Women say some rape victims should take blame - survey (UK)

[AllieBaba]

Folks need to decide on the fucking definition. If it's rape to have sex with a girl who is unconscious, or who says "no" once, then it's fucking rape regardless of how drunk she is, how drunk you are, where it is, what time it is, etc.

Last I heard, that was the definition of the word rape. Having sex with someone who has either stated they don't want to have sex, or not given consent.

Except if they gave consent, then go back and say they got raped, it's not rape.

Well that's hard to prove. Like I said, if it concerns you, make sure you know who you're fucking.

 

[BrianH]

I don't think women should necessarily be "blamed" for being raped. I think rapists are the ones to blame and should be put in prison for life. However, I do believe that in some cases, women should take more responsibility for the way they dress. Exhibit A: when I was in college, the volleyball girls would walk around campus with their tiny tight shorts and t-shirts on. (I'm talking SHORT shorts-or bloomers) Many of them would catch guys looking at them and then get pissed off that they were looking. My question is: Why get mad when you knowingly dress yourself in such a manner?

I wouldn't walk around with my junk hanging out and then get mad at the people for looking, or act like I was stealing something and then get mad for being accused of stealing. Women should not dress inappriopriately, and then get mad when they draw the wrong kind of attention. If they do choose to dress in such a manner, then they do so knowing the possible consequences.

Women know that there are predators out there who would and could rape them, therefore, women should be more careful about what and where they display what their momma gave them. Now, I know that a rapist will do what he wants to do regardless of the way a woman is dressed; however, women should not draw unnecessary attention to themselves. It's the same logic that tells you not to dart across the highway at rush hour, or not to look down the barrel of a gun.

Someone mentioned in an earlier post that it's no different than a man looking handsome. I must say I disagree. There is a difference between looking handsome and looking like a male stripper. In analogy, there is a difference between a woman looking beautiful and looking like a skank.

 

[Cecilie1200]

It is complicated. I think part of it goes back to your previous post, too. How many women think men have a harder time controlling their "urges" and are maybe giving them even unconsciously a little slack in that department? They're guys but they do still have ears and functioning brains and everything. And any man who can't or won't stop when told NO is no man, period. It doesn't matter what the circumstances are.

That's all true and I agree. However, I still say that it is unrealistic to expect men to be mind readers - however capable they are. Putting yourself into a situation where something may be misunderstood is as much a woman's responsibility as it is a man's.

Damn, I'm defending men. That's not like me at all. I'm usually holding them responsible for every ill in the world and then some.

Well all of this has me wondering how confused men must feel at times.

I swear to God if I were a guy, I'd have a woman sign a waiver --- "I, _______, being sober and coherent, agree to have sexual intercourse with _______"

And I'd keep a notary in the spare bedroom to witness and seal the agreement.

It's a little strange to think that the kink community has the most responsible position on this, but this sort of thing is exactly why they negotiate everything they are going to do to a fare-thee-well ahead of time and have safe words. And why most of them are so careful to not play with anyone who can't provide references from known and respected people in the community.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So that is the mindset that women are expected to have everytime they even start to make out with a guy?? Beware ladies, men are dangerous brutes and we must always be on guard and not give into temptation, or else be labeled "reckless". Ugh.

Ah now, come on. That's not what she's saying.

Yeah, I guess I am just frustrated because I believe in personal responsibility as well, but sometimes you want a moment to be able to just let go and give in without fear. I don't know if that makes sense.

Then take up skydiving. Don't make dating and sex into extreme sports.

Seriously, I'm not saying "live in fear". I'm saying, "live in sensible prudence". Get to know a person before getting naked and groiny with them - or before being alone with them, quite frankly. Don't go to frat parties and get puking drunk, or drink drinks you don't know the origin of. Don't park your car at the far end of a dark mall parking lot and then walk out to it alone. It's really not more difficult than remembering to lock the doors on your house to prevent burglary, or on your car to prevent GTA. You wouldn't consider either of those to be "living in fear", would you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Ah now, come on. That's not what she's saying.

Yeah, I guess I am just frustrated because I believe in personal responsibility as well, but sometimes you want a moment to be able to just let go and give in without fear. I don't know if that makes sense.

It makes perfect sense.

I guess the bottom line is that we are vulnerable. I just want to keep the playing field as level as possible.

Then buy a gun and learn to use it. As the saying goes, God made men and women, but Colonel Colt made them equal.

Really, the playing field of men being physically stronger than we are IS leveled by two facts: One, most of them really are decent human beings, and two, when in relationships, they need us a lot more than we actually need them. Their ability to overpower us is mitigated by their desire to please us and protect us. So don't throw away that advantage by trusting a complete stranger too quickly.

 

[Misty]

No has to mean no in all situations.

 

[goldcatt]

You used the wrong word Dogbert. It's not "blame" it's "responsibility". The woman should own some responsibility for the situation they willingly and knowingly (if stupidly) placed themselves in. The blame rests solely on the POS that committed the rape. But the responsibility for being in a situation that anyone with common sense would have left long ago sometimes is shared by the woman. If a woman drinks with a man to the point of inebriation, makes out with him, and climbs into bed with him, then the woman has stupidly partaken in activities which increase her chances of an assault.

Take the hot-button word "rape" out of it for a second. If you walk down the street in the worst part of town with a big fat stack of cash, and your constantly thumbing through it, you are increasing your chances of being mugged, or a victim of an even more violent crime. Yes, you should not have been robbed, but the behavior you exhibited increased your chances of being robbed. Therefore you own some "responsibility" for your cash-less self now.

Common sense means you don't engage in risky behavior. Such behavior increases the chances of bad things happening to you. And while no one deserves such bad things to happen to them, there are some easy steps that a person can take to not increase the risks.

Sorry, I know this is probably a big old piece of flamebait, but it's just the way I see things.

Not flamebait at all, although I agree there should never, ever be "blame" for the victim. Or even "responsibility" in the sense of contributing to her own situation. Rape is a crime and it is wrong, the bad actor is at fault, period.

But you're saying basically the same thing most of the ladies here were saying - that women need to be smart about cutting their risks just as they would with any other crime. Agreeing with the ladies = smart man.

 

[RadiomanATL]

You used the wrong word Dogbert. It's not "blame" it's "responsibility". The woman should own some responsibility for the situation they willingly and knowingly (if stupidly) placed themselves in. The blame rests solely on the POS that committed the rape. But the responsibility for being in a situation that anyone with common sense would have left long ago sometimes is shared by the woman. If a woman drinks with a man to the point of inebriation, makes out with him, and climbs into bed with him, then the woman has stupidly partaken in activities which increase her chances of an assault.

Take the hot-button word "rape" out of it for a second. If you walk down the street in the worst part of town with a big fat stack of cash, and your constantly thumbing through it, you are increasing your chances of being mugged, or a victim of an even more violent crime. Yes, you should not have been robbed, but the behavior you exhibited increased your chances of being robbed. Therefore you own some "responsibility" for your cash-less self now.

Common sense means you don't engage in risky behavior. Such behavior increases the chances of bad things happening to you. And while no one deserves such bad things to happen to them, there are some easy steps that a person can take to not increase the risks.

Sorry, I know this is probably a big old piece of flamebait, but it's just the way I see things.

Not flamebait at all, although I agree there should never, ever be "blame" for the victim. Or even "responsibility" in the sense of contributing to her own situation. Rape is a crime and it is wrong, the bad actor is at fault, period.

But you're saying basically the same thing most of the ladies here were saying - that women need to be smart about cutting their risks just as they would with any other crime. Agreeing with the ladies = smart man.

Does this mean I get to see bewbs then?

 

[goldcatt]

You used the wrong word Dogbert. It's not "blame" it's "responsibility". The woman should own some responsibility for the situation they willingly and knowingly (if stupidly) placed themselves in. The blame rests solely on the POS that committed the rape. But the responsibility for being in a situation that anyone with common sense would have left long ago sometimes is shared by the woman. If a woman drinks with a man to the point of inebriation, makes out with him, and climbs into bed with him, then the woman has stupidly partaken in activities which increase her chances of an assault.

Take the hot-button word "rape" out of it for a second. If you walk down the street in the worst part of town with a big fat stack of cash, and your constantly thumbing through it, you are increasing your chances of being mugged, or a victim of an even more violent crime. Yes, you should not have been robbed, but the behavior you exhibited increased your chances of being robbed. Therefore you own some "responsibility" for your cash-less self now.

Common sense means you don't engage in risky behavior. Such behavior increases the chances of bad things happening to you. And while no one deserves such bad things to happen to them, there are some easy steps that a person can take to not increase the risks.

Sorry, I know this is probably a big old piece of flamebait, but it's just the way I see things.

Not flamebait at all, although I agree there should never, ever be "blame" for the victim. Or even "responsibility" in the sense of contributing to her own situation. Rape is a crime and it is wrong, the bad actor is at fault, period.

But you're saying basically the same thing most of the ladies here were saying - that women need to be smart about cutting their risks just as they would with any other crime. Agreeing with the ladies = smart man.

Does this mean I get to see bewbs then?

 

[Modbert]

You used the wrong word Dogbert. It's not "blame" it's "responsibility".

Sorry, I know this is probably a big old piece of flamebait, but it's just the way I see things.

It's not my poll. I'm only putting what the poll said in the OP.

 

[goldcatt]

That's all true and I agree. However, I still say that it is unrealistic to expect men to be mind readers - however capable they are. Putting yourself into a situation where something may be misunderstood is as much a woman's responsibility as it is a man's.

Damn, I'm defending men. That's not like me at all. I'm usually holding them responsible for every ill in the world and then some.

Well all of this has me wondering how confused men must feel at times.

I swear to God if I were a guy, I'd have a woman sign a waiver --- "I, _______, being sober and coherent, agree to have sexual intercourse with _______"

And I'd keep a notary in the spare bedroom to witness and seal the agreement.

It's a little strange to think that the kink community has the most responsible position on this, but this sort of thing is exactly why they negotiate everything they are going to do to a fare-thee-well ahead of time and have safe words. And why most of them are so careful to not play with anyone who can't provide references from known and respected people in the community.

I don't think it's odd at all. What many of them do involves a lot more risk than your average one-night stand, and on more than one level. Higher risk = higher awareness of the risk involved. I don't think most couples outside their community need to go that far, but clear communication is always a good idea.

 

[dilloduck]

I don't know anything about this stuff

 

[Sherry]

Ah now, come on. That's not what she's saying.

Yeah, I guess I am just frustrated because I believe in personal responsibility as well, but sometimes you want a moment to be able to just let go and give in without fear. I don't know if that makes sense.

Then take up skydiving. Don't make dating and sex into extreme sports.

Seriously, I'm not saying "live in fear". I'm saying, "live in sensible prudence". Get to know a person before getting naked and groiny with them - or before being alone with them, quite frankly. Don't go to frat parties and get puking drunk, or drink drinks you don't know the origin of. Don't park your car at the far end of a dark mall parking lot and then walk out to it alone. It's really not more difficult than remembering to lock the doors on your house to prevent burglary, or on your car to prevent GTA. You wouldn't consider either of those to be "living in fear", would you?

Not all rapes are first encounters.

 

[Cecilie1200]

No has to mean no in all situations.

Sure it does. And in an ideal world, it will always be that clearcut and black-and-white, and there will never be misunderstandings, and there are no guys who seem really nice but turn out to be psychotic bastards. Unfortunately, we don't live in an ideal world, so it's a lot better to not put yourself in a position where you have to count solely on another person respecting your "No" on his own.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Well all of this has me wondering how confused men must feel at times.

I swear to God if I were a guy, I'd have a woman sign a waiver --- "I, _______, being sober and coherent, agree to have sexual intercourse with _______"

And I'd keep a notary in the spare bedroom to witness and seal the agreement.

It's a little strange to think that the kink community has the most responsible position on this, but this sort of thing is exactly why they negotiate everything they are going to do to a fare-thee-well ahead of time and have safe words. And why most of them are so careful to not play with anyone who can't provide references from known and respected people in the community.

I don't think it's odd at all. What many of them do involves a lot more risk than your average one-night stand, and on more than one level. Higher risk = higher awareness of the risk involved. I don't think most couples outside their community need to go that far, but clear communication is always a good idea.

Oh, I don't know. From what I've seen of regular couples, I'd say they DO need to go that far. I can think of a lot of couples who would benefit from clearly negotiating exactly what they want ahead of time.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yeah, I guess I am just frustrated because I believe in personal responsibility as well, but sometimes you want a moment to be able to just let go and give in without fear. I don't know if that makes sense.

Then take up skydiving. Don't make dating and sex into extreme sports.

Seriously, I'm not saying "live in fear". I'm saying, "live in sensible prudence". Get to know a person before getting naked and groiny with them - or before being alone with them, quite frankly. Don't go to frat parties and get puking drunk, or drink drinks you don't know the origin of. Don't park your car at the far end of a dark mall parking lot and then walk out to it alone. It's really not more difficult than remembering to lock the doors on your house to prevent burglary, or on your car to prevent GTA. You wouldn't consider either of those to be "living in fear", would you?

Not all rapes are first encounters.

No, very true. And many cars are stolen despite being locked, and many houses are burglarized despite same. I didn't say it was ever possible to remove all risk and danger from your life. I said be sensibly prudent and don't add more risk and danger than has to be there.

 

[B L Zeebub]

I have be able to have women climb into bed and leave unmolested if they wished.

Turned down by a blowup doll Mr Tithead

 

[B L Zeebub]

Many women in Britain still have a 1950s mentality when it comes to rape

I'm a Brit, would you care to explain

 

[B L Zeebub]

The Brits are wrong. Just because she got into bed, doesn't mean she can't change her mind.

She gets naked in bed and ready to get down, then realizes she doesn't want to do. She has all the right in the world and she is completely without blame if she chooses to blue ball the guy. I won't put an ounce of fault on her.

[/QUOTE]you missed out the words, the British women who answered the poll in that way are wrong.

We still have a jury system to define guilt, thankfully the rape laws include rape within marriage and rape of prostitutes.

 

[goldcatt]

Abso-fucking-lutely.

I'm not sure I agree about being drunk though. Voluntary intoxication isn't an excuse for any other crime, I don't personally see a reason to make an exception for rape. If you choose to get that loaded, you take on the risk of your behavior.

What I'm saying is if that both parties are intoxicated and had sex, it's unlikely in my opinion that it was rape if she calls it that.

Now if she's drugged, that's a whole different story. However, if she's slamming down shot after shot, then she knows the consequences of impaired thinking. Sex in this case would be one of them with a guy you may regret doing so in the morning.

Having regrets in the morning is probably the #1 cause of false rape claims, but it isn't rape if she consented at the time. You can't withdraw consent after the fact.

But whether both parties being drunk makes it more likely a rape claim is false is a question for me. Were they feeling good, being uninhibited and doing things maybe one or both of them wouldn't normally do - but with full consent? Or are we talking passing out, unaware of her surroundings loaded? Saying because they had a few drinks means she's more likely to be lying is a dangerous place to go.