the comparison is absurd:

Well, I guess if a person has the basic underlying defects that make them willing to rape someone but they only ever have the desire to have sex once or twice in their life then thwarting the crime of passion might stop the crime altogether, sure.

Maybe you weren't able to understand that comment? It's pretty abnormal for a person to spend most of their life with an on-again off-again desire to kill other humans. We generally think that such a person ends up being a serial killer, who, as you pointed out, tends to commit murders whether or not any particular individual gives them the chance to.

Unlike the desire to kill other humans, the desire to fuck other humans is something most people will have frequently for most of their life. The strong desire to fuck something is going to come over most people thousands or millions of times. It's not as if that's only going to happen once or twice and as long as the closest person is prepared to defend themselves on those rare occasions no crime will be committed.

Now following that comment, a person who actually believed I was incorrect and cared enough to make an issue of it would have responded to something I said, and a person with no further interest in the conversation would have not responded, and a person with nothing left to say but who wasn't about to let that stop them from talking would have resorted to ridiculing some other idea or position that I never advanced.

Please amend your argument, because sanctioning the belief that rape had anything to do with sex means you are misinformed and supporting a rape myth. It's also a sign of a rape culture to believe that. And probably anyone who would believe that is likely to be a rapist.

 

[doubtingt]

Look at these outrageous victim blaming signs, clearly promoting an international "theft culture".

How dare anyone try to give people information (no matter how objectively accurate) that is relevant to their safety and self-protection from dangers! In fact, we clearly need Obama to from a task force to investigate the National Weather Service for their blatant promotion of a "Pro Tornado and Hurricane culture".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Well if you are going to steal from an unlocked house you weren't that honest to begin with. Not any more than a man who would take advantage of a passed out woman.

The poster says "drinking", not being drunk or passed out.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Look at these outrageous victim blaming signs, clearly promoting an international "theft culture".

How dare anyone try to give people information (no matter how objectively accurate) that is relevant to their safety and self-protection from dangers! In fact, we clearly need Obama to from a task force to investigate the National Weather Service for their blatant promotion of a "Pro Tornado and Hurricane culture".

Notice what all those signs lack

A gendered picture, a particular history, and a cultural narrative.

But do carry on.

 

[Derec]

Well if you are going to steal from an unlocked house you weren't that honest to begin with. Not any more than a man who would take advantage of a passed out woman.

The poster says "drinking", not being drunk or passed out.

And that's another problem with this "rape culture" bullshit. It assumes any woman who drinks is a victim of rape even though most are perfectly capable of consenting.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The poster says "drinking", not being drunk or passed out.

And that's another problem with this "rape culture" bullshit. It assumes any woman who drinks is a victim of rape even though most are perfectly capable of consenting.

Was that the sound of goalposts shifting?

The assumption above is on your end, not theirs. Otherwise they'd have said 1 in 3 women who drink get raped.

 

[Bronzeage]

The poster says "drinking", not being drunk or passed out.

And that's another problem with this "rape culture" bullshit. It assumes any woman who drinks is a victim of rape even though most are perfectly capable of consenting.

I have a question for you Derec. Please give this some thought before answering. Would you consider having sex with a very attractive woman, if you knew she is likely to say no, until after having several drinks?

 

[prideandfall]

Who's objecting? Skepticism that criminals will change their behaviour because they see a poster asking them to not be criminals isn't an objection. Put up all the posters you like. In fact, I've already stated that such posters definitely have an effect on minor acts (stealing, cheating) but I'm profoundly skeptical they'll stop major ones (murder, rape).

All I've ever wanted to do is point out that informing potential victims about ways they might mitigate their risk is not blaming the victim, any more than travel warnings put out by national governments are blaming the victim.

just wanted to quote this bit here for how completely "yes, that" it is in regards to this discussion.

 

[repoman]

What is the empathy level in society now? How does it compare to previous societies? Does that relate the amount and types of rapes that occur now and in the past? Is denial of "privilege" (when real) a sign of a lack of empathy?

This is a line from a Louis CK bit, I think that it somehow hits on the lack of empathy and respect that rapists obviously have:

You should never rape anyone. Unless you have a reason, like you want to fuck someone and they won't let you. In which case, what other option do you have? How else are you supposed to have an orgasm in their body if you don't rape 'em... like what the fuck? (sheepish laughter) Ah, ok that's fucked up (muttered quietly)

You would think that a rapist would be more likely to engage in fraud, robbery, theft, assaults and so on. Especially, what his cowardly ass thinks he can get away with.

 

[Bronzeage]

What is the empathy level in society now? How does it compare to previous societies? Does that relate the amount and types of rapes that occur now and in the past? Is denial of "privilege" (when real) a sign of a lack of empathy?

This is a line from a Louis CK bit, I think that it somehow hits on the lack of empathy and respect that rapists obviously have:

You should never rape anyone. Unless you have a reason, like you want to fuck someone and they won't let you. In which case, what other option do you have? How else are you supposed to have an orgasm in their body if you don't rape 'em... like what the fuck?

You would think that a rapist would be more likely to engage in fraud, robbery, theft, assaults and so on.

There will always be people among us who lack the empathy which restrains the rest of us when tempted to do something which would harm someone else. That's different from the person who truly "doesn't know any better." Culture, rape and any other kind of culture, is defined by what people believe it is. Beliefs and other thoughts can be changed. We see it happen throughout history. From slavery to child marriage to capital punishment, any aware person can think of a dozen things which were once accepted as normal, but are now considered wrong, and something a caring person avoids doing.

A change in cultural thinking is a difficult thing to accomplish, but it can be done if enough of the people with normal levels of empathy are convinced something is no longer acceptable. After that, it's easier to deal with the sociopaths, because they stand out in the places where they once blended in.

 

[repoman]

Well, there is a term called "circle of empathy" isn't there? We should have rape and sexual assault and sexual harassment victims inside of it. Any victim warning that is done should not be seen as or have the effect of casting them out of the circle.

It just seems that there is a lot of economic inequality and insecurity in America now that really feeds a huge amount of lack of empathy and people feeling that there is no empathy paid to them in any aspect of their lives.

 

[repoman]

There could probably be a parallel video made about rape victims to this "good aids/bad aids" satire: