Rape vs Theft Double Standard

[broto]

There should be no victim blaming for either crime. That man is not at fault for his own robbery, yes he put himself in a much more vulnerable position by flashing his phone and money but that doesnt ever make it his fault.

In the end like I tried explaining in my posts above, these are two completely different crimes in which the relationship between the victim and the accused are very very different. The outcomes of each crime are incredibly different, the affect on the victim in each crime is not even comparable etc.. etc..

You have to be able to understand why it is deemed acceptable by society to put a portion of blame on a person for leaving out a valuable consumer good and having it taken from them, when it is not and never ever should be acceptable to blame a woman for someone else's selfish disgusting attack against their body.

it doesn't matter whether a rapist SHOULD or SHOULDN'T rape a person. we know they shouldn't. but they do it anyway.

is it safe to say that a rapist would more likely take advantage of a provocatively dressed woman that's absolutely hammered at a bar? i'd say so. if you were a woman, then, would you believe that you're more likely to get raped if you go to a bar and get extremely drunk while wearing skimpy clothing? is that not a similar comparison to someone leaving something more prone to being stolen in a sketchy area?

there are preventative measures people can take to prevent theft. lock your car, front door, etc.

then there are preventative measures woman can do to prevent rape. THIS DOESN'T MEAN ITS RIGHT THAT A WOMAN SHOULD HAVE TO DO THEM. you shouldn't have to lock your door from thieves. BUT, people don't all operate on good morals. and so i'd say it's wise to not get so drunk that you could become a target, etc.

obviously determined robbers will still break in, and determined rapists may use roofies or other methods to get their way. BUT why should we just ONLY say to women "it's never a victim's fault" when saying "there are things you could do to prevent rape" could lessen a person's chances of being raped? it's not about the current victim, it's about the next potential one.

i have now realized i haven't read page two and hope i'm not just copying what someone else said. whatever.

 

[NEPTR]

it doesn't matter whether a rapist SHOULD or SHOULDN'T rape a person. we know they shouldn't. but they do it anyway.

is it safe to say that a rapist would more likely take advantage of a provocatively dressed woman that's absolutely hammered at a bar? i'd say so. if you were a woman, then, would you believe that you're more likely to get raped if you go to a bar and get extremely drunk while wearing skimpy clothing? is that not a similar comparison to someone leaving something more prone to being stolen in a sketchy area?

there are preventative measures people can take to prevent theft. lock your car, front door, etc.

then there are preventative measures woman can do to prevent rape. THIS DOESN'T MEAN ITS RIGHT THAT A WOMAN SHOULD HAVE TO DO THEM. you shouldn't have to lock your door from thieves. BUT, people don't all operate on good morals. and so i'd say it's wise to not get so drunk that you could become a target, etc.

obviously determined robbers will still break in, and determined rapists may use roofies or other methods to get their way. BUT why should we just ONLY say to women "it's never a victim's fault" when saying "there are things you could do to prevent rape" could lessen a person's chances of being raped? it's not about the current victim, it's about the next potential one.

i have now realized i haven't read page two and hope i'm not just copying what someone else said. whatever.

tru

 

[shocker611]

Woke up to a chick riding me while I was unconscious. Made absolutely no moves. She 100% knew I wasn't interested but decided to use my dick because it was there.

Honestly pretty rapey. If that had brought me to a place where I was super freaked out, and wanted to do something about it I would have gotten laughed at. Trying to make that case would have been seen as a huge joke because I have a dick and she had a vagina.

Talked to a friend of mine about it(she's a mutual friend and this happened on a trip together) He said he woke up next to her with a condom on or near by or something.

I don't take things too seriously and he doesn't really either but he said their friendship was never really the same after.

I was kind of whatever about the whole thing. Felt kind of weird after, then I also had to drive solo with her to toronto later that morning. Was pretty awkward.

Not saying that I wanted to press charges but just that if I did it would have been the funniest thing ever. Even though she 100% knew I had absolutely no interest in having sex with her but decided to take advantage of me while I was passed out.

Girls bitch all day about double standards regarding gender so I figured I'd throw in my 2 cents considering I was actually on the victim end.

This is one thing that I've always wondered about, is how much of the rape disparity between men/women is actually true and how much of it is because men don't usually report or consider similar acts as rape. I have been "raped" multiple times in the "I passed out and a sober girl took advantage of me" type of way including this weekend and also when I lost my v-card, however have never came close to thinking about pressing charges.

Now with that said, obviously there are significantly more forceful rapes being perpetrated by men, but I think it is an interesting dialogue to say the least.

 

[Blurst]

How does severity of the crime have anything to do with who is at fault for the crime? Lol.

I am simply pointing out the double standard that exists with victim blaming. Neither victim should be blamed, yet most people are totally cool with pointing out all the ignorant things a robbery or assault victim might have done.

I don't know if I am not wording my posts properly or if you just can't read them very well but I clearly stated the the severity of the crime has NOTHING to do with who is to blame.

I also thought that I pretty clearly answered your original question showing why it is deemed acceptable in our society to put a portion of the blame onto someone who is being robbed compared to someone who is raped based on the differences in the NATURE of the crime and what effect the overall outcome has on the victim and finally because of these differences in the nature of the crime how this actually isnt really a double standard.

 

[Blurst]

it doesn't matter whether a rapist SHOULD or SHOULDN'T rape a person. we know they shouldn't. but they do it anyway.

is it safe to say that a rapist would more likely take advantage of a provocatively dressed woman that's absolutely hammered at a bar? i'd say so. if you were a woman, then, would you believe that you're more likely to get raped if you go to a bar and get extremely drunk while wearing skimpy clothing? is that not a similar comparison to someone leaving something more prone to being stolen in a sketchy area?

there are preventative measures people can take to prevent theft. lock your car, front door, etc.

then there are preventative measures woman can do to prevent rape. THIS DOESN'T MEAN ITS RIGHT THAT A WOMAN SHOULD HAVE TO DO THEM. you shouldn't have to lock your door from thieves. BUT, people don't all operate on good morals. and so i'd say it's wise to not get so drunk that you could become a target, etc.

obviously determined robbers will still break in, and determined rapists may use roofies or other methods to get their way. BUT why should we just ONLY say to women "it's never a victim's fault" when saying "there are things you could do to prevent rape" could lessen a person's chances of being raped? it's not about the current victim, it's about the next potential one.

i have now realized i haven't read page two and hope i'm not just copying what someone else said. whatever.

I've already said that dressing provocatively and getting drunk in a public place certainly makes someone more vulnerable to rape than someone who is going to the library in the middle of the day, thats true and there is no denying that. The same way that flossin through the ghetto or not locking the doors of your house makes you more vulnerable to robbery.

I think educating about preventative measures that could lessen your chances of being in a vulnerable situation is a great strategy to help women be more aware of bad situations that they may find themselves in. But it is truly not fair to put ANY of the actual blame or fault onto a woman if they happen to be in one of these devastating situations, just because they put themselves in a more vulnerable situation by wanting to have some fun and empowering themselves by showing off their young hot body doesnt mean they should suffer through increased emotional distress because of someone else's actions, who they had no control of (because we all exercise our own individual free will), onto them.

 

[Rusticles]

Simple, one targets a persons belongings, the other targets the persons physical and mental health. Being robbed is not likely going to ruin your life, being raped could.

 

[Charlie_Kelly]

Simple, one targets a persons belongings, the other targets the persons physical and mental health. Being robbed is not likely going to ruin your life, being raped could.

I disagree. My mom was robbed two years ago. Priceless jewelry, her fire arm, her laptop, her fathers ancient coin collection, her wedding ring, all of it taken (and as it turns out burned in a fire when the robbers realized the state police were on to them. These things can't ever be replaced. But thats not what drove her and my brother to tears, it was the fact that someone violated their privacy and safety. Now she carries a gun around in her purse at all times literally because of the robbery.

When your robbed, you can no longer feel safe in the one place you are supposed to feel safe, your home, just like when you are raped you may no longer feel safe in your own body.

I also find it funny that most people seem to think rape is an act of sexual aggression towards a female perpetuated by a male. Relating to abortionators post, Im curious to see actual numbers of female vs. male rape, though as stated many men don't even report it for fear of embarrassment.

And what about teachers? I have read about many, many teacher sex scandals and I'd be confident to say about 70-80% of them are perpetuated by female teachers on male students. What about that?

 

[Turkelton]

There's an epidemic of girls regretting consensual sex and then crying rape.

Look at Brian Banks. His life was destroyed by someone who couldn't face the fact it was consensual.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-accuser-contacts-Facebook-say-happened.html

Look at that lying woman at Columbia with her bed, who never filed a police report and the man wasn't found guilty by police or the college.

Yet false accusers are barely sentenced... How can men and some women protect themselves from lies?

 

[californiagrown]

I don't know if I am not wording my posts properly or if you just can't read them very well but I clearly stated the the severity of the crime has NOTHING to do with who is to blame.

I also thought that I pretty clearly answered your original question showing why it is deemed acceptable in our society to put a portion of the blame onto someone who is being robbed compared to someone who is raped based on the differences in the NATURE of the crime and what effect the overall outcome has on the victim and finally because of these differences in the nature of the crime how this actually isnt really a double standard.

How does the nature of the crime have any effect on whose fault it was?

Take the example I gave before of an individual breaking and entering, then robbing, then assaulting, then raling, then murdering. Does the victim become more and more blameless as the nature of the crime escalates? No. The victim was blameless to begin with.

So there does exist a double standard, right?

 

[Blurst]

How does the nature of the crime have any effect on whose fault it was?

Take the example I gave before of an individual breaking and entering, then robbing, then assaulting, then raling, then murdering. Does the victim become more and more blameless as the nature of the crime escalates? No. The victim was blameless to begin with.

So there does exist a double standard, right?

I was answering your question regarding why its deemed acceptable in society to victim blame for robbery and not for rape, because the nature of the crime, I personally am not saying its ok, I'm just trying to rationalize why it is more acceptable. I thought I was incredibly clear with that, I guess you really are just not getting what I'm saying at this point.

 

[Blurst]

You shouldnt have left valuables in plain sight. you shouldnt have gone alone at night to that shitty neighborhood. You shouldnt have gotten really drunk in that Frat's basement. You shouldnt have dressed like a slut(lets be real, this is pretty objective most of the time).

It all seems like victim blaming to me.

Why is it okay to victim blame a robbery victim for "bringing it upon themselves", but not okay in the situation of rape?

Okay, how bout murder, or aggravated assault vs rape.

Why do people condone victim blaming/shaming for certain crimes, but not others?

So you are cool with victim blaming, as long as rape isn't involved?

Regardless my question remains. Why are two victims equally not responsible for the act committed against them viewed differently. One is blamed the other is not. Why.

If you replace rape with robbery in the exact situation you posted above, many people would blame the victim for putting themselves in that situation.

Why?

So you think a drunk guy with cash sticking outta his pocket, talking on an iPhone in the middle of the ghetto at night...is not in any way to be at fault should he be robbed?

All that you have contributed to this thread is essentially a reiteration of your OP. You can't just keep asking the same question, get good answers to said question, and then ask it again because you don't like the answer but don't have a defense for the side that you wish to be right.

 

[Blurst]

How does severity of the crime have anything to do with who is at fault for the crime? Lol.

I am simply pointing out the double standard that exists with victim blaming. Neither victim should be blamed, yet most people are totally cool with pointing out all the ignorant things a robbery or assault victim might have done.

How does the nature of the crime have any effect on whose fault it was?

Take the example I gave before of an individual breaking and entering, then robbing, then assaulting, then raling, then murdering. Does the victim become more and more blameless as the nature of the crime escalates? No. The victim was blameless to begin with.

So there does exist a double standard, right?

heres some more from this page.

 

[J.D.]

The difference between the two crimes is precisely the point, isn't it?

"You should be prepared because there are a lot of jerks out there who will steal stuff if you just leave it around."

"You should be prepared because there are a lot of sexual predators out there who will forcibly penetrate you against your will as you cry and beg them to let you go."

Seriously? These things are not equivalent. People aren't really all that upset if advised to prepare for things anyway (like Paige said) but theft is something that is more readily anticipated than rape because it's simply not as unforgivable as human conduct. Most people have stolen something at some point. In contrast, you shouldn't expect people to be rapists, any more than you should expect people to be murderers.

By the way someone mentioned victim blaming in the murder context - are you nuts? This happens WAY less often than victim blaming in the rape context.

 

[californiagrown]

All that you have contributed to this thread is essentially a reiteration of your OP. You can't just keep asking the same question, get good answers to said question, and then ask it again because you don't like the answer but don't have a defense for the side that you wish to be right.

I'm not sure if you realize this, but you aren't actually the only person who has or will contribute to this thread. It is not, in fact, all about you.

And you're answer assumes that society totally misses how I am comparing the two crimes.

 

[californiagrown]

The difference between the two crimes is precisely the point, isn't it?

"You should be prepared because there are a lot of jerks out there who will steal stuff if you just leave it around."

"You should be prepared because there are a lot of sexual predators out there who will forcibly penetrate you against your will as you cry and beg them to let you go."

Seriously? These things are not equivalent. People aren't really all that upset if advised to prepare for things anyway (like Paige said) but theft is something that is more readily anticipated than rape because it's simply not as unforgivable as human conduct. Most people have stolen something at some point. In contrast, you shouldn't expect people to be rapists, any more than you should expect people to be murderers.

By the way someone mentioned victim blaming in the murder context - are you nuts? This happens WAY less often than victim blaming in the rape context.

So a robbery victim is more at fault than a rape victim?

I'm not comparing the nature of the two crimes, I'm comparing how much the victims are to blame for the crimes happening to them.

 

[J.D.]

You're talking about our willingness to blame the victims of crimes. We are less willing to blame the victims of more serious crimes because they are more egregious and less common, and therefore less expected and harder to defend against.

I'm not sure what sort of sociopath has difficulty comprehending this.

 

[T.DUB]

The point trying to be made becomes a bit stronger if you were to compare it to getting mugged. Where I live in manchester there are a lot of rapes and a lot of muggings. Although at the same time this double standard sort of evaporates, you're most likely to be raped or mugged after 11pm, it's at the point now where warnings have been issued etc. You can't be blamed for wanting to go anywhere after these times therefore you cant be blamed for being mugged, and likewise you cant be blamed for getting raped, what is criticised is the lack of precautions taken. I always go and meet the girl I live with at the bus stop to reduce her risk, just as travelling in a group makes it more difficult for anyone to mug you. on the original point made, just because you've left your door unlocked doesnt mean you're asking to be robbed, just because you wear a short skirt doesnt mean you're asking to be raped, it's less doing something stupid and actually is more just a misjudgement by the victim (of either crime) of the morales and ethics of anyone they could encounter.

 

[californiagrown]

You're talking about our willingness to blame the victims of crimes. We are less willing to blame the victims of more serious crimes because they are more egregious and less common, and therefore less expected and harder to defend against.

I'm not sure what sort of sociopath has difficulty comprehending this.

What kind of sociopath blames a person who, through no fault of their own, is a victim of a crime?

 

[miroz]

This is a really interesting question. I don't think you can blame the victim of either crime. As people before said, you can take certain measures to prevent the occurrence of these crimes (locking your door, not going down that street, not getting blackout), but all in all they are not the criteria that allow you to make the blanket statement that "the victim deserved it" or "the victim had it coming" because neither is true in either the case of a robbery or rape. I don't think you can blame either victim.

 

[Elg]

I get the impression that when people are reading this thread, theft = something stolen from you when you're not looking.

What about armed robbery? Where a person is robbed at gun point, or stabbed. That could be equally as life ruining as being raped.

 

[Blurst]

So a robbery victim is more at fault than a rape victim?

I'm not comparing the nature of the two crimes, I'm comparing how much the victims are to blame for the crimes happening to them.

What kind of sociopath blames a person who, through no fault of their own, is a victim of a crime?

dude you just did the same thing again.... but with a different person who gave a very rationale well thought out answer.

 

[-emile-]

dude you just did the same thing again.... but with a different person who gave a very rationale well thought out answer.

you know when you point a finger , 3 are pointing back at you ?

you're doing the exact same thing he's doing but your point is that we shouldn't blame rape victims because the nature of the crime is violent and leaves permanent scars on someone lol

 

[S.J.W]

I get the impression that when people are reading this thread, theft = something stolen from you when you're not looking.

What about armed robbery? Where a person is robbed at gun point, or stabbed. That could be equally as life ruining as being raped.

theft is theft and armed robbery is armed robbery. You get charged with two different chargers. For taking someones property, you get charged with theft either in the first, second or third degree. What you are talking about is robbery and further into that armed robbery and aggravated robbery. Robbery is very different from theft.

 

[californiagrown]

dude you just did the same thing again.... but with a different person who gave a very rationale well thought out answer.

And my addition to the point is to question that logic.

 

[californiagrown]

theft is theft and armed robbery is armed robbery. You get charged with two different chargers. For taking someones property, you get charged with theft either in the first, second or third degree. What you are talking about is robbery and further into that armed robbery and aggravated robbery. Robbery is very different from theft.

But in the context of this thread they are the same. We are simply looking at the matter of blameworthiness.

 

[S.J.W]

But in the context of this thread they are the same. We are simply looking at the matter of blameworthiness.

If you honestly think that saying 'it's the victims fault' in armed robbery then you are an idiot. Same with sexual assault. It's never the victims fault and the only people who blame the victim in crimes are seriously dillusional.

 

[Elg]

theft is theft and armed robbery is armed robbery. You get charged with two different chargers. For taking someones property, you get charged with theft either in the first, second or third degree. What you are talking about is robbery and further into that armed robbery and aggravated robbery. Robbery is very different from theft.

Didn't know that. It is still relevant though, If you're alone at night in a bad place talking on you iphone with your nice watch poking out of your sleeve, and someone stabs you and steals your shit, people might say you're stupid.

 

[californiagrown]

If you honestly think that saying 'it's the victims fault' in armed robbery then you are an idiot. Same with sexual assault. It's never the victims fault and the only people who blame the victim in crimes are seriously dillusional.

Yet what is your gut reaction to hearing about a rich white guy loudly flashing money to everyone he sees in the hood and then getting mugged?

I know I would think "what an idiot".

That's not right, and that view needs to change. Or does it?

 

[S.J.W]

Didn't know that. It is still relevant though, If you're alone at night in a bad place talking on you iphone with your nice watch poking out of your sleeve, and someone stabs you and steals your shit, people might say you're stupid.

But you're still not to blame for having your stuff stolen and you being stabbed. Likewise, with sexual assault, if you get black out drunk and some fuck boy climbs onto you while you're passed oout, it's still not your fault.

A woman's clothing is no indication of consent.

 

[DJtearegas]

But you're still not to blame for having your stuff stolen and you being stabbed. Likewise, with sexual assault, if you get black out drunk and some fuck boy climbs onto you while you're passed oout, it's still not your fault.

A woman's clothing is no indication of consent.

no, youre not to blame, but you could have some fucking sense of personal responsibility and take basic steps to prevent a bad thing happening to you

if you don't take these steps, you're being willfully ignorant and living in a fantasy world without considering the harsh realities of real life, which is no surprise, because many white kids (especially those well off enough to support an expensive hobby and post about it on the internet) have yet to face anything outside of their sheltered lifestyle, so it doesn't catch me off guard when pinknames on here act like everyone should treat them like princesses and everything should be perfect all the time

/rant

 

[louie.mirags]

Well, if I or you see a chick with her tits hanging out, we don't go rape her. And if I see a $20 hanging out of your pocket I am not going to rob it. A women partying in a frat house does not mean she is asking for it. It means she wants to party at a frat house. Doesn't make the person raping her less responsible. Usually dudes who can't get laid or are jealous are the ones blaming the victim.

The biggest difference between getting yourself robbed and getting raped (with your cleavage out at a frat house) is that most likely the valuables are just items you're attached to. These are replaceable items (for the part). When a person is raped it affects them mentally and physically. There is no replacing those hurt feelings. Of course somebody could get PTSD from getting robbed but what was taken is replaceable.

tl;dr a person who is raped should not be blamed regardless of the circumstances...

 

[californiagrown]

Well, if I or you see a chick with her tits hanging out, we don't go rape her. And if I see a $20 hanging out of your pocket I am not going to rob it. A women partying in a frat house does not mean she is asking for it. It means she wants to party at a frat house. Doesn't make the person raping her less responsible. Usually dudes who can't get laid or are jealous are the ones blaming the victim.

The biggest difference between getting yourself robbed and getting raped (with your cleavage out at a frat house) is that most likely the valuables are just items you're attached to. These are replaceable items (for the part). When a person is raped it affects them mentally and physically. There is no replacing those hurt feelings. Of course somebody could get PTSD from getting robbed but what was taken is replaceable.

tl;dr a person who is raped should not be blamed regardless of the circumstances...

But someone who gets robbed should be blamed in certain circumstances?

 

[louie.mirags]

But someone who gets robbed should be blamed in certain circumstances?

hmmm no I don't think so. I did focus on the rape victims more and comparing the differences between the two but I wouldn't say blame the victim in either scenario. Just because somebody is walking through a bad neighborhood with fancy jewelry or a chick drinking in a frat house doesn't mean they're inviting it.

I mentioned this in my last post but the crowd that seems to blame the women for getting herself raped are the same dudes who wish they were the ones fucking her. In some form or another they are sexually frustrated and take that out on the victim. The women who think she was asking for it are jealous they are not getting the same attention. This is the case a lot of the time.

 

[safety.third]

op i think you would get more of answers you are looking for if you changed your analogy, theft is just too far of a step away from rape.

a more reasonable comparison would probably be along the lines of a cyclist not wearing a helmet, maybe even at night with or without lights, who gets hit by a drunk driver. they suffer a permanent brain injury that severely impacts the rest of their life and their family's. in this hypothetical case, the brain injury would have been completely preventable, if they were wearing a helmet.

clearly the drunk driver was at fault. they are an easy person at which to point the finger (rightly so) and to mark as a shit stain on society. however i know there are people out there who would immediately hop on their high horse about the cyclist not using a helmet, lights, and riding at night.

or how about an advanced skier not wearing a helmet, who gets hit from behind by jerry who is flying down the hill out of control. maybe the skier hits a tree and has the same sort of preventable brain injury that has a huge life long impact. once again someone else is clearly at fault, but i think we all know there are people so adamant about helmet use, they would say, "damn that sucks, but that guy should have been wearing a helmet."

in the same way a girl should be free to go out, have a good time, feel safe, and not get raped, people should be free to go out and do the things they enjoy and use safety equipment as they see adequate and not get seriously injured by other people fucking up. the double standard you notice exists in that some of these people who have bad things happen to them get "blamed" for not taking steps to avoid a dangerous life changing (most importantly COMPARABLE) consequence, that was strictly a result of some other piece of shit, except in the case of rape where people are moving away from saying things like "she shouldn't have (fill in the blank of risky behavior)"

but to offer my opinion of your question, i think what you are observing is this new push for lack of a better phrase, no tolerance proactive rape prevention. ive noticed it too, and it seems like there's a movement to reduce instances of rape by 100% shunning the behavior. this is basically an attitude that both explicitly and implicitly takes an aggressive stance against rapists and their actions and avoids any justification of rape cases on behalf of the rapist. this includes things like not victim shaming, being open and supportive towards victims, and at every opportunity publicly deeming any act of rape as one of the worse wrongs a person can commit. and while we're here, let me just state that i'm pretty much on board with this approach, as rape is a severely disgusting act that demonstrates an complete lapse of any morals. honestly, i wish hell was real so all the rapists, pedophiles, animal abusers, and murderers could burn forever. while it might seem like an extreme one-sided approach, for the sake of potentially stopping even just one case of rape, it's worth it.

i recall a rape joke thread in nsg, whether it was simply a discussion about them or someone trying to tell one, i can't remember. anyway, someone in the thread commented the importance for not laughing at rape jokes or even being idly complacent. among the people listen there is a possibility for one or more of which to have the potential to rape another person. even though the person telling the joke or the people laughing find it entirely in jest, the person who may be have a rapist lurking within them see the exchange very differently. they see the conversation as a justification that what they may be consider to be acceptable. for this reason, i believe it is important to speak out against that kind of shit. for the sake of any potential victim its worth saying. even better if you provide the reasoning. that was just an idea that resonated with me (months ago), i wanted to bring it back up.

tl:dr to everyone getting hung up about rape and theft not being comparable, what are your responses to my scenarios? (dude getting hit by drunk driver, tom wallisch getting hit by gaper). and to speak out against rape so people looking to justify it know how fucked they are

 

[californiagrown]

there's a whole lotta victim blaming going here...
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...for-suspect-police-say/ar-BBhHQte?ocid=LENDHP

 

[deleted5]

because it's a crime that usually involves women

 

[californiagrown]

op i think you would get more of answers you are looking for if you changed your analogy, theft is just too far of a step away from rape.

a more reasonable comparison would probably be along the lines of a cyclist not wearing a helmet, maybe even at night with or without lights, who gets hit by a drunk driver. they suffer a permanent brain injury that severely impacts the rest of their life and their family's. in this hypothetical case, the brain injury would have been completely preventable, if they were wearing a helmet.

clearly the drunk driver was at fault. they are an easy person at which to point the finger (rightly so) and to mark as a shit stain on society. however i know there are people out there who would immediately hop on their high horse about the cyclist not using a helmet, lights, and riding at night.

or how about an advanced skier not wearing a helmet, who gets hit from behind by jerry who is flying down the hill out of control. maybe the skier hits a tree and has the same sort of preventable brain injury that has a huge life long impact. once again someone else is clearly at fault, but i think we all know there are people so adamant about helmet use, they would say, "damn that sucks, but that guy should have been wearing a helmet."

in the same way a girl should be free to go out, have a good time, feel safe, and not get raped, people should be free to go out and do the things they enjoy and use safety equipment as they see adequate and not get seriously injured by other people fucking up. the double standard you notice exists in that some of these people who have bad things happen to them get "blamed" for not taking steps to avoid a dangerous life changing (most importantly COMPARABLE) consequence, that was strictly a result of some other piece of shit, except in the case of rape where people are moving away from saying things like "she shouldn't have (fill in the blank of risky behavior)"

but to offer my opinion of your question, i think what you are observing is this new push for lack of a better phrase, no tolerance proactive rape prevention. ive noticed it too, and it seems like there's a movement to reduce instances of rape by 100% shunning the behavior. this is basically an attitude that both explicitly and implicitly takes an aggressive stance against rapists and their actions and avoids any justification of rape cases on behalf of the rapist. this includes things like not victim shaming, being open and supportive towards victims, and at every opportunity publicly deeming any act of rape as one of the worse wrongs a person can commit. and while we're here, let me just state that i'm pretty much on board with this approach, as rape is a severely disgusting act that demonstrates an complete lapse of any morals. honestly, i wish hell was real so all the rapists, pedophiles, animal abusers, and murderers could burn forever. while it might seem like an extreme one-sided approach, for the sake of potentially stopping even just one case of rape, it's worth it.

