Majority of women blame victims for rape

From http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/16/2820499.htm">ABC

"More than half (54 per cent) of women questioned in a survey thought rape victims should in some cases bear responsibility for their attack.

One in eight thought that dancing provocatively, flirtatious behaviour, or wearing revealing clothing made them partly to blame.

More women than men also thought that dressing sexily made the victim accountable for the assault.

The online poll of 1,061 men and women in London, called Wake Up To Rape, was carried out for Haven, which runs three sexual assault referral centres in the capital.

A fifth of the women said the victim was partly responsible if they went back to the assailant's house and a 10th said taking a drink from a stranger had unforeseen consequences.

Twenty per cent of women surveyed said they would not report a rape to police, with half of those citing shame or embarrassment as a reason.

Experts said the findings supported anecdotal evidence that a prevalent "blame culture" among women stopped them coming forward.

"Unfortunately, women have bought into the idea that sometimes the rape victim is to blame. Under no circumstances is a woman at fault for being raped," said Dr Jan Welch, clinical director at one of the Haven centres.

My comment: How cruel are these ladies. Men have to learn hold their hormones and when a woman says "no, it means "no".

Any stories that get their data from an online poll are not worth reading.

But I think there is something to be considered if that 54% figure is off even by a factor of two or three or four. That could be as many as 1 in 6 women who think that getting raped is partially their own fault. It's very disturbing to me, with three pre-teen granddaughters, that any of them might acquire that attitude.

EDITED to conform with the actual statistic, which I misremembered at first.

and a need to think there is some amount of control they have... the need to think that if they are just careful enough, and if they act the right way, it won't happen to them.

Just thinking out loud...

I suspect many women like to think that if they don't act in what they consider a provocative manner then they will not be raped.

I had a conversation with my neighbours not that long ago.
and yes, the talk about 'short skirts' and crap was brought up and I was this close to clocking them.

but was no point in pointing things out because the stupid was so thick with yelling and crap. I was nauseated.

they have 2 boys tho, so I suppose they are thinking 'what ifs' or something in their tiny little throwback brains. I dunno.

wouldn't listen to anything. nothing about rape being a violent act, not a sex act. nothing about how about very young children and older women that don't wear 'short skirts'.

This is way too serious a subject for me to rant too long about this pet peeve of mine, but the fact that a scientific poll is conducted using the Internet doesn't render it un-scientific.

I didn't check out the details, and just replied with my first reaction.
I hate it when people do that.

here would suggest.

The sad fact is that some women internalize sexist opinion. This is not unknown to researchers. Victims can often internalize their victimization as their fault. It is well known. Women who blame other women for their rapes are in a society that demeans them as women. In response, these women side with their oppressors in a sort of "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" mentality.
Women do female circumcisions in Africa. They probably feel they have no choice...

were not actually female.

Online polls are about as useful as electric football bats.

saying "she goes rollerblading around the neighborhood in these skimpy outfits. She's just asking to get raped when she wears that kind of stuff." I was pretty shocked by the statement and did step in to counter that it's a free country, she can wear whatever she damn well pleases, and NO ONE ever "asks" to be raped; rape is an act of violence, period.

http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/200608040004

Generally this "blame the victim" thing is a right-wing meme. x(

NO ONE ever "asks" to be raped; rape is an act of violence, period.

You're saying those two like they mean the same things.

I think three statements are true:

1. No one ever asks to be raped.
2. Rape is always an act of violence.
3. Rape is always a sexual act.

We agree on 1 and 2. You seem to say 3 somehow contradicts 1 and/or 2, and I don't get why.

because it isn't. It's an act of violence; an attempt by one human to dominate and humiliate another. You've misread my statement completely.

You seem to be implying that a violent act cannot be sexual, or that "sex" is always consensual, and I don't understand why.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

That's what made it "sexual" abuse.

maybe you thik you are.
but masterbating in someone against their will is not having sex.

is that clear enough?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Which is a lot easier to think about than the reality, which is that a woman's chance of being raped at some point in her life is shockingly high. And that there's not a lot she can do about it, really.

I feel a rant coming on, so I'm going to stop typing while I'm ahead.

Isn't the stat something like one in three women will be attacked in their lifetimes.

With sexual assault so common you think there would be a little more solidarity at least among women.

Would the majority say it was the victim's fault because of the way they walked, or which pocket they had their wallet in, or the fact that they carried money? Would the victims be blamed if they didn't say "No" loud enough or often enough and the robber took their wallet anyway?

Somehow I think that not one victimized man would think they were at fault. What's the difference?

I would love to see the results.

it would be my opinion it was partly your own doing, since drug dealers aren't the souls of honor. If I left my car unlocked, if I left my bike in my front yard - I'd say it was partly my own fault.

Not that I "deserved" to get robbed - but I put myself in a situation where I was easy to rob, for those who had the inclination.

I'd imagine some men would agree with me.

to one more of your liking. Congrats.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

drinking or buying drugs or location in the proposed question. That would naturally run the truck off the road and in many different directions.

Nevertheless, it happened. I am not interested in one thousand moral and high grounding views.

That, in itself, is a form of victim blaming and is just as immoral.

by labeling their behavior somehow provocative.

Took a class about victimization.

A lot of time was dedicated to whether or not crime as "victim precipitated"

An example of a man being blamed for being victimized.. a middle class male walking around a poor neighborhood dressed in a suit at night. People would say he was asking to get robbed.

That is, of course, as ridiculous as blaming a female for getting raped because of her outfit.
Actually, blaming the rape scenario on the victim would be more ridiculous, as rape often has nothing to do with "sex", hence an attractive outfit would be irrelevant.

issue is how would a jury react to that insinuation by the robber's defense attorney? Would the jury go ahead and acquit the defendant because, well, maybe the guy was asking for it? And if he didn't want to be robbed, what was he doing in a poor neighborhood at night? I think the jury would go ahead and convict anyway. In the case of rape, you don't know that.

People twist themselves into all kinds of knots to avoid blaming the rapist, I don't think that happens so much with the robber.

Thank you.

I think what looks like blaming the victim is more like identifying actions that they think will keep them safe if they avoid them. You know the drill:

Don't go outside at night. Stay in a group. Wear ugly clothing that a nun would likely wear. Don't go anywhere unescorted by a male you trust. Don't trust any males, they're all after one thing. Don't smile. Don't have long hair. Don't go to bars. Don't park more than 3 spaces away from an entrance. Make sure your hemline is far below your knees. Dress in subdued colors. Don't talk to strangers even if they just want to know what time it is. You can't have too many locks on your doors. Don't open the window no matter how hot it is in the summer. If you go out in the evening, don't eat or drink anything, it might be drugged. Don't wear makeup, don't look attractive, don't be fashionable.

The truth, of course, is that there is nothing we can do to avoid it. Every rape victim out there has had a perfect right to be where she was, dressed the way she was, doing whatever she was doing.

Stopping rape isn't up to us. It's up to men.

Looks, apparel, and behavior have nothing to do with it and the only ones who can stop it are men.

Rape Prevention Checklist:

If a woman is drunk, don't rape her.

If a woman is walking alone at night, don't rape her.

If a woman is drugged and unconscious, don't rape her.

If a woman is wearing a short skirt, don't rape her.

If a woman is jogging in a park at 5 am, don't rape her.

If a woman looks like your ex-girlfriend you're still hung up on, don't rape her.

If a woman is asleep in her bed, don't rape her.

If a woman is asleep in your bed, don't rape her.

If a woman is doing her laundry, don't rape her.

If a woman is in a coma, don't rape her.

If a woman changes her mind in the middle of or about a particular activity, don't rape her.

If a woman has repeatedly refused a certain activity, don't rape her.

If a woman is not yet a woman, but a child, don't rape her.

If your girlfriend or wife is not in the mood, don't rape her.

If your step-daughter is watching TV, don't rape her.

If you break into a house and find a woman there, don't rape her.

If your friend thinks it's okay to rape someone, tell him it's not, and that he's not your friend.

If your "friend" tells you he raped someone, report him to the police.

If your frat-brother or another guy at the party tells you there's an unconscious woman upstairs and it's your turn, don't rape her, call the police and tell the guy he's a rapist.

Tell your sons, god-sons, nephews, grandsons, sons of friends it's not okay to rape someone.

Don't tell your women friends how to be safe and avoid rape.

Don't imply that she could have avoided it if she'd only done/not done x.

Don't imply that it's in any way her fault.

Don't let silence imply agreement when someone tells you he "got some" with the drunk girl.

Don't perpetuate a culture that tells you that you have no control over or responsibility for your actions. You can, too, help yourself.

K&R your post :)

I just wish more men would read it.

It implies that rape is preventable by doing the 'right' things (or, more properly, by avoiding the 'wrong' things), and since there seems to be a human need to figure out "why couldn't this happen to me?" the answer comes from reflecting on one's training.

Makes as much sense as that dirty underwear emergency room triage our mothers taught us about.

Women don't come forward because they're ashamed or afraid of repercussions. Most women who've been raped don't even want to talk about it, much less have the whole world know about it. Rape does more psychological damage that lasts for years than physical damage in most cases.

I sat on a rape jury a number of years ago. There were five men and seven women on the jury and we were eventually hung. The men had determined that he was guilty, but most of the women thought that the victim had brought it on herself. We had been instructed not to bring outside bias to wards our decision. The women, however, ignored the instructions and made their opinions known. Rape is a criminal act, and as long as the women says no, any sex is rape in my opinion.

I recently read a "chick" novel in which the main character ends up becoming closer to her teenage son, from whom she's become estranged, when he's "falsely" accused of rape (or so says the book blurb) and she has to support him through the ordeal. Well, if you actually read the description of the scene in which he has sex with the girl who accuses him of rape...you discover that, well, it is RAPE. Both participants are drunk, but the attitude presented by the author is that somehow the boy could be expected to try to have sex with a drunk girl so what did she expect? Sure, it was bad judgment on his part, but somehow it's not "rape"...Also, at one point she seems to be coming on to him, but not right up to the point of the act. She also calls him by the name of another guy she DOES want to have sex with, so it's obvious she's not making a conscious decision to have it with this one. But he proceeds anyway--because he's tired of being a virgin, he thinks his friends expect it of him, and besides she's had sex with guys before so what's one more? And while he thinks about the fact that he has no condom, ultimately he goes ahead anyway because he figures that being as trampy as she is, she's on the pill (he doesn't consider the possibility of disease).

In the end, he doesn't go to trial because his victim recants and says she only accused him because of pressure from her parents--she doesn't want them to know how trampy she is.

I thought "This whole thing is set up so that we sympathize with the boy and his mother, and to get us to believe he didn't really rape the girl. But he DID."

Yet I'm probably the only one of the many female readers of this novel that saw things that way. The female author certainly didn't. She created sympathy for her female protagonist this way. And the irony is, there's another scene in the book in which an almost-rape takes place, and we're supposed to want the would-be victim to be saved. Yet she's had consensual sex with the man before, and that seems to be the reason he thinks raping her will be OK.

It just amazed me that a woman's novel could describe a rape in such a way as to claim it was not "really" a rape and advocate the viewpoint of the boy involved, and his mother, over that of the girl involved, using all the same old excuses: She was drunk, she was slutty, she acted like she wanted it, and he felt pressured to prove his manhood so you really can't blame him, and if she'd turned up pregnant it would have been her fault for not using birth control.

Just stunning.

"and besides she's had sex with guys before so what's one more? "

There's still a lot of stigma regarding women having uncommitted sex.

'In The Cut' by Susanna Moore. Lots of rape/is it rape? scenarios. It was quite unusual to see that sort of thing written by a woman. It was on a list of "ten sexiest books" somewhere at the time I looked it up...

(edit for typo)

While I don't know the specifics of this novel, your post somehow seems to indicate that.
I think not. I had sex with girlfriends while both of us where completely shitfaced. No one later suggested that this was rape.

Both participants are drunk, but the attitude presented by the author is that somehow the boy could be expected to try to have sex with a drunk girl so what did she expect?

Hm. Two people are too drunk to consent to having sex, but have sex anyways. Why is one a rapist?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

This is very sad.

but unfortunately not surprising

Because, let's face it, women have to think about the possibility that this could happen to them every day and trying to point to some reason why it happens is probably more of a coping mechanism than anything else.

Yet we live with this fear -- and it is a rational one, no matter how young or old we get to be. :-(

I remember being 10 years old and reading in the newspaper about a 12 y.o. girl who was raped and murdered in my town. What the hell had she ever done to "deserve" this? Almost a decade later when I was in college, a classmate and I (for reasons I don't remember now) almost simultaneously recalled her name: Joanne Y_____i. I think a lot of us remembered, and acted accordingly. We restricted our lives.

Hekate

6:00 p.m.

personally, I always saw that as a way of letting "them" win and there was certainly nothing stopping a rapist from coming into her home. But that's how she chose to deal with her fear.

I wasn't aware of it in that way until I read an article by a feminist about it somewhere in my 30s or 40s. Then I saw how deeply the cultural shaping had been internalized.

Hekate

A few years ago the results were similar. I'd like to know, though, what the ages and backrounds of the women are who responded this way. In the last poll, they broke down the ages for instance, and it was mostly the women in older age brackets who felt that way.

Men are far less tolerant of date-rapists than women are. Women are taught from a young age to be aware of personal security dangers. Since not doing what one is told is thought to be "fault," it follows that failure to follow safety "rules" makes one at fault for any injury resulting from it. Also, the whole "slut" stigma resonates more strongly with women than it does with men.

Men are not taught to be security-conscious (which is why most assault victims are men) and, therefore, usually assign little blame to the victim. Plus men know how men are and know that "being boys" is not uncontrollable behavior.

I'm speaking in generalities, of course.

"Men are far less tolerant of date-rapists than women are. "

I'm sure if the friends were complicit, they would cover for each other.

when alone and dark, walk confident, eyes forward, yada yada yada

for man, pretty simple. dont rape

for a woman, i didnt do this or that or this.

but my thought is... are they saying they think the woman is responsible for rape, or.... if only, then it would not have happened.

in the psychological scheme of things, and threat (as in number of rapes) of rape, people tend to shift blame so they can convince self they would be safe.

in other words... what could the victim have done to prevent the rape. and women need to have the hope that they can prevent it.

On a similar note, I think conservatives are into the whole blame the victim thing because it is a way of convincing themselves that if they do what they are supposed to do, nothing bad will ever happen.

I think there's a difference in blaming the victim and advocating an aggressive personal security posture.

That said, when I do bring it up, I always put it in the context of muggings rather than rape, because of precisely this can of worms. For whatever reasons, nobody seems to mind when I give men or women advice on what they can do to deter muggers.

Though, as pointed out downthread, the stranger/ambush rape scenario is relatively rare compared to acquaintance rape, and I'm not sure how much good an aggressive personal security posture does in the acquaintance situation (hard to imagine it would make things worse, though).

my ass

EF's founder Phyllis Schlafly infamously said in 2007: "By getting married, the woman has consented to sex, and I don't think you can call it rape."

The stoopid! It burns!

both been rape victims. Bizarrely, my mother deceided this meant they both had been prostitutes, though she recanted that position years later.

I give your point of view more weight because of the proximity to the situation, and am surprised by your answer. Can you elaborate on it? Are the victims themselves saying "it was my fault", or is it family and friends assigning blame to the victim? Or something else entirely?

at our local rape center. That's why I believe it too, along with the fact that it isn't a one time poll. The poster you responded to will have better info since mine is second hand (aside from the self-blaming for abuse I see at the women's shelter) but in the meantime what I've heard is that families can be very non-supportive, especially where very conservative/religious values come into play, and also victims sometimes second guess the way the rape went down or otherwise blame themselves.

we do a lot of prevention ed work and the stuff you hear out in the community, and I live in a bluer than blue county, from young women and girls especially is very discouraging.

one of the nuns got raped on a path that led from the hospital to the convent. Pray tell me what was so provocative about the full habit that nuns wore back then? Was it the sexy rosary beads rattling when she walked? Rape is a crime of violence. If what they said is true, rape would be the highest crime at the beach and yet, it's not. Look at these stats for Long Beach, California, a city of mixed race and ethnicities and a beach town where people wear mostly beach wear. The top crimes are murder, robberies and assaults. Rape is less than the national average. http://longbeachca.areaconnect.com/crime1.htm

Not to say that I've never heard guys be dickheads, mind you.

I do tend to believe that women are meaner to one another, but two things I will say. One, online poll, always an iffy thing. And two, men may be afraid to answer honestly and paint themselves in a bad light on such an issue.

Ask the average American woman about her current dude's ex, and you'll probably hear a misogynistic rant that would sound more at home coming out of Mel Gibson on a bender.

And I won't lie, I've done it too.

And this is a poll of Londoners. Not that this makes it less reliable than if it were from the American Broadcasting Company, which most of folks here would likely assume when they see ABC, but given that the Australian Broadcasting Corp. isn't what most people will think of when they see your "ABC" link, I find that presentation curious.

Rape is about power, inflicted on someone the rapist can overpower by force or threat of force to the victim or someone she loves.

:cry:

Rape is never about sex for the victim; it may or may not be about sex, partially or entirely, for the attacker.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I see.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the rapist was an acquaintance of her BF and was really creepy.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"there seems to be a percentage of men who totally misread signs of rejection or neutrality as being tacit or implied consent and it just spirals out of control from there"

No.

There is no fucking way that at some point those men do not realize that they do not have consent.

The words "spirals out of control" imply that they are not in control of their actions at some point, and that is total fucking bullshit.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

it turns into an "I'll show you!" type of thing. That is dominance.

That is, the BS sexist notion that women are not supposed to want sex that remains from Victorian times leads to explicit consent from the women to be discouraged. Us guys are implicitly taught that "women play games" because of this. This, obviously, leads to problems, it also creates loopholes that lets guys get away with date rape.

First off, rape is a sexual act: it is the act of having sex without the partner's consent. I don't see the point of defining it as "non-sex", though I recognize this is for whatever reason a need we strongly feel as a society.

The doctrine seems to be that the motivation of the rapist is power rather than sex. I am arguing:

A) "Power" and "sex" are probably not easily distinguished by many rapists (and even much consensual sex has power-oriented components)
B) Even granting that distinction, I simply do not agree that all rapists commit rape in order to feel power over the victim; I assert some commit rape for sexual gratification.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

The monster that raped my friend with cerebral palsy apparently had a disabled/wheelchair fetish, though that probably doesn't really conflict with the power thing.

Ugly. Ugly all around.

:grr:

between moral responsibility for rape and some common sense self-preservation techniques. There is no logical contradiction or opposition between holding a rapist guilty for his crime and women taking basic steps to mitigate risk to themselves. None. To suggest that there is is the height of irresponsibility.

Rape is a crime of violence, not sexual gratification.

It is by far, one of the most despicable assaults one can prevail upon another. There are no "excuses" for the act, and the act itself, can often move into the death of the victim. it is despicable that the crime exists at all, and it is even more despicable that some people who might become the victims of such a crime would even "consider" the notion that the victim is to blame.

I have long been an advocate for women's rights, among these rights is the right to be free from fear of sexual assault. I cannot see any viable "excuse" for not reporting such a horrendous crime, nor can I see any viable reason why any such "study" should be taken seriously by people with more than 2 firing synapses.

I have daughters...I cannot explain how I would feel if this crime happened to them, I do know, it would bring out a very dark side of my personality, one I care not to see or think about.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

does not take away the "dominance" aspect. "No" means no, regardless of the situation; when one forces themselves upon another, it is an act of violence. I see the "acquaintance" aspect as a red herring. There is no viable explanation or excuse for one individual to force themselves upon another...except an explanation using the violence/dominance aspect.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:puke:

What utter bullshit. I can't believe anyone would take that shit seriously. :mad:

Ever?

No way on earth. Ever.

Unless the woman is passed out or in a coma... and then, well... you get the idea.




Yep... more than enough DU for me today.

Neither consent nor refusal are said explicitly in a whole lot of cases.

and apparently others in this thread, that what you are doing is defending an atrocious act upon another human being.

The could always be an extenuating circumstance in so many things, there si no extenuating circumstance in rape...by definition, it is the forceful act upon another without their consent, in a sexual manner. There is simply no way to defend this act perpetrated upon another.

I don't, and that's so ludicrous to me I can't understand why you do.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

even if not intended, makes it appear you finding "defenses" for the defenseless.

My view on murder might be considered outdated as well...but the result is the same, and individual is murdered. However, my view on Justice would be considered Progressive by most Americans, as I am against the DP.

no matter how one spins it, rape is a violent act upon another.

Your claim: Rape is an act of violence on another.

My claim: Some rapists act for sexual gratification rather than out of a desire to dominate the victim.

Can you explain to me why you think those two claims are contradictory, or how a rapist's motivation of sexual gratification could be interpreted as a defense?

You get raped...are you going to think it was for the sexual gratification or the person who raped you or an act of violence?

How about both.

If you are raped, you are going to spend the rest of your life reliving that experience, and the rapist may as well...you fulfilled his "sexual desire"...and his domination over you.

Rape is a sexual act, and an act of violence.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

motives vary, even if the crime is the same.

The vast majority of rapes are committed by people who are known to each other, victim/perpetrator. How well they know each other varies; the initial "reason" for the attack varies...that is essentially irrelevant, the bottom line is, the perpetrator wants to impose their dominance upon the victim.

No matter how you spin it, that is the essence of the act.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

...the hook. The problem IMO is the sexist cultural elements can can be summed up as "Maybe is Yes, No is Maybe, and Yes means you are a slut". Both sexes are implicitly taught that women who consent to directly are "sluts", turning a lot of consensual sex into simulated date rape. That is what is meant by "communication failures".

Comments saying that rapists didn't know they had raped someone, and that they just didn't realize that she meant no... that's fucked up.

I'm also very puzzled by that "turning a lot of consensual sex into simulated date rape" comment. I don't know if I want to pursue it though. It's just too disturbing.

the "lack of communication" would be on the recipient.

I don't think in every act of rape the victim said "no" in words (note that I'm saying this is still rape). Most people don't get explicit verbal permission with every stage of sexual activity. Some are so insensitive and mean that they simply don't listen to anything but the word "no" (and plenty don't even listen to that).

If you are stating that every rapist knows at the time that he is committing rape, I do not agree with you. That man is still a rapist, though.

my point is, simply, that unless the situation is mutually acceptable, it is rape, at the very least, sexual assault.

That is not only a crime against the individual, but a crime against society as well.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

That does not, in any sense, create a "defense" of it. It is a despicable crime, and needs to be seen as such. That is the issue.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

there is no other way to look at that, it is a sexual act.

It is violent in nature, and completely unacceptable.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Does the percentage of rape victims peak at about 14-20 age range and then gradually reduce to almost nothing after age 50?

I would like to see a link to that please. I would like to see links for your other assertions also. "does most rape involve alcohol or other mind altering substances and involve people who know each other and under conditions in which tacit consent is unsure? If it were a violent crime wouldn't it be far better to victimize someone you don't know and therefore cannot be linked to?"

"Why do most rapists explain their motivation as being an uncertainty in consent and the situation getting out of hand rather than psychologists/psychiatrists noting a violent or sexually predatory personality?"

Good lord, do you REALLY expect them to tell judges "oh yeah, I really just wanted to beat the shit out of her/him" rather than "I didn't hear her/him scream NO".

Those of us who have been raped by acquaintances/dates can tell you that there is a lot of domination inherent in the rape. Most men will stop when you say "stop", those who don't want to dominate you.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It doesn't work that way. We are each a product of our experiences and for many of us that includes being raped. If you don't want to hear "anecdotal evidence of rape victims", then you discount us and our experiences.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

people involved. Goodbye

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I hope no one you know ever becomes a victim since you seem to be the type who would demand that they show "Truth" that they were victimized. I hope to not see ya, avoiding you from here out.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I don't think saying that some rape is about sex for the attacker is an attempt to excuse it; just an attempt to prevent it by learning what actually happens.

The attorney for the defendant did all she could to blame the attack on the victim. I don't begrudge her that, it's her job; but the evidence was marked toward conviction. I do not take it lightly when I sit in judgment of someone's guilt or innocence and I use all all at my disposal to figure the situation as best I can and work with the other jurors to come to a just conclusion.

As I stated, the defense atty did her best to make the victim, a victim again. I watched the defendant and the victim...in this particular case, what I saw was a classic case of "domination" over a woman. I will not go into detail, but it was bad.

After the case was over, I researched other events, looked at all sides and after a long, and disturbing tek through these things, I came to the conclusion that in virtually every case, it was a crime of violence. In every case, the victim had been violated and there were no viable "defenses" for the perpetrator. Some were forced events by predators; some were events that happened after the female "passed out", (often not the case at all); others happened after "No" was not accepted, (many defenses in this scenario, most of the, "I didn't think she was serious" type)...all of them, against the will of the woman involved. By definition, "against the will" equates to violent.

Now I am not so naive as to not know that a small percentage of these charges were brought by some women that that felt "jilted" or some other variant; but the incredible majority were committed as an act of violence.

My baseline of "excuse" is that someone will use "dress" or "come hither" looks as an open door to maintain that an attack, (what rape is), as opposed to an amenable sexual act. The "games people play" to attract a mate for either an hour or a lifetime can be viewed as contracts, and either party has the right to negate a contract, and one can be in breech of a contract...but the bottom line is, No means no. Virtually all rational people understand that.

None of what you're saying gets to whether the motivation of the rapist is dominance or sexual gratification. You're linking the claim that some rapists are seeking sexual gratification with it somehow being the victim's fault; that's the step I don't understand.

all rape is violent, therefore, not for sexual gratification, but for dominance.

Because it doesn't at all to me. I don't see how rape being a violent crime removes the possibility of its giving sexual gratification to the rapist.

including dominance.

It has been stated that Jack the Ripper got gratification from mutilating women; Ted Bundy received gratification from killing women. The list is endless on "gratification. I maintain that rape is a violent act, regardless of the "gratification" involved. Each individual case, may be looked at from a psych-social point of view, but that does not take violence and dominance out of the equation.

I just don't understand why we want to pretend it's not also sexual.

sexual organs...it has nothing else to do with sex. Masturbation is sexual, sadism/masochism can be sexual or asexual.

It is an attempt to destroy the female or male, physically, psychologically, socially and any other form of destruction someone can think of.

That is the reality of the situation.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

the individuals you described are the same people that will be just as likely to "brag" to their "friends" what they had done, even if it was an act not doe with consent. In view of that, they gain perceived "power"...and I agree, they care less about what the victim thinks. These "people" are barely, if at all, human.

"Consent" is the operable word here.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Do you not see assaulting someone sexually while "couldn't really care less about what their victim thinks" is not intentionally destroying their target?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You seem to be saying that there are degrees of crimes and, I assume, that there should be degrees of consequences for varied degrees of crimes.

I say that if the outcome is the same, it doesn't matter if the perp says "I just wanted to have sex whether or not she did" or "I wanted to force her into doing something she didn't want to".

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

to repeat: And if the victim ends up the same, should the perp be let go because he "didn't mean to harm her beyond the rape itself"?

I say that if the outcome is the same, it doesn't matter if the perp says "I just wanted to have sex whether or not she did" or "I wanted to force her into doing something she didn't want to".

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You still do not answer what YOU think.

If the victim ends up the same, should the perp be let go because he "didn't mean to harm her beyond the rape itself"?

I say that if the outcome is the same, it doesn't matter if the perp says "I just wanted to have sex whether or not she did" or "I wanted to force her into doing something she didn't want to". Do you agree?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

should have less of a sentence than someone who raped with the intent of also mutilating and didn't.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Where one might look at a trajectory of events and say the ultimate end was predictable.

Any woman who flirts with a guy and accepts an invitation to go back to a his home thinking that he is not hoping for sex, and does not expect her agreement to return with him an indicator that she's at least considering it, is naive at best. The X factor is you probably won't know until it's too late whether the guy in question feels he's entitled to sex, or not.

That's not a claim she deserves to be raped, not in the least. Simply naive. That's not her fault.

More than half (54 per cent) of women questioned in a survey thought mugging victims should in some cases bear responsibility for their attack.

One in eight thought that ostentatious displays of money or electronics, walking alone, or dressing "rich" made them partly to blame.

More women than men also thought that dressing "rich" made the victim accountable for the assault.

The online poll of 1,061 men and women in London, called Wake Up To Mugging, was carried out for Haven, which runs three assault referral centres in the capital.

A fifth of the women said the victim was partly responsible if they went back to the assailant's house and a 10th said taking a drink from a stranger had unforeseen consequences.

Twenty per cent of women surveyed said they would not report a mugging to police, with half of those citing shame or embarrassment as a reason.

Experts said the findings supported anecdotal evidence that a prevalent "blame culture" among women stopped them coming forward.

"Unfortunately, women have bought into the idea that sometimes the mugging victim is to blame. Under no circumstances is a woman at fault for being mugged," said Dr Jan Welch, clinical director at one of the Haven centres.

saw it working during Columbine.

It is a psychological process in this culture.... people distance themselves in order to feel safe.

So much for compassion...which means "to feel WITH".

Until we come to grips with how much we operate on FEAR, and how we blame others, we aren't going to make substantial progress.

But those are two things that we just don't want to look at. Its in US...not "out there".

and that would make it a very anxiety filled existence.

people do what they can to feel safe.

They probably think only women walking down dark alleys at night or hanging around strange men are raped. I agree that this is a way of comforting themselves that it won't happen to them.

...solving it would mean solving the issues with sexism and misogyny in our society.

the thinking is, I believe, if they aren't somehow to blame for what happens to them then it could happen to anyone. It could happen to you. Rape victims themselves often believe they were somehow responsible for their attacks because the rapist has taken away their power over their lives. They are trying to hold on to what is left and find a reason. It is not ever anyone's fault that they are raped. It is the rapist's decision and only the rapist's decision. It doesn't depend on looks, age, clothing, or behavior. The same with any other kind of crime. Is a robbery victim at fault because they went to the ATM or were in the wrong place at the wrong time?

This mindset applies to any deleterious change in the human condition. I have a mostly invisible disability. I have had so many people come up to me when they found out and ask me what I think I did to have God visit this on me, or what I am being "punished" for. My own brother still is reluctant to be around me as he has been since I was diagnosed. He is afraid he or his kids are going to end up with the same disability even though there is no hereditary link. It is really pernicious whenever it happens. Minds just clank shut and mostly refuse to open again.

The just world hypothesis.

People find comfort in the belief that there are things they can do to prevent horrible things from happening to them.

If rape is the victims fault, women will be able to ensure that they are never raped.