"Not Ever" - A Campaign Against Blaming Rape Victims

[Meed]

I suspect that's because people aren't making unintuitive, irrational political claims about murder and trying to pass them off as scientific fact.

If I went around saying "Bashings in the pub are all about rival schools of art", then people might well respond by saying "You're an idiot, chimpanzees bash each other and they don't have rival schools of art".

Not a great analogy, since chimpanzees do have different levels of social power.

Also will you kindly stop pretending that anybody here is rationalizing rape? This is the kind of behaviour that gives internet white knights a bad name.

I'm not sure why he thought you were somehow defending rapists.

...and they have, and it turns out it's a behaviour found in our closest relatives as well as throughout human societies all around the world throughout history, so if you think that it's not the product of our evolution then I don't know what the hell you might think it is.

Saying it's a product of evolution is trivially true, since every behavior can be described as a product of evolution in some sense. But it doesn't tell us anything. It doesn't mean that the behavior is motivated by one thing and not another or even that the behavior is adaptive. I have to agree that there is not much merit to 'evolutionary psychology' other than it makes for interesting speculative exercises.

That said, I don't know how much evidence there is behind the "rape is about power" claim. I would suspect that sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

 

[Skeptic]

I was in a relationship like that for almost nine months.

My reply to this post -- about tyr being in a mental institution -- was moved to AAH... folks, it was a JOKE! I meant to humorously tell tyr the relationship must have driven him crazy...

 

[TraneWreck]

My reply to this post -- about tyr being in a mental institution -- was moved to AAH... folks, it was a JOKE! I meant to humorously tell tyr the relationship must have driven him crazy...

You shouldn't camouflage the humor with that green font.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

You put on women's clothing and hang around in bars?

(Sorry, I'll get my coat).



There's an old joke saying that the difference between rape and romance is patience. There is some truth to that: a man who will wait until you are willing to have sex with him is not a rapist, a man who will not is.

As a man I would say that I, and most men, would think that if you kiss with me on the dance floor it means you might be willing to have sex with me later; that you enjoy my company and want to see how things will go on. Not that you want me in your bed right now. "Later" for me might mean anything from "later that night" to "when we get married", depending on many circumstances, but not "the minute we stop kissing".

After all, if men weren't turned on by women kissing or dancing with them they wouldn't bother going to such clubs at all. For that matter, women wouldn't go to such clubs unless they enjoyed dancing or kissing with men. But that hardly means men go to such clubs thinking they may rape any girl that turns them on, or women with the expectation of, in Dorothy Parker's words, of "two more drinks and I'll be under the host". I saw a car I really liked on the way home tonight -- does this think I mean I think I now have the right to steal it?

Kleptomaniacs, nymphomaniacs, and serial rapists always exist, of course, but they are a very small minority.

This feels a bit like a fallacy of the excluded middle. It is probably best to go by societal norms as a guide, with a notation that some societies have screwed up nor

Just for the record, as I am married, I do not kiss the men I dance with at clubs

And I think both you and ponderingturtle read a little too much into my post.

The only point of my post was that Wolfman stated that merely the act of turning a man on is irresponsible and invites rape upon a woman because she is, in his words "putting herself in that situation." My counterpoint is that this is ridiculous, because by that standard, any women who gives any man a hard on is irresponsible and inviting rape upon herself, even if the only thing she ever did was kiss him.

Heck, for that matter, just SEEING a person can turn you on, as Trainewreck pointed out. My next door neighbor in college was drop dead gorgeous, and I was very in lust with him for some time. Merely seeing him got me all hot under the collar.

Wolfman's low standards for what consists of a woman putting herself in a dangerous, irresponsible situation (the mere act of turning a man on) would mean that simply being attractive and not dressing to hide that fact would be irresponsible and invites rape as a man could become turned on at the sight of you.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Just for the record, as I am married, I do not kiss the men I dance with at clubs

And I think both you and ponderingturtle read a little too much into my post.

The only point of my post was that Wolfman stated that merely the act of turning a man on is irresponsible and invites rape upon a woman because she is, in his words "putting herself in that situation." My counterpoint is that this is ridiculous, because by that standard, any women who gives any man a hard on is irresponsible and inviting rape upon herself, even if the only thing she ever did was kiss him.

Heck, for that matter, just SEEING a person can turn you on, as Trainewreck pointed out. My next door neighbor in college was drop dead gorgeous, and I was very in lust with him for some time. Merely seeing him got me all hot under the collar.