i recall a rape joke thread in nsg, whether it was simply a discussion about them or someone trying to tell one, i can't remember. anyway, someone in the thread commented the importance for not laughing at rape jokes or even being idly complacent. among the people listen there is a possibility for one or more of which to have the potential to rape another person. even though the person telling the joke or the people laughing find it entirely in jest, the person who may be have a rapist lurking within them see the exchange very differently. they see the conversation as a justification that what they may be consider to be acceptable. for this reason, i believe it is important to speak out against that kind of shit. for the sake of any potential victim its worth saying. even better if you provide the reasoning. that was just an idea that resonated with me (months ago), i wanted to bring it back up.

tl:dr to everyone getting hung up about rape and theft not being comparable, what are your responses to my scenarios? (dude getting hit by drunk driver, tom wallisch getting hit by gaper). and to speak out against rape so people looking to justify it know how fucked they are

You are one dumb motherfucker if you can't see the difference between a malicious act that preys upon someone else, and an accident that unintentionally hurts some one.

 

[Troy.]

You are one dumb motherfucker if you can't see the difference between a malicious act that preys upon someone else, and an accident that unintentionally hurts some one.

I think his analogy was spot on actually. You don't intentionally get robbed. You don't intentionally get hit by a beginner skier. You don't intentionally get raped. His thinking is from the victim's point of view, not the perpetrators.

 

[deleted5]

Well, if I or you see a chick with her tits hanging out, we don't go rape her. And if I see a $20 hanging out of your pocket I am not going to rob it. A women partying in a frat house does not mean she is asking for it. It means she wants to party at a frat house. Doesn't make the person raping her less responsible. Usually dudes who can't get laid or are jealous are the ones blaming the victim.

The biggest difference between getting yourself robbed and getting raped (with your cleavage out at a frat house) is that most likely the valuables are just items you're attached to. These are replaceable items (for the part). When a person is raped it affects them mentally and physically. There is no replacing those hurt feelings. Of course somebody could get PTSD from getting robbed but what was taken is replaceable.

tl;dr a person who is raped should not be blamed regardless of the circumstances...

But if you do go to a frat house and you end up drinking too much you're putting yourself in a dangerous situation. I'm not saying what's done to her is going to be right because its not. But come on we all know what goes on there. If I was with one of my friends and she's a girl and she got too drunk at a frat house I would literally just pick her up and take her home.

But I think with Rape there's three categories, two are not the victim's fault. Using force, and being so intoxicated you're passed out or close to it.

But then the third situation we should be questioning the I wouldn't have done it sober. There's a fine line between being too drunk, and then not doing something you would have done sober.

 

[californiagrown]

I think his analogy was spot on actually. You don't intentionally get robbed. You don't intentionally get hit by a beginner skier. You don't intentionally get raped. His thinking is from the victim's point of view, not the perpetrators.

I am one dumb motherfucker for completely missing the point.

 

[Turner.]

What kind of sociopath blames a person who, through no fault of their own, is a victim of a crime?

You, man. You've been doing it throughout this entire fucking discussion.

For example, people have repeatedly explained to you that someone who is raped at frat party should not be blamed for the sexual assault. This is because everyone who attends a party should be able to consent to any sexual acts perpetrated against them at that party. Anyone who performs a sexual act with that person without getting his consent, is at fault. If a person is sexually assaulted while he is incapacitated, it is not his fault. People have repeatedly explained this to you.

In turn, you have repeatedly said "well what if it is their fault".

See, you did it again right here:

Yet what is your gut reaction to hearing about a rich white guy loudly flashing money to everyone he sees in the hood and then getting mugged?

I know I would think "what an idiot".

That's not right, and that view needs to change. Or does it?

You're actively suggesting that we should call girls who are raped, idiots. You are blaming rape victims. You are the sociopath.

 

[louie.mirags]

But if you do go to a frat house and you end up drinking too much you're putting yourself in a dangerous situation. I'm not saying what's done to her is going to be right because its not. But come on we all know what goes on there. If I was with one of my friends and she's a girl and she got too drunk at a frat house I would literally just pick her up and take her home.

But I think with Rape there's three categories, two are not the victim's fault. Using force, and being so intoxicated you're passed out or close to it.

But then the third situation we should be questioning the I wouldn't have done it sober. There's a fine line between being too drunk, and then not doing something you would have done sober.

