AIBU with this perspective on rape?

[TheOnlyWayThrough]

Rape is vile and awful and always the rapists fault in its entirety. Of course it is, you'd be mad to disagree.

The bit I don't really get is the argument that women shouldn't need to take any responsibly for keeping themselves safe. The idea that women (and sometimes men) wouldn't be vulnerable if rapists didn't rape.

Well of course that is true, but that would be in an ideal world. And this certainly isn't one, so the point is moot surely? That principle could be applied to all walks of life where some people do inexplicably nasty things to others... which is basically ALL THE TIME. Some things are obviously worse than others, and rape is up there with the most obscene. It's not the only awful thing though.

You don't hear people saying that elderly people shouldn't need to have chains on their door for their own protection. And if someone forced their way into the home of someone elderly without a chain, I wouldn't for a second blame them/say they were asking for it. It's just that that a chain might have kept them a bit safer; that's why we have them.

A friend of mine was mugged walking home from work one night recently (it was about midnight). She wasn't hurt, but was of course shaken up and felt horribly violated. She won't be walking home again like that as it clearly isn't as safe as she thought. And I think that's sensible. But I don't feel that makes me a 'mugging apologist'. My friend wasn't at fault for the scummy thing that happened to her, but she DID put herself in a situation which wasn't very safe... and she got stung.

When I was burgled whilst sleeping I wished I'd have put the burglar alarm on as it might have stopped it from happening. I put it on every night now, rather than saying "I shouldn't have to; it's the burglars that shouldn't burgle".

Why is saying that it's a good idea to keep ourselves safe somehow misconstrued as mitigating rape in a way that doesn't seem to with other crimes? It's not intended that way, and it's not judging or blaming anyone who has been raped. It doesn't matter if you were drunk, half-naked, whatever - the crime was the rape and the victim did nothing wrong.

So is it unreasonable to think that in some situations, some ladies have put themselves in situations which weren't at all sensible and made them prey to scummy behaviour? And to think that that isn't the same thing as saying they are to blame or deserving of rape in any way?

(Just to add, this isn't about the Ched Evans case any more than any other particular case. And to anyone who has been a rape victim, I hope nothing I've said offends you, it certainly wasn't meant to. And I hope those who hurt you receive justice)

You say your friend was attacked at midnight.

What time do you think it would have been 'safe' for her to walk home? What is the cut off point? When it gets dark? 10pm? 11pm?

I work shifts. Sometimes finishing at 10pm, sometimes later, like many shift workers. Many of us choose or have to walk home (missing last bus, flat tyre on bike, no access to car etc). I feel safe walking home, but on some days, I don't get home until gone 10.30. Is this allowed according to you? Am I deliberately and stupidly putting myself into a vulnerable situation? Would I bear some responisbility if I were attacked? I thought I was just walking home from work.

Ok, statistically you may be right. But none of my friends have been raped by a trusted friend. All of us have had unpleasant things happen on drunken one night stands.

So my advice would not be based upon statistics, or on correctness, but upon my own reality, which is that getting pissed and going home with a man you've only just met can be the best fun you've ever had in your life, and it can also lead to situations you later realise were not consensual or respectful.

So approach with caution, bearing both sides of the coin in mind. Alcohol has never improved anybody's judgement or awareness that I know of.

Hmmm, I don't think it's black and white.

People give advice about keeping yourself safe etc because 'there will always be rapists'. But when they are talking about 'rapists' in the context they are talking about the 'hide in the bushes with a knife' type of rapist and that, like murderers and muggers, these people have always existed, we will never be able to do anything about that and you should take steps to avoid them. It's the whole, 'what's the point in telling men not to rape, obviously the won't listen, if they want to rape they are going to do it anyway'.

What this sort of thinking fails to ignore is that a lot of rapes take place because many people in our society don't actually understand the concept of consent, or that people have been brought up in a society where women are seen as objects to just be shagged, and if they are drunk, well that's heir fault isn't it? It's almost as if if a man is presented with a very drunk woman, he is somehow obliged to shag her, which then absolves him of responsibility because you know, she was drunk.

This is an attitude that can and must be changed.

Yes of course, be responsible for yourself, don't get into vulnerable sitatuons etc - but this should apply to everyone, men and women and should not just be about 'avoiding getting yourself raped'.

I used to live somewhere where the quickest route back from the train station to my house was along a towpath by the canal, which was completely unlit. There would often be several people walking that way. As I'd start walking on my own, men getting off the train would ask if I'd like them to walk me home.

I'm not sure how many of them were thinking about rape as a possible danger, but it did strike me as the most peculiar thing, that they all assumed I would naturally be safer with them (a stranger) than facing other strangers. It was very kind - it just makes me think how very odd we are as a society.

OP you make very reasonable comments. You will be flamed however by the totalitarian brigade who are unable to countenance nuance in this issue. Don't let their idiocy stop you thinking like the rational and reasonable human being that you obviously are.

Yanbu, we do not live in an ideal world unfortunately so you do need to take precautions. It is your responsibility to.

'The bit I don't really get is the argument that women shouldn't need to take any responsibly for keeping themselves safe.'

Yes people should do their best to avoid risky situations but you absolutely cannot 'take responsibility' for someone deciding to rape you.

YABVU and a victim blamer.

4.30/5pm in the winter is as dark as midnight. Should I not be outside then if I am being 'responsible'? Should I give up work, not collect my children?

So in the Ched Evans case, it is true that if the victim had been less drunk and had been laughing with a group of friends or whatever, then the chances are that she wouldn't have been targeted by Clayton MacDonald. But her being drunk was not why she was raped. She was raped because Clayton MacDonald and Ched Evans had been brought up to believe that women are pieces of meat to put their penis into, and that having sex with women who are too drunk to consent is an ok think to do.

