• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Rape Victims: Do They Have a Responsibility in Getting Themselve Raped?

Do rape victims have a responsibility in having been raped?

  • Yes, they always do.

    Votes: 2 4.4%
  • No, they never do.

    Votes: 36 80.0%
  • It depends; sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.

    Votes: 7 15.6%

  • Total voters
    45

Sultan Of Swing

Well-Known Member
You chose a male pronoun in dealing with my gender neutral scenario.
Would you say the same for a female who is raped?

Caution:
Sneakiness again.
Yes, I think anyone who gets drunk and wanders around alone in public is stupid, or made a stupid decision, if that's better.

Responsibility still lies with the aggressor.
 

FearGod

Freedom Of Mind
A shocking news over there, the man is kind of an animal but i think the woman was
responsible for giving them the chance by being intoxicated.


Pervert is jailed after admitting raping an 'extremely drunk' woman who he found lying unconscious in the street
  • Peter Nicholson woke his victim while he was having sex with her on road
  • Had taken one leg out of her trousers to rape her before stealing her phone
  • Admitted carrying out attack on woman who was 'paralytically intoxicated'
  • The 27-year-old was today jailed for six years at Grimbsy Crown Court

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...n-lying-unconscious-street.html#ixzz40QhgNCWU
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 

Smart_Guy

...
Premium Member
Guys, responsibility here does not mean sharing it with the offender. The offender is 100% responsible, at least in rape cases. Responsibility here means having a part in the scenario that could be controlled.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
...but i think the woman was
responsible for giving them the chance by being intoxicated.

Precisely why, and in what sense, is she responsible, FearGod? It can be said that anyone who is the victim of any crime "gave someone a chance of victimizing them". After all, no perpetrator of a crime could commit his or her crime unless someone gave them a chance to do so. But does that mean all victims are also in some sense responsible for becoming victims? Or are only some victims responsible in some sense for becoming victims?
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Guys, responsibility here does not mean sharing it with the offender. The offender is 100% responsible, at least in rape cases. Responsibility here means having a part in the scenario that could be controlled.
I don't think I can accept or use such a definition of responsibility. Certainly not for rape.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
But if it is the latter, it wouldn't be rape. Asking for something means wanting it, and here rape wouldn't be rape then ;)
That makes no sense for me. There is rough, consensual sex, and there is rape. There is no blurry line, no middle ground.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Yes, I think anyone who gets drunk and wanders around alone in public is stupid, or made a stupid decision, if that's better.
Responsibility still lies with the aggressor.
I agree, except that I'd avoid the word "stupid" in favor of the kinder & gentler "unfortunate".
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Sorry, I mean my community, not country. I can't judge the whole country really. It's big. I also say it according to my real life experience.
I notice a funny thing about gauging the frequency of rape.
Whether a victim will tell one depends so much upon their relationship.
Some people might never have a victim open up to them.
Others do hear of it.
I know victims, but what I don't know is how many other acquaintances are, but just haven't told me.
And statistics must be viewed with a jaundiced (skeptical) eye because definitions vary with time & political perspective.
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Precisely how "don't we ignore the actions of the victim"? By giving the killers lesser sentences? What exactly do you mean in concrete terms?
Why does it have to be anything concrete? In this context it’s really just being able to say “If you get involved in illegal drug dealing, you’re putting yourself at greater risk of violence or even murder” without someone responding that we shouldn’t say that because it’s blaming the victim. In the wider context, it’s striking a balance between preventing actual victim blaming and promoting reasonable safety messages.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
Why does it have to be anything concrete? In this context it’s really just being able to say “If you get involved in illegal drug dealing, you’re putting yourself at greater risk of violence or even murder” without someone responding that we shouldn’t say that because it’s blaming the victim. In the wider context, it’s striking a balance between preventing actual victim blaming and promoting reasonable safety messages.

Do you think it's possible you might be equivocating on the word, "responsibility"?
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Do you think it's possible you might be equivocating on the word, "responsibility"?
No, I think I’m actually countering equivocation on the word “responsibility” (which is why I’m trying to avoid using it). The “responsibility” of an attacker for their crime is an entirely different concept from the “responsibility” of a victim who chose to put themselves in a position where the crime was significantly more likely and it is using the same word to refer to both concepts that leads to this issue in the first place.

There is no logical reason why the two aspects shouldn’t be addressed entirely differently. We should be able to address rape, assault or theft as threats that exist just like environmental threats that don’t involve the actions of other people and address how we can take reasonable steps to reduce our risk of suffering from them. We’d obviously also want to address how we can prevent rape, assault and thefts happening at all but that’s really an entirely different conversation, largely with an entirely different group of people.
 

Sunstone

De Diablo Del Fora
Premium Member
No, I think I’m actually countering equivocation on the word “responsibility” (which is why I’m trying to avoid using it). The “responsibility” of an attacker for their crime is an entirely different concept from the “responsibility” of a victim who chose to put themselves in a position where the crime was significantly more likely and it is using the same word to refer to both concepts that leads to this issue in the first place.

There is no logical reason why the two aspects shouldn’t be addressed entirely differently. We should be able to address rape, assault or theft as threats that exist just like environmental threats that don’t involve the actions of other people and address how we can take reasonable steps to reduce our risk of suffering from them. We’d obviously also want to address how we can prevent rape, assault and thefts happening at all but that’s really an entirely different conversation, largely with an entirely different group of people.

Thanks for your response. We seem to be in substantial agreement here.
 
Top