Given women tips to “stay safe” following sexual attacks in my area - AIBU to be annoyed by this?

[brokenspoon]

Sadly several women were sexually assaulted in my local area last week. The local authority have sent out an email first of all stating that the police is investigating, however then follows a long list of “tips” for women to stay safe, including:

• not travelling alone at night
• using taxis rather than walking
• making sure your phone is fully charged

For some reason this has angered me. I loathe the language around violence against women. Messages like this I believe place the responsibility with women, rather than the attackers. Like when we get attacked it is because we were walking out alone, or because our phone wasn’t charged. Which of course isn’t true. Women get raped because men choose to rape them.

To me it smacks of “it’s her fault because she was drunk/wearing a short skirt”.

Am I unreasonable in feeling this way?
What should such a letter say instead? I appreciate the local authority is unlikely to sent out a letter with tips telling men how not to rape, although frankly that would probably be more appropriate!

As pp have said the reason for this is the same reason we tell people to lock their houses and cars, instead of educating criminals not to steal.

You can refer messages to/ educate Thieves and rapists all you like but they are not likely to listen.

Does it come with a list of things for men to do/not do? Maybe...

1 Stay indoors after dark.
2 Do not intimidate people by walking close behind them.
3 Do not talk/call to people you do not know personally, even from across the street.
4 Never assume a woman travelling alone is looking for male attention. Assume she wants to be left alone and keep away from her.
5 Do not loiter in dark/wooded/otherwise deserted areas.

This sort of thing should be covered at school @Hailtomyteeth.

@Hailtomyteeth

Does it come with a list of things for men to do/not do? Maybe...

1 Stay indoors after dark.
2 Do not intimidate people by walking close behind them.
3 Do not talk/call to people you do not know personally, even from across the street.
4 Never assume a woman travelling alone is looking for male attention. Assume she wants to be left alone and keep away from her.
5 Do not loiter in dark/wooded/otherwise deserted areas.

The only issue being that offenders don't listen to this sort of thing. They already know sexual and violent offending is wrong - they do it anyway. So it's not going to be enough.

Would you feel angry if they said there has been a number of burglaries recently, make sure to keep your house and possessions secure?

People who say this are literally seeing women as property. Disgusting.

Unfortunately these are things I will have to do to keep myself safe. It's very clear that things aren't going to change anytime soon.

The recent case of Oliver Banfield proves just this - a police officer assaulting a woman and getting away with it. It was all caught on CCTV! No doubt he'll lose his job but its not enough. I notice that the report helpfully pointed out that she 'walking alone at night', need i say more?

@Awalkintime

Would you feel angry if they said there has been a number of burglaries recently, make sure to keep your house and possessions secure?

People who say this are literally seeing women as property. Disgusting.

I disagree.

You're still a victim of crime if your house gets broken into and robbed - there's still a human cost as opposed to just loss of property. Some people who have been burgled can develop ptsd and have to leave their homes as they no longer feel safe, for example.

And yea - you can't compare sexual / violent assault with burglary in a truly like for like sense. But there is still a human cost with both offences, and we are given precautionary safety advice around both types of offences.

It doesn't just apply to offenders. If all men stayed indoors, the potential offenders would be noticeable by being out!

@Awalkintime

Would you feel angry if they said there has been a number of burglaries recently, make sure to keep your house and possessions secure?

People who say this are literally seeing women as property. Disgusting.

I know! You can leave valuables at home... but it's not I can go out without my body, is it? Of course that's the whole fucking point.

@Hailtomyteeth

It doesn't just apply to offenders. If all men stayed indoors, the potential offenders would be noticeable by being out!

Are you suggesting that men change their behaviour when they've done nothing wrong! The very idea!

@Hailtomyteeth

Would you want male paramedics, doctors, firefighters, police officers, prison officers, etc ... to stay indoors after dark too?

So these professions would be staffed only by females after dark?

What LA is this OP? I'd love to tweet the fuckers.

@Gobbycop

So if there's a serial killer doing the rounds targeting a particular group is it not common sense to take steps to protect yourself? Would expect police to keep quiet?

It's not victim blaming at all it's trying to mitigate risk. Your choice if you want to follow advice or not.

Whether it's police or another agency if they just kept quiet and withheld information there'd be uproar, they can't win.

I have to agree.
We'd be fuming if something serious like this happened in our local area and no one raised awareness so we could take steps to protect ourselves

It's like putting a sticking plaster on a gaping gunshot wound - a waste of time and hugely annoying. Women know all this however many women need to go out in the dark when they are returning from/going to work particularly in winter and the idea that all women can afford taxis is laughable. We have now reached a time when society needs to decide if women are equal to men and sort out the fact they are not safe when they are out or say that as a society we are fine with the fact that women aren't safe, that they'll need to leave work at 2pm each afternoon in winter to get home before dark and that women are definitely second class citizens.

LucieStar

It is viewing women as property. You are comparing her body to property to be taken and used and therefore she should put it away safely and keep it safe so no one can take it like the TV in the house or the ipad. This wasn't about burglary it was about comparing women to pieces of property we lock away which is appalling and victim blaming.

At no point did I say burglary was victimless not sure where you got that from at all.

@Awalkintime

LucieStar

It is viewing women as property. You are comparing her body to property to be taken and used and therefore she should put it away safely and keep it safe so no one can take it like the TV in the house or the ipad. This wasn't about burglary it was about comparing women to pieces of property we lock away which is appalling and victim blaming.

At no point did I say burglary was victimless not sure where you got that from at all.

Firstly I didn't make the original comment so I'm not comparing anything to anything - I was simply saying I could see PP's point and I really, strongly don't think that was the meaning of her message.

I made the point about human cost being relevant in both crimes to illustrate the above. I don't think PP is even thinking about the property itself in her comment - if my home was broken into and things were taken, personally, I'd be less traumatised by the loss of items and more personally and emotionally affected. Hence, in that sense, it's not a comparison of property with person - it's a comparison of shitty cost to person in both situations (albeit very different costs, admittedly).

Not sure if that makes sense. I just really don't think pp was intending to compare humans and objects, at all.

But if she comes back and says no, no I do in fact mean that I view humans as objects, then of course I'll concede I was wrong.

Taking a taxi didn't keep the victims of John Worboys. It's not ideal covid wise and many can't afford to daily.

Walking home in pairs always leaves one person doing the final bit of the journey alone, when you both live alone.
It's not like we can just stay at someone's house or walk in a larger group at the moment.

And after the whole women walking with coffee being stopped by the police, women are going to be somewhat wary of being seen to be breaking the rules.

LucieStar

I don't think that was the intention at all but by doing so the poster was comparing women to property.

I get the cost to both and yes there are costs to both without a doubt.

However, if we compare women to property and say they should be locked up and say things like this, what happens when a women does get raped and she wasn't following this advice - she gets the blame. She also blames herself and so does society. Women are still asked about their knicker colour etc after a rape.

I've never been asked what colour knickers I was wearing after a few times I've reported someone in my garden stealing. I did of course offer this information and the police said I was being ridiculous....and it sounds ridiculous too.

The only reason someone gets raped is because the perpetrator chooses to rape.

However, if we compare women to property and say they should be locked up and say things like this, what happens when a women does get raped and she wasn't following this advice - she gets the blame.

Ok well we can agree to disagree that anyone is comparing women to property on this thread.

And I don't agree necessarily that advising precautionary steps (against any crimes) equates victim blaming. Even if someone had a lapse of memory and forgot to lock their home or car one day, and things were stolen (hence they didn't follow the advice), I can't imagine anyone with any human decency saying "well tough shit, your fault for not following the advice".

No matter the offence, the victim should never be blamed. But advising precautionary steps is to me, not the same as victim blaming.

@Eekay

YADNBU It makes me sick. Women, you must curtail your freedom and adjust your behaviour. Where's the information campaign telling blokes to adjust their behaviour? How about telling men, don't go out alone at night because you might get the urge to assault a passing woman. No, that would be ridiculous.

Well of course it would be fucking ridiculous. The men who are actually inclined to attack women aren’t going to decide against it on advice are they. They already have zero morals.

Your views are naive and failing to offer advice to women to protect themselves would also be naive.

I don’t want to catch Coronavirus so I wash my hands, avoid unnecessary trips and wear a face mask. Should we advise people to ignore the advice and ask kindly that a virus not spread?

Well, what is more likely to reduce further attacks in the short term? Increased vigilance by potential victims or telling the perpetrators ‘Don’t do that’?

YABU. Some of the responses here are simply unhinged.

Presumably the same people think the police just need to remind burglars not to burgle and that would obviate the need for us all locking our doors and windows...

@Awalkintime

Would you feel angry if they said there has been a number of burglaries recently, make sure to keep your house and possessions secure?

People who say this are literally seeing women as property. Disgusting.

Don’t be ridiculous @Awalkintime. It’s an analogy. It doesn’t mean that one thing is literally the same as another.

@Hailtomyteeth

It doesn't just apply to offenders. If all men stayed indoors, the potential offenders would be noticeable by being out!

Yes, they would be noticeable you're right. With a team of female-only police officers to deal with and restrain them on the streets when they attacked women, given your proposed after dark curfew on men, meaning no male officers to support their female colleagues.

Perhaps not ideal.