• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Women say some rape victims should take blame - survey

Harry Guerrilla said:
I think there is some responsibility, like knowing the people and knowing your surroundings.

It's not fool proof and it does not excuse the actions of a rapist.
Click to expand...

This is NOT responsibility for the rape. Your choices are independent of this action.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That certainly wasn't what I was saying, if you inferred that from what I wrote.

I specifically said that rape is not excusable in any situation but pretending that you can't prevent it in some reasonable ways is stupid.
Know where your going and know the person your with, even then that isn't fool proof but it's important.
Click to expand...

One can make smart choices in any situation to minimize bad things from happening. That does not change, however, that if a bad thing happens TO someone, as an independent variable, the person has no responsibility in that bad thing occurring. Prevention is wise. Doesn't change that the responsibility falls totally on the perp.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
This is NOT responsibility for the rape. Your choices are independent of this action.
Click to expand...

I agree but there are things that you can do to make yourself less of a target.
That's really my point.

CaptainCourtesy said:
One can make smart choices in any situation to minimize bad things from happening. That does not change, however, that if a bad thing happens TO someone, as an independent variable, the person has no responsibility in that bad thing occurring. Prevention is wise. Doesn't change that the responsibility falls totally on the perp.
Click to expand...

Like I said already, there is no justification for rape but there are bad people in this world and they don't care whose fault it is.
They want to rape for sex or power, nothing will change this.

The only thing you can do is try to make yourself less of a target.

I mean we wouldn't go walking around in a ghetto flashing a fistful of $100 bills.
That would be stupid even though you aren't responsible for being robbed, the robber is.
 
What could possibly put part of the blame for a violation of a law on the person that the law that protects him was violated?

Where's the logic in blaming rape victims for the rape?
 
To at least some degree, I blame society as a whole because of the way we hang on to these sexual anachronisms whereby we frame the sex act in terms of a woman GRANTING the sex. She is GIVING UP her virginity upon the first instance, she is TAKEN in countless romance novels, and she ACQUIESCES to the manly demands for sex. Certainly, not every person frames sexual relations in these ways, but if the overall assumption is that an act involves one person protecting something and another person seeking it, the ultimate expression of this relationship involves violation almost by very definition. Rape is an exaggeration of the basic framing dynamics of the society at large.

Because of the ways we frame the sex act, we have created a double standard whereby women are castigated for the very nature that men are rewarded -- the very desire for sex to begin with -- and so women are considered sluts for that which men receive high fives, and as a result if these double standards, an entire interplay between the two sexes can involve the women being put in the position of being shamed lest they put up too little "defense" against guarding their virtue. Although this can lead to situations that I believe do blur the line between consent and rape -- women saying no when they mean yes, and doing so as a way to simultaneously protect their honor while pursuing something that should be perfectly natural -- I think one of the psychological sources of date rapes (as distinguishable from ambush/predatory rapes) has to do with the need to shame. Especially for the younger people for which this more often applies, if a women is shamed for giving up something and a man is shamed if he doesn't get it, the whole relationship is fubared from the get go.

Until recently, and because of other factors, the rape statistics for Scandinavian countries have long been extremely low compared to ours. For my money, the reason for this has to do with the frank, and matter of fact way Scandinavians have treated the subject compared to us. Instead of this coy, little dance where the male aggressor pursues his object of lust and has to wear down the barriers she puts up, the sex act is treated with less inherent sexism. It is something acknowledged more equally in terms of need, and with fewer double standards. The entire premise being based upon mutual consent instead of conquest produces fewer examples of the ultimate example of conquest -- namely, rape.
 
Jerry said:
Hell yeah!! **** those stuffy Conservatives and their bigoted ideals like "self respect"!!

You wana be trailer-trash? You go be the best truck-stop cum-dumpster you can be girl!!
Click to expand...
You sound like you grew up in a mobile home park.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
No, Jerry, I've read the thread. You have presented a whole mess of non-logic. The animal analogy, for example. Completely illogical. Animals are instinctual and do not have the ability to reason in the way that a human would. If you poke an animal it will bite... instinctively. If you poke a human it will assess the situation and decide, based on MANY factors whether or not it will respond, and how it will respond. This is just an example of the lack of logic in your argument. Like I said, either you have presented a complete lack of knowledge on this topic, or this is one of your failed "thought experiments". Either way, your argument is illogical, either by design or by lack of information.
Click to expand...

What you're doing here is taking one small snippet of everything I've said on this thread and behaving as though I said nothing else, all while completely ignoring sources linked and failing to provide any of your own.

I've tried twice now to debate the issue according to sources, but all you see is a dog analogy.

Why should anyone on this forum ever bother to do anything but troll if that's the example you're going to set?
 
Last edited:
Apart from the odd numskull comment, it seems pretty much agreed here that the actions of the victim, however reckless or foolish, should not excuse the perpetration of rape in any way whatsoever. Unfortunately, however, that is not how rape is judged in the real world. The perception that some responsibility lies with the victim is invariably used by defence lawyers to try and mitigate their clients' crimes. Establishing a person's past behaviour as promiscuous--or their behaviour/state of attire at the time of the rape as provocative--can often lead to a complete acquittal for the rapist. In reality, the personal responsibility of the victim is a powerful factor in the minds of jurors and judges.

So, what to do? To tell the truth I can't decide in my own mind what will best serve justice. On the one hand, it is instinctive to say that courts should prohibit lawyers from presenting anything about the alleged victim which is not related directly to the crime. If a person is dressed or behaving provocatively, that should not be allowed to be admissible evidence. But wait... we have to play the "what if" game here and consider how such a stipulation might affect false charge cases. If the accused is really innocent, are we in danger of stacking the deck against them being found not guilty? Rape is one of those crimes which can rarely be categorically proven one way or the other. It is almost always one person's word against the other's--"it was rape" versus "it was consensual"--and evidence of sexual congress doesn't prove either side. So all that is left is for judges and juries to examine the circumstances and weigh up the characters of the people involved to come to a decision about who is telling the truth. If you take away certain aspects of character examination, are you not favouring the accused over the accuser and thereby increasing the possibility of injustice for the accused? It is an unfortunate fact that too few rapes lead to solid convictions, but even though in most of those cases it probably was rape and not consensual, is it not still better to let ten guilty people go free rather than incarcerate one who is innocent?
 
I guess I don't understand why everyone is hung up on the "that doesn't excuse rape" side.

Well no **** it doesn't excuse rape, so who gives a **** about that topic. It was settled before the thread was opened.

Certain behaviors do increase the risk of a crime happening to you. Minding those behaviors to lower your risk is only smart, while carelessly disregarding those behaviors is foolish.
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XovSI_gSJ4"]YouTube- WWE Raw 2/15/10 Guest Host: Jerry Springer (HD)[/ame]
 
Infinite Chaos said:
Link

I seem to remember a time when the mere fact a woman said "no" (and meant "NO") defined the boundaries - whatever the point in time in any sexual liasion. The man going beyond without permission was then commiting rape.

This latest survey seems to take backward steps for women and rape victims when it is widely acknowledged that prosections for rape in the UK have a poor record.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see the wording of the questions asked in the poll. For example, compare compare these two:

1. Should a woman take precautions to protect herself from being raped by avoiding dangerous situations and behavior?
2. Does a woman who puts herself in a dangerous situation deserve to be raped?

I think most people would be much more likely to answer yes to the first question.
 
Luna Tick said:
It would be interesting to see the wording of the questions asked in the poll. For example, compare compare these two:

1. Should a woman take precautions to protect herself from being raped by avoiding dangerous situations and behavior?
2. Does a woman who puts herself in a dangerous situation deserve to be raped?

I think most people would be much more likely to answer yes to the first question.
Click to expand...

I love your avatar, I totally feel like that some days :mrgreen:
 
Luna Tick said:
It would be interesting to see the wording of the questions asked in the poll. For example, compare compare these two:

1. Should a woman take precautions to protect herself from being raped by avoiding dangerous situations and behavior?
2. Does a woman who puts herself in a dangerous situation deserve to be raped?

I think most people would be much more likely to answer yes to the first question.
Click to expand...


Spot on, excellent summary.

Yes, to number one.

No to number 2.

Like Catz, my sympathy is somewhat limited if the victim did three or more WTF? things that helped put her in the situation. If you're past 18, you should know that stupid hurts, and that if you show your butt often enough the universe will smack it at some point.

