The Student Room Group

Rape

Scroll to see replies

Reply 80
Original post by LipstickKisses
But this is akin to suggesting we all live in a bubble never leaving our homes to be 'protected' from everything as pretty much everything carries a risk. We have to live our lives. Sometimes planes crash, does that mean we should all stop flying? No. Rape is the same. I am not going to live in fear just because Im a woman.


No you don't stop flying but you should inconvenience yourself in order to avoid flying around Africa on an airline that just got banned in the EU.
Reply 81
This precaution argument is weak and full of holes. If someone wants to rape, they will rape. If they want to attack, they will attack. Women shouldn't have to be shadowed like it's the 1950s when they go out. Instead of focusing on the victim, how about we focus (as some have said) on the sickos who think this behavior is okay.
Original post by Muffin.
By that logic there should be precautions to take to avoid being murdered. How about we focus on the sick people who are doing the raping in the first place. Being a victim of rape has nothing to do with whether or not precautions were taken, you can take all the precautions you like but if it's not you being raped, someone else will still be raped purely because rapists exist.


And there absolutely is. For all the bad things that can happen to a person in life, there are recommended precautions to take so as to have the best chance of avoiding them, rape included.

To take your murder point;

I know that Moss Side in Manchester is a notorious gangland area filled with primarily black people, some of whom have a big fat chip on their shoulders towards white people. So I don't go there, as a precaution to avoid being murdered (even though in a perfect world, I have the right to go where I please).

Suppose I find myself there out of bad luck, and a big angry black fella points a gun in my face. I might be thinking to myself, "get the **** away from me you dirty scum". In a perfect world where I am free to say as I please, I would tell him that to his face. Why don't I do this in practice? Because he's pointing a f***ing gun in my face, and I want to give myself the best chance possible of walking away.

Rape is no different to murder, theft, assault or any other crime, in that there are things you can do to help yourself. Won't always work, but it's a damn sight better than doing nothing at all. Just seems to me that other crimes don't create this gender divide quite so much, whereas rape does. Because most rapes are committed by men, this seems to make normal procedure in protecting yourself against crime fly out of the window, in favour of blindly saying what a bunch of dicks men are for being rapists.

If I saw a woman being raped, I'd be straight over re arranging the pervert's face, because I think they're scum. But as much as I think that, I also firmly believe women have a responsibility to themselves to take precautions where appropriate. It's not about the rapist, men vs women, feminism or any bull**** like that. First and foremost, it's just common sense.
Original post by ColonelMoore
And there absolutely is. For all the bad things that can happen to a person in life, there are recommended precautions to take so as to have the best chance of avoiding them, rape included.

To take your murder point;

I know that Moss Side in Manchester is a notorious gangland area filled with primarily black people, some of whom have a big fat chip on their shoulders towards white people. So I don't go there, as a precaution to avoid being murdered (even though in a perfect world, I have the right to go where I please).

Suppose I find myself there out of bad luck, and a big angry black fella points a gun in my face. I might be thinking to myself, "get the **** away from me you dirty scum". In a perfect world where I am free to say as I please, I would tell him that to his face. Why don't I do this in practice? Because he's pointing a f***ing gun in my face, and I want to give myself the best chance possible of walking away.

Rape is no different to murder, theft, assault or any other crime, in that there are things you can do to help yourself. Won't always work, but it's a damn sight better than doing nothing at all. Just seems to me that other crimes don't create this gender divide quite so much, whereas rape does. Because most rapes are committed by men, this seems to make normal procedure in protecting yourself against crime fly out of the window, in favour of blindly saying what a bunch of dicks men are for being rapists.

If I saw a woman being raped, I'd be straight over re arranging the pervert's face, because I think they're scum. But as much as I think that, I also firmly believe women have a responsibility to themselves to take precautions where appropriate. It's not about the rapist, men vs women, feminism or any bull**** like that. First and foremost, it's just common sense.

I think to some people it just came across like it was being said that if women dont take the precautions then in some way it's their fault they're raped.
Original post by ArcadiaHouse
Er, an improvement on the woeful conviction rate maybe?

EDIT: It's at 6%, for those who think that's acceptable.

http://fullfact.org/blog/rape_conviction%20rate_six_percent_cameron_ken_clarke-2712


Um, the link you quote is a blog explaining why the 6% figure is completely misleading and useless.
Original post by Samung
This precaution argument is weak and full of holes. If someone wants to rape, they will rape. If they want to attack, they will attack. Women shouldn't have to be shadowed like it's the 1950s when they go out. Instead of focusing on the victim, how about we focus (as some have said) on the sickos who think this behavior is okay.


Yet again, what the hell do you mean by " focus on the sickos." Beyond making it illegal and having to arrest anyone who is accused of rape, what else can be done? Eugenics? Stop and be realistic for once. In this "free" country, women will always have to take precautions as it will reduce the number of rapes.
Reply 86
Original post by Samung
This precaution argument is weak and full of holes. If someone wants to rape, they will rape. If they want to attack, they will attack.

Yeah, but what rapist would take on a group of 3 or 4 girls? Why don't girls like you realise that there are actually some good precautions worth considering?

Or what about if you've got a family? Is there a member who can drive that'll be happy to pick you up after your night? How can a rapist on the street get you when you're in a car that's moving rapidly beyond his capacity to run?

By your logic, if someone wants to burgle a house, then they will burgle. Yet you don't leave the front door of your house wide open 24 hours a day, do you? Why? Because it minimises the chances of being burgled. Same as rape. Taking precautions can minimise the chances if you think about them well.
Women shouldn't have to be shadowed like it's the 1950s when they go out.

You're doing exactly what I described in the OP. Yes, they shouldn't have to be taking these precautions. But welcome to the real world. Rapists do exist and you never know where they operate. When we're addressing rape by strangers, particularly at night-time, it makes sense to consider precautions where you can. If they're not convenient, then that's fair enough. You would have to walk home alone. But at least, consider the precautions first rather than doing what you're doing and saying just because rape shouldn't happen, therefore we shouldn't have to take precautions.

Look at Hannah Cant. She had no way of knowing a rapist would get her when she was only two streets away from home. That's how bad it is. And instead of people like you to learn from her experience and at least be considering precautions where you can, you would rather bury your head in the sand. Crimes happen. And while people try to tackle crime, it also makes sense to take precautions where and when you can.
Instead of focusing on the victim, how about we focus (as some have said) on the sickos who think this behavior is okay.

But people are focusing on the rapists as well. There's a law system that tries to tackle rape, there are feminists that are doing work to try and address the crime etc. But it also makes sense for people to take precautions where and when they can.

You don't leave the front door of your house open 24 hours a day, do you? You don't walk in dark alleys at night that have chavs there, do you? Why? Because it lowers the chances of being a victim of crime. It's just common sense. Why should rape by strangers be any different?
Reply 87
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/us/09assault.html?_r=2

So, was it the victim's fault for not taking precautions?
Reply 88
Original post by Cable
Good post. It's almost as if some people just want to force any alleged rapist behind bars regardless of whether he was innocent or guilty just because their emotion blinds their judgement. Rape is a serious crime and evidence must be examined carefully before giving a verdict.

Don't get me wrong. I do get suspicious sometimes about whether there are a lot fo rapists unnecessarily spared in spite of some decent evidence against him. But that is all speculation.

Have you got some data/evidence to back up your post?


Telegraph article

Baroness Stern said the figure, which compares the number of convictions against total reports to the police, is based on calculations not used for any other offence.

Once a rape case reaches the courts, almost 60 per cent of defendants are convicted a rate higher than some other violent attacks.


Straight statistics

While for all other crimes the conviction rate describes the percentage of all the cases brought to court that result in a conviction, the report says, rape is different. For rape, the term has come to mean the percentage of all cases recorded by the police as rape that result in a conviction of rape. This makes it impossible to compare rape with other crimes.
*
The actual conviction rate for rape, measured conventionally, is 58 per cent. More cases should come to court and the review backs the Government’s*efforts to achieve that.


I think those two indicate the findings of the Stern report. Once again we need to increase the numbers getting to court, not the conviction rate.
Reply 89
Lol I clicked on this thinking 'here we go again...' and was proven right
Reply 90
Original post by Miss G
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/us/09assault.html?_r=2

So, was it the victim's fault for not taking precautions?

For goodness sake!

Who did the rape? The boys. So who's fault is it? The boys.

You don't even know the entire story of the case from that article.

It's not the victim's fault for not taking precautions. Because we never know if she could even still have been raped despite taking precautions. But it's wiser to take precautions or at least consider them because they'll reduce the probability of being raped.

The brains of 11 year olds haven't developed properly enough to make competent judgements. So it raises the question of what the mother was doing when the girl got raped. Had the girl being educated enough about things relating to rape (although this might not be comfortable and therefore not convenient)?
Reply 91
Original post by abc:)
Lol I clicked on this thinking 'here we go again...' and was proven right

So go on. What's your problem with my OP?
Reply 92
Original post by Cable
So go on. What's your problem with my OP?


I really cba to go into it, you know what my views are gonna be, I know what yours are gonna be, and I'm not expecting I'm gonna change your mind so it seems a bit pointless

Edit - although my main issue with it isn't where you stand on the issue of rape but the fact that people with very little experience of the legal system or very little knowledge of rape beyond the definition jump on the hype bandwagon and recycle old points
(edited 12 years ago)
Reply 93
Original post by Cable
So it raises the question of what the mother was doing when the girl got raped. Had the girl being educated enough about things relating to rape (although this might not be comfortable and therefore not convenient)?


Well, what were the mothers of those 18 boys doing when they were raping her? They weren't all grown men. Some were middle school kids. Why didn't their mothers teach them it's wrong to rape? Why don't you ask that question? Why blame the victim's mother? Why does society always concentrate on what the victim could have done, or what the victim;s parents could have done or should have done instead of the rapist's parents and the rapist himself? Why do we always try and blame the victim? And this happened in her community as well. Where was the mother? Where, where was THEIR mother?
Original post by LipstickKisses
I dont think you can take precautions against rape at all though. Rape is usually about dominance and power, and not all about sex. Conservatively dressed religious women also get raped, its not all drunk girls in low cut tops. Its more about the rapist than the victim.


Yes, BUT religious women/conservatively dressed women are raped far less than women who are dressed in shorts/mini-skirts. Obv precautions can be taken, but these precautions do not completely eliminate the chances of someone being raped.
This is irrelevant, but the punishments/sentences given to convicted rapists are really lame.
Reply 96
Original post by Miss G
Well, what were the mothers of those 18 boys doing when they were raping her? They weren't all grown men. Some were middle school kids. Why didn't their mothers teach them it's wrong to rape? Why don't you ask that question? Why blame the victim's mother? Why does society always concentrate on what the victim could have done, or what the victim;s parents could have done or should have done instead of the rapist's parents and the rapist himself? Why do we always try and blame the victim? And this happened in her community as well. Where was the mother? Where, where was THEIR mother?

Because if you had any common sense, I do question the rapists and their parents as well. Just like I questioned the rioters and their parents. Just like I question chavs and their parents. It's so obvious that I don't condone rape that I don't have to spell it out all the time.

Like I said earlier, we don't know the full story. So I don't know what the mother did. Therefore it makes no sense to blame her at all. All I did was ask questions. And I didn't even blame the mother in the first place. So don't strawman me. I told you that I blamed the boys and throughout this thread I have stated that I fully blame rapists for rape.

But maybe the parents of the rapists had already taught their kids good morals but the children had not listened and decided to do crime instead. Maybe the parents didn't teach their kids good morals and the kids turned out bad expectedly. This can show that parenting needs to be addressed in some cases. Maybe the parents didn't need to specifically tell their kids not to rape because they had good opinions of their kids and were sure the kids already knew it was a crime and wouldn't do it. But the kids still went and committed the crimes.

It doesn't matter what angle you look at it. The fault lies with the rapists due to their twisted mind. But while we're trying to tackle rape, it's wise to try and take precautions whenever and wherever we can at the same time. And like I said before, it's not all rapes that could have been avoided especially when it's done by people you know. It's not all rapes that precautions could have prevented especially when they're not 100% effective in the first place. But it's still wiser to try and reduce the chances of rape by taking precautions (if they're convenient).
(edited 12 years ago)
I shouldn't have to take precautions to walk down my own bloody street. You are approaching this as if rape is something that is 'going' to happen anway, so women SHOULD take steps to stop something that is invetable.


when someone is raped, you shouldn't look at what she DIDNT do to stop it, its why the hell the guy did it in the first place and what are the police going to do to find them.
Reply 98
Original post by chocoholic.
Yes, BUT religious women/conservatively dressed women are raped far less than women who are dressed in shorts/mini-skirts. Obv precautions can be taken, but these precautions do not completely eliminate the chances of someone being raped.



Really? And can you back that up with statistics? Because I'd like to see them.

Look at this:

Utah State University Sexual Assault and Anti Violence Information

Myth: Rape victims provoke the attach by wearing provocative clothing

- A Federal Commission on Crime of Violence Study found that only
4.4% of all reported rapes involved provocative behavior on the part
of the victim. In murder cases 22% involved such behavior (as simple
as a glance).

- Most convicted rapists do not remember what their victims were wearing.

- Victims range in age from days old to those in their nineties,
hardly provocative dressers.

Utah State University

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/776945.html

I'd suggest you do your research before you go around blaming the victim.
Reply 99
Original post by maxcartwright
I shouldn't have to take precautions to walk down my own bloody street. You are approaching this as if rape is something that is 'going' to happen anway, so women SHOULD take steps to stop something that is invetable.


when someone is raped, you shouldn't look at what she DIDNT do to stop it, its why the hell the guy did it in the first place and what are the police going to do to find them.



That's so true. Unfortunately, people will always blame the victim.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending