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)

Actually I think it's appalling to suggest that women who are alone with men when a few drinks and a snog have been had are "unwise".

Terribly victim blaming and terrible assumptions about men being prone to rape also.

Most men take no for an answer. Most men do not want to fuck women who don't want to be fucked. That's just a terrible view of the male sex.

Yes, and that was a choice you made in that situation, and a valid one.

But to extrapolate from that that every women who decides differently, does go back to his room with him and subsequently gets raped, has 'asked for it' or 'should have known better' or 'made the wrong decision'.

Back to the 'prick tease': it implies that once a man is aroused and if he does not get relief by orgasm, he is ?what… going to explode, or summit? He has a god-given right for sexual intercourse?? Such utter nonsense

Yy to most men not being rapists.

The usual nice twisting of people's meanings by taking words out of context.

I can choose to not put myself in a situation where I might become a victim as I did walking down a dark alley You left out the 'as I did walking down a dark alley' because, guess what I did become a victim!

Victim blaming? Am I blaming myself? No! Did the police blame me? No! Did my family blame me? No! Are you blaming me?

Apparently my brother, husband, son and Uncle Tom (not thomasina) Cobbley all have the potential to rape. Guess what? No they don't! Most men will back off.

Another twist I need to clarify. I do not need a male member of my family to 'escort' me on my evening out. I didn't say that! Ffs. But ....I would prefer to get a lift from them, or from my mother, sister or any other female member of my family offering a free taxi service

We've all had a few drinks and kissed and flirted, putting ourselves at risk but not been raped. We learn what's wise and what isn't.

"Most men will back off. "

What does this mean?

You see following your instincts on whether to go somewhere with someone (or a group of people) is a good idea.

Thinking "well I'm not up for sex and he's obviously going to try it on and he's not very interesting to talk to anyway so I'll go home now" is a good plan.

Feeling for whatever reason that you don't want to do X and so not doing it is perfectly reasonable and fine.

The idea that this decision is "wise" and that therefore anyone who makes a different decision is "unwise" is where I start to feel pretty uncomfortable. Plus the idea that it's "wise" - not because he's a bit dull, or because you foresee him trying it and you saying no and then it all being a bit uncomfortable or anything like that - but because he might rape you, is just really judgemental.

Was it because he was a footballer that you felt there was a reasonable risk of rape? Or because you had kissed him? Or what?

I mean if you thought it was completely safe then you would have gone, wouldn't you. Wouldn't you? If not - he was dull anyway or whatever - then the "wise" comment doesn't make sense.

"We've all had a few drinks and kissed and flirted, putting ourselves at risk"

Seriously can't you see what's wrong with that statement?

Seriously can you not see how you are projecting your views and steamrollering any opposition?

I don't see all men as rapists, far from it. I would take care of my personal safety as I would take care of my valuables.

Back off as in take no for an answer and leave you alone, if they misread the signals.

Ok, so you are saying most men are not rapists?

We all agree on that.

Most men will back off- what on earth does that mean?

But having a few drinks and flirting and kissing is not putting yourself at risk.

It's just not. It is perfectly standard normal everyday behaviour for a large proportion of the UK population most especially when they are younger.

Describing a normal night out as "putting yourself at risk" - and just for girls I assume - is just terrible! Can you genuinely not see that?

""We've all had a few drinks and kissed and flirted, putting ourselves at risk"

So if you say we're putting ourselves at risk, then surely you are saying that we do have some responsibility if we are raped?

Back off....dictionary definition...to stop being involved in a situation. What is so difficult to understand there

I am saying nothing of the sort. Are you saying if I was raped I would be responsible? If so the law doesn't agree with you.

From a personal experience. I got drunk and ended up kissing a total stranger who was pulling me off from my friends and luckily my friends (male and female) pulled him away and took me home. So was I putting myself at risk? Yes. No one else got me drunk, no one else made me kiss the twat. I learned a lesson. I put myself at risk. If I had been assaulted then it wouldn't have been my fault, it would have been his.

What does "pulling you off from your friends" mean? He was being aggressive?

So you were unlucky enough to pull a dickhead. Your friends sorted it out.
And so that meant you never got pissed and kissed anyone again?

Can you can see that saying women should never get pissed and pull as it is putting themselves at risk is an extreme suggestion in our society, given that is the standard weekend activity of pretty much everyone single between the ages of about 15 and 35?

And also that if a man wants to attack a woman, he will do so, and if no women get drunk ever, he will attack a sober one?
And that the fact of a woman being drunk and kissing does not turn a man into a rapist?

I don't understand this approach at all, if I'm honest. It's miles away from how I view people & life.

No. You are saying that. I am saying get drunk if you want. Kiss men (or women) if you want. Just exercise caution if you are can see the situation has a potential to get tricky. Why is that so difficult to explain. I never said women should never go out and enjoy themselves.

To explain. We were walking along in a group. Man if group I did not know pulled me back (not aggressively) as my friends carried on. Friends saw us kissing (me reluctantly) and pulled me back into the group. Told me to watch out for him as he wasn't a nice guy.

I honestly can't make sense of your last paragraph it is so convoluted!

Omnipotent Most men do not want to fuck women who don't want to be fucked. Thanks for this. I cannot work out what sexual pleasure there can be in such a thing.

In every relationship there are times when one person is willing but not as enthusiastic as s/he might be on another day; particularly when they are trying to start a baby and this is the "right" day. And the act is less enjoyable for the other person than it would be if they were both really, really keen. So where the pleasure can be I just can't imagine.

The problem is that you are seeing that as you putting yourself in a risky situation but you didn't that was sexual assault but due to all the advice given to women on how to protect themselves you do not recognise it for the assault it was.

He was definitely doing that and I was way too pissed to realise it.

I just can't see where you're coming from.

You didn't "put yourself at risk". You were with your friends and they came and got you. Nothing really happened, did it?

I don't get the idea that having a few drinks and kissing and flirting = putting yourself at risk. To me having a few drinks and kissing and flirting = perfectly standard behaviour for people who live in the UK. I just can't see anything wrong with it. The only time it would go wrong is if during your night you encounter someone who is "not a nice guy" - like you did - but that is luck and nothing to do with any of the drinking or the flirting or anything.

The responsibility for poor behaviour needs to be laid where it belongs.

Men's behaviour is not the responsibility of women.

If a man is sexually aggressive, or assaults someone, it is his responsibility. It is not the responsibility of women who are out and about indulging in perfectly normal standard behaviour. Going out for a few drinks and snogging someone is perfectly normal behaviour in the UK. It is not "putting yourself at risk".

Of course it was a sexual assault, but I was very young and brushed it off. Even when I was jumped on in a dark alley I didn't go to the police until the next day and they were because they would have sent out a car.

The number of sexual assaults (minor and major) that get shrugged off by women must be enormous. You do need to be aware and avoid dangerous situations and if you choose to call that victim blaming then it is your prerogative. I prefer to keep myself safe and call it common sense.

Just read your most recent post - so he assaulted you. In your first post you didn't give the impression that it was non consensual.

And like Can'tBeBothered says - women are socialised not to see these things as assaults on them but as unfortunate incidents that it is up to them to stop from happening.

This is all cock-eyed.

Additionally, wouldn't it be nice if there was something that could be done about "minor" sexual assaults. That they were totally socially unacceptable, that the police would take them seriously, or something. Because at the moment this behaviour is unchecked and so the men who do it are doing it to loads of different women and often escalating. And in the end maybe if they end up raping a string of women they might get put away. BUT like your one he was known to be "not very nice" which I take to mean that he was known as a sexual predator in some way - wouldn't it be good if somehow and as a society that could be addressed rather than being left to do it again and again and get worse.