Antagony also brought up an excellent point about false allegations. False allegations of rape are very common. Such allegations are often used for revenge by a woman angry at a man. In most cases it doesn't go as far as court; often the accuser loses her nerve before it gets there, or is confronted by the lack of evidence, etc...but I'm sure sometimes it does. As much as we all hate rape (I believe that forcible rape should be a capital crime) we can't let that tilt the justice system in such a way that false allegations might stand.
 
Jerry said:
What you're doing here is taking one small snippet of everything I've said on this thread and behaving as though I said nothing else, all while completely ignoring sources linked and failing to provide any of your own.

I've tried twice now to debate the issue according to sources, but all you see is a dog analogy.

Why should anyone on this forum ever bother to do anything but troll if that's the example you're going to set?
Click to expand...

Jerry, I've seen the sources. In no way do they support your position. NO WAY. If a women walks down the street wearing provocative clothing and gets raped, the rape is 100% the rapist's fault. The decision to walk down the street wearing provocative clothing is the choice of the woman, but because this is a completely independent and NON-dependent variable, it does not follow that this caused, in any way, the rape. This is LOGIC, Jerry. The sources do not back your position, and logic does not back your position. Your position is faulty. I'm of the opinion that you may be wording your position incorrectly, but either way, the way it is being presented, is completely inaccurate.

And knock off the "troll" comments. You do not know what you're talking about.
 
Jerry said:
I guess I don't understand why everyone is hung up on the "that doesn't excuse rape" side.

Well no **** it doesn't excuse rape, so who gives a **** about that topic. It was settled before the thread was opened.

Certain behaviors do increase the risk of a crime happening to you. Minding those behaviors to lower your risk is only smart, while carelessly disregarding those behaviors is foolish.
Click to expand...

See? That wasn't so hard. You misrepresented your own position with poor wording. My guess is that THIS was what you were trying to communicate. I would imagine that most would agree with this statement
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Jerry, I've seen the sources. In no way do they support your position. NO WAY. If a women walks down the street wearing provocative clothing and gets raped, the rape is 100% the rapist's fault. The decision to walk down the street wearing provocative clothing is the choice of the woman, but because this is a completely independent and NON-dependent variable, it does not follow that this caused, in any way, the rape. This is LOGIC, Jerry. The sources do not back your position, and logic does not back your position. Your position is faulty. I'm of the opinion that you may be wording your position incorrectly, but either way, the way it is being presented, is completely inaccurate.
Click to expand...

Except that my argument is in perfect alignment with sources given while your post here is not but unfounded opinion :2wave:

It's called a "hyperlink". Use it.
 
Last edited:
CaptainCourtesy said:
See? That wasn't so hard. You misrepresented your own position with poor wording. My guess is that THIS was what you were trying to communicate. I would imagine that most would agree with this statement
Click to expand...

Yeah it was, it very ****ing hard, you and others kept thinking I was talking about justifying rape or some bull****, when clearly I never said anything of the sort.

I'm glad you finally decided to read what I actually typed instead of what you wanted to see :2wave:

There's the blame for the crime, and then apart, detached, unrelated and separate form that, there's blame of the person if they did anything wrong.
 
Last edited:
This thread makes me very sad and angry. A victim is a victim and that is that! Anybody that thinks a rape victim should take any blame is full of crap. Period:(
 
Kali said:
This thread makes me very sad and angry. A victim is a victim and that is that! Anybody that thinks a rape victim should take any blame is full of crap. Period:(
Click to expand...

She should take the blame for her actions, absolutely.

Note: Unless she rapes herself, I did not just shay she should take blame for the rape.
 
Jerry said:
Yeah it was, it very ****ing hard, you and others kept thinking I was talking about justifying rape or some bull****, when clearly I never said anything of the sort.

I'm glad you finally decided to read what I actually typed instead of what you wanted to see :2wave:

There's the blame for the crime, and then apart, detached, unrelated and separate form that, there's blame of the person if they did anything wrong.
Click to expand...

Jerry, I find it hard to believe that EVERYONE misread your posts. But whatever, Jer. You clarified and I hope we all understand your position, now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom