Support NeoGAF

[H.Protagonist]

That makes sense.

I'd say it'd be interesting if, instead of directly telling teens and young adult to not get drunk (which is useless, because they will anyway) they would be taught how to be more careful with what they do when they've been drinking. I know women that thought nothing would happen and went back home alone. And nothing happened but it could have. And it's a risk that isn't really worth taking.

That is certainly something that could be pushed more in schools from a younger age. The fact that alcohol seems to be viewed as somehow giving more license to take advantage of or excuse sexual assault is a real thing. This 'gray' area for a lot of people exists alongside those that just rape because they know it's wrong and don't care, and results in more rapes than the 'evil alleyway boogeyman' rapist. It's not really addressed at all in high school and it should be. I don't think we even had any such classes or discussions when I was in school, high school or college.

Yeah, you say that and I agree but its kind of hard to directly appeal to people who are committing crimes. Someone who rapes a drunk woman in the street isn't someone you can target an advert to and they'll go 'oh God, what have I been doing? I didn't realise that was rape!' They know what they did.

The adverts made that do target men are about parties and the meaning of consent. I mean, maybe you're American but here in the UK there's been a lot of targeted advertising to young men from the government. Not just about consent but abuse in relationships, etc...I even saw one at the cinema the other day. The UK does actually do these things.

Yes, it is hard. And you're right. Adverts on the street aren't going to convince a rapist to stop. That's why it seems like the preferred method is to tell women what to do to prevent their rape constantly. No one wants to invest in social programs, classes, lectures, or discussion in grade school about what it is or why it's wrong. That ruffles feathers, upsets people, is unpopular. The confusion and uncertainly about what even constitutes rape is a very real thing, though. You say that these people who take advantage of drunk victims do realize what they're doing, but in plenty of cases they don't view it as 'rape'. There was a recent report that I remember was in the news that found, "that roughly a third of male university students would rape a woman if there were no consequences – though most didn’t recognise that these actions were, in fact, rape." This is just a snippet from the report.

Basically, I think that we need to make it clear at a younger age. What it is, about consent, and responsibility. There are 'evil alleyway boogeyman' rapists out there, and public safety measure/punitive and/or rehabilitation methods can target those, but proactive measures to clearly explain and hammer home what the crime is, what damage it causes, that consent matters, and what the consequences would be is surely better than this trite 'advice' that women should be careful when drinking, don't you think?

 

[azyless]

Is this a "gotcha" reply or something? because jeez

Well why just half ass it with "don't drink", "don't walk alone at night/in that neighbourhood", "don't wear this", etc. ? Interacting with men in any way "puts you at risk", since apparently that's the wording we use now, as if we're talking about the weather and not a deliberate action.
Sexual abuse is never provoked, your behaviour doesn't suddenly make someone a rapist, and what you're really saying when you tell someone to not put themselves at risk is "make sure he rapes the next woman, not you", doesn't feel so good now does it ?
Meanwhile most men who commit these crimes will never see the inside of a prison cell, or they'll get a slap on the wrist and newspapers will make their headlines about how this brilliant student athlete's life is ruined for raping another person.

Okay then how about this. Driving late at night in areas with bars raises your risk of getting hit by a drunk driver compared to driving around at noon.

I've literally never heard of anyone telling someone who got hit by a car that they put themselves at risk by being in a certain neighbourhood.

 

[jchap]

man what? crashing your car while drunk is caused by you not having the ability to drive it correctly. getting raped while drunk is SOMEONE ELSE taking advantage of you not have the ability to stop them.

Okay then how about this. Driving late at night in areas with bars raises your risk of getting hit by a drunk driver compared to driving around at noon.

 

[Subpar Scrub]

Like, the "drinking increases risk of something bad happening" is technically correct I guess, but its advice that is only ever given to women, which makes it fairly sexist imo

I can't really agree with this. I know quite a few police officers who have lectured many young men who had their their phones or wallets stolen as they pass out drunk in a park or outside a club that it was partially their fault. Similarly, I frequently see stories about guys who are unwillingly pulled into fights around clubbing areas by aggressors, and the articles often mention that the victim being drunk lessened their ability to flee, call for assistance or fight back, therefore increasing their risk of injury.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

That is certainly something that could be pushed more in schools from a younger age. The fact that alcohol seems to be viewed as somehow giving more license to take advantage of or excuse sexual assault is a real thing. This 'gray' area for a lot of people exists alongside those that just rape because they know it's wrong and don't care, and results in more rapes than the 'evil alleyway boogeyman' rapist. It's not really addressed at all in high school and it should be. I don't think we even had any such classes or discussions when I was in school, high school or college.

Yes, it is hard. And you're right. Adverts on the street aren't going to convince a rapist to stop. That's why it seems like the preferred method is to tell women what to do to prevent their rape constantly. No one wants to invest in social programs, classes, lectures, or discussion in grade school about what it is or why it's wrong. That ruffles feathers, upsets people, is unpopular. The confusion and uncertainly about what even constitutes rape is a very real thing, though. You say that these people who take advantage of drunk victims do realize what they're doing, but in plenty of cases they don't view it as 'rape'. There was a recent report that I remember was in the news that found, "that roughly a third of male university students would rape a woman if there were no consequences – though most didn’t recognise that these actions were, in fact, rape." This is just a snippet from the report.

Basically, I think that we need to make it clear at a younger age. What it is, about consent, and responsibility. There are 'evil alleyway boogeyman' rapists out there, and public safety measure/punitive and/or rehabilitation methods can target those, but proactive measures to clearly explain and hammer home what the crime is, what damage it causes, that consent matters, and what the consequences would be is surely better than this trite 'advice' that women should be careful when drinking, don't you think?

Yeah I totally agree. We really need all aspects of sex education to be strengthened so that we can curb any idea that this is normal.

The report you cited is more than just troubling but frightening. I mean, at University (UK, I assume the study is American?) I knew there were some bad attitudes but a lot of that was to do with 'lad culture' and it was mostly seen as a joke rather than endorsement of rape but if people are actually walking away thinking this is okay it makes you wonder. More than that it makes you think that a joke to you can not only be interpreted as serious but form part of someone's belief system.

I'd refer you back to a post I made just before you responded for the government's challenges towards this:

The UK, in my youth, had the following adverts on national TV, the internet, cinemas, etc...:
An advert where a guy gives his girlfriend shit and ends up smashing her phone. The advert says this is abuse. The advert has the young man screaming from behind his own vision 'what are you doing? Stop! Don't hurt her' or something to that effect.
An advert where a guy takes a girl upstairs at a party and she says 'no' but he keeps going. The advert was clear that this is rape. Similar behind his own vision motif.
An advert where a man belittles his partner openly in a restaurant. The advert was about emotional abuse.
Currently theres an advert discussing the following: 'no means no', physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexting (pressure) and revenge porn. It highlights how these are wrong. The campaign is called 'Disrespect NoBody'

These are just the ones I remember.

 

[psychowave]

Who isn't doing this, sorry?

The UK, in my youth, had the following adverts on national TV, the internet, cinemas, etc...:
An advert where a guy gives his girlfriend shit and ends up smashing her phone. The advert says this is abuse. The advert has the young man screaming from behind his own vision 'what are you doing? Stop! Don't hurt her' or something to that effect.
An advert where a guy takes a girl upstairs at a party and she says 'no' but he keeps going. The advert was clear that this is rape. Similar behind his own vision motif.
An advert where a man belittles his partner openly in a restaurant. The advert was about emotional abuse.
Currently theres an advert discussing the following: 'no means no', physical abuse, emotional abuse, sexting (pressure) and revenge porn. It highlights how these are wrong. The campaign is called 'Disrespect NoBody'

These are just the ones I remember.

Do you care to maybe explain your point? Perhaps you're not from the UK?

No, I'm not from the UK, but this shit needs to start sooner. Raise boys to respect girls. There's no point in teaching grown men the meaning of consent if they already believe women exist for their enjoyment.

 

[4 is a cutie]

Id like to think telling someone "Dont be drunk so you have an easier time spotting danger" is generic, so im not sure what good its supposed to do for rape victim

 

[Gangster Bastard]

Simply encouraging women to stay safe is not victim blaming, it's just not a side of the debate you wanna be pushing, for various reasons.
There are those who will use incidents of rape as an opportunity to push a conservative agenda based on some idea of how a "proper" woman is supposed to look and behave, almost as if they were sitting on a solution in search of a problem. Whether they realize it or not, these guys are promoting a rape culture by making the existence of rape a convenient fact.

 

[H.Protagonist]

Yeah I totally agree. We really need all aspects of sex education to be strengthened so that we can curb any idea that this is normal.

The report you cited is more than just troubling but frightening. I mean, at University (UK, I assume the study is American?) I knew there were some bad attitudes but a lot of that was to do with 'lad culture' and it was mostly seen as a joke rather than endorsement of rape but if people are actually walking away thinking this is okay it makes you wonder. More than that it makes you think that a joke to you can not only be interpreted as serious but form part of someone's belief system.

I'd refer you back to a post I made just before you responded for the government's challenges towards this:

The study is American, but it was internationally circulated at the time because it reflected similar disturbing trends in other Western countries. I'm also American but living in the UK, so I know the adverts you mean, but therein lies the problem. Adverts, like commercials and uninteresting promotions spray-painted on a bus, can be ignored and usually are. To make a difference, to convince or really relay a point you need to engage people. I think the adverts are positive but nowhere near as effective as enforcing classes. They're something politicians or people can point to to say, look! We're doing something! that is far more affordable and less investment than real programs. As a woman, I feel like it's a token gesture in a lot of ways.

EDIT to add: And since you seem particular about the US/UK difference, the UK's Office for National Statistics recently found that "more than a quarter of the public believe drunk victims of rape or sexual assault are at least partly responsible for what has happened to them."

How funny (sad) the takeaway from those findings in 2014 was "Too often, judges and others in authority make derogatory remarks about victims. This has an impact on how others view victims. We believe that every age group needs to stop blaming women for rape and putting responsibility directly onto the rapist." and we see the same thing again now. That's why the judge's 'advice' in this case is shitty however 'practical' people want to spin it.

 

[FlutterPuffs]

It's sound advice for me.

 

[BlazinSkatinAxel]

This is a tough topic to discuss, because it's highly semantic.

eg. 1 "You were raped because you got drunk and wore skanky clothing". <-- to me, this is 100% victim blaming. Specifically takes the blame off the perpetrator and puts it on the victim.

eg. 2 "If you are going to go out drinking tonight, please be careful, as being a drunk woman in this part of town puts you at higher risk of very real dangers in our society." <-- this doesn't come off as victim blaming to me. Those dangers exist, we're all aware of it, but we're also not saying that you deserve what happens to you if you make certain decisions. It is NOT your fault if you make those decisions, however there are some harsh realities we must protect ourselves from.

Does that makes sense?

With example 2, being drunk lowers one's ability to defend oneself.

It increases the chance of being taken advantage of.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

No, I'm not from the UK, but this shit needs to start sooner. Raise boys to respect girls. There's no point in teaching grown men the meaning of consent if they already believe women exist for their enjoyment.

Those adverts aren't for grown men, they're targeted at the ages just beginning to get into relationships. From like, 12 and up, I'd think? The actors in the adverts were always relatively young. Except for when I stated 'man.'

The issue is not raising people to 'respect' as that's being done, the issue with these are making sure people understand the definitions and what constitutes abuse and rape. This is why one of those adverts specifically targeted coercing drunk girls into sex.

I do think that your post is a bit hyperbolic though, I don't think that anywhere near the majority of men see women as purely existing for their enjoyment.

The study is American, but it was internationally circulated at the time because it reflected similar disturbing trends in other Western countries. I'm also American but living in the UK, so I know the adverts you mean, but therein lies the problem. Adverts, like commercials and uninteresting promotions spray-painted on a bus, can be ignored and usually are. To make a difference, to convince or really relay a point you need to engage people. I think the adverts are positive but nowhere near as effective as enforcing classes. They're something politicians or people can point to to say, look! We're doing something! that is far more affordable and less investment than real programs. As a woman, I feel like it's a token gesture in a lot of ways.

EDIT to add: And since you seem particular about the US/UK difference, the UK's Office for National Statistics recently found that "more than a quarter of the public believe drunk victims of rape or sexual assault are at least partly responsible for what has happened to them."

How funny (sad) the takeaway from those findings in 2014 was "Too often, judges and others in authority make derogatory remarks about victims. This has an impact on how others view victims. We believe that every age group needs to stop blaming women for rape and putting responsibility directly onto the rapist." and we see the same thing again now. That's why the judge's 'advice' in this case is shitty however 'practical' people want to spin it.

Perhaps but then its purely up to sex education which is something I heavily agree with strengthening in the UK. We're better than some countries but religious schools in the UK can opt out and parents can take their kids out. That needs to stop. They need to properly explain these things from a young age.

Without being cheeky, that study you posted is actually in the OP.

I do, however, disagree with your last point. The judge's advice holds up. She's not blaming the victim or making derogatory remarks about her and the same judge convicted the rapist on two counts, she wasn't just like 'six of one...' and then left it at that. You can help people to minimize risk to themselves or their person without blaming them. Shit, I know someone who walked home drunk and got mugged and the advice was: if you're drunk, alone and vulnerable then you need to get a taxi home. Should you have to? Absolutely fucking not but as long as bad people exist you need to work that into your approach to life.

 

[Arjayes]

Are we talking about hit you over the head with a bottle rape, or I'm so drunk I can't function rape, or I consented but it doesn't count rape? Because I did the last one and in that case I would agree with the judge. Maybe even in the second I would agree; not a rape sense but because we should all watch out limits any time we drink. If we pass that, anything could happen. However, in the first situation I would be pretty pissed if someone said to "be careful".

 

[Frodo]

Because only drunk women get raped, right Judge?


Fuck off with that bullshit.

 

[TimmmV]

I can't really agree with this. I know quite a few police officers who have lectured many young men who had their their phones or wallets stolen as they pass out drunk in a park or outside a club that it was partially their fault. Similarly, I frequently see stories about guys who are unwillingly pulled into fights around clubbing areas by aggressors, and the articles often mention that the victim being drunk lessened their ability to flee, call for assistance or fight back, therefore increasing their risk of injury.

You're comparing different things there though, passing out drunk in a public area is totally different than merely being drunk in a public area.

I don't really agree with the fighting comparison either, there is a difference between "the victim being drunk lessened their ability to flee, call for assistance or fight back" and the 'advice' of "if you go out drinking you are increasing the risk of being raped". The former is circumstances that made the man more of a victim who wasn't able to defend themselves, the latter is framing the rape as something that could have been avoided if only the woman hadn't been drinking

 

[BeforeU]

Don't see how it's any more victim blaming than drinking increases risk of crashing your car.

I mean, that judge wasn't wrong. Getting drunk undoubtedly increases the risk of being sexually assaulted. It's shitty and awful that this is still the case, but the judge was just being realistic. I don't really see how anyone could read that as the judge blaming her specifically.

This is insane. This is like saying its victims fault for wearing short clothes. wtf is wrong with you?

 

[H.Protagonist]

Those adverts aren't for grown men, they're targeted at the ages just beginning to get into relationships. From like, 12 and up, I'd think? The actors in the adverts were always relatively young. Except for when I stated 'man.'

The issue is not raising people to 'respect' as that's being done, the issue with these are making sure people understand the definitions and what constitutes abuse and rape. This is why one of those adverts specifically targeted coercing drunk girls into sex.

I do think that your post is a bit hyperbolic though, I don't think that anywhere near the majority of men see women as purely existing for their enjoyment.


Perhaps but then its purely up to sex education which is something I heavily agree with strengthening in the UK. We're better than some countries but religious schools in the UK can opt out and parents can take their kids out. That needs to stop. They need to properly explain these things from a young age.

Without being cheeky, that study you posted is actually in the OP.

I do, however, disagree with your last point. The judge's advice holds up. She's not blaming the victim or making derogatory remarks about her and the same judge convicted the rapist on two counts, she wasn't just like 'six of one...' and then left it at that. You can help people to minimize risk to themselves or their person without blaming them. Shit, I know someone who walked home drunk and got mugged and the advice was: if you're drunk, alone and vulnerable then you need to get a taxi home. Should you have to? Absolutely fucking not but as long as bad people exist you need to work that into your approach to life.

Haha. You can be cheeky. I read it but didn't realize it was the same one that came up when I was just checking for local stats. In my defense, I'm only on my third coffee.

For the last point, it's not that she's making derogatory remarks per se, it's that those remarks, especially in her official capacity, color how people view victims. Instead of the takeaway that something inexcusable happened to her and a crime was committed, we're left with the idea that her actions, drinking, contributed to her rape. That's not the kind of takehome that's productive or fair, imo.

 

[ReplacementPelican]

Haha. You can be cheeky. I read it but didn't realize it was the same one that came up when I was just checking for local stats. In my defense, I'm only on my third coffee.

For the last point, it's not that she's making derogatory remarks per se, it's that those remarks, especially in her official capacity, color how people view victims. Instead of the takeaway that something inexcusable happened to her and a crime was committed, we're left with the idea that her actions, drinking, contributed to her rape. That's not the kind of takehome that's productive or fair, imo.

That's alright, I'm probably as far through coffee as that as well.

That's fair enough. I guess it sort of ties into my earlier thoughts about:

So even if its a discussion to have, should we? In a time where this is a troublingly common attitude do we take the risk of legitimizing stupidity? Where this amount of people already think that a victim is not 'so much' a victim because they're drunk?

So we can agree on that but what we come to then is a discussion about whether or not we should blame the judge and hold her responsible because of how these people will interpret it and from that perspective I guess in a perfect world it shouldn't be viewed as that, the victim certainly doesn't see it that way but people can be, as we've established, pretty awful.

 

[Media]

Don't see how it's any more victim blaming than drinking increases risk of crashing your car.

If you can go out and get smashed without worrying about someone fucking raping you, then so should I. And all women. It's not about the victim, it's about the crime. Getting behind the wheel of a car is a decision you make. Raping someone is a decision you make. Getting raped is not something you chose to do.


That said, it's something that most of us already have ingrained in us. To be careful and only drink with friends and cover our drinks and...yet we still get raped so...

 

[duckroll]

Okay then how about this. Driving late at night in areas with bars raises your risk of getting hit by a drunk driver compared to driving around at noon.

How about we just stop with lazy and bad rape analogies?

 

[Subpar Scrub]

This is insane. This is like saying its victims fault for wearing short clothes. wtf is wrong with you?

I never said anything of the sort. What the fuck is wrong with YOU?

I said that getting drunk most likely increases the risk of a woman being sexually assaulted compared with being sober. You know, the whole reduction in perception and co-ordination thing? Do you disagree with this?

This being said, the fact that the woman is assaulted AT ALL is fucking abhorrent and absolutely not her fault. I've stated that many times throughout this thread, so please enlighten me on why what I've said is akin to telling women that they're at fault for their rape due to a short skirt.

You're comparing different things there though, passing out drunk in a public area is totally different than merely being drunk in a public area.

The former is circumstances that made the man more of a victim who wasn't able to defend themselves, the latter is framing the rape as something that could have been avoided if only the woman hadn't been drinking

I'm not comparing the situations I listed with rape, I was stating that I've seen situations where guys were told the "Drinking increases the risk of a bad thing happening" thing, which you previously said was exclusive to women.

Id like to think telling someone "Dont be drunk so you have an easier time spotting danger" is generic, so im not sure what good its supposed to do for rape victim

It's called Obiter Dictum. You usually see pretty broad statements being made with it as often it can't relate definitively to the case in which it's utilised. Examples of statements I've heard live in court using this is "Women should be free from fear of being beaten by their significant others" and "Stealing from those who cannot defend themselves is terrible". It usually has to be fairly generic, so that the prosecution or defence can't later argue that the judge's decision was based on opinions and emotions rather than justifiable reasoning.

 

[Alienfan]

Id like to think telling someone "Dont be drunk so you have an easier time spotting danger" is generic, so im not sure what good its supposed to do for rape victim

Yeah people acting like it's some new found advice is weird, like no shit you should look after yourself, and drinking impairs your ability to do that. That's not really the issue. The issue is rape culture and how so many people don't know what rape is.

 

[family_guy]

Like, the "drinking increases risk of something bad happening" is technically correct I guess, but its advice that is only ever given to women, which makes it fairly sexist imo

A man's safety isn't exactly prioritized in society compared to a woman's.

 

[Media]

A man's safety isn't exactly prioritized in society compared to a woman's.

It's not really about keeping women safe however, as if it were rape wouldn't be so common.

 

[MsKrisp]

Yeah people acting like it's some new found advice is weird, like no shit you should look after yourself, and drinking impairs your ability to do that. That's not really the issue. The issue is rape culture and how so many people don't know what rape is.

Yeah why are we acting like this is new, helpful advice?

 

[Angelus Errare]

Sounds like a nice way of saying "many men are POS who take advantage of drunk women so be careful where you are"

 

[Media]

Yeah why are we acting like this is new, helpful advice?

Because telling women it's somehow/somewhat their fault is easier than coming to grips with how common it is and how it's not just a force of nature that happens of you do bad things.

There's a lot of 'me/mine are GOOD so it won't happen to me/us' mindset as well.

 

[shintoki]

Sounds like a nice way of saying "many men are POS who take advantage of drunk women so be careful where you are"

Sounds about right. I don't think the judge was blaming the victim, but it's like saying. Avoid dark alleys at night if you can so you don't get robbed. It's not your fault you got robbed, but try not to put yourself in those positions either since their are little shits out there.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

This is a tough topic to discuss, because it's highly semantic.

eg. 1 "You were raped because you got drunk and wore skanky clothing". <-- to me, this is 100% victim blaming. Specifically takes the blame off the perpetrator and puts it on the victim.

eg. 2 "If you are going to go out drinking tonight, please be careful, as being a drunk woman in this part of town puts you at higher risk of very real dangers in our society." <-- this doesn't come off as victim blaming to me. Those dangers exist, we're all aware of it, but we're also not saying that you deserve what happens to you if you make certain decisions. It is NOT your fault if you make those decisions, however there are some harsh realities we must protect ourselves from.

Does that makes sense?

Spot on, people took the Judges quote out of context and made it out to be your first example when in reality it was your second
Frankly the Uk has a problem with drink and glamourizing drinking as much as possible as fast as possible and that's the issue the Judge really has, it is increasing the risks to people, in this situations and others.

this is a very difficult conversation to have as its very emotive so people rightly or wrongly make assumptions very quickly, but there are conversations to be had, reducing the risk of crime is what occurs for every other crime, but in the instance of rape its very difficult to make even slight suggestions as people assume victim blaming, which isn't the case here

 

[ahoyhoy]

In my mind it's like calling someone stupid for not wearing their seat belt and dying in a car crash caused by a reckless driver.

It's not the victims fault the accident happened, but the victim didn't take reasonable steps that could have easily prevented it.

 

[TimmmV]

I'm not comparing the situations I listed with rape, I was stating that I've seen situations where guys were told the "Drinking increases the risk of a bad thing happening" thing, which you previously said was exclusive to women.

You are comparing men being told not to do something risky while drunk with the inherent risk of getting drunk in public, which are different

Both genders would be warned not to pass out in a public place, thats just common sense too. The difference is that there aren't judges warning men that they run the risk of an assault/mugging/whatever beforehand.

Both genders increase their risk of something bad happening to them if they go out drinking, yet the advice that "drinking is risky" is mostly aimed at women, which is why I think its sexist

 

[Media]

Spot on, people took the Judges quote out of context and made it out to be your first example when in reality it was your second
Frankly the Uk has a problem with drink and glamourizing drinking as much as possible as fast as possible and that's the issue the Judge really has, it is increasing the risks to people, in this situations and others.

this is a very difficult conversation to have as its very emotive so people rightly or wrongly make assumptions very quickly, but there are conversations to be had, reducing the risk of crime is what occurs for every other crime, but in the instance of rape its very difficult to make even slight suggestions as people assume victim blaming, which isn't the case here

The problem a lot of people have with 'helpful advice' on how not to get raped is that in general it's not helpful. We know that getting smashed puts us at risk, just as we know that even going out at night puts us at risk. What they don't tell you is to be wary of those you think you can trust, as, statistically, they will be the most likely people to hurt you. This type of advice paints rape as the rare back alley stranger rape. So...not helpful.

 

[Somnid]

Interesting topic. I view it like locking doors. If you don't lock your door and someone robbed you is it your fault? Not really, you should have a societal expectation that people aren't opening your door and taking your things. You did nothing wrong. Of course this is an ideal, reality doesn't doesn't exist like that and so you have to take it into account. These people do exist and you will be very sorry if they take things from you so it's prudent to lock your door because even if you are 100% in the right, taking a precaution is a million times better than dealing with the aftermath.

I think what was said is okay so long as it's not used to justify someone taking advantage of you because that does happen, especially with some of the shitty male-centric viewpoints out there.

 

[Derwind]

Don't see how it's any more victim blaming than drinking increases risk of crashing your car.

Weird, it's like some men unknowingly lose the ability to have all self-control and basic human decency the moment they catch a whiff of a drunk & possibly unconscious woman.... Oh wait, no they don't.

Your analogy would make more sense if we were blaming the person who probably died in a car crash because a drunk driver decided to take the same stretch of road as him/her. "If you hadn't gone out of your house and attempted to do something perfectly legal like driving to work, you wouldn't have crashed into a drunk driver."

 

[Chococat]

There is a huge difference between saying "getting drunk can increase the level of danger one might encounter" verse "getting drunk makes a victim partial/fully responsible for getting raped".

The former is advice, the later is victim blaming.

 

[jonno394]

Because only drunk women get raped, right Judge?


Fuck off with that bullshit.

The judge never said or implied that. The judge merely stated that that the choice the woman made to introduce large amounts of drugs and alcohol in to her system put her at risk, which it did. It is In no way saying she got raped because she was drunk, just saying that she put herself in a situation where she could be taken advantage of by the wrong'uns in our society.

 

[Angelus Errare]

A man's safety isn't exactly prioritized in society compared to a woman's.

Blame men for that, much like you can also blame men for the societal pressure placed upon themselves…maybe one day as a collective group we'll realize we're our worst enemy.

And yes women's safety is prioritized more because they're more likely to be victims…at the hands of men.

 

[bionic77]

It is never the woman's fault but women should be careful in America considering how common sexual assault is (some stats show as many as 30% of college women are sexually assaulted while at college). It doesn't help that the rapist often gets away with it.

 

[benicillin]

Responses of "reasonable advice" like the ones in this thread ignore the greater problem (how common rape is, who commits it and a culture that perpetuates it). Like locking a door? Smh and people wonder why victims, male and female, often don't come forward.

 

[Bluenoser]

I agree with much of what has already been said. I don't think this is controversial at all. It's not like the judge is saying, drunk girls deserve what they get.

But it is a fact that the risk goes up as inhibitions go down. Less likely to be able to make the right decision to defend/protect yourself. Heck, the same logic would apply to a man as well, in that they are more of a target for assault or a robbery when they are stumbling home from a bar. It's a message about safety, and while everyone should have the right to feel safe no matter what, unfortunately, that's not the world we live in. Criminals exist.

 

[H.Protagonist]

That's alright, I'm probably as far through coffee as that as well.

That's fair enough. I guess it sort of ties into my earlier thoughts about:


So we can agree on that but what we come to then is a discussion about whether or not we should blame the judge and hold her responsible because of how these people will interpret it and from that perspective I guess in a perfect world it shouldn't be viewed as that, the victim certainly doesn't see it that way but people can be, as we've established, pretty awful.

Yeah, the judge sit is a problem because the damage has already been done. Personally, I don't think that blaming the judge would help anything. Probably make it worse as people will just say that those against such common sense advice are insane and/or living in a fantasy world.

Moving forward, it would be great if the she clarified her position with something like, "Let us not let a bit of precaution overshadow the real problem: that a crime was committed and that this country needs to do better," etc., etc. I think that would even things out a bit and remind people of what the real issue is. But, I doubt that'll happen and those words will remain the only memorable thing about the case in the public consciousness and be dredged up next time it happens again as a way to say, "But see? Even an intelligent woman of position says that women shouldn't drink if they don't want to be assaulted!" *Sigh* Anyway, people can be pretty awful, but I think we can do better than this. Surely. (I mean this in a general way).

Now I think we both deserve another coffee.

 

[Derwind]

The judge never said or implied that. The judge merely stated that that the choice the woman made to introduce large amounts of drugs and alcohol in to her system put her at risk, which it did. It is In no way saying she got raped because she was drunk, just saying that she put herself in a situation where she could be taken advantage of by the wrong'uns in our society.

The judge is saying a whole bunch of nothing then.

There is nothing wrong with drinking or going out and if you end up having far too much that's it's own seperate issue.

If someone decides to take advantage of the situation, that's them putting you in a situation you never consented to. Not the other way around.

Rapist target anyone they can potentially insert dominance/power over. We should try to stand up against those who do that, not tell potential victims they should avoid normal human activities.

 

[Gotdatmoney]

What the judge is saying is fine in a more personal or private context. It's not wrong. But as an example, when I lost my wallet I didnt really give a shit about people telling me to be more careful or how to best avoid it happening again. At this moment in time, that advice is really fucking useless.

That's how I feel about telling women to be careful in the context of a someone who just got raped. It really serves no purpose at this venue.

 

[Dude Abides]

What the judge is saying is fine in a more personal or private context. It's not wrong. But as an example, when I lost my wallet I didnt really give a shit about people telling me to be more careful or how to best avoid it happening again. At this moment in time, that advice is really fucking useless.

That's how I feel about telling women to be careful in the context of a someone who just got raped. It really serves no purpose at this venue.

Yep. It's fine advice before it happens. Pointless afterward.

 

[n00bsauce87]

It's never the victim's fault for being a victim of a crime that could have been prevented by the criminal not committing the crime.

It should so be so simple.

That's taking the responsibility from (potential and/or alleged) criminals to do make the right decision at that moment. If it's a matter of them not knowing from right-and-wrong, they need to be sent to a mental institution for help.

 

[BassForever]

That is certainly something that could be pushed more in schools from a younger age. The fact that alcohol seems to be viewed as somehow giving more license to take advantage of or excuse sexual assault is a real thing. This 'gray' area for a lot of people exists alongside those that just rape because they know it's wrong and don't care, and results in more rapes than the 'evil alleyway boogeyman' rapist. It's not really addressed at all in high school and it should be. I don't think we even had any such classes or discussions when I was in school, high school or college.




Yes, it is hard. And you're right. Adverts on the street aren't going to convince a rapist to stop. That's why it seems like the preferred method is to tell women what to do to prevent their rape constantly. No one wants to invest in social programs, classes, lectures, or discussion in grade school about what it is or why it's wrong. That ruffles feathers, upsets people, is unpopular. The confusion and uncertainly about what even constitutes rape is a very real thing, though. You say that these people who take advantage of drunk victims do realize what they're doing, but in plenty of cases they don't view it as 'rape'. There was a recent report that I remember was in the news that found, "that roughly a third of male university students would rape a woman if there were no consequences – though most didn’t recognise that these actions were, in fact, rape." This is just a snippet from the report.

Basically, I think that we need to make it clear at a younger age. What it is, about consent, and responsibility. There are 'evil alleyway boogeyman' rapists out there, and public safety measure/punitive and/or rehabilitation methods can target those, but proactive measures to clearly explain and hammer home what the crime is, what damage it causes, that consent matters, and what the consequences would be is surely better than this trite 'advice' that women should be careful when drinking, don't you think?

The thing is even if starting today all k-12 schools across the board were to implement these kinda of programs and even colleges as part of orientation included them (my first college ucf did) this doesn't help the millions of women out of school who are victims every year. Just like we can all agree schools need better sex education we can all agree that getting drunk as a skunk does unfortuantely increase your chances of someone taking advantage of you and making you the victim of a robbing/raping/kidnapping/etc. The same way we need better sex ed in schools, we also need better drug and alcohol education since so many times I've heard "the party doesn't start until everyone is tipsy" which is just inviting bad things to happen.

 

[jph139]

This is a tough topic to discuss, because it's highly semantic.

eg. 1 "You were raped because you got drunk and wore skanky clothing". <-- to me, this is 100% victim blaming. Specifically takes the blame off the perpetrator and puts it on the victim.

eg. 2 "If you are going to go out drinking tonight, please be careful, as being a drunk woman in this part of town puts you at higher risk of very real dangers in our society." <-- this doesn't come off as victim blaming to me. Those dangers exist, we're all aware of it, but we're also not saying that you deserve what happens to you if you make certain decisions. It is NOT your fault if you make those decisions, however there are some harsh realities we must protect ourselves from.

Does that makes sense?

I think the difference here is that the first is retrospective and the second is preemptive.

If someone has been raped - or mugged, or burgled, or assaulted, or otherwise victimized - they know what happened. They're aware of the situation. In my experience, a victim is already feeling shame and thinking in terms of "what did I do wrong?" They don't need you pointed out their fuckups, however minor or major they may have been.

But if someone is imminently going to start making decisions that put themselves or others at risk, NOT voicing your concerns is a shitty thing to do. People forget. People take risks. People are dumb. We all need the occasional reminder to keep our guard up in a threatening world.

We shouldn't ignore that thoroughly awful people are everywhere. But it's not helpful to point that out after the fact.

 

[Elfotografoalocado]

I think this is a case of short run and long run expectations...
It's like going in a trip to a dangerous country where you have to take some precautions to reduce your risk of being robbed/kidnapped. The truth is, BEFORE the fact, it is good indeed to take said precautions, not trust people blindly, being aware of your surroundings, etc. but that does NOT mean that being a victim is your fault.
So, if I have a daughter in the future and the rape problem is still as bad as it is now (And even if it gets better, but I doubt it'll dissapear in the timespan for me having kids) I'll be very upfront that it exists and that education and activism are essential for reversing it, but also that because it exists she must be extra careful.
And in the case she becomes a victim of sexual assault (or abuse, or whatever) I'll never bring the advice up because it'll be utterly irrelevant.

 

[EGM1966]

It's never the victim's fault for being a victim of a crime that could have been prevented by the criminal not committing the crime.

It should so be so simple.

That's taking the responsibility from (potential and/or alleged) criminals to do make the right decision at that moment. If it's a matter of them not knowing from right-and-wrong, they need to be sent to a mental institution for help.

That's right but that's not the point of the advice. Being drunk makes you an easier victim hence the comments.

While this is specifically about rape to be honest the advice applies generally. Drunk (as in helplessly drunk) people are easy targets for robbery, assault, rape, etc and that goes for both sexes.

Retaining a decent degree of control simply reduces the ease with which you can be assaulted.

That said it should always be noted whether drunk or not the criminal act is in no way mitigated or excused.

 

[UncleSporky]

The problem with your analogy is that being drunk increases the risk of a crash, and if this drunk driver crashes, it's their fault. If a woman is drunk in the city or clubs or something, it might increase her risk of being sexually assaulted, but if a woman is sexually assaulted when she's drunk, it's not her fault.

Both are drunk, but only one is in the wrong should the bad thing occur. You get what I'm saying?

Not to say the drunk driving example was a good one, but there's also a difference between directly crashing into someone/something and being too impaired to swerve out of the way of someone else doing something they shouldn't be, like performing a dangerous passing maneuver. A safe/sober driver would've had the reaction time to minimize or prevent the accident, but in this hypothetical case the instigator wasn't the drunk/sober person.