Please help me frame my argument wrt rape apologist

[PacificDogwod]

I need help as I feel I've lost a debate today although I know I'm right, goddammit!

Ok, here goes:
Female co-worker and I were talking about sexual assault/rape and she came out with the old 'well, she was asking for it what with her short skirt/gaudy make-up/being out and alone at that time of night/teasing him with her provocative dancing' or whatever. Which I countered that that represents rape apology and that the guilt is always with the rapist, no matter what went before.

So she gave the example that is two men (or women, I suppose, 2 people of the same sex) get in to a fight and one punches/stabs the other any judge/court would take in to account whether they were provoked and that unreasonable or inflammatory action by the victim prior to the attack would be used to mitigate the guilt of the attacker (or at least result in a lesser sentence).

Now I know that sexual assault/rape has very little to do with sex and an awful lot with power/need to dominate/control and nobody no matter how short their skirt should ever have to be subjected to that kind of violence, but I struggle to not agree with the mitigation argument?

Help!! I know I won't be able to let this lie, and I do have until Monday to get things clear in my head.

"had all their wares on display"

And with her exactly words you've got your argument: it doesn't matter how attractive the display, theft is illegal. And those are inanimate objects, with no feelings to hurt, no psyche to rip to shreds, no sadness of the family and friends of the toaster oven.

Shoplifting, armed robbery, cat burglary, ram raiding - all different levels of "violence" used to steal those items, but in the end theft has occurred and it is illegal.

Preemptive, yes, I got that far, it was her argument that the 'wares on display' were some kind of mitigating factor - but I like the argument that the fact that the house was unlocked when the burglary occurred might invalidate your insurance cover but it is still theft and illegal and morally wrong.

Even that weak argument is bogus. I once had some jewellery stolen, we're pretty sure it was a cleaner (a temp covering for the usual person). So, someone I'd actually let into the house. The items were in a pretty little pouch on the bathroom shelf - 'Wares on display' ... But the thing is, they weren't 'wares', they were items belonging to me of sentimental as well as monetary worth. They weren't there to be taken by anyone who fancied them, and anyone with an ethical compass would know that. So, the local bobby came round and did a report, I got an incident number and the insurers paid out in full.

Pacific, you might spot that don't post on here much (mainly because I don't have a hope in hell of saying it adequately, compared to some of the regulars ) but I do lurk a lot, and you have to trust that I have self-identified as a feminist since I was about 12 (arguably 4, but that's a long story). I say this by way if background/contrast.

Ok, deep breath.

I sometimes go to - let's call it a festival - camping and parties and all. A few years ago, on one of the darker "streets" (in the woods, but not isolated), a woman was raped. The news went all round the community over the message boards during the following year, and many discussions were had (one group saying: "we protect OUR women - don't let them walk around in the dark without an escort" which was grr-making) and general rape myths were trotted out and for the most part aired and diminished (obviously nothing is going to stop some blowhards).

But where it gets personally cringeworthy for me: between the time of first hearing about the rape and when, finally, it emerged that it was her abusive ex-BF, even with my years of Feminism and all the rape statistics under my belt, I had pictured a "stranger" rape and didn't first think "ex-BF" or even "date rape". Thankfully I didn't say anything to that effect, but I still feel rotton for not having the higher statistical likelihoods at the top of my mind.

This is my confession, FWRs.

Preemptive, sorry, but your 'confession' made me smile.
If that's your worst feminist 'sin'.... we are all well socialised, aren't we? To accept a version of reality that is deeply, deeply misogynist.

I deal with victims of DV/EA/rarely sexual assault or rape and I am getting angrier and angrier the older I am getting. And I struggle to contain that anger at times - I have to physically remind myself to not become too agitated when dealing with the victim

What an ignorant woman - what a shame some people still think like that.

The difference with her scenario is;

1. if someone provokes you verbally it's unlikely to get you off in a sentence but if someone physically provokes you (grabbing, pushing etc) that in that scenario it's physical aggression that is being shown.

2. sexually being aroused doesn't make you think you are in danger, whereas aggression does causing a fight or flight response.

Tbh I don't even bother explaining to rape apologists unless they are very young and naive or they seem to be confused by the situation as they wont change their opinions so not worth my energy.

Buffy, no, member of the admin team, over 50, adult son.
She's nice.
Which somehow makes it worse IYKWIM

No, she's not.
We were talking about a report in the local paper about somebody going to court about a sexual assault that had taken place here a year or so ago. And how conscious we were that we were raising boys and that we did not want them to be rapists 'but some of the girls goad them in to it' - that's what sparked our conversation off. Oh, deep sigh.

Maybe it's useful in this context to raise the issue of male rape. Do men 'goad' other men on by wearing short skirts, showing their boobs etc?

www.telegraph.co.uk/men/thinking-man/10657485/Men-and-boys-get-raped-too.html

You could also point out that the jurisprudence in relation to provocation requires that person B acted in such a way that Person A lost all control of their mental reasoning. It's not just enough that they do something that might make person A want to hit/have sex with them more or make that course of action more appealing to A.
So for the analogy to hold true you'd have to be dealing with someone for whom the sight of a short skirt literally made the resulting action something that he could not stop indeed from doing.
In which case society needs people like that off the street as they'll be raping multiple people every time they go down the high street.

Also provocation is never a full defence in law, it can be a partial defence to murder to reduce it to manslaughter. For everything else it has no bearing on guilt and only goes towards mitigation of sentence.

It also has to be based on whether a reasonable person would react to such provocation which makes a further nonsense of it unless they're going to argue "well any reasonable man in his position would have raped her, I mean she was drunk and wearing a short skirt. What reasonable man wouldn't rape her in those circumstances?"

Oh, Quimby, thank you for the legal input, v helpful.

PreemptiveSalvageEngineer

Late 1980s, he was in his late 20s.

Very odd bloke. His child (yes he was married with a child) was an absolute brat and the parents were called to nursery because he was chasing children, catching them and then kicking them. He thought it was amusing to be called in to nursery.

He also would not go abroad on holiday because he'd 'been once' and the food wasn't the same. People told him you could get English food in Spain but it wasn't proper English food.

A couple of years ago I was watching some newslite type programme, think the One show - he popped up being interviewed as to why he went to Cornwall on holiday and said,"I've been coming to Cornwall now for 20 years, I can't imagine going anywhere else".

If a man walks down the road in a West Ham shirt and is attacked by a Millwall supporter, is he guilty of provocation? They are, of course, traditionally enemies. He was dressed in a provocative way.

Of course the victim isn't culpable. He was just wearing clothes.

Re provocation, it is only provocation if she believes all men are rapists and only need to see a short skirt, to be provoked into raping a woman.

I find expressing surprise that they are such man-haters, that they believe men are all one skirt away from rape, can be effective. If you follow up the surprise with indignation on behalf of decent men who aren't a skirt away from rape, that's even more effective.

Or sometimes, I pretend I'm a man-hater too and get them to join in a game of man hate together. "Well yes, I always make sure I'm never alone with a man, you never know when they're going to rape you and what will set them off. One minute it's a mini-skirt, next it's staying late at the office with them - you have to be so careful what signals you're sending. You never know when they might rape you, do you?"

That can be quite funny.

You know what, I wouldn't bother re-engaging. Not worth it with the pig ignorant. A deep breath and a silent DFOD should suffice.

Well we all know she's talking out of her arse.

A judge would take the circumstances into account when sentencing a rapist. The rapist would still be a rapist but sentencing would take into account other factors such as whether she was beaten half to death as well as being raped.

A man fighting a man is also not comparable, a woman will be physically weaker, likely smaller, more vulnerable. If she's drunk that only makes her more vulnerable. She can't rape him back can she?

This woman is also confusing rape with sex, the woman might have instigated sex, she didn't instigate rape.

There's no right or wrong way to be raped. My female body is not property so the analogy of leaving your car keys in a car is fucking stupid. Being raped is one of the most violating things that could ever happen to a woman and not comparable to theft.

As for what we are teaching our sons, this is an ideal learning scenario. No matter how turned on you are son, don't rape someone. No matter how much you fancy her, don't rape her.

Sadly we still live in a society where there are some very messed up views about mens entitlement to sex.

I sometimes wonder whether women like this think this way as a defence mechanism, ie it could never happen to them because they'd never do X y z.

I sometimes wonder whether women like this think this way as a defence mechanism, ie it could never happen to them because they'd never do X y z.

I very much get the impression from some of the more outré rape apologists on MN that that is the case, yes. The magical thinking that, if I dress modestly, don't get drunk and never act in a 'sexual' manner, then no man will ever rape me. Or worse that I am a 'good' woman, and rapists only rape those 'bad' women, which keeps me safe.

The even sadder part about it is that a lot of the women who say those things have experienced serious sexual assaults/rape, so are not just blaming other women for being raped, but also themselves. Society has a lot to answer for when it comes to VAWG.

Has she never worn a bikini or swimming costume in public? By her logic beaches should be rape hot spots. Particularly those beaches where women are topless. How can those poor men control themselves with all that exposed female skin?

Fuck with her. Say "look at all the rape that goes on on beaches. Because of all that bare skin. Men should be banned from beaches. Shall we start a petition?"

Some women live in fear their son's will get accused of rape for some reason. It's not rocket science to figure some will contort their minds into all manner of minimising and deflection. I think the fatherly equivilant is being too controlling and dictatorial with an older daughter (particularly around dating and boys). Personally I think it betrays an innate understanding of how shit men can be towards women, coupled with a fear/reluctance to tackle this head on.

A few years ago, I accidentally left my back door open overnight, and was burgled - they took money and electrical items. And yes, my insurance did pay out in full. Also, the police took it seriously, and sent CID round who said it's quite a common and opportunistic crime. At no point did anyone say it was my fault, despite me blaming myself for not having checked the door. However, if I happened to find someone else's door unlocked, it wouldn't mean that I would consider it acceptable to go in and steal things.

More good come backs - thank you, all

Yes, I to think that some (usually female) rape apologist need to be able to 'justify' the motivation for rape to help make themselves feels safer as long as they do 'all the right things' and avoid all the wrong ones natch

I do like the idea of a bit of 'men cannot control themselves when there's a bit of a short skirt around' one-upmanship

I'm not sure I'll go out of my way to bring the subject up again at work tbh, but I do feel a lot better armed for quick repartee if it does.