So, the dudes who rape the chick who is too drunk aren't even being mentioned? If she is responsible for what happens to her when she is passed out, how come the dudes aren't even mentioned and they're conscious? Rape is wrong regardless if she has cleavage hanging out in a frat house. The fact that you're even attempting to take the blame off the savages who would be raping her is odd as fuck

 

[californiagrown]

You, man. You've been doing it throughout this entire fucking discussion.

For example, people have repeatedly explained to you that someone who is raped at frat party should not be blamed for the sexual assault. This is because everyone who attends a party should be able to consent to any sexual acts perpetrated against them at that party. Anyone who performs a sexual act with that person without getting his consent, is at fault. If a person is sexually assaulted while he is incapacitated, it is not his fault. People have repeatedly explained this to you.

In turn, you have repeatedly said "well what if it is their fault".

See, you did it again right here:

You're actively suggesting that we should call girls who are raped, idiots. You are blaming rape victims. You are the sociopath.

You have awful reading comprehension. Seriously. I am actively suggesting that because we don't victim blame in one situation, we shouldn't victim blame in another.

Go back and read the thread you illiterate fuck.

 

[deleted5]

So, the dudes who rape the chick who is too drunk aren't even being mentioned? If she is responsible for what happens to her when she is passed out, how come the dudes aren't even mentioned and they're conscious? Rape is wrong regardless if she has cleavage hanging out in a frat house. The fact that you're even attempting to take the blame off the savages who would be raping her is odd as fuck

that is literally the opposite of what I said reread it.

 

[Turner.]

You have awful reading comprehension. Seriously. I am actively suggesting that because we don't victim blame in one situation, we shouldn't victim blame in another.

Go back and read the thread you illiterate fuck.

ayyy, you seem kind of worked up about this.

So then if I'm to understand you correctly now, this whole thread is about not blaming the victims of robbery. Is that right? Your point being that because we don't blame rape victims (and indeed we don't, because it would take a sociopath to say otherwise) we shouldn't blame robbery victims either.

You seem awfully preoccupied with the culpability of rape victims for this whole discussion to have been about nothing more than exonerating people who have been robbed.

 

[californiagrown]

that is literally the opposite of what I said reread it.

The issue is some people don't have the mental capacity to separate emotion from what they are reading, and so they read what they want, not what the words actually say.

 

[louie.mirags]

that is literally the opposite of what I said reread it.

"But if you do go to a frat house and you end up drinking too much you're putting yourself in a dangerous situation. I'm not saying what's done to her is going to be right because its not. But come on we all know what goes on there"

So, that isn't you taking the blame off the rapist and putting it on the victim?

 

[louie.mirags]

The issue is some people don't have the mental capacity to separate emotion from what they are reading, and so they read what they want, not what the words actually say.

you're right man! I have no mental capacity. I am retard. I slow. Where I be?

I confused

 

[californiagrown]

ayyy, you seem kind of worked up about this.

So then if I'm to understand you correctly now, this whole thread is about not blaming the victims of robbery. Is that right? Your point being that because we don't blame rape victims (and indeed we don't, because it would take a sociopath to say otherwise) we shouldn't blame robbery victims either.

You seem awfully preoccupied with the culpability of rape victims for this whole discussion to have been about nothing more than exonerating people who have been robbed.

Not just robbery, that was the vehicle with which to start the discussion. Its about all victim blaming, and the point at which it becomes okay, or not.

Is it ever okay? Is the victim ever responsible for their victimization? Even when they knowingly put themselves in an extraordinarily dangerous situation?

Because victim blaming seems to be condoned in some situations, and forbidden in others.

 

[NSwidow]

Not just robbery, that was the vehicle with which to start the discussion. Its about all victim blaming, and the point at which it becomes okay, or not.

Is it ever okay? Is the victim ever responsible for their victimization? Even when they knowingly put themselves in an extraordinarily dangerous situation?

Because victim blaming seems to be condoned in some situations, and forbidden in others.

Good fucking lord. You are equating physical possessions with rape. That's your problem. You go "Hey, a crime is a crime." when that's not fucking true. If it was, then lets compare, murder with illegally downloading movies. They're both crimes!

Also, stealing things could be thought of in a thief's head as a victimless crime. Stealing from a house when there is no one home. Breaking into a car when there's no one around. They probably justify it by saying the victim has insurance. Whereas to rape someone, you literally have them in your hands. Inflicting pain and destroying someone's life.

Then you have the nerve to say that its the same. And if one can be blamed for having their shit stolen, one can be blamed for being fucking raped.

OP remind me to NEVER go to a party with you.