Wolfman's low standards for what consists of a woman putting herself in a dangerous, irresponsible situation (the mere act of turning a man on) would mean that simply being attractive and not dressing to hide that fact would be irresponsible and invites rape as a man could become turned on at the sight of you.

Wow, way to strawman Wolfman's posts...

 

[bookitty]

It seems to me that your political stance is one that's going to lead to more women being raped... but on the bright side, hey, at least some people will be less inclined to tell the rape victim that if she had behaved differently she would have been at less risk of rape. I don't think overall that is a win.

Ah yes, because without people telling women how they might get raped, less women will take precautions. Without a clear list, repeated ad infinitum and updated constantly, women will prance merrily into dangerous situations expecting some sort of protection.

Let me assure you this is not the case. Women know about rape, and women know what behavior is dangerous. After the age of 12, the warning is unnecessary, it's been pounded in.

Because the list of potential danger is so long and so thorough, there's a side effect. If a woman gets raped and her behavior can match up to anything on that list, she feels responsible and is less likely to report the rape. Society says that she did something wrong and after the trauma of being raped she doesn't want to deal with the after affects of defending her own actions.

There is an unnecessarily high number of rapes that go unreported. Which means that those rapists are free to rape again and are now bolder because there is a lack of consequence. Even in this, you'll find people blaming the woman. She should have reported it no matter what. Even if her case was thrown out, this guy would have a record. Etc. etc.

If placing the blame solely on the aggressor led to more convictions, there would be less rape. If trying to place some of the blame on the victim means that she will not report it, there will be more rapes.

 

[Morrigan]

If it were just about "control of women" or "power", you'd expect homosexual men, for example, to rape women just as much as heterosexual men. While I cannot deny there could be, for all I know, some rare cases where a homosexual man might have raped a woman out of spite,

Hmm. Do you think all prison rape is committed by homosexual men?

Excellent point, TW. I read the autobiographical comic book "Persepolis" about a girl's coming of age in Tehran after the Revolution. She tells one story about how she (dressed in ankle length robes and a veil) was walking or running somewhere because she was in a hurry. A member of the Revolutionary Guard stopped her and reprimanded her for doing so because in running, it had made her garment press against her backside, which revealed to him the faint outline of her buttocks through her robe. The Guard reprimanded her for doing something so provocative.

I haven't read the comic, but I saw the movie (which I highly recommend, very good movie) and remember that scene. Didn't she just tell the idiots off? I bet she'd just get arrested and beaten for doing the same thing nowadays... so sad.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

Wow, way to strawman Wolfman's posts...

Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't think that Wolfman himself is actually arguing that being an attractive woman, or merely kissing a man invites rape.

But my point is that he stated that "turning a man on" means you are "putting yourself in a situation" to be raped.

So his point seems to be that if woman sends the signals she wants sex, this is putting herself in a situation in which she is inviting rape. But my point is...well, where do you draw the line, considering I have encountered men who have thought that merely kissing signals that you want sex?

For that matter, when I was in Italy and Spain, some men seemed to think that me making eye contact at them and smiling was a signal that I wanted sex, and responded quite aggressively with me, to the point that more than once, in both those countries, I was literally groped in the streets as a man tried to get me to go back to his place (I was 16 and 17 at the time, to boot).


I wasn't trying to indicate that Wolfman is ACTUALLY proposing that any woman who doesn't wear a burqa is inviting rape. Only that "she turned a man on...which put herself in the situation in which she is raped" is not a useful definition of what dangerous behavior consists of, because people can get turned on by just about anything given the right situation, and that people can potentially interperet even the most banal of actions as sexual come ons.

And I would challenge him to provide a universally agreed upon point at which, past that threshold, a woman can be considered to be unequivically be sending "I want to have sex with you right now" signals.

I simply do not agree with the argument that we as a society have established such a set point. And if we haven't established such a set point, a threshold at which we can say to a woman, "okay, NOW you are definitely indicating you want sex right now," his argument is rather useless.

 

[Mark6]

I wasn't trying to indicate that Wolfman is ACTUALLY proposing that any woman who doesn't wear a burqa is inviting rape. Only that "if she hadn't turned a man on" is not a useful definition of what dangerous behavior and sending misleading sexual signals consists of, because people can get turned on by just about anything given the right situation, and that people can potentially interperet even the most banal of actions as sexual come ons.

