Polimicks

Leftist commentary from a mouthy bitch

This is a perfect example of Victim-blaming bullshit.

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,402111,00.html

“Court Cuts Rape Victim’s Compensation by 25 Percent Because ‘She Was Drunk'”

Ok, now the article is actually about how a higher judicial power reversed that decision, because they recognized it as the bullshit, victim-blaming piece of crap it was. But the fact that it happened at all is reprehensible. The piece goes on to describe how the victim’s drink had been dosed, which is how she wound up unable to defend herself from her attacker.

“What were you wearing?” “What were you doing?” “Were you drinking?” All of these questions deflect guilt from the rapist. And this is wrong. Very wrong. The only thing all rape victims have in common was being in the presence of a rapist. From infants to the elderly, age, race, dress, sobriety, none of that matters. What matters is that someone decided to commit a violent assault against someone who either didn’t consent, or who couldn’t consent, either because of age or incapacitation.

If you have sex with someone who cannot consent because they are unconscious, particularly if you caused them to be that way, you are a rapist. Even if you didn’t make them unconscious, taking advantage of their inability to articulate the word “no” makes you a rapist. Their being drunk in your presence does not any way, shape or form imply consent.

And this article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1044160/Dont-blind-drunk-women-rape-bear-responsibility-happens-them.html), in the Daily Mail, while mostly appearing to be pro-victim has a few give-away lines in the bottom:

“I certainly defend women’s right to enjoy themselves and, in all cultures, men must always take responsibility for their behaviour.
There is never an excuse.
But so must women – and brewers and publicans who ply them with cheap drink.
Women always retain the right to say no whatever condition they are in.
But if they have been drinking, they may not be able to make that clear to someone stronger than them who doesn’t wish to hear it.”

So, her being not being drunk is going to stop some guy stronger than her who doesn’t want to hear no? Are you fucking kidding me? No, really. Do you really think that someone being sober is going to save them from being raped?

I was stone cold sober both times I was raped. I was also not provocatively dressed. I was also with someone I trusted, both times. Boys I was dating, who said they loved me. Both times I said no, both times they didn’t want to hear no. Both times they did what they wanted regardless of my wishes. All without the benefit of alcohol.

This is part of the over-arching belief in rituals of safety and goodness that permeate our culture. Just as a lot of people think being thin will save them from an early death, an awful lot of people think that if women just followed “common sense guidelines” they wouldn’t be raped.

Really? What about sitting in your own house watching tv in sweats is so against common sense? What about spending time with someone you’ve been dating, who said they loved you and would never, ever hurt you, is against common sense? What about trusting a friend you’ve known for years, is against common sense?

Ok, here are just a few of the things women are supposed to do to not get raped:
Don’t go out alone.
Don’t go out after dark.
Don’t dress too sexy.
Don’t walk with your head down, you’ll look like a victim.
Don’t walk with your head up, you’ll bring attention to yourself.
Don’t drink.
Don’t be alone with men, any man, in any location, work, school, public transportation.
Don’t let anyone know you are home alone.
Don’t say “hi” to anyone you don’t know.
Don’t let strange men (including service people) into your home.
Don’t go anywhere alone. Ever.
Always check the backseat of your car before you get in it.
Always look under your car before you get too close.
Get in your car quickly.
Have your keys out before you leave whatever building you’re in.
Make sure no one’s following you.

Ok, that’s just a few. Now, guys, if someone told you that you had to live by this list, or you would deserve to get the shit kicked out of you just for transgressing it, how would you react? You’d probably be fucking outraged, right? Nevermind that parts of this list are contradictory as hell. Well, why aren’t women supposed to be outraged? Because that’s just the way it is? Fuck that.

Rape is NEVER the victim’s fault. Got it? Trust me, rape victims spend enough time blaming themselves for what happened, they don’t need the rest of the world jumping on that bandwagon, too.

17 comments on “This is a perfect example of Victim-blaming bullshit.

  1. garpu
    August 13, 2008

    What the fucking fuck? People do suck.

