NationStates Jolt Archive

I'm using this thread as an extension to Women Get Blamed For Being Raped (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=455299). I'm curious as to how people feel about blaming the rape victim/attributing partial blame to the victim under certain circumstances, and how this correlates to their personal experience and gender. Unfortunately, I have to make the poll multiple choice to get all the options in, but please vote sensibly. If you're looking to debate if blame should be attributed to the victim, please follow the link at the top.

My personal belief is this: women are more likely to never believe blame should be attributed than men, because women have a greater fear of rape and a greater likelihood of it occuring to them. Those who have never been raped or known someone who has been raped will be less likely to attribute blame than those who have been raped or know someone who has been.

I have made it a public poll, because otherwise it's pointless. I do realise people are now less likely to take the unpopular stance of always attributing blame. If my public poll puts you off that, perhaps your reasons for attributing blame deserve a re-examination.

Oh, and if the public nature of the poll is putting any rape victims off voting, please vote anyway but use the "close friend/relative" option. Thanks.

are we assuming that all rapists are men and all rape victims are women?

are we assuming that all rapists are men and all rape victims are women?
Uh ... :confused:

Legs, you are one confusing woman! Heh!

I am missing an option for "(knowing people that were) almost raped".

are we assuming that all rapists are men and all rape victims are women?

Bugger. Didn't think of that.

I am missing an option for "(knowing people that were) almost raped".

Or that. Double bugger.

OK, since there are apparently more variables than I can fit on a single poll, how about you get as close as you can with the poll and post any relevant specifics on the thread.

Specifically, with as little emotion attached as possible, I was raped from the age of four to the age of thirteen by a family "friend". I was raped twice in my later teens by people I thought I knew and trusted.

There is no option for knowing people who have been raped and being raped as well, but if there were I would have to put a check there, too, as my mother was hit in the head with a fire poker and then raped.

Does this explain my opinions at all? If I was partially to blame for being raped in my childhood, please explain this to me. Thank you.

i have never been raped nor (to my knowledge) has any of my close friends. im 48 so i have known lots of people in my time so im sure that someone somwhere has suffered sexual assault. but no personal experience colors my opinions

while there are some bizarre cases out there that makes me shake my head, i dont use those to excuse the rapists responsibility in rape. it is 100% the perpetrators responsibility 100% of the time.

while there are some bizarre cases out there that makes me shake my head, i dont use those to excuse the rapists responsibility in rape. it is 100% the perpetrators responsibility 100% of the time.
I agree. No matter how turned on/up for it/whatever one party is, if the other party says no then it stays no. If someone feels the need to force themselves upon someone else, they deserve punishment and need rehabilitation.

Okay, I'm going to just assume that we're talking specifically about females who have been raped by males, since this is by far the most common kind of rape.

Barring some of those truly bizarre cases, and the cases where women are making spurious accusations (it's not common, but it does happen) I believe that it is always the perpetrator who is to blame for a rape. The victim is just that, a victim. They bear no responsibility for what has happened to them.

Women especially, however, need to be cautious and aware that they are often at risk, much more so than males. In an ideal world, women wouldn't need to worry about this sort of thing, but, unfortunately, this isn't an ideal world.

while there are some bizarre cases out there that makes me shake my head, i dont use those to excuse the rapists responsibility in rape. it is 100% the perpetrators responsibility 100% of the time.

Spot on, well said.

On another note, how common is rape, really? 5 of my close female friends have been raped, and I only have 2 female friends that have not been raped. None is over the age of 18. So, the vast majority of women I know have been raped. Which leads me to believe that it happens much more then is commonly thought.

Spot on, well said.

On another note, how common is rape, really? 5 of my close female friends have been raped, and I only have 2 female friends that have not been raped. None is over the age of 18. So, the vast majority of women I know have been raped. Which leads me to believe that it happens much more then is commonly thought.
Sampling errors mate. I know no-one that has been raped. We're either side of the mean, methinks. Unfortunately for you, I'm on the good side :(

Okay, I'm going to just assume that we're talking specifically about females who have been raped by males, since this is by far the most common kind of rape.

Barring some of those truly bizarre cases, and the cases where women are making spurious accusations (it's not common, but it does happen) I believe that it is always the perpetrator who is to blame for a rape. The victim is just that, a victim. They bear no responsibility for what has happened to them.

Women especially, however, need to be cautious and aware that they are often at risk, much more so than males. In an ideal world, women wouldn't need to worry about this sort of thing, but, unfortunately, this isn't an ideal world.

i agree with you. while only a fool isnt careful, we live in a dangerous world, the criminal bears all responsibility for the crime.

I had a rather disturbing argument on this with someone in an IRC channel and I am firmly against rape, even if I can't yet find a way to get around that Nietzschean moral destruction.

..and some how you don't seem to be able to find a way around mentioning nietzsche in every single thread, eh?

well, first off, i miss the "having gotten very close to getting raped" option too.

anyhow. very far from excusing any sex offenders, and/or blaming responsibility for the very act itself, i *do*, under certain circumstanes, blame the (future) victim for (unnecessarily) creating situations which make a rape much more probable than other situations.

once again, this does not apply to all, maybe not even many, rape situations, and it does not shift the blame of the rape itself to the girl, nor does it excuse the rape. all it basically is is an appeal to be careful.

oh, and the explanation why i took that middle option.

very far from excusing any sex offenders, and/or blaming responsibility for the very act itself, i *do*, under certain circumstanes, blame the (future) victim for (unnecessarily) creating situations which make a rape much more probable than other situations.


I understand that people aren't perfect, that we are all susceptible to temptation, etc... but, fact remains, that unless we're under extreme duress, we still hold ownership over our actions. One person who rapes another does so out of their own will and nothing more; that person is wholly responsible for taking action, and regardless of what 'situational' encouragement they might have to act, they are solely responsible for what they do. No blame, as far as I'm concerned, can possibly be passed off to victims.

I'll agree, sure, there are certain situations where the possibility for rape occurring is higher, and people ought to avoid getting into those situations where and when they can, but by no means does that excuse the rapist of the responsibility in the choice that they make to rape the other person.

If you're careless, and end up in one of those potentially horrible situations that could have been avoided, that's very unfortunate. They are only -potentially- horrible, though; the responsibility for actualizing this potential lays with the Rapist.

So I completely agree with Ashmoria, Revasser, etc.

People shouldn't be blamed for being raped. Being raped hardly is "deserved" for wearing a miniskirt or whatever, and while being drunk is stupid, it's something that men are allowed to do - so blaming women for it is hypocritical.

EDIT: Fucked up my vote, only voted for one option.

As I've stated on here before, I despise anyone who abuses their relative strength to abuse someone weaker. This includes pedophiles, muggers and rapists. Any fool stoopid enough to molest any of the women in my family will get a vist from the "Four Horsemen of the Apocolypse:" My older son, my younger son, my son-in-law, and me! Mwahahahahahaha! :D

First of all, blaming anyone for anything is pointless. If someone is not able or willing to accept responsibility, stating that they must accept responsibility is futile.

Secondly, accepting responsibility is about empowerment, not finding fault. If a woman is being raped, it is in her best interest to accept responsibility for the situation and take action, e.g. talking her attacker out of the situation, fighting off the attacker, and failing those, pressing charges.

This is a principle that goes for all of life, not just rape. If one does not accept responsibility for their life, then one is going to constantly be at the mercy of the whims of others.

I do not think a victim of a rape should be blamed for a rape. I had a girlfriend once, that when you would play around would say "no". I would immediately stop and back away from her. She would get really really mad when I did that. In her own words "When I stay no, it means yes and you should keep doing it." Yeah, that never worked, but I can foresee some horny drunk guy not being able to differentiate between no and no.

That being said, in the eyes of the law especially, it should always be seen as 100% the rapists fault.

The only way it could be partially the victims fault would be if they conciously risked rape,eg by going through a part of town they know to be a 'rape hotspot'.But even in such situations the victim would surely have a good reason for risking rape,so they would only bear a miniscule amount of the blame,and no blame in the eyes of the law.

First of all, blaming anyone for anything is pointless. If someone is not able or willing to accept responsibility, stating that they must accept responsibility is futile.

Secondly, accepting responsibility is about empowerment, not finding fault. If a woman is being raped, it is in her best interest to accept responsibility for the situation and take action, e.g. talking her attacker out of the situation, fighting off the attacker, and failing those, pressing charges.

This is a principle that goes for all of life, not just rape. If one does not accept responsibility for their life, then one is going to constantly be at the mercy of the whims of others.
that doesnt make any sense.

blaming a rapist for rape has a point. the point is that he is a criminal and needs to go to jail. he has no choice but to accept responsiblity, its thrust on him by his jail sentence (if he is found and convicted)

wtf are you talking about "she needs to accept responsiblity for the situation". no woman in the midst of an assault says "well its all his fault so ill do nothing" she does what seems to her to be her best response at the time. that varies from situation to situation and woman to woman. "taking responsiblity" doesnt come into it.

we ARE at the mercy of the whims of others. if you come through the gate at my house in the middle of the night, my brother in law might just shoot you. your "responsibility" wont keep you from getting shot. that little bit is up to HIM not you.

did you not notice that a million people died in a tsunami for no fault but the whims of nature sending a huge wave to kill them? did you miss how a bunch of old people "taking responsibility for themselves" got burned up in a bus while trying to escape hurricane rita?

bad things happen to good people. its life.

Sampling errors mate. I know no-one that has been raped. We're either side of the mean, methinks. Unfortunately for you, I'm on the good side :(
Well, I know of two people who have been sexually assaulted and one that's been raped so...

All of them got off scott free too. It's really fucking frustrating knowing that those fucking bastards are still doing that and I can't do a thing to stop them.

The only way it could be partially the victims fault would be if they conciously risked rape,eg by going through a part of town they know to be a 'rape hotspot'.But even in such situations the victim would surely have a good reason for risking rape,so they would only bear a miniscule amount of the blame,and no blame in the eyes of the law.

That's the way I look at it, too.

are we assuming that all rapists are men and all rape victims are women?
Good point, already we are seeing from the poll that men do indeed get raped (although usually by other men).

First of all, blaming anyone for anything is pointless. If someone is not able or willing to accept responsibility, stating that they must accept responsibility is futile.

Secondly, accepting responsibility is about empowerment, not finding fault. If a woman is being raped, it is in her best interest to accept responsibility for the situation and take action, e.g. talking her attacker out of the situation, fighting off the attacker, and failing those, pressing charges.

This is a principle that goes for all of life, not just rape. If one does not accept responsibility for their life, then one is going to constantly be at the mercy of the whims of others.
I'd love to hear you answer the question of how a child is at fault when he/she is raped, as you claim that the victim always has partial responsibility in the poll.

I used the "was raped" option, although legally speaking I'm a Secondary Victim of rape, not a Primary Victim. This happened repeatedly throughout third grade, with my "best friend" of the time as the perpetrator.
Due to this experience, I began (and have not in any way finished) a project in which I'm researching about rape and then am going to report my findings on a website, hopefully with some form of PSA (Public Service Announcement) to get people to find it, since a ridiculously high amount of people (not represented here) often DO think it is the victim's fault, etc., and thereby bungle up the legal system. Since there was a question about statistics, etc., I'll provide a few pertinent ones here.

While there are "victims" who in fact are not victims and press lawsuits because they have serious psychological issues. Such a population is quite a bit less than 5%, however.

In 1970, 1 in 3 women in the US were rape victims. That statistic has been rising (meaning MORE than 1 in 3 women are now rape victims). Also, 1 in 5 men were rape victims, although I am unaware if that has been rising, declining, or remaining the same.

1 in 12 men are perpetrators. Most are people that you wouldn't think of as "the sort" because they are married, well-dressed, or whatever like that.

54% of rape victims report having been UNDER 18 the first time they were raped. (First time meaning the only time if they were raped once, and the first time if they were so unfortunate as to be raped more than once).

The most common forms of rape involve betrayal by someone that the victim trusted, eg. boy/girlfriend, family member, close friend, neighbor, etc., and then gang rape. The least likely involve absolute strangers alone. Furthermore, from most-to-least common: male-female, male-male, female-male, female-female (rapist-victim).

Finally, rape is about power, not sexual interest, so the entire "I couldn't help it, I was feeling horny/she was provoking me" defence is utter crap. This also makes the mini-skirt, etc., thing utter crap.

Hope this helped with any confusion. If you have any questions, please send me a telegram; I'll be happy to answer!

**Also, I'm female, but I didn't put that in the poll because I got confused.

I used the "was raped" option, although legally speaking I'm a Secondary Victim of rape, not a Primary Victim. This happened repeatedly throughout third grade, with my "best friend" of the time as the perpetrator.

What's the difference between a primary and secondary victim?

The easiest way to explain the difference is to say that with a primary victim, the rape was physical, while with the secondary victim, it was verbal. Otherwise, it's pretty much identical. The psychological response is identical, and it is just as terrible, but there isn't anything that can legally be done about it. The victim has to get therapy and move on, like primary victims, but the victim cannot press charges. It's not a crime, unless there is a large age difference.

A primary victim was raped by any and all definitions. There were at least two people, one of which was a rapist. There was most definitely sex involved.

A secondary victim was not raped quite like that. In many ways, it is worse, because there IS NOTHING that the victim can do about it legally. What happens is that a primary victim will describe his/her rape to the secondary victim with so much detail that the secondary victim ALSO lives the experience. Unlike a primary victim describing the experience to someone to get help or receive therapy or whatever, this is done with malicious intent. The intent is to hurt the secondary victim. In my case, a "game" was used, in which part of it was acted out. I was given no choice in what happened in the game, nor was I allowed to leave. It was, again, a power play. It was just verbal instead of physical.

The easiest way to explain the difference is to say that with a primary victim, the rape was physical, while with the secondary victim, it was verbal. Otherwise, it's pretty much identical.

A primary victim was raped by any and all definitions. There were at least two people, one of which was a rapist. There was most definitely sex involved.

A secondary victim was not raped quite like that. In many ways, it is worse, because there IS NOTHING that the victim can do about it legally. What happens is that a primary victim will describe his/her rape to the secondary victim with so much detail that the secondary victim ALSO lives the experience. Unlike a primary victim describing the experience to someone to get help or receive therapy or whatever, this is done with malicious intent. The intent is to hurt the secondary victim. In my case, a "game" was used, in which part of it was acted out. I was given no choice in what happened in the game, nor was I allowed to leave. It was, again, a power play. It was just verbal instead of physical.


Interesting.I've never heard those terms before.


By the way,I hate that book;)

The easiest way to explain the difference is to say that with a primary victim, the rape was physical, while with the secondary victim, it was verbal. Otherwise, it's pretty much identical. The psychological response is identical, and it is just as terrible, but there isn't anything that can legally be done about it. The victim has to get therapy and move on, like primary victims, but the victim cannot press charges. It's not a crime, unless there is a large age difference.

A primary victim was raped by any and all definitions. There were at least two people, one of which was a rapist. There was most definitely sex involved.

A secondary victim was not raped quite like that. In many ways, it is worse, because there IS NOTHING that the victim can do about it legally. What happens is that a primary victim will describe his/her rape to the secondary victim with so much detail that the secondary victim ALSO lives the experience. Unlike a primary victim describing the experience to someone to get help or receive therapy or whatever, this is done with malicious intent. The intent is to hurt the secondary victim. In my case, a "game" was used, in which part of it was acted out. I was given no choice in what happened in the game, nor was I allowed to leave. It was, again, a power play. It was just verbal instead of physical.

*shudder*

i can see where that would really mess with your head. did it take a long time to find a therapist who understood what happened to you?

I think women generally get raped more often because it's easier for a woman to seduce a man than vice versa. It becomes an easier way for a guy. Of course, most guys are idiots when it comes to women. That's a prejudice I've got to live with. >.>

Unless you do research on the subject, you shouldn't be surprised. It really doesn't come up elsewhere. Ever.
If you DO research on the subject, however, then I'll be surprised for you! Although, perhaps I have quite a bit of interest in that term since it accurately describes what I am. Meh.

**As for finding the therapist, no. I had a referral from a friend for a VERY GOOD therapist. INCREDIBLY good. She does not need to go through, or even fully understand, the exact circumstance to understand what it's like to go through crappy circumstances. Plus, she probably did research once she learned what my problem was, and since I told her at the beginning, she would have been able to understand long before she needed to start her part of therapy. The first part is just letting me rant and explain what happened. It took a few sessions before she had to start responding.

In the other thread there were many good metaphors for why overwhelming desire is not justification for taking something that belongs to someone else against their will.

Just because you want it does not entitle you to steal it.

So even if you might think that rape has anything to do with sexual desire, the fact that one desires to have sex with someone (even if that someone is provoking that desire) does not grant permission to do it.

If someone is saying something or looking a certain way that makes you want to smash their face in, it is still up to you whether you act on that.

So the victim may be the cause of the feelings, but is never in any way responsible for that person's choice of behavior.

Im a female, and i have been raped. I was not dressed provocatively, I was not flirting, I took all the precautions I thought were necessary for my safety. Rape is not a sexual crime, but a crime of violence.

I think women generally get raped more often because it's easier for a woman to seduce a man than vice versa. It becomes an easier way for a guy. Of course, most guys are idiots when it comes to women. That's a prejudice I've got to live with. >.>

Actually, it's a few factors, none of which have to do with that. As previously stated, rape has nothing to do with sexual desire, so your theory inherently doesn't work. As said, it's a crime of violence (and it's due to a need to dominate/feel power, actually). So:

Sex is, of course, just the weapon in the crime. Similar crimes occur where the weapon is different, including murder with the weapon being a knife or a gun, etc.
Women generally try to get power through verbal means (social games, etc.,) and are also more social on a whole than men, hence why rape isn't so perpetrated by women.
Men, initially, generally try to get power through physical means (although many reroute that into business or politics), so rape is more oriented towards the male "way of doing things," as it were.
Finally, due to gender-schemas, men feel a much higher need than women to be powerful. Think about it; throughout history, it's always been the powerful man vs. the demurr woman when it came to gender-schemas. So, men on a whole will go farther to try to feel powerful.

(Doesn't that just make you hate society and its gender-schemas?)

I'd love to hear you answer the question of how a child is at fault when he/she is raped, as you claim that the victim always has partial responsibility in the poll.

Well, I can't answer that one because, as I had stated earlier, assigning blame is pointless. What makes rape such an insidious crime is that it is not a matter of a single incident as much as it can be a life-altering event. It may be many years before a child can mature enough to comprehend what has happened, but once that comprehension takes place, it is in their best interest to accept responsibility and take action, e.g. seeking counseling, pressing charges (assuming none have been pressed already), etc.

People don't "deserve" to be raped anymore than one deserves to have their house washed away in a hurricane. However, it is in a person's best interest to accept responsibility for both. A shattered house is not going to rebuild itself because it's the hurricane's fault and a shattered life is not going to fix itself because it a rapist's fault.

Well, I can't answer that one because, as I had stated earlier, assigning blame is pointless. What makes rape such an insidious crime is that it is not a matter of a single incident as much as it can be a life-altering event. It may be many years before a child can mature enough to comprehend what has happened, but once that comprehension takes place, it is in their best interest to accept responsibility and take action, e.g. seeking counseling, pressing charges (assuming none have been pressed already), etc.

People don't "deserve" to be raped anymore than one deserves to have their house washed away in a hurricane. However, it is in a person's best interest to accept responsibility for both. A shattered house is not going to rebuild itself because it's the hurricane's fault and a shattered life is not going to fix itself because it a rapist's fault.
How the hell is "accepting responsibility" going on for the victim by seeking counseling or pressing charges? That's called addressing the issue, not taking responsibility for it.

And how do you "accept responsibility" for hurricane damage to your house? Again, you're addressing the problem, you're not saying "I am partially to blame for my house being 20 feet underwater." I think your definition of accepting responsibility is highly flawed.

I think there's a considerable difference between precautions taken and responsibility.

For instance; Do I believe there are behaviors, attitudes and environments that a woman can avoid that would put her at greater risk of being raped? Yes. I think so. However, this does NOT equate to blame. The rapist is to blame. Period.

I would say that it is the fault of the rape victim for being rape if and only if they say to someone "Please rape me." Then it's their fault for getting raped. But only then.

I would say that it is the fault of the rape victim for being rape if and only if they say to someone "Please rape me." Then it's their fault for getting raped. But only then.

Consentual Rape? :p

Consentual Rape? :p

I think it's the extreme example of the "miniskirt" argument that a woman brings it on herself with her actions. Some would say that a woman should accept responsibility for enticing a man into raping her with her clothing or her words or her actions, and I would tend to agree only in the example I previously provided. If a woman asks explicitly to be raped, then I would say she's at least partially responsible.

Or maybe I'm just crazy.

How the hell is "accepting responsibility" going on for the victim by seeking counseling or pressing charges? That's called addressing the issue, not taking responsibility for it.

And how do you "accept responsibility" for hurricane damage to your house? Again, you're addressing the problem, you're not saying "I am partially to blame for my house being 20 feet underwater." I think your definition of accepting responsibility is highly flawed.
I agree that there are semantic issues that make this discussion difficult. Much in the same way that I do not acknowledge "blame" and "fault", I do not acknowledge "regret" or "remorse" either. Things happen and wishing they had not happened or thinking "if I had only done x instead" is not going to make things unhappen. These are forms of mental massochism. The sooner one stops entertaining such thoughts, the sooner one can get on with life.

I do think that "addressing the issue" and "accepting responsibility" are describing the same thing in this case. If it would help make things clearer, I can use your terminology instead.

I agree that there are semantic issues that make this discussion difficult. Much in the same way that I do not acknowledge "blame" and "fault", I do not acknowledge "regret" or "remorse" either. Things happen and wishing they had not happened or thinking "if I had only done x instead" is not going to make things unhappen. These are forms of mental massochism. The sooner one stops entertaining such thoughts, the sooner one can get on with life.

I do think that "addressing the issue" and "accepting responsibility" are describing the same thing in this case. If it would help make things clearer, I can use your terminology instead.
please do change your terminology

taking responsibilty means you are responsible for something happening not for cleaning it up afterwards. your sloppy language is causing people to think you must be some kind of nut.

Sampling errors mate. I know no-one that has been raped. We're either side of the mean, methinks. Unfortunately for you, I'm on the good side :(

Seems that way. I've never put much stack into statistics, anyway.

No so much unfortunatly for me, as unfortunatly for my friends....

As I've stated on here before, I despise anyone who abuses their relative strength to abuse someone weaker. This includes pedophiles, muggers and rapists. Any fool stoopid enough to molest any of the women in my family will get a vist from the "Four Horsemen of the Apocolypse:" My older son, my younger son, my son-in-law, and me! Mwahahahahahaha! :D

Right on! Why press charges and have them arrested when you could beat the shit out of the criten, then press charges and have them arrested?

Well, I know of two people who have been sexually assaulted and one that's been raped so...

All of them got off scott free too. It's really fucking frustrating knowing that those fucking bastards are still doing that and I can't do a thing to stop them.

Yea, I know what you mean. If I knew who these guys were, or if the one I knew still lived here, I'd give the shitbags what they deserved. Heavy blunt objects repeatedly, at high speed, and the toes of my boots. No one should get away with that.

please do change your terminology

taking responsibilty means you are responsible for something happening not for cleaning it up afterwards. your sloppy language is causing people to think you must be some kind of nut.

I blame the sloppiness of the topic, but I will address the situation;)

The most precise way I can think to define the primary issue is "Can women be charged with contributory negligence in cases of rape?" No. Of course the people chastizing women for poor judgement weren't there at the time, so there's no telling if their interpretation of the situation would have produced different results, much in the same way this discussion will not produce different results in a court of law.

"Since the woman is not the criminal in a rape case, it must be the man who's guilty." No. Rape is a subjective crime and it is entirely up to the person who can press charges as to wether a crime was committed. It's like the difference between "theft" and "borrowing without permission". What makes one a crime and the other not is the matter of consent. In cases where consent was never granted or consent was withdrawn, it would be theft. If it can be shown that the defendant had consent at some point, was not notified of consent being withdrawn, and a reasonable person would come to the same conclusion, then they would be found not guilty.

One other point of distinction to make in an effort to clean up the sloppiness of the language, "not guilty" and "innocent" are two different things and I am not implying that the defendant in the aformentioned case is innocent.

Who should address the situation? Both. For men, dragging a woman off to a broom closet and ripping her clothes off may be exciting, but things may happen so fast that it may be all over before one realizes consent was never granted. For women, understand who you are dealing with. Men are aware of their own emotions and not much else. Men respect authority and decency in public, but in private, all bets are off. Throw alcohol into the mix and there may be no recollection of wether consent was granted or withdrawn. Failure to address the situation may not have any impact on wether a woman can press charges and obtain a conviction, but it is not going to make her any less raped.

What of the 'third person' in many sex crimes?

I don't refer to a third actual person, but to either drug influence (including alcohol) or mental illness.

Do we blame the individual, or are there circumstances wherein a certain degree of understanding is meritous?

I know several victims of such crimes. No, actually, about a dozen. Of that dozen, one said that they feel that the 'third person' part is sometimes quite critical - people do things while under an influence of some sort that they wouldn't usually do. So, what do you all think? :)

Personally, I'd rather not actually voice my opinion yet, since it isn't fully formed on that particular facet yet.

But in general, no, I do not believe any blame should be attributed to the victim. To say that it should is to suggest that sex crimes are in some manner acceptable, and that is far too slippery a slope to attempt to slalom.

One last point to consider. It is not only women who are forced into sexual acts without preconsent.

My ex-gf got raped on new years eve. It was most definetly not her fault.. A serial rapist attacked her.

Men are aware of their own emotions and not much else. Men respect authority and decency in public, but in private, all bets are off. Throw alcohol into the mix and there may be no recollection of wether consent was granted or withdrawn.
Jesus, you have a pretty low opinion of men! That's a damn broad brush to paint half the world with.

Ah, the topic of sexual abuse. Let me give you my perspective. Sexual abuse was so common when I was a kid, that I was hyper-aware of it for as far back as I can remember. That hyper-awareness kept me safe, but it also prevented me from being trusting. I viewed all adults with suspicion, and most kids too, because quite often it was older brothers, sisters, or cousins doing the abusing, after they had been abused. What this meant was, I didn't like hugging my brothers. I would never sit in my dad's lap. They probably still don't understand why...none of them are even remotely abusive. But that fear was always with me. The one time I couldn't escape a situation, I attacked a boy eleven years older than me with a baseball bat that I pulled out of the closet he had me in. But I never told anyone why I did it, and they thought I was a bit nuts for a while. Boy, they sure figured things out quick five years later when his sister admitted he'd been raping her. Fucking bastard.

No, it's not just women that get abused, and it's not just men doing the abusing. Kids, victims and perpetrators, often get forgotten about unless the crime is particularly violent or sensational. But in the community I was raised in, child abuse was the most common, and untalked about crime. Living up in the NWT for three years was like stepping back in time. I had students in grade 5 who wanted to be prostitutes, because they already 'knew all there was to know about sex, and might as well make some money off it'. Sexual abuse is about power, which is why I think so many victims become perpetrators of it...they want that power back. So is the offender always completely to blame? Sometimes they're just doing what they know. That doesn't cleanse them of blame, no, nor does it assign any blame to the victim...but the more prevalent sexual abuse is not stranger-rape...it's molestation by people you know, and it's a vicious cycle.

The victim is NEVER to blame. But what do we do about the victims who become offenders?

A little addition to this story...about the boy I hit with a bat...we found out years after things blew up with his sister, that his uncle had been abusing him since he was 5. Now I wonder...who abused the uncle? And where does it end?

Ah, the topic of sexual abuse. Let me give you my perspective. Sexual abuse was so common when I was a kid, that I was hyper-aware of it for as far back as I can remember. That hyper-awareness kept me safe, but it also prevented me from being trusting. I viewed all adults with suspicion, and most kids too, because quite often it was older brothers, sisters, or cousins doing the abusing, after they had been abused. What this meant was, I didn't like hugging my brothers. I would never sit in my dad's lap. They probably still don't understand why...none of them are even remotely abusive. But that fear was always with me. The one time I couldn't escape a situation, I attacked a boy eleven years older than me with a baseball bat that I pulled out of the closet he had me in. But I never told anyone why I did it, and they thought I was a bit nuts for a while. Boy, they sure figured things out quick five years later when his sister admitted he'd been raping her. Fucking bastard.

No, it's not just women that get abused, and it's not just men doing the abusing. Kids, victims and perpetrators, often get forgotten about unless the crime is particularly violent or sensational. But in the community I was raised in, child abuse was the most common, and untalked about crime. Living up in the NWT for three years was like stepping back in time. I had students in grade 5 who wanted to be prostitutes, because they already 'knew all there was to know about sex, and might as well make some money off it'. Sexual abuse is about power, which is why I think so many victims become perpetrators of it...they want that power back. So is the offender always completely to blame? Sometimes they're just doing what they know. That doesn't cleanse them of blame, no, nor does it assign any blame to the victim...but the more prevalent sexual abuse is not stranger-rape...it's molestation by people you know, and it's a vicious cycle.

The victim is NEVER to blame. But what do we do about the victims who become offenders?

A little addition to this story...about the boy I hit with a bat...we found out years after things blew up with his sister, that his uncle had been abusing him since he was 5. Now I wonder...who abused the uncle? And where does it end?

Here, here. Absolutely. The person taking the action is almost always ignored, but then, since so many people have been abused and abused others in turn, that would mean alot of people would have to look at themselves, rather than at The Other.

Which is never comfortable, now, is it?

13/105 people have voted being raped on that poll? :confused: Never expected the figure to be that high. That is more than 10%, assuming they are all truthful.

EM, I note that of the 106 people who have voted (as of the time of the writing of this post), only 53 have answered a definite 'yes' or 'no' to that particular question. So in fact, it's 13 out of 53 - or slightly less than 25%.

(For those who like super-accuracy, 24.528301886792452830188679245283%. >.>)

A very high number indeed.

I was raped. I have spent years saying I was assaulted, attacked, molested...anything but saying the word "rape". I was raped by a young man who I accepted as a peer to my children. I did not present myself as a sexual object, I did not put myself in a provocative situation, and I never intimated that I was anything other than a loving wife. I believe that some women encourage sexual aggression by their demeanor. But, on the other hand, if the lady says "No" then, even if she is a card carrying prostitute, tuck it away guys or else it is rape.

Exactly. No means no.

while there are some bizarre cases out there that makes me shake my head, i dont use those to excuse the rapists responsibility in rape. it is 100% the perpetrators responsibility 100% of the time.

Amen.

Why would anyone disagree?

Heh, who knows? If it can be proven that the perpetrator is indeed truly a perpetrator (ie that they forced themself upon an unwilling victim), then I see no reason why they should not be held 100% accountable. Since when is a justice system about protecting criminals (even if this is what it does very often)?

Since when is a justice system about protecting criminals (even if this is what it does very often)?
If we don't protect the rights of criminals and ensure they get a fair trial, then we become criminals ourselves.

I meant protecting criminals we know should pe prosecuted, beyond the point that their innocence is presumable.

If we don't protect the rights of criminals and ensure they get a fair trial, then we become criminals ourselves.

agreed.

but the assumption of the question is that a rape has actually occurred and their is a guilty perpetrator

Which would be beyond the point that their innocence is presumable ;)

the problem is that unless the woman has the sight of mind to immediately go to the emergency room and recieve a rapetestkit, or there is a witness, or the man confesses, it is a he-said-she-said kind of case, completely circumstantial. the majority of rapes are not reported, and of those who are, only a handful are taken to court, and again, a smaller precentage result in conviction. the fact that justice is so rarely served causes many women to not put themselves through the process, which is often seemed as very shaming because her entire sex history is made a thing of public record and the blame is put on her shoulders. this perpetuates the idea that there is something to be ashamed about when it comes to rape, and women internalize the idea of guilt, blame, and shame.

These issues do indeed need redressing, and I hope they receive it one day.

Heh, who knows? If it can be proven that the perpetrator is indeed truly a perpetrator (ie that they forced themself upon an unwilling victim), then I see no reason why they should not be held 100% accountable. Since when is a justice system about protecting criminals (even if this is what it does very often)?

Actually, technically, a justice system which is seen as protecting a criminal usually does not protect the criminal, but rather the innocent. Once conviction is gained, virtually all protection ceases beyond the minimum required (ie, protection from the press - in some places).

It is never the fault of a victim that they become a victim. It is the fault of the perpetrator.

the problem is that unless the woman has the sight of mind to immediately go to the emergency room and recieve a rapetestkit, or there is a witness, or the man confesses, it is a he-said-she-said kind of case, completely circumstantial. the majority of rapes are not reported, and of those who are, only a handful are taken to court, and again, a smaller precentage result in conviction. the fact that justice is so rarely served causes many women to not put themselves through the process, which is often seemed as very shaming because her entire sex history is made a thing of public record and the blame is put on her shoulders. this perpetuates the idea that there is something to be ashamed about when it comes to rape, and women internalize the idea of guilt, blame, and shame.

Well said.

Sadly, only one in 100 victims of forcible rape sees her attacker sent to prison.

Well said.

Sadly, only one in 100 victims of forcible rape sees her attacker sent to prison.

That's....just aweful.

Any time you use the word "never", you are bound to be wrong. There are always exceptions, so it's stupid to use such absolute language. Therefore I said I could attribute partial responsiblity to the victim in some cases though none come to mind at the moment.