Ways to lessen the risk of rape

[ArabeIIaScott]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/789f07e8-49aa-11ee-ae7e-1fff6c8e0528?shareToken=0d97e81f86763060709b5a5106cc7a9b

The idea that any form of precautionary behaviour from women is akin to 'victim blaming' seems like madness to me. A very sensible column from K Stock.

'Someone needs to tell young women what sort of world they live in and how best to defend themselves accordingly — imperfect certainly, but still better than nothing. Contrary to popular belief, this isn’t always the same thing as telling women that if they don’t listen to sensible advice, they have no right to complain about whatever happens next.'

Another detail that I'd never considered is how insulting it is to suggest that it's mothers' responsibility to 'teach sons not to rape'.

Yes. As per my public service campaign suggestion above, in the manner of those hard-hitting 80s AIDS campaigns (information-lite but hard hitting in style).

Where are the men in this thread?

There was an exhibition somewhere a few years ago entitled something along the lines of “What I was wearing when I was raped”: pyjamas, jeans, sports gear. Just ordinary clothes in everyday settings.

The trouble with this for me is that it's a small slip from doing something to keep you safe, to well you didn't do this/that/other and therefore it's your own fault.

That the big issue - and why it's so hard to say anything.

Avoiding being somewhere isolated and poorly lit - nice in theory and obviously thing to avoid but in RL IME sometimes unavoidable despite best efforts and even then woman have been abducted in broad daylight off busy streets. There is no fool proof way to avoid harm - though that doesn't mean risk reduction shouldn't be thought about.

I don’t agree with the swimming in the reservoir analogy. Water is inherently dangerous. So to ward against rape women should understand that all men are inherently dangerous? Most women do and get called out for generalisation. I don’t that will get much legs, with the climate of Not All Men.

I had known two/three of my assailants for over a decade. I had fallen asleep in his company many times.

the only thing I agree with is - women who are perceived not be believed are targeted more. How then do I protect myself against a deprived childhood and the care system?

That was very lame. Maaaaaate. Is that all men can say to each other on the subject of VAWG?

Perhaps they’d find some better words if they could picture their daughter/sister/mum being raped. I’m sure they could find the vocabulary for that.

I do all these things but have been sexually assaulted in broad daylight in a public place, and by a very trusted friend when drunk in a “nice” comfortable home. Other things, too. My clothes were totally bloody irrelevant to what happened to me.

But you still do them.

I religiously lock my doors and windows but I have been robbed before. I lock my doors and windows not because it will protect me 100% but because I want to lessen my chances.

I wouldn’t advise a woman (sober or otherwise) to walk around by herself late at night

What advice would you give to the woman who was raped walking in our local park at 8.30 in the morning? whether she was taking a short cut to work, enjoying the sunshine, walking her dog, she was just going about her normal everyday business and met an attacker.

The problem with advice like avoiding late night and dark areas is that the percentage of rapes that take place in that particular situation is miniscule. I don't worry about being out late because the risk is low, fear might be high but the actual risk of anything happening is incredibly low. This is the issue the advice given is bullshit and doesn't actually really reduce risks it just reduces perception of risk.

But we weren't talking about "assault" we were talking about rape.

I think a conversation can be had about avoiding being a victim of crime without it being victim blaming. I tell my kids ways we can minimise the chance of being mugged, or pickpocketed or involved in a fight, if any of those things happened it would not be their fault in the slightest, but still sensible to tell them there are things we can do to reduce the likelihood of it happening?

There is a certain type of man who is happy to rape if he thinks he can get away with it. Educating and informing ourselves and our daughters will not affect his desire to rape.

The solution lies in reducing men’s ability to get away with it: effective prevention strategies, education, zero tolerance of ‘low level’ sexual crimes, police presence on the streets (after sacking those with VAWG records), policing that prioritises safety of women and girls, educated courts and judiciary, restrictions on police and lawyers investigating victims’ past histories, legal support for victims in court paid for by legal aid, much much longer custodial sentences, damages payments for victims.

It is “Do it to Julia”.

Women can’t prevent rapes. We can (slightly) reduce the chance of being raped ourselves - but all we are doing is getting the rapist to rape someone else.

I am also not convinced by some of the advice. Has any research been done on how likely you are to be raped by a stranger in an alley vs how likely you are to be raped by the nice bloke who offers to walk you home. The women who sensibly got a taxi home with John Worboys would have been safer in the darkest of dark alleys.

This is KEY. Many of the things that might make you vulnerable to sexual assault cannot be protected against and yet people still spew nonsense about how to protect yourself against certain dangers when the real risk of these situations are low. All this does is curtail women's freedoms, make them feel anxious and worried, and make them feel ashamed and blamed if something does happen to them.

And what advice for children? From the ONS: while 5.7% of the population [is] aged 10 to 14 years, this age group accounted for 24.1% of police recorded sexual offences where the victim was female. One-third of all female victims were aged under 15 years old". Don't be a girl????

Measures to avoid being mugged are things like, don’t carry valuables.

a woman’s body is the very thing being stolen. She can’t lock the door on that.

I don't worry about being out late because the risk is low, fear might be high but the actual risk of anything happening is incredibly low. This is the issue the advice given is bullshit and doesn't actually really reduce risks it just reduces perception of risk.

Actually I think it increases the blame afterwards - there was a woman abducted from a bus stop near IL. IL assumed all kind of things - very young drunk etc and missed in the article was a 40 year old shift worked coming home because it was at night incidentally similar time to MIL coming home and same bus stop.

You're most likely to get raped by someone you know, so the only thing women can do is not have dads, brothers, uncles, male cousins, husbands, male friends, male co-workers.

The closest I ever came to rape was after a night out when I got very drunk and allowed a man who I wasn't really interested in, but had known for years, to convince me to go home with him. I was lucky, but it was a close run thing. That's not to say I disagree that in many many many, if not most, cases a woman can be stone cold sober at 9 in the morning and still be raped by someone she knows and trusts, but that yes, in my case, if I had not been drunk I would not have been in that situation.

I really like KS' no nonsense approach. However, this is not her best argument or article. She is trying to make the point that in the same way we tell people to lock their cars and doors, it's not unreasonable to tell women to do certain things that make them less vulnerable. But she doesn't do it well. Even her opening comparison with drunk men and assault falls flat considering that I think most men who get drunk and then get into a fight are absolutely considered to be at blame.

She also sort of slips in a philosophical point that doing something that increases risk doesn't mean you're morally responsible for that risk. But it's a bit light and easily missed. Plus the entire piece skips over the reality that much of the violence and rape experienced by women is NOT taking place at night, in the dark, by strangers.

I think she was trying to say it's not victim blaming to tell women to be careful but frankly, she didn't do a very good job of it.

I wish I'd known that 1 in 20 men are rapists.*
I wish I'd been taught to be more careful with my drink in a club/pub.
I wish I'd been taught the red flags to look out for in an abusive male.
I wish I'd known more about consent.
I wish I'd been taught more about boundaries.
I wish I'd been taught more about the statistics on rape/assault, and understood the scale of the issue.

I am angry, tbh, because I grew up with libfemmery, and some of that taught me shit that put me in danger. Suggesting that women can and should drink as much as men. That women can and should be as open to casual sex as men. That spent a lot of time pushing the idea that being sexually attractive/available was the ne plus ultra of womanhood.

It's all very well to say that it's 'victim blaming' to warn women about how to lessen the risk of rape, but in my own personal experience that approach led to nobody ever really saying anything about the causes or risks of rape, nobody looking squarely at the issue, nobody naming it as MVAWG, nobody suggesting women do have the ability and the right to take measures to try and protect themselves.

Had I been armed with some clearer knowledge and information, I may well have avoided some of the assaults I endured.

What messages do we have now, for young girls? Only Fans being promoted? 'Sex work is work'? Universities are teaching this shit!

The tacit suggestion that any woman who is uncomfortable with her body being objectified must be less of a woman - nonbinary, asexual, or transman - and the implication that any girl who is 'identifying' as a woman is therefore some pornified ever-ready sex object?

We are still being sold bullshit that puts women in danger. An absence of clear information puts women in danger.

*a best guess, I've personally found it helpful to put at least a rough figure on this. It helps me with perspective.

I was once told on a MN thread that by warning my daughter not to walk alone in her dangerous part of a city after dark I was pushing the risk of rape onto another woman.

Serious question, not a gotcha (don’t have time at work to RTFT but on skimming I can’t see an answer, please if there is one already suggested feel free to reply) how do we teach men not to be rapists?

What is the suggestion of this argument, logically? We should accept our own rape because otherwise the man will just rape someone else?

One of the reasons why men are attacked more often than women is that women already self-police their behaviour in ways that men don’t.

Has any research been done on how likely you are to be raped by a stranger in an alley vs how likely you are to be raped by the nice bloke who offers to walk you home.

I'd never trust a man to walk me home and in the days when I caught taxis, I always registered a call at the centre rather than flagging one down.

Kathleen Stock is a strange philosopher. More pragmatic than theoretical. I watched her talk with students at Oxford and thought just that. And again with this argument. I admire her in some ways for daring to speak up and I'm sure there are people who nod along with her arguments. But they are not theoretically or logically sound.

With that in mind, on a purely pragmatic level I think its sensible for women to take control of that which is in their power to do so. Are we served well by passivity or fear? does passivity create the very conditions that we seek to address? does helplessness create greater fear? are we afraid more or less by outsourcing all responsibility and blame? in what way do we hold ourselves to an impossible standard of both 'asking for what we get because we are standing up for ourselves' but also 'asking for what we get because as passive objects and in no way seek to protect ourselves'

To me it's a bit like the violence in revolution. One does not use violence to advance one's position, but must in order to protect one's position. Just like "just war" theory. It's moral to use equal force to protect oneself. Being passive in the face of threat is not moral. So, yes I believe women should perceive and analyse the threat, take measures to avoid it, and if need be arm themselves to deal with it. (not suggesting anything other than self defence lessons, boxing, staying fit, being assertive).

However Stock's argument leads in the same direction as those who disagree with her. Both positions lead to passivity, policing one's own behaviour and ultimately to fear.

Men are absolved of any responsibility-either for their own behaviour or the parenting of their children. Nothing will change until men step up. In big and little ways.

Women can’t prevent rapes. We can (slightly) reduce the chance of being raped ourselves - but all we are doing is getting the rapist to rape someone else.

We are not getting the rapist to rape.

No. The point is that women and girls cannot prevent themselves from being raped. All the "advice" on here and elsewhere (such as the article) as to how to do that is bollocks.