We can change this.

I plan on telling all my children how to be safer, DSs and DDs alike. This doesn't mean I would think it their fault if they were attacked - quite frankly that is a stupid idea and you'd have to be extremely dim to think that's what giving safety advice means.

It's all very well saying "oh, you are more likely to be raped by X
Y or Z", it may be true but that doesn't mean you can take precautions against A or B.

can you imagine if anyone suggested men do the above?

Well, I will be suggesting my DSs do the things mentioned. It might lower their chances of being mugged/stabbed/whatever.

I also find the "top ten rape prevention tips" somewhat offensive even though I can see the point it is making. Personally, I hope I manage to raise my sons to have morals and respect for others. Rapists are not made simply by having a penis.

However, these are not opinions you are allowed to have on MN.

Rapists are not made simply by having a penis.
Clearly this is true.

As is the statement most rapists have penises

YABVU and a victim blamer

And so the name calling begins.

You will be flamed OP. You will be called nasty names. You will be called a rape apologist.

But, for what it's worth, I agree with the way you have put your original post.

I have a duty of care to MYSELF, and that includes not getting paralytic and going off with strangers. It also includes being as safe as I can, i.e. staying with friends, not walking down the middle of the motorway, etc.

Now I will be flamed. Sigh. For having a different opinion.

Really, soup? How odd, they seem to be opinions I see all over MN, usually followed by a martyrish comment like yours.

I was raped on a date in my late teens. The person who raped me was a boy I'd known since I was 8yo, someone who was in my circle of friends in school, in a small town. His words to me afterwards? "Nobody will believe you, because we've gone out." That was 30 years ago, and I've never reported it.

How in god's name can you protect yourself from that? Never go on a date - even if the person was someone you've known for years and thought you could trust as they were a friend? Stay in the house? Live like a recluse?

The blame must ALWAYS and COMPLETELY lie in the hands of the rapist. No matter what. There is no room for victim blaming of any kind, regardless.

The very suggestion of anybody taking responsibility for their lives, actions and safety on MN never seems to go down well

I think we all need to keep the topic of precautions entirely separate from the topic of responsibility. A woman is not responsible for being raped, including in all those cases where she has not taken precautions against being raped. The responsibility always rests on the perpetrator.

I disagree with implication in the OP that anyone is actually arguing against women taking precautions. Men and women do take precautions against assaults, including sexual assaults, and that's perfectly fine and sensible.

The objection people have is that if the conversation becomes all or even mostly about the need for precautions, we are not tackling the problem at its heart (men who feel entitled to behave in such a disgusting way) and we will not reduce rapes much if at all (no precautions are foolproof, rapists always find a way, including within their own family homes, or by choosing younger more gullible victims). And in addition, there is a real risk we will end up bolstering the view too many people have that if women don't want to be raped then they have to restrict their lives and change their appearance (as if that works) rather than make demands of sexually violent men to change their behaviour.

Oh, and I was wearing non-revealing clothing (middle of winter, I had a fucking PARKA on FFS!) like a jumper and jeans. And had absolutely zero to drink - and neither had he.

However I will not tell my daughter to not get drunk as she is more likely to be a victim of rape, because it is bollocks.

Do you really believe that women are at no greater risk of being raped if they are drunk?

Soup it's a satire on equally silly and offensive advice to women on how not to get themselves raped - like making analogies between an unlocked front door and a woman's body, or, as one poster on this thread has said 'keep your knickers on'. Because nothing repels an intent rapist like two centimetres' width of polycotton, huh?

Of course rapists aren't made by having a penis, and of course you are allowed to say so. Neither does a locked-up vagina 'unmake' a rapist, and this is the problem with stupid arguments about 'keeping yourself safe' and not 'putting yourself' in a position where you will or won't get raped.

'And so the name calling begins.'

It's my opinion that the OP is victim blaming. I don't see that as 'name calling' as you put it.

But please do continue to sigh away if it brings you comfort.

I think rape is always the rapists responsibility not the person who has been raped. It doesn't matter what the person has been doing, where they were etc.

I also think the 'don't go into dangerous situations' advice is often misleading particularly when it's directed at women. Random attack by a stranger rape in a dark alley type is actually pretty rare statistically speaking, you are much more likely to be raped by someone you know. Also I was told that it's men who are much more likely to be attacked in public then women (in terms of mugging/random violence not sexual violence) yet they rarely get told the same things.

However I do think that the concept of victim blaming is often unjustly used to justify binge drinking and drunkenness generally. Whenever someone points out that one of the dangers off getting drunk is that it makes a man or women vulnerable to crime someone always cries out 'victim blaming'. I don't think these are the same things. If you get blind drunk is it your fault that you get raped? No of course not, it is entirely the rapists fault and the victims status at the time of the attack shouldn't be taken into account (unless it is to prove that she/he couldn't have consented). But that doesn't mean it's OK to binge drink.

make demands of sexually violent men to change their behaviour.

I think you can 'demand' all you like. I DON'T think a sexually violent person will give a fuck what you 'demand' !!

That's horrible, alice, I'm sorry.

Now I will be flamed. Sigh. For having a different opinion

No, I'm the one sighing at the ridiculously matryred form of passive-aggression in posts like this. If disagreement with this 'keep yourself safe' argument counts as 'flaming', then so does disagreement with the argument that 'keeping safe' from rapists is either possible or in a woman's gift.

And now I know how Joan of Arc felt!

Well obviously Feckless that's a kind of shorthand for campaigning. Which I think does change attitudes, if only slowly. Clearly I won't be ringing up Ched Evans to lecture him on the importance of consent!