This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Is rape 100% the perpetrators fault? Are they to be blamed entirely?

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40

jusdorange

most rape is done by someone you know

and not a drunk rape

Reply 41

usernme_

anyone who blames the victim is twisted and probably has felt like raping before
you cant just force yourself on someone like that cos u think they look tempting and everyone understands personal space they know there in the wrong

the same way its not right to steal from a market stall just cos you felt like it

you cant say its the sellers fault or the apples fault cos the apples shouldnt have been hanging around / should have been in more packaging / was no security cameras

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 42

username1315644

Original post by Kiss

True, but there's a difference between expectation and reality which everybody needs to consider. As is the case if you walk alone at night through a park with no lights - you take the risk of being attacked in some form, even by someone you know. It shouldn't be the case but it happens. Telling people to be safe and sensible is not the same as alleviating any blame upon the perpetrator, it's just stating the obvious.

I phased it that way because the thread title suggests there exist situations where the perpetrator is 90% to blame. That suggests there a situations where we can give the perpetrator some kind of special consideration. The point being the perpetrator doesn't lose any of their blame because of the victims actions. Even if someone is suggesting the victim acted naively, the perpetrator is still as much to blame as if they acted vigilantly. The semantic of the victims condition or what not are a secondary argument which have no bearing on the placing of blame in the first.

Reply 43

User1214833

I think there's a difference between date rape and someone attacking a stranger. Sometimes people lie to get back at the other person or they lie because they regret having sex with the other person. It's not always straightforward. It depends on the circumstances.

Reply 44

TimmonaPortella

Original post by IlexBlue

The guy who raped is the only one at fault.

Not the girl who is free to dress how she wants.

Not the girl who had no alternative but to walk home alone (where she should be safe to do so anyway.)

Not the girl who has had something to drink.

Correct.

The girl is absolutely free to walk home at whatever time she wants, wearing whatever she wants, having drunk whatever she wanted to. Doing so does not put her at fault in any real sense. Certainly it doesn't exculpate the rapist, as I have said, to any degree. But alas, we do not live in a perfect society, and it may well be very reckless for her to exercise those rights.

This is one instance in which the burglary analogy works perfectly well. The victim has the right to leave his house unlocked if he pleases. He isn't breaking any laws by doing so, and in a perfect society he would be able to do so with no risk. If he is burgled, he is not to blame for that burglary. But he is 'at fault' in (only) one sense: in that he was reckless to leave his home unlocked. The same is true of the girl you describe.

Reply 45

Rascacielos

Cause and blame are not the same thing.

A poster above used the example of leaving expensive items in plain view in a window. That fact may have caused the perpetrator to break into that particular home, but they are not to blame for it. It was the perpetrator's decision to break in in the first place; he is entirely to blame for making that decision to commit that particular crime.

The same can be said for a woman who is raped. Wearing a short skirt may have caused the rapist to choose her, but she is not to blame for that rape. It is the rapist's inability to control himself (or whatever reason he has for raping) that is 100% to blame. "Blame" suggests there is something wrong in a woman choosing to wear a short skirt, or a person choosing to leave their laptop on their desk, which just happens to be by the window. There is nothing wrong in that, so there is no blame in it.

Reply 46

Rascacielos

Original post by TimmonaPortella

It doesn't matter how many rapes are committed by which particular kinds of rapist. These threads always descend into bickering about the extent to which a shorter skirt will increase a girl's risk of being raped. It makes no difference whatever to the matter of principle: who is to blame if a woman puts herself at risk.

A woman puts herself at risk by leaving the house. Actually, scrap that, most rapes occur within the home. So it seems like a woman puts herself at risk by not sewing up her vagina and making it known to the world that it is impossible to rape her.

I apologise for going to ridiculous lengths, but I wanted to ask the question, at what point does a woman putting herself at risk of rape transpire into her being partly to blame for it?

Reply 47

Mericcup

I wish negative rep was still available!

It is *NEVER* the victims fault! No means NO.

Reply 48

TimmonaPortella

Original post by Rascacielos

Well, recklessness implies taking an unwise risk. As I tried to say, it doesn't make the slightest difference to the matter of the rapist's fault what in particular constitutes an unwise risk.

Putting oneself at risk of x does not put one at fault for committing x, if x occurs. That's just an illogical jump. The rapist is to blame for the rape however silly a risk the victim took, and, as I've said, is not exculpated to any degree by the victim's recklessness.

(edited 10 years ago)

Reply 49

Rascacielos

Original post by TimmonaPortella

I agree with you there.

Reply 50

ffionm

Yes it is the perpetrators fault, otherwise it wouldn't be rape?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 51

bertstare

It is, but any girl who thinks that justifies walking through the worst part of town alone, piss drunk and wearing next to nothing, just because the blame will always lie with the rapist, is a retard of the highest order

Reply 52

The Socktor

Well, I think a lot the blame should go to the society he/she was brought up in so I guess technically they shouldn't get 100%, however the victim is 0% to blame in any case.

Reply 53

User1214833

Original post by Mericcup

I wish negative rep was still available!

It is *NEVER* the victims fault! No means NO.

What if both people are drunk and the woman/man doesn't explicitly say no?

Reply 54

grumbeale

A lot of rape 'victims' have not been raped at all. They bring it on themselves, with drunken behavior, provocative clothing etc... and end up getting shagged when drunk, then claim rape in the morning as they can't cope with the stress of being used in such a way.

If the guy in question was a little rough with her, ejaculated into her, along with her false testimony, it can be construed as rape, when it may very well not be. This happens a lot. A lot of women who claim date rape, when tested for such drugs only have alcohol in their system. Alcohol is still the number one date rape

I was thinking earlier about a hypothetical case where a girl was acting up at a party so a guy who was fond of her tried to calm her down (grabbed her arms, maybe ripped her top a bit as she struggled about). He calms her down but she kicks off again a bit later and she storms off, and gets raped on the way home by a stranger. She was so drunk and all she can remember is the guy from the party and mistakenly claims he raped her. His DNA is found on her, there's bruising on her arms and body, rips in her clothes and clear evidence that she has indeed been penetrated. People are interviewed from the party and confirm that they saw him grabbing her forcefully (or at least they'll be persuaded into making that call - this is what police do). The guy from the party goes to trial and ends up convicted of rape.

Reply 55

Dylann

[redacted]

(edited 2 years ago)

Reply 56

Dylann

Very interesting points have been raised so far, I hope to see the discussion progress as it already has. Everyone has been very respectful and contributed different arguments which is great to read. Keep it up.

Reply 57

bertstare

I don't like to think of it as "blame", she's just an idiot

Reply 58

SamKeene

We as human beings should at least make some effort to minimize the chance of someone else choosing us as a target. I won't take a shortcut through a dark alley in a dodgy city. I wont walk down a dangerous area holding an expensive phone etc.

If I ignore all this, and am targeted, in a sense I am to 'blame'.

Feminists like to respond: 'But a women SHOULD be able to get as drunk as she wants at night, wear what she wants and NOT need to worry about getting raped!'.

I really think this is just a detachment of reality, its not how society works, we do not live in a utopia... Imagine if I said: 'A person SHOULD be able to walk down a dangerous area with an expensive phone, and wallet of cash without needing to worry about being mugged!'.

The only difference in these situations is that mugging is a far more opportunistic crime, only a few 'rapes' fall into the 'drunken party' genre. And its this genre of rape where precautions would be most effective. Ultimately, if someone wants to rape you (or mug you), they can do it. But you can at least minimize the opportunists by taking certain precautions and making them move onto weaker targets.