Is the raped also responsible for the act of rape?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

I don't buy into the notion of the negation of free will one iota. This is the same argument (different scenario) as we had concerning whether Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust. It is the same used by Liberal extremists (and I say this as someone who largely embraces Liberal ideals) to excuse the guilt of the robber or murder who had a tough childhood. Certainly the woman who walks naked down a back alley (or dresses in an excessively provocative manner, acts in an excessively flirtatious manner, and gets drunk at a party) is inviting trouble no less than a man walking down the street flashing a wad of cash and a lot of expensive jewelry in the bad side of town is inviting trouble.... but ultimately it is the rapist or the mugger... the one who crossed the line of legality... that is to be held responsible. I might be stupid for strutting through the "hood wearing an Amarni suit and flashing a wad of cash... but I didn't break any laws.

---

I wholeheartedly agree with this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonywalt

...Or if a man walked naked, let's not be sexist about this.

---

Thank you, Tony. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

I don't buy into the notion of the negation of free will one iota. This is the same argument (different scenario) as we had concerning whether Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust. It is the same used by Liberal extremists (and I say this as someone who largely embraces Liberal ideals) to excuse the guilt of the robber or murder who had a tough childhood. Certainly the woman who walks naked down a back alley (or dresses in an excessively provocative manner, acts in an excessively flirtatious manner, and gets drunk at a party) is inviting trouble no less than a man walking down the street flashing a wad of cash and a lot of expensive jewelry in the bad side of town is inviting trouble.... but ultimately it is the rapist or the mugger... the one who crossed the line of legality... that is to be held responsible. I might be stupid for strutting through the "hood wearing an Amarni suit and flashing a wad of cash... but I didn't break any laws.

---

I agree with this wholeheartedly with the exception of the section that I placed in bold, and the disagreement with that section is likely a matter of semantics rather than a true disagreement. (I doubt you really meant to argue that robbing or raping someone is wrong just because it breaks a law, rather than causing unnecessary harm to another person, as that statement implies.)


EDIT: I don't intend to get into an argument over the existence of free will here (primarily because a serious debate on the subject would require extensive knowledge of neurology and leave most of us, myself included, out of our depth), but even if we were to assume that the theoretical rapist or thief had no choice in the matter as a result of genetics and environmental conditions, it does not have a practical effect on the end result: The person has still caused serious harm to another person without just cause, may cause serious harm again in the future, and thus needs to be removed from general society to prevent further harm. (Please note that I'm intentionally making this argument without diving into the issue of punishing the person to make the victim feel better, because that's a much more sticky subject with a pretty large grey area.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

I don't buy into the notion of the negation of free will one iota. This is the same argument (different scenario) as we had concerning whether Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust. It is the same used by Liberal extremists (and I say this as someone who largely embraces Liberal ideals) to excuse the guilt of the robber or murder who had a tough childhood. Certainly the woman who walks naked down a back alley (or dresses in an excessively provocative manner, acts in an excessively flirtatious manner, and gets drunk at a party) is inviting trouble no less than a man walking down the street flashing a wad of cash and a lot of expensive jewelry in the bad side of town is inviting trouble.... but ultimately it is the rapist or the mugger... the one who crossed the line of legality... that is to be held responsible. I might be stupid for strutting through the "hood wearing an Amarni suit and flashing a wad of cash... but I didn't break any laws.

---

Exactly. While you have an obligation to behave in a manner appropriate to the situation if you don't wish to draw unwanted attention to yourself, you are in no way responsible for bringing violence upon yourself if you have not broken any laws.

In private of course you have to look at how you behave and interact with others and the results of such behavior-is it getting you the results you want? But that doesn't seem to be what you are asking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamCrackers

The impetus is with the aggressor. Sexual predators like what they like. To them, the woman, the panties, the leather boots, didn't the Red Dragon see a 'shine' on the women that attracted him to go attack them? It is all colors of crazy. Crazy people see auras that they can't resist. Blaming the victim is outrageous. Crazy sex perverts sometimes stalk people. I don't blame their victims for being too shiny.

---

I couldn't have wrote it better myself.

Actually, there was a story in the news a few months ago about a group of women who decided to parade downtown, it was either naked or scantily clad bikinis, trying to make some kind of 'statement' against rape. Patrolling to protect other women, or some such nonsense. Utter foolishness, and fruitless, in my opinion.

Just because we can wear what we like, doesn't mean we necessarily should. Especially at certain times of day. It's common sense. Sadly, a woman must either have an escort, if she wishes to dress down, or she must dress more modestly.

Dressing scantily, and walking alone in the dark doesn't put the responsibility of rape upon the victim. Never. But, it is foolish, as someone else said.

Yeah -- the raped is not responsible for the crime. The rapist is for pretty much all of the reasons here. At best you could accuse the hypothetical victims here of acting foolishly, but they committed no crime. Just as, if I were to leave my wallet or credit card on my desk at school and later find that it was taken. I could rightly be accused of foolishness, but I played no part in the theft.

I'm not going to say that victim-blaming is as bad as rape...However, I'd say that it ranks pretty high on the list of absolutely abhorrent and unacceptable things for civilized people to do.

When you think about it, it comes across as less of a negation of free-will, and more an extreme reading of free-will. It posits that "You should know better, and you made a certain decision, so you're responsible for anything that happens to you." And it's wrong. Very, very, very wrong. I had a friend who got attacked a few months ago...Thankfully, she got away. But everyone around her felt perfectly comfortable saying that if she didn't want to be attacked, she shouldn't have walked around by herself at night. At that moment, those people all sunk as low in my estimation as the attackers.

There are terrible people out there, and we should be aware of that and be careful. But, I will always believe that human beings have the right to walk around wherever they want however they want without having to fear for their safety. In America, we believe in the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and along with that comes the responsibility not to violate anyone else's basic rights. Sadly, it's still deeply ingrained in our society that we should have to yield to terrible people, and we're responsible for everything that happens to us...Maybe if that idea were done away with, less people would get the idea that "Hey, if she didn't want me to forcibly insert myself into her, than she wouldn't have dressed like that."

These terrible bastards need to learn that their desires are less important than the rights of other human beings. Not the other way around. Have you ever looked at a woman in revealing clothing, and suddenly felt like she deserved to be mounted right then and there whether she likes it or not? I hope not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BookBeauty

Just because we can wear what we like, doesn't mean we necessarily should. Especially at certain times of day. It's common sense. Sadly, a woman must either have an escort, if she wishes to dress down, or she must dress more modestly.

Dressing scantily, and walking alone in the dark doesn't put the responsibility of rape upon the victim. Never. But, it is foolish, as someone else said.

---

I think the problem with locating this debate on the idea of women walking around scantily clad is that it ignores the reality of how and when rapes occur. Most cases of rape involve men the women know. The masked attacker in the park is relatively rare occurrence.

There are disabled girls, boys, women, and men who are bedridden, mentally unstable, and physically deformed. They are not sexually inviting, yet they can be victims of rape as many cases will show. This makes me believe that rape is an issue of two powers: the power of lust over its victim, the rapist, and the power of the lustful over his/her victim, the raped. I cannot blame the raped although I can accept that the rapist is a victim too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OrphanPip

I think the problem with locating this debate on the idea of women walking around scantily clad is that it ignores the reality of how and when rapes occur. Most cases of rape involve men the women know. The masked attacker in the park is relatively rare occurrence.

---

To go off of this idea, I think there's a general misinformation that the majority of rapes are about unbridled lust/attraction. I would put forth that a great many are about control, anger, and dominance.

Therefore it would not be a matter of a woman (or man) dressing provocatively and therefore "asking" for it, as the original poster seems to insinuate.