And I would challenge him to provide a universally agreed upon point at which a woman can be considered - by everyone- to be unequivically be sending "I want to have sex with you right now" signals.

IOW, "If only life came with a manual!"

The following was originally my PM to one of the posters here, but after reading about Schrodinger's Cat's experiences in Europe I decided to post it. Heck, it may come useful to somebody!

How often does it happen that woman says "no", and the man thinks she is just playing hard to get? When two people come from different cultures, this is entirely possible. In Russian culture, "no" means "maybe" or "I am a tease". If a Russian woman really does not want a man's advances, she slaps him in the face. No Russian man would be offended by it, because that slap is simply an unequivocal way of telling him that his advances are unwelcome. And if he backs off, chances are she'll be perfectly friendly to him again. And if he does not back off, that's rape.

But if Russian woman just keeps saying "no", the man will not listen to her because in that culture, saying "no" means teasing. And whenever I happen to talk to young American women traveling to Russia fot the first time, I explain this cultural dissonance. And I know at least one American woman who got raped in this manner, and then the guy genuinely did not understand what she is complaining about. He just followed the script.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

How often does it happen that woman says "no", and the man thinks she is just playing hard to get?

Indeed.

As a personal anecdote:

In college once, I was hanging out with a male friend. There was no romantic history between us and I had never expressed any romantic interest in him. He was pretty drunk, and he started kissing and fondling me. I said "no" as soon as he started kissing me, but he persisted. My being a very petite girl, and he being a very large person, he was able to pin me down on the bed pretty easily and continued to grope and undress me as I pleaded with him not to. Now at the time, I did not scream, and I didn't realy struggle that much - I mean, I pushed back against him but I didn't actually kick or hit or anything like that. I just really was so taken aback by what was happening (as the two of us were pretty good friends and had been for years) that I didn't really know how to react. I just kept saying no.

Finally, he released me in order to grab for a condom. I took the moment to jump off the bed and run. As I was running out of the room, I looked behind me at him. And he looked so very, very shocked at my doing this. I realized in that moment that in his mind he wasn't trying to rape me. To him, as I was simply saying "no" and pleading as opposed to biting, kicking, screaming, etc...this was just some lovely little hard to get game of foreplay.

 

[Furcifer]

If placing the blame solely on the aggressor led to more convictions, there would be less rape. If trying to place some of the blame on the victim means that she will not report it, there will be more rapes.

And if women continue to engage in high risk activities there will be more rapes.

I don't see how you can expect people to have the same empathy for a 12 year old girl that gets raped by her uncle at a family reunion, as a promiscuous college girl that gets drunk at a party and wakes up in a bed with a strange guy.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how to look past the behaviour we know statistically put a woman at higher risk for rape. And why can't we identify the behaviour and warn women without the risk of "blaming the victim"?

As I sit here writing this a happened to turn on the Tyra Banks show, which is discussing the sharp rise in teen sex, teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Some of these girls are so young they just don't know any better. They're allowing older guys to pressure them into having sex, sex they don't want to have, in order to fit in and be accepted.

I think a lot of this is because we're afraid to "blame the victim". These girls know they can do what ever they want, and never run the risk of being "blamed" for their poor choices. Then they find themselves in bad situations, situations we know have higher risk of being raped or worse.

 

[bookitty]

And if women continue to engage in high risk activities there will be more rapes.

I don't see how you can expect people to have the same empathy for a 12 year old girl that gets raped by her uncle at a family reunion, as a promiscuous college girl that gets drunk at a party and wakes up in a bed with a strange guy.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how to look past the behaviour we know statistically put a woman at higher risk for rape. And why can't we identify the behaviour and warn women without the risk of "blaming the victim"?

As I sit here writing this a happened to turn on the Tyra Banks show, which is discussing the sharp rise in teen sex, teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Some of these girls are so young they just don't know any better. They're allowing older guys to pressure them into having sex, sex they don't want to have, in order to fit in and be accepted.

I think a lot of this is because we're afraid to "blame the victim". These girls know they can do what ever they want, and never run the risk of being "blamed" for their poor choices. Then they find themselves in bad situations, situations we know have higher risk of being raped or worse.

Well, heaven forfend we attach any blame to those nice men who are pressuring young girls into having sex they don't want. Obviously these wayward little lolitas are just asking for it.

 

[quixotecoyote]

Indeed.

As a personal anecdote:

In college once, I was hanging out with a male friend. There was no romantic history between us and I had never expressed any romantic interest in him. He was pretty drunk, and he started kissing and fondling me. I said "no" as soon as he started kissing me, but he persisted. My being a very petite girl, and he being a very large person, he was able to pin me down on the bed pretty easily and continued to grope and undress me as I pleaded with him not to. Now at the time, I did not scream, and I didn't realy struggle that much - I mean, I pushed back against him but I didn't actually kick or hit or anything like that. I just really was so taken aback by what was happening (as the two of us were pretty good friends and had been for years) that I didn't really know how to react. I just kept saying no.

Finally, he released me in order to grab for a condom. I took the moment to jump off the bed and run. As I was running out of the room, I looked behind me at him. And he looked so very, very shocked at my doing this. I realized in that moment that in his mind he wasn't trying to rape me. To him, as I was simply saying "no" and pleading as opposed to biting, kicking, screaming, etc...this was just some lovely little hard to get game of foreplay.

I had a date similar to that, after she took her pants off and got on my bed,she started actually and legitimately doing that as a form of foreplay. Of course, because I'm not an idiot, I told her she had to ask me to **** her before I'd do so (I would have also accepted being given permission, but I'm willing to play along with the mode my partner's in, as long as we're safe). That said, I DID have a conversation with her afterward regarding that not being the wisest form of play with a guy she didn't know well.

And now everyone thinks I'm excusing rapists, right?

 

[Mark6]

Indeed.

As a personal anecdote:

In college once, I was hanging out with a male friend. There was no romantic history between us and I had never expressed any romantic interest in him. He was pretty drunk, and he started kissing and fondling me. I said "no" as soon as he started kissing me, but he persisted. My being a very petite girl, and he being a very large person, he was able to pin me down on the bed pretty easily and continued to grope and undress me as I pleaded with him not to. Now at the time, I did not scream, and I didn't realy struggle that much - I mean, I pushed back against him but I didn't actually kick or hit or anything like that. I just really was so taken aback by what was happening (as the two of us were pretty good friends and had been for years) that I didn't really know how to react. I just kept saying no.

Finally, he released me in order to grab for a condom. I took the moment to jump off the bed and run. As I was running out of the room, I looked behind me at him. And he looked so very, very shocked at my doing this. I realized in that moment that in his mind he wasn't trying to rape me. To him, as I was simply saying "no" and pleading as opposed to biting, kicking, screaming, etc...this was just some lovely little hard to get game of foreplay.

My sympathy for Schrodinger's Cat, and I think you were lucky to escape the situation.

However, question to Live830 and Travelgirl:

How in heck do you define the above as "crime of power, control and anger"?

 

[Meed]

And if women continue to engage in high risk activities there will be more rapes.

I don't see how you can expect people to have the same empathy for a 12 year old girl that gets raped by her uncle at a family reunion, as a promiscuous college girl that gets drunk at a party and wakes up in a bed with a strange guy.

Not a very useful distinction. In generally we would have more empathy for a 12 year old, but that is not because she is not engaging in high risk activities. Also I might might feel a bit less empathy for a promiscuous person than a virgin simply because I would expect the latter to be an even worse experience (not because one somehow deserves it more). I would not feel less empathy for a promiscuous college girl who was drunk at a party than another promiscuous college girl who was not engaging in supposedly high risk behavior. The only exception would be if the drunk girl actively consented (or even initiated), but was considered to be raped under statutory rape law.

Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how to look past the behaviour we know statistically put a woman at higher risk for rape. And why can't we identify the behaviour and warn women without the risk of "blaming the victim"?

We can. But you just said you'd have less empathy for them, so you are blaming the victim to a degree.

BTW, most rapes are carried out by dates, acquaintances or family members by my understanding. I don't know why everyone assumes that rape usually happens, because a girl walks alone at night or gets drunk with a bunch of strangers. That does happen, but a lot less often.

As I sit here writing this a happened to turn on the Tyra Banks show, which is discussing the sharp rise in teen sex, teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases. Some of these girls are so young they just don't know any better. They're allowing older guys to pressure them into having sex, sex they don't want to have, in order to fit in and be accepted.

I think a lot of this is because we're afraid to "blame the victim". These girls know they can do what ever they want, and never run the risk of being "blamed" for their poor choices. Then they find themselves in bad situations, situations we know have higher risk of being raped or worse.

Sorry, that is just ridiculous. The idea that children think they can't be blamed is as absurd as the idea that they aren't blamed.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

Maybe I'm missing something, but I just don't see how to look past the behaviour we know statistically put a woman at higher risk for rape. And why can't we identify the behaviour and warn women without the risk of "blaming the victim"?

I do agree that it is only sensible to identify high risk behavior in order to avoid it.


Should I be able to drink at a party without fear of getting raped? Well, I would argue that getting black out drunk is inherently dangerous because you are at risk of alcohol poisoning and possibly making poor personal decisions when that intoxicated. But aside from that, my mother still warned me about the dangers of heavy drinking and sexual assault, and I plan to do whe same. Just like I'll warn my children about internet predators and all the other risky situations.

Just because a child SHOULD be able to use the internet without fear of predation and just because a woman SHOULD be able to get drunk without fear of rape doesn't mean that we shouldn't warn them not to do these things, because we don't live in a perfect world and where what should be reality IS reality.

But I do agree with what other people have stated, that though people should be warned about high risk situations, the onus should not be solely placed on potential victims.

I have seen the view expressed plenty of times in which if a woman doesn't say no, than it's not rape. Recently there was a case in Canada about a girl who was gang raped at a rave. Now it was suspected that she had been slipped a date rape drug (not sure if that was confirmed or not). The event was caught on video, and the girl was clearly unconcious while she was being gang raped. One newspaper article I read had interviewed various students at her school, and several students had stated that if the girl herself had taken drugs or drank to the point that she had passed out, it was not rape. This sort of attitude needs to be addressed more firmly.

When I was in high school and college, there were several mandatory seminars they held for female students in which they went over high risk behavior and rape prevention. And I don't have any problem with that. I appreciated this service, I wasn't offended by it. But I wonder, is this commonly done with boys as well? Explaining the concept of consent and what it means, things like that? I honestly don't know if this is something that occurs on campuses, but if it's not, if the responsibility to prevent rape is ONLY placed on the women, then that just seems fundamentally wrong to me.

Not a very useful distinction. In generally we would have more empathy for a 12 year old, but that is not because she is not engaging in high risk activities. Also I might might feel a bit less empathy for a promiscuous person than a virgin simply because I would expect the latter to be an even worse experience (not because one somehow deserves it more).

I agree

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

Well, heaven forfend we attach any blame to those nice men who are pressuring young girls into having sex they don't want. Obviously these wayward little lolitas are just asking for it.

If we are talking consentual sex rather than rape then there is no 'blame' to attach to either party.

If a woman consents to having sex she doesn't want to have then I can only see one person responsible there.

If we are arguing that these girls are too young to know any better then you need to revisit the age of consent.

 

[Schrodinger's Cat]

I had a date similar to that, after she took her pants off and got on my bed,she started actually and legitimately doing that as a form of foreplay. Of course, because I'm not an idiot, I told her she had to ask me to **** her before I'd do so (I would have also accepted being given permission, but I'm willing to play along with the mode my partner's in, as long as we're safe). That said, I DID have a conversation with her afterward regarding that not being the wisest form of play with a guy she didn't know well.

And now everyone thinks I'm excusing rapists, right?

Nah. It seems like you handled the situation you describe very appropriately.

 

[bookitty]

If we are talking consentual sex rather than rape then there is no 'blame' to attach to either party.

If a woman consents to having sex she doesn't want to have then I can only see one person responsible there.

If we are arguing that these girls are too young to know any better then you need to revisit the age of consent.

So, if an older man who has the benefit of size, weight, experience, and understanding of the human psyche manipulates a younger, less experienced girl into having sex that she doesn't want by putting her in a position where she is too afraid or confused to say no, then we should blame the girl?

So basically, it's open season on teen girls.

 

[Furcifer]

One newspaper article I read had interviewed various students at her school, and several students had stated that if the girl herself had taken drugs or drank to the point that she had passed out, it was not rape. This sort of attitude needs to be addressed more firmly.

A concerning response to an obvious violation of the girls rights, but one has to wonder if the perpetrators just don't see themselves as victims. Victims of drugs and alcohol. You can't "blame" her for her behaviour, so how can you "blame" the perpetrators? They're all just victims. I think this is something we need to consider as a result of this "don't blame the victim" mentality.