Or is this victim blaming?

Where do you draw the line? Some ppl think women should be covered head to toe or at least modestly dressed at all timea. I originally come from such a modest culture though I have long since left it behind.
Should I advise my dd to cover herself lest a man is tempted?

Im furious that there is a need for the sign. The fury should be directed at the rapist, not the victim.

You are being unreasonable. Even if you and many others wouldn't have done it, clearly some people were not too scared to be in those situations. Whether you can imagine feeling that way is irrelevant. Maybe they thought they were with someone they could trust? Maybe they just never thought it would happen to them? Maybe they felt pressured? Maybe they're just not as good at anticipating possible outcomes as you? Loads of possible reasons.

Focusing on what the victim could have done to guard against being assaulted is implying that the crime is at least partly their fault, i.e. Victim blaming.

You just compared a womans body to an object. Thats what rapists do.

Are you saying a woman agreeing to go back to the hotel room creates an expectation of sex that then overrides her right to say no or change her mind?

I was in situations when I was (too) young where I initially consented to sexual activity but it became too painful and I withdrew my consent. I thought those people would respect my wishes but they did not and continued. Their right to sex and power over me then became more important than my consent. Am I then at fault because I created that expectation of sex and they got frustrated at being asked to stop?

Its a slippery argument that hinges on (men) having a ‘right’ to sex, and that women should automatically expect to be raped and shamed if they are alone with a male in a hotel room.

This! But I’m also furious that the bar knows there’s a risk to its female patrons but thinks that this sign is the solution!!

I don't think that women should have to keep themselves safe, but unfortunately the reality is that we do, wherever possible. That does not make it the woman's fault. I say this a victim of SA.

I understand where you’re coming from to an extent

it’s possible to believe someone behaved foolishly (I know very little about this case so I’m not saying I believe she was foolish, I don’t know anything about it, I am just speaking generally) and simultaneously believe they, of course, did not deserve to be raped. I don’t think it’s necessarily blaming someone to acknowledge that they might have protected themselves better.

I say this as someone who was drugged and I suppose then assaulted by a male “friend” (ha) when younger. I don’t think I was to blame for what happened, but I do look back and think “I will make sure my daughter knows to protect herself better than I did”. That doesn’t mean I blame myself, or any other woman who experienced something like what I did.

In a similar but not exactly comparable way, there is never an excuse for violence but I will teach my son not to deliberately wind people up and provoke people into fights - not because I condone a man punching another man in response to a verbal insult, but because I want my child to have the best possible chance to avoid those situations.

I suppose the thing I do wonder, OP, is what is the point of discussing this explicitly in reference to this case right now? We can discuss general safety advice for women without linking it to a specific woman’s newsworthy rape case, which to me feels insensitive.

Maybe they were up for sex but then the sex became violent, degrading and non-consensual. So they said no. As all women are allowed to do at any time.

Why ? Because you see them as the right kind of victim ? What you’re doing is asking women to risk assess everything they do to mitigate men’s behaviour. That’s victim blaming.

I don't like my 16yo travelling alone at night, ie taking buses or taxis, so I always collect her from places. I don't do this because I think if something happened to her it would be her own fault, I do it to minimise risk. Minimising risk is clearly the suggestion that @Feedingmybaby is making. In an ideal world, absolutely we wouldn't have to 'risk assess' individual situations. The world however is far from ideal.

Even if you do know a man very well, you don't know if he's a rapist. In fact, statistics show a man known to a woman is more likely to rape her.

So the biggest risk is actually getting to know men very well and believing you know he isn't a rapist.

I'm going to guess that the vast majority of women on here have taken that risk, even those who don't walk in the dark alone or would never go back to a strange man's hotel room/house.

It is victim blaming, but I do understand you questioning some women's self-preservation instinct. Or lack thereof.

I liked the social media campagin after the Cornell incident where people showed what women didi to men who were intoxicated and incapcitated at parties. Funnily enough, they weren't raped. Generally they were wrapped in blankets and given a non-alcoholic drink.

If I drive in my car with no seat belt on, and a car dangerously ploughs into me and kills me - the dangerous driver is 100% to blame for my death. But it doesn't negate the inescapable conclusion the high might have been alive if I took precautions from my own safety and wore the seat belt. I'm not to blame, but I'm still dead, potentially unnecessarily.

I think looking out for our own safety is important, not because we should be blamed if anything bad happens, but to minimise the risks of bad things happening to us.

We know it's sensible to take precautions for a safety when driving, when walking around with valuables, with alcohol. Why is sexual safety treated so differently?

Why ? Do you think fathers are incapable of rape ?

I agree OP. It's like a lone male walking around a bad area at night. Totally wrong if he gets assaulted but totally avoidable too.

Oh well, my DD does walk home alone at 10 pm in London. She couldn't hold down a job if she cowered at home.

They cant police every customer who comes into their establishment. Better to be aware that a drink could be spiked and act upon that advice

Absolutely! Me too. There shouldn’t be a need for it. But unfortunately, rapists don’t seem to care that it’s illegal or frowned upon by society, and they continue to attack women and girls.

I understand what you're getting at. There are two questions here. The first is, who is responsible for the rape? And the answer always is, the rapist, only and entirely the rapist.

But there's separate question which is, why would people willingly put themselves in risky situations? The rapist can be appropriately punished, but nothing can undo the rape. That's a life sentence the victim will have to live with.

Unfortunately the two questions often get confused, as if advising people to avoid risky situations in some way exonerated the criminal from their crime.

I see both sides. My dad (now in his 80s) absolutely drummed it into me that you can never be too careful where men are concerned - never walk home alone after dark or anyway lonely, “never, ever trust the bastards.” !!
I have never worn revealing clothing and Inwould never go to a hotel room or get drunk with a man that I wasn’t in a relationship with because it’s clearly a very stupid thing to do.Certainly I’d never sleep in a bed with a man I wasn’t in a relationship with…

But I know this because I was taught it!

Not all women benefit from a dad like mine who was so very worried about what could happen and tried his best to warn me

I of course thought he was being ridiculous, I don’t now. I thank him.

However, none of these behaviours mean you deserve to be raped and men should wake up to the difference. It shouldn’t all be on anxious dads and women to protect themselves. Women should be able to trust men.