asking for it?

[antoinettechigur]

Just been thinking about this turn of phrase and wondering what it really can mean.

Follows on from lots of lunchtable discussion at work of a current rather high profile case in which some men are being accused of raping one of a group of women who were at their house after nightclubbing (just keeping it a tiny bit vague as trial not over yet. Most of my colleagues were analysing the woman's reported behaviour and discussing whether she had "asked for it" by getting into a vulnerable situation. When I asked "what, she wanted to be raped?" the responses were along the lines of "Oh of course not, but you know...". Nothing very specific. Another colleague joined me in the suggestion of questioning why these discussions/reports always focus on the woman's behaviour, not the man/men's in the situation.

So what does it all mean? What do people mean when they say a woman was "asking for it"?

Well, thought I better start a thread as I always turn up late to the interesting discussions these days

But it always runs alongside, and then it overtakes, breasts the finish line and gets all the glory.

I have never ever seen anyone say 'sure, we can talk about how burglary is on the increase as long as we spend 90% of our print space on what homeowners can do to stop being burgled.'

Why is it that we're so invested in telling women how to restrict their freedom and not in how to educate men not to rape?

Why is it only this crime?

I will say this again: when you talk about the sorts of behaviour, or the sorts of women, who "get themselves raped", you are giving rapists a map to their victims.

I entirely agree that crimes that are sexual in nature (esp. against women) seem to be held in a class of their own. Infact there have been studies about child molestation that show a boy's attacker is given a harsher sentence that a girl's. This is obviously very wrong.

However, knowing all of this is not going to change the fact that some men are dangerous. There is a role for education to play but many rapists are just preditory. They really don't care that everyone else thinks it is wrong. While we are waiting for these men to realise this then we will have to keep educating women about how to keep themselves safe.

I'm so sick of this argument.

It's not as if 'educating women' is value-neutral. The "tips" in question are all freedom-limiting.

Oh, you'll say, but it's worth all women never getting drunk/flirting with strangers/walking home alone/wearing what they choose if it reduces the risk of rape? Sure, most of those women won't be raped anyway, but it's worth it to save those who will be.

If men can't be educated, can't be reasoned with, can't be expected to control themselves, why don't we restrict male freedom instead? After all, if we stop all men getting drunk/flirting with strangers/walking home alone, the risk of rape will be reduced. So you know, it's a shame for the nonrapist men, but hey, it's worth it.

It's not about not getting drunk or not walking home alone. It's about accepting there are increased risks. People can choose to do what they wish. It's not only women who need educating about safety, it's men too. Men between 18-25 are more likely to be attacked (not all sexual attacks) than their female counterparts.

Rape is a danger, making yourself vulnerable puts you at an increased danger. It's crap, it's not fair but it's the way it is.

I'm not suggesting women should in anyway be limited in what they do. I just feel that some situations are more dangerous than others. It really hasn't got anything to do with rape. I wouldn't walk alone in my local city centre for many reasons. Fear of sexual assault is one but so is robbery and general assault. I wouldn't want any men from my family doing it either for the same reasons.

Of course people who rape others should be given much harsher sentences. I'm still not sure why rape is considered to be one persons word against anothers when I would have thought a mugging or general assult would be pretty much the same evidence wise. There is serious unfairness in the system, most of it sexist which needs to be tackled most urgently.

However, if you were going to attack someone and you had two choices a) a person walking in a large group in broad daylight b) a person walking alone at 2 in the morning. Which would you choose?

Well said, Dittany. Pro-rapists(!) keep blaming the victims by focusing on stranger rape, yet something like 80% of rapes are inflicted by friends & relatives. If you let a cousin into your home and he rapes you, were you then 'asking for it'?

It should be noted that the cultures, which require women to cover themselves completely and never to go out alone, are the very same ones that criminalise the victim. Penalty of death, in same cases - for being raped while observing the most draconian measures to not 'ask for it'.

Soapbox:

"It's not about not getting drunk or not walking home alone"

"I just feel that some situations are more dangerous than others. It really hasn't got anything to do with rape. I wouldn't walk alone in my local city centre for many reasons."

"if you were going to attack someone and you had two choices a) a person walking in a large group in broad daylight b) a person walking alone at 2 in the morning."

So is it about walking alone, or not?

Please, tell me, what "education" is it that you're recommending for women? You keep talking about risky behaviour and accepting consequences, but you haven't named one piece of 'risky behaviour' except walking alone at night.

Err I did not make any comment about how most rapes happen. Nor am I making comments about all the situations where rape occurs. The OP was about a high profile case in the media and about how collegues were discussing the woman's behaviour and whether she had put herself in a vulnerbale position. This, as you put it, would not reflect the majority of rapes but it was in the OP. Therefore discussing people's views on this and what being vulnerbale means is part of the discussion. In this particlar type of attack it may or may not be relevent. In some cases I think it is but not in that it makes the rapist less criminal or the victim to blame.

Scoutliam said: 'Milly, Gay by all means women should take care of themselves and be safe. We should also take responsibility for our actions but no matter how ill judged any woman behaves drunk or sober nothing deserves rape or any assault.'

I have no idea why you are attempting to argue against me and direct these points about drunk women at me. I have never even mentioned drunk women, and I really feel you should apologise to me for making this outrageous claim that I have suggested women's actions are what is at fault.

I do not believe that women who are drunk, or in a nightclub, or out late at night, or wearing heels, or who are young and sexually active, or who have multiple partners, or who go places on their own deserve to be raped or are even more likely to be raped. I believe that spreading the idea that women who behave a certain way are more at risk is untrue and dangerous. Nor do I believe that women should change their behaviour.

I certainly want my own DD to be able to go out late at night and have fun, and grow up as an independent person. I believe that encouraging women not to enjoy themselves and to limit their own behaviour because of the possibility of rape is a terrible thing.

I have never said otherwise on this thread, or any other thread.

I have simply said that women should be aware that there are warning signs for dangerous men - and you can view these on many domestic violence websites. Many of these danger signs are things that some people are encouraging in young men because they claim them as part of being masculine - we need to change that.

We should encourage everyone in society to look at the behaviour of men they know, and consider if they are likely to turn out to be a rapist, and stop looking at the behaviour of women they know, and stop considering if they are likely to turn out to be a rape victim.

Dittany, I am assuming from the timing of your post that you are not addressing me.

Dittany I don't understand why you think that you cannot put yourself at an increased risk of crime.

Yes the situations I am discussing are a very small section of the whole picture but they are still there. The crimes that are reported in the news tend to be these sensationalist types. Hence the OP. Shall I say it again for you since you seem to be unabe to hear me. I do not think that women's freedoms should be inhibited in any way.

The views of this entire planet need to change so that women are safer but you seem unable to even grasp that people have different views to your own. If you want things to change you need to take people like me with you.

Yes and we need to stop murders murdering and thieves stealing. That isn't going to happen tomorrow. I haven't answered your question because I believe that you are being flippent. None of the things in the list you made are generally the topics used to make headlines in the papers where a woman is suggested to have been part of the problem. These stories are a small slice of the bigger picture but they are usually what people discuss when these topics arise. They are what colours the general publics opinions. Just as the one story about a girl making a false alligation means that every other woman is making it up.

Take stories about girls in footballers hotels etc. Usually there will be some cry that they were asking for it because they went there. Well of course they weren't asking for it but there have been quite a few stories like this and many people would stay clear.

You have not answered my question. Do you think it is impossible to reduce you chances of being a victim of crime?

Oh God, this is depressing. If a woman is raped it is 100% the fault of the man. There are no extenuating circumstances or contributary factors to take into account.

I'm appalled by dittany's statistics. I had no idea that a disabled woman was at greater risk. It's makes me feel physically sick. The awful thing, though, is that when I actually really think about it, I'm not even surprised. No reason to assume that a man who would rape would give a shit about the victim's abilities.

And as for this idea that certain women are more likely to be raped - I don't think that's true at all. You only have to look at the stats to see that's not the case.

It's hard, though, to fight through all this shit. I was seriously sexually assaulted by someone I knew quite well. I didn't bother to report it because I had been at a party with him (and his wife) and other friends. He walked me the 50 yds or so to my hotel room (outside in the grounds of the hotel where the party was held) and forced himself into my room. Although I'd been drinking, I don't think it's my fault that when he held me where he wanted me he pulled my hair so hard that my head was still bleeding in the morning minus a big clump of hair. The only reason I wasn't raped was because he climaxed on my legs.

I do, however, blame my then best friend for behaving as if nothing had happened when I told her and for her quite clearly believing that I had been "asking for it".

That (apologist) mindset does seem very media driven. I think it has become a bit of a vicious circle but if only some reporters would turn down the salacious tone and would shift the perspective a bit it really could have an influence on how casual discussions go.