    Like

  2. staxxy
    August 13, 2008

    the fact that there is ANY defense for rapists other than mistaken identity (ie, the wrong person is being accused), is outrageous. I think that people who *did not do it* should not be accused of it, but when you know who the attacker is and things happen? The line of questioning that tries to paint the victim as asking for it, in my mind is the attorney asking for a serious smackdown on their own. What a crock of shit.

    Like

  3. mojrim
    August 13, 2008

    Reminds me of a few nights in the 80’s
    The conversations ended with “You got drunk, and ran your mouth, and got your ass kicked. What the fuck did you think was gonna happen?”

    Like

    • sirriamnis
      August 13, 2008

      Re: Reminds me of a few nights in the 80’s
      So where are the calls for all guys ever to never, ever drink?

      Like

      • mojrim
        August 14, 2008

        Re: Reminds me of a few nights in the 80’s
        None, never will be. We just take the beating and carry on. Party A’s criminal liability and party B’s foolishness are unrelated, but codependant.

        Like

  4. kurosau
    August 14, 2008

    I was wondering, would you be willing to share your opinion about seduction vs rape, and how similar or dissimilar the two are?

    Like

    • geekalpha
      August 14, 2008

      There is no victim because the other person is persuaded to assent to willingly and actively participate in all sexual activities?
      I’m just guessing here.

      Like

      • kurosau
        August 14, 2008

        That defense would also work in a confidence game. So in my mind, there may be something fishy there.
        In essence, the question is whether or not seduction can be outright trickery. And whether or not regret could mean rape.

        Like

      • geekalpha
        August 14, 2008

        I actually hadn’t taken your question very seriously, but I suppose there is arguable territory as to how one could conceivably acquire assent. Many of the nastiest, although technically non-violent, means of coercion available never really occur to me in discussion.
        However, I think the measure of regret as a definition of rape is just out of bounds. If that is the measure, then I have been raped many many times. I think that really trivializes what rape is.

        Like

      • mojrim
        August 14, 2008

        It’s more than that. Rape is, first and formost, a legal term defining an assault with sexual content. The law requires clear, bright lines to function properly, definable points at which the accused could/should have turned back. If regret can be used to define rape than the accused has no gate at which he could have stopped, and the prosecution has literally no boundaries.
        Adding regret to the list gets us into the territory that MD occupied in 2004, with the Court of Appeals being forced to uphold a very bad law (that consent cannot be withdrawn) in order to overturn an unjust conviction. The harpies at feministing.com were arguing that “no means no” isn’t enough, and that the standard should be “enthusiastic participation.” One can only imagine where that would have taken us.

        Like

      • polimicks
        August 14, 2008

        Women pressing rape charges out of regret as opposed to actually being raped is really rare.

        Like

      • kurosau
        August 14, 2008

        I have no evidence on it, but I would agree. I’ve only ever seen that issue brought up in fiction.

        Like

      • mojrim
        August 14, 2008

        True enough, but I’m not really concerned with today so much as what might be tomorrow. We have all watched as, just within our lifetimes, previously unacceptable forms of stupidity have become protected under the law. Rape is a legal term, and it means whatever the statute (and precedent) says it does. Imagine a world in which women are told that regret, or lack of enthusiasm, turns it into rape. It won’t take long at all…

        Like

    • polimicks
      August 14, 2008

      I can do that.
      And there is a world of difference.

      Like

  5. kaligrrrl
    August 14, 2008

    and:
    Don’t ever leave your doors and windows unlocked/open, even if it’s 100 degrees.
    Park under a streetlight.
    Don’t wear a thong.
    Don’t go to X part of town.
    Don’t go jogging or walking.
    Don’t wear an ipod or talk on a cellphone.
    Don’t ever let anyone into your building.
    Have “intuition” and always listen to it.
    Don’t ever break down and if you do, don’t leave your car.
    Don’t pump your own gas.
    Don’t be a tease.

    Like

    • mojrim
      August 14, 2008

      Or just carry a gun.

      Like

    • lexica510
      August 14, 2008

      But whatever you do, don’t insult a man by acting as though he might possibly be a danger to you!

      Like

Leave a reply to lexica510 Cancel reply

Information

This entry was posted on August 13, 2008 by in Uncategorized.

Recent Posts

Archives