Rape is a violation and ultimately a violent act... it's not about the kind of passion or lust that dressing or acting provocatively could engender.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Varenne Rodin

Thank you, Tony. :)

---

And I might add that I have walked naked down many alleyways, without so much as even a whistle. Weirdly disappointing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desolation

I'm not going to say that victim-blaming is as bad as rape...However, I'd say that it ranks pretty high on the list of absolutely abhorrent and unacceptable things for civilized people to do.

When you think about it, it comes across as less of a negation of free-will, and more an extreme reading of free-will. It posits that "You should know better, and you made a certain decision, so you're responsible for anything that happens to you." And it's wrong. Very, very, very wrong. I had a friend who got attacked a few months ago...Thankfully, she got away. But everyone around her felt perfectly comfortable saying that if she didn't want to be attacked, she shouldn't have walked around by herself at night. At that moment, those people all sunk as low in my estimation as the attackers.

There are terrible people out there, and we should be aware of that and be careful. But, I will always believe that human beings have the right to walk around wherever they want however they want without having to fear for their safety. In America, we believe in the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, and along with that comes the responsibility not to violate anyone else's basic rights. Sadly, it's still deeply ingrained in our society that we should have to yield to terrible people, and we're responsible for everything that happens to us...Maybe if that idea were done away with, less people would get the idea that "Hey, if she didn't want me to forcibly insert myself into her, than she wouldn't have dressed like that."

These terrible bastards need to learn that their desires are less important than the rights of other human beings. Not the other way around. Have you ever looked at a woman in revealing clothing, and suddenly felt like she deserved to be mounted right then and there whether she likes it or not? I hope not.

---

Hear, hear!

There is of course a solid and correct concensus about this issue by westerners here. I wonder where Osho comes from? I remember this argument playing out years ago in the UK - it must have been the 70s or 80s - but no-one would now even ask the question, and it seems grotesque to do so.

I wonder what the situation is like in the East and whether they are raising the same debates. Perhaps it's to do with the status and rights of women where Osho comes from.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Easter

Rape is a violation and ultimately a violent act... it's not about the kind of passion or lust that dressing or acting provocatively could engender.

---

This is probably the most important point: Rape is an act of violence, period. Sex is the tool, just as a gun is the tool in a shooting. The victim's state of dress/manner of walk/style of dancing is nothing more in the end than an excuse by a coward, as all bullies are at their core.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paulclem

There is of course a solid and correct concensus about this issue by westerners here. I wonder where Osho comes from? I remember this argument playing out years ago in the UK - it must have been the 70s or 80s - but no-one would now even ask the question, and it seems grotesque to do so.

I wonder what the situation is like in the East and whether they are raising the same debates. Perhaps it's to do with the status and rights of women where Osho comes from.

---

This is currently a very burning issue in Indian society. A month or so ago a woman was raped in a moving car and when she lodged a report about it the Chief Minister of that state who happens to be a woman too alleged that it was only a plot to malign her government. This is the kind of mentality which Indian women are facing and unfortunately some women upheld the idea that a rape victim is responsible for the rape.
Rape has nothing to do with dressing provocatively. Women dressed in sari and salwar suit with long dupattas are targeted every day. A few years ago a woman was thrown from a local train 'cause she resisted the criminals. This issue was hotly discussed back then in Indian media. I don't know what happened to those criminals. As for the woman whom I mentioned earlier, she was helped by a responsible female police officer who was later punished for her kindness by being transferred to some paper pushing job.
As some others said here the rape victim can be foolish or careless but never ever responsible for the crime. Holding them as co-criminals may be possible by the same logic which the wolf used to eat the lamb in a fable we all read as kids. When a society fails to redress a social evil it tries to use such logic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonywalt

And I might add that I have walked naked down many alleyways, without so much as even a whistle. Weirdly disappointing.

---

Poor, poor Tony! :biggrin5: