To be sick of women being told to exercise 'situational awareness'

[Quantumblue]

In Melbourne we have just had another sickening rape and murder of a young woman. A 22 year old comedian, walking home at 10.30 pm after finishing a gig. Through an inner city park where thousands of people walk, run, cycle and hang out each week.
The police response has been to tell women to exercise caution and situational awareness.
So upset at this loss ( she was at school with my nephew) and so upset that the solution is for women to be more aware. We are all aware of danger every time we go out our front doors.
RIP Eurydice

If women only were raped and murdered by psychos in dark parks then it would be a sensible solution, but they are not and you can’t avoid everywhere and everything. No doubt if women lived in hermetically sealed bubbles made out of Kevlar, some psychos would love to get in and rape and murder them.

So because you can't avoid the risk of some types of rape without being in a hermetically sealed bubble, you aren't going to do anything to avoid being raped and murdered in situations that are easily avoided. Completely irrational and nonsensical but it is up to you.

The most frustrating thing is that it never applies to just "psycho killer in deserted park at night". What women can do to keep safe is almost always expanded to all kinds of rape and all kinds of victim.

This is why I take issue with this kind of statements. Because for every park victim there will be thousands more in different situations that are told/made to think that there's something more they could've done. That they're not "victim " enough. That it was avoidable if only...

When my classmates assaulted me O was asked what i was wearing ,what i was doing and why I was in their room. I was playing cards in shorts and a tshirt in a different room, they (6 of them) barged in drunk. I was 13.

When my grandfather touched me i was asked why i was alone with him. I was told to stay away from him next time and avoid him. I was 14.

When my maths tutor touched me I was told that I should've been safe because i was fat(thus unattractive) and it was winter and i had bulky clothes on. I was 17.

Haven't told anyone about my cousin because i was too young and only get flashbacks but I'm sure there will still be reasons why some how i was in the wrong and some way I should've changed my behaviour.

Good article on the kind of language police could use about gendered violence.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jun/20/this-is-what-police-should-say-after-an-act-of-gendered-violence

A relative of mine was mugged last week. She, a girlfriend and a male friend, all in their late 20s, were surrounded by several large males with knives and told to hand over their bank cards, pin codes, phones etc. They were held at knifepoint while their bank accounts were relieved of cash.

My relative and her two friends were sitting in an empty skate park near their home in London having a chat. It was 11pm. She is adamant that any suggestion they were taking a unconsidered risk is “victim blaming”.

great article Quantum, it's men who need the situational awareness isn't it
Show situational awareness when you are around women; do everything you can to minimise ambiguous or threatening behaviour around them, and to affirm women’s equality and right to safety

It always seems to be this odd idea "men are only raping because they are being tempted into it by you being an easy target."
Do we really think that there are men going home from the pub who have never assaulted anyone in their lives, spotting a women out on her own and thinking "oh go on then, since you're offering. Normally I wouldn't but it seems rude not to".

Men who rape are going out with the intention of raping someone. All that the advice of covering up, being more aware, wearing running shoes etc is doing is saying "make sure some other woman is an easier target." Its the joke on escaping polar bears "you don't have to be faster than the bear, you just have to be faster than someone else in your group."
I can't imagine that a rapist goes out for two or three nights, only encounters women in groups and well-lit areas and thinks "well I guess that's it, no more raping for me ever again", he will just change his tactics to "cab driver", "plausibly nice guy in a club", "waiting for woman to get off a bus at a dark stop and then following her off the bus" etc etc etc. We cant "aware" rape away, we can only try and shunt it along to some less-fortunate woman. Only rapists can choose to not rape, its up to society to work out why they currently feel entitled to do it and address that. Having men speak up when other men are making rapey women-hating "jokes" and be clear that its unacceptable is one way to start.

Great post storm treader.

I can't imagine that a rapist goes out for two or three nights, only encounters women in groups and well-lit areas and thinks "well I guess that's it, no more raping for me ever again", he will just change his tactics to "cab driver", "plausibly nice guy in a club", "waiting for woman to get off a bus at a dark stop and then following her off the bus" etc etc etc.

Obviously, he isn't going to give up on the idea of raping because it's more difficult but if it isn't as easy to get away with it he may not attack as many women before getting caught. There isn't a limit so I don't agree that if he doesn't get an opportunity to attack on three nights he will necessarily just make up for it another way.

The way you make it less easy for men to get away with rape is to change the conversation from what did the women do to what are the men doing.

There is some wilful misunderstanding going on here, and I’m not sure why. Although it should be safe to go where you please, it currently is not, and no one is advocating that women in general should throw caution to the wind and go walking through pitch dark, secluded areas, completely alone and paying no attention to any human that comes near them. What people are repeatedly saying, making clear and valid points, alongside unfortunate examples from their personal experience is that avoiding dark parks does not mean you can avoid rape (you’re just avoiding being raped in a dark park and even then there’s nothing stopping a rapist dragging you or driving you into a dark park from wherever you were anyway) and that women avoiding dark parks does not make a rapist ‘think twice’ about their rapey ways. Tbh you’d have to be pretty crap at being a rapist to go and hang out where the women aren’t. Much more sensible to put yourself in a position where women would be around you and have their guard down.

There is some wilful misunderstanding going on here, and I’m not sure why.

I could say the same thing about your posts. You keep repeating the point that avoiding dark parks doesn't mean you can avoid ever getting raped but noone has suggested otherwise. Obviously you can never reduce the chance of rape to zero. You can only decrease the risk in some circumstances.
Nobody has said that avoiding dark parks makes rapist "think twice" about their rapey ways either. The fact is though if they have less opportunity without being caught they ^may" attack fewer women before being stopped.

With regard to psychopathic killers, there is probably little point in having conversations. They're not going to listen. The only way to stop them is probably to catch them.

men are only raping because they are being tempted into it by you being an easy target.

I don't see the logic there. Evidently someone who is going to rape can only do so where there is opportunity. You cannot remove all opportunities from a rapist but you can take some steps (if you feel it's worth curtailing your freedom over) to decrease opportunity as it relates to yourself.

It would be the same if someone was going around murdering hitchhikers. He can't do it without opportunity. You can't remove every opportunity. You can decrease the opportunity as it relates to yourself. Whether you feel society should be expecting you not to hitchhike etc is a separate issue.

The way you make it less easy for men to get away with rape is to change the conversation from what did the women do to what are the men doing.

I don't think that is necessarily true in this context or that it justifies closing down conversations about steps women can take to increase their safety.

I have a personal alarm. It's a small sacrifice and a small reassurance. I don't think every woman should have one or that a rapist would be caught any faster if I was assaulted and the police commented 'littlerocketman did/did not have her personal alarm with her'... It's just one element that might keep me safer in a world where there are, unfortunately, predators. If I can do so without turning my life upside down, I would like to not be the person available to them. I realise that isn't decreasing the number of rapes taking place or moving society forward. Doesn't mean it's pointless.

The logic to me is there is a subtext in all these cases of "if only she had been more careful this wouldn't have happened."

It always seems to imply that if only every woman was careful enough, wary enough, covered enough, raping would stop. There's an implication that women are causing their own rapes through being wilfully overly rapable, as in the earlier example of it being likened to stepping out in front of a train or car - if no-one ever stepped out in front of a train, train-impact-deaths would entirely stop. That isn't the case with rapes, rapists will ALWAYS rape and it isn't the fault of the woman for that being the case.

When a woman is raped, 100% of the blame for this is with the rapist, but there always seems to be some fault found with the victim as if she caused the rape - she wore the wrong clothes, she had headphones in, she was in the wrong place - it was HER failure that caused this.

I think it's perfectly natural that women think that by taking these steps they will stay safe, it's not true but it helps women to function and live their lives to tell themselves this. 1 in 5 women are raped. This strategy is rubbish and stops us looking at things that might actually bloody work.

But nobody thinks they are totally safe birdsdestiny.

storm

I realise you think that's the implication - that someone was assaulted because they were too 'rapeable'. While I can see that is something to clarify and be careful about, it's only one deduction and doesn't necessarily means there's something wrong with the advice.

It may not be that the police think women avoiding 'dangerous' areas will deal with the problem of the rapist. They might just be addressing every individual woman out of a sense of concern because it's what public services do. If there's a hurricane around, they tell you to put away your garden furniture and buy candles. If an animal has escaped from the zoo they suggest you stay indoors. It doesn't mean you have to or they think you're incapable of reasoning - they're just used to being the people who deal with the fall-out when individuals get hurt so they do what they can to lessen the number of individuals at risk. The assumption that this is their primary response to dealing with the problem is just not justified IMO.

When it comes to these issues, I don't really get why your perceived extrapolation (not being personal, I mean 'your' as in anyone who thinks that way) trumps everything else and almost seems to outlaw fairly useful advice one would instinctively give to a friend or neighbour just because the narrative is open to misinterpretation. Surely it is natural to make different decisions if there is a string of sexual assaults in a neighbourhood and the reasons for doing so are self-evident and sound. Surely individual lives are also important.

This strategy is rubbish and stops us looking at things that might actually bloody work.

But is it. Obviously it's rubbish for dealing with the majority of rapes because they aren't perpetrated by strangers in alleyways. And they don't stop a rapist on the lookout for a target because he will just continue until he finds an opportunity, and he will. But as a strategy to lessen the risk I'm in from random sexual assault, it could be reasonably effective. I don't really see why it has to be a distraction from the bigger issues. They can still be talked about. Different actions can be taken. I would imagine that the policeman's warning was the smallest part of his response.

It's rubbish because the figures show us one in 5 women are raped. One in 3 in some sections of the population so yes rubbish.
Dungeon I think its along the lines of it won't happen to me if I do xyz, it's magical thinking but I understand why people do it.

birdsdestiny

What's your point? Do you mean it's rubbish because it clearly isn't working? Or something else?

Dungeon I think its along the lines of it won't happen to me if I do xyz, it's magical thinking but I understand why people do it.

I disagree with you that people think "it won't happen to me if I do xyz". On this thread, posters are just stating that they can reduce their risk of being raped and murdered by a stranger in a dark part/alley if they take certain precautions. You are extrapolating that to insist that they think they can prevent all rape in all circumstances despite the fact that no one has said this on this thread. Most people have said the opposite but apparently, you know what they think better than they do.

I think the problem is that rapists and child abusers have a very high chance of getting away with rape and abuse once it goes to Court. It’s the Court system and the victim blaming and shaming that goes on with defence barristers that needs to change. How is it relevant what someone’s previous sexual history is why not just stick to the facts of the attack.

Yes its rubbish because the figures are so high. Prevention strategies that maintain this number are not an example of success. Drink driving campaign, smoking, all examples of effective campaigns. This not so much.

I take great issue with any suggestion that women are somehow “letting the side down” if they take reasonable precautions to assess risk and try to avoid danger. You have to be a complete snowflake to believe that (a) the world should be risk free (b) you should live out reality according to your ideals.

In an ideal world yes, you would be able to go anywhere you please and we should aim to make our world a safer place. It’s rare someone advocates women should do exactly as they please in the world as it is now. I would not advocate this.

Yes if you never go in a dark park for any reason you are unlikely to be raped in one. It is good advice to avoid dark parks if you do not wish to be raped in one. It is not good general advice to avoid being raped. It doesn’t prevent rape in general and it doesn’t solve rape as a societal issue.

Where this sensible advice falls down (avoid the dark park! Don’t go in dark alleys! etc etc) is when there are women that for whatever reason cannot avoid x, y or z in order to go about their business so what do they do and it also takes the focus from thinking fully about the larger risk of rape from men that are in your acquaintance. Much like I spend a lot of time worrying when I fly once or twice a year about the plane crashing but I rarely worry about being in a car crash even though I’m in the car every day.

It’s much easier to tell women (who aren’t known for risk taking behaviour anyway) to curtail their lives to avoid rapists than it is to really focus on getting men to stop raping women. I think it could be reduced, perhaps not eliminated, but most other violent crime is reducing so it is not outside the realms of possibility.

“Most other violent crime is reducing”

No it isn’t.