Victim Blaming (attempt 2)

[Earthtank]

Let’s talk Victim Blaming


Ok now that you’ve click on my thread and fell for my trap (mwahahaha) or maybe you really do wanna talk victim blaming, let’s get to it.


I want to start off by stating my stance on the criminals (abusers, rapists, etc.) and the victims, my official and outward public opinion is that I never blame the victim for the sole purpose of letting the criminals know that this will NEVER EVER be tolerated nor ever give them a precedent to try and fall back on. Now, with that pc junk out of the way, let’s get to the fun stuff. I will play out 2 different scenarios with my opinion at the end, I would encourage people to join in.


Scenario 1:

A random lady goes jogging a few times week, same days at the same time, her creepy neighbor is constantly watching and stalking her, he knows when she’s home alone and pretty much knows her schedule. He devises a plan and one day rapes, when he’s done he threatens to kill her if she ever reports him. Unfortunately, he ends up committing this crime 2 more times before she finally calls the authorities and he gets thrown in jail.

Even though she could have reported him after the first instance but, there was enough fear (for her life and possibly others that lived with her) and cause for her not do so. Now this unfortunately, happened 2 more times before she finally reported him.

Let’s look at the criminal and the victim separately for a bit. The rapist got what he wanted, I highly doubt any person can defend the rapist in this case so I won’t elaborate any further. The victim got raped, traumatized, physically and mentally messed up as well as a bunch of other “scars” for the rest of her life, the victim was 100% a loser in this situation. She did nothing to deserve it, she could not escape it, she did not encourage it nor have the power to stop it.

In this scenario, I blame the victim 0% and 100% on the rapists.


Scenario 2:

A female personal trainer is training a famous athlete (for those wondering this scenario is loosely based off Antonio Brown’s case), after training him for a few months or even a year, one day she claims that on 3 separate occasions he exploited her and sexually assaulted her as she claims he used manipulation to bring her in to his world and get her name out there (among other athletes) as a trainer, where should would profit in return. I guess they would both profit in their own way. And for sake of this scenario, let’s not assume she only claims this happened, let’s go ahead and say this 100% happened, he 100% sexually assaulted her on 3 separate occasions.


Let’s look at the criminal and the victim separately once more. Let’s start with the “criminal”, while yes, he did possibly abuse his power as a famous athlete (and for sake of this scenario only) yes, he did sexually assault her 3 different times and yes, he did understand by getting sexual favors he would in turn “make her famous” among other athletes. I could add more but you get the idea.


Ok now to the “victim”, is she really a victim? Let’s look and think about this logically, after the first sexual assault, she must have gone home and thought about what happened, right? She must have recalled how weak and abused she felt, right? I mean for crying out loud she must have at the very least thought about what they both did to end up in that situation. Ok now that she spent all night or a few days thinning about it, we would assume if it truly were sexual assault, she would either 1) quit 2) report it to the cops or 3) Have a plan in place to make sure this doesn’t happen again. I am 100% fine if she chose option 3 since, it may or may not have really been that bad (I don’t know) and I don’t want to lose my job over it.

I am 100% fine with always giving the “victim” a pass the first time things like this happen because they could have been caught off guard and just went along with whatever was going on out of fear. Fine, I get it the world is a cruel place and sometimes crap happens. So far she is 100% innocent in my book. But, that’s not where it stop, she went back again (remember she claims 3 separate occasions) so she gets “sexually assaulted” again all while still holding out for hopes that she will get famous among other athletes and be brought in to her “abusers” world and all the bling bling that goes along with it.

The first time it happened we gave her a pass for the reasons stated above, what about the 2nd and 3rd time? Why not report him and sue him after the 2nd time? Why let it happen 3 times? Is she really a victim or just some “gold digging” modern day prostitute hoping to get famous? This is the day and age of social media and the metoo movement, why not come out after the 2nd time it happened? We all know that today whether allegations are true or not people are losing their jobs. She is not training some random dude in the woods that no one can find or reach, she’s training a famous athlete that the entire world (at least the US) knows, so why did she really stay quiet? Personally, I believe she was staying quiet during all this “sexual assaults” (which are bs) because she was hoping for a big “ pay day” but when she found out there was no gold at the end of the rainbow she played her victim card. To me this sounds seems like it was a consensual or at the very least an implied consensual agreement that turned negative, like a bad business partnership. She was fine “training” him even though she admits he was being manipulative and assaulting her, and he seems to not have a problem keeping her hired as long as they both got what they wanted.

In this scenario, I blame the “victim” 70% and 30% on the “criminal” although I don’t really consider him a criminal in the true sense, yeah he abused his power and all messed up stuff but, she had plenty of time to stop it. Had she complained after the first time I would not have blamed her at all.

 

[Orbit]

You have to understand how power and trauma work. Why would any woman report any assault when what happens to women are that they are immediately attacked, disbelieved, and asked what they were wearing. Who's going to believe her?

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

...

Scenario 2:

A female personal trainer is training a famous athlete (for those wondering this scenario is loosely based off Antonio Brown’s case), after training him for a few months or even a year, one day she claims that on 3 separate occasions he exploited her and sexually assaulted her as she claims he used manipulation to bring her in to his world and get her name out there (among other athletes) as a trainer, where should would profit in return. I guess they would both profit in their own way. And for sake of this scenario, let’s not assume she only claims this happened, let’s go ahead and say this 100% happened, he 100% sexually assaulted her on 3 separate occasions.


Let’s look at the criminal and the victim separately once more. Let’s start with the “criminal”, while yes, he did possibly abuse his power as a famous athlete (and for sake of this scenario only) yes, he did sexually assault her 3 different times and yes, he did understand by getting sexual favors he would in turn “make her famous” among other athletes. I could add more but you get the idea.


Ok now to the “victim”, is she really a victim? Let’s look and think about this logically, after the first sexual assault, she must have gone home and thought about what happened, right? She must have recalled how weak and abused she felt, right? I mean for crying out loud she must have at the very least thought about what they both did to end up in that situation. Ok now that she spent all night or a few days thinning about it, we would assume if it truly were sexual assault, she would either 1) quit 2) report it to the cops or 3) Have a plan in place to make sure this doesn’t happen again. I am 100% fine if she chose option 3 since, it may or may not have really been that bad (I don’t know) and I don’t want to lose my job over it.

I am 100% fine with always giving the “victim” a pass the first time things like this happen because they could have been caught off guard and just went along with whatever was going on out of fear. Fine, I get it the world is a cruel place and sometimes crap happens. So far she is 100% innocent in my book. But, that’s not where it stop, she went back again (remember she claims 3 separate occasions) so she gets “sexually assaulted” again all while still holding out for hopes that she will get famous among other athletes and be brought in to her “abusers” world and all the bling bling that goes along with it.

The first time it happened we gave her a pass for the reasons stated above, what about the 2nd and 3rd time? Why not report him and sue him after the 2nd time? Why let it happen 3 times? Is she really a victim or just some “gold digging” modern day prostitute hoping to get famous? This is the day and age of social media and the metoo movement, why not come out after the 2nd time it happened? We all know that today whether allegations are true or not people are losing their jobs. She is not training some random dude in the woods that no one can find or reach, she’s training a famous athlete that the entire world (at least the US) knows, so why did she really stay quiet? Personally, I believe she was staying quiet during all this “sexual assaults” (which are bs) because she was hoping for a big “ pay day” but when she found out there was no gold at the end of the rainbow she played her victim card. To me this sounds seems like it was a consensual or at the very least an implied consensual agreement that turned negative, like a bad business partnership. She was fine “training” him even though she admits he was being manipulative and assaulting her, and he seems to not have a problem keeping her hired as long as they both got what they wanted.

In this scenario, I blame the “victim” 70% and 30% on the “criminal” although I don’t really consider him a criminal in the true sense, yeah he abused his power and all messed up stuff but, she had plenty of time to stop it. Had she complained after the first time I would not have blamed her at all.

What facts are missing in your scenario? There are at least 2 variables you haven't touched on.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I tend to think if a victim capitalizes in some way, ie; tolerates the abuse to obtain some benefit, then that victim must share at least some ofthe blame as there was something to gain.

 

[HonestJoe]

I want to start off by stating my stance on the criminals (abusers, rapists, etc.) and the victims, my official and outward public opinion is that I never blame the victim for the sole purpose of letting the criminals know that this will NEVER EVER be tolerated nor ever give them a precedent to try and fall back on. Now, with that pc junk out of the way, let’s get to the fun stuff.

So you're so embarrassed by your real opinion that you're not willing to be open about it? Maybe you should consider why that would be.

I think your conclusions here are wrong for a couple of reasons.

The first issue is that you're assuming that there is some fixed amount of blame to be distributed, that if a victim does something wrong, that somehow makes the actions of their attacker less serious. The simple fact is that a criminal, assuming they're sane and not acting under any duress, is 100% responsible for their criminal actions regardless of what anyone else did.

The classic less controversial example would be a stolen car. If someone forces the lock on your car door and steals the car, they're obviously responsible for the crime. If you left your car unlocked and that same person steals your car, they'd be no less guilty of stealing your car and no less responsible for choosing to do so. You'd be responsible for leaving it unlocked but that's entirely separate.

In these specific examples, you make some common flawed assumptions. Significantly, you acknowledge the first woman could fear retaliation and thus be reluctant to report the crime but you don't give that same credit to the second woman. Just because there isn't a literal spoken threat doesn't mean the victim won't fear the consequences of reporting the crime. If anything, the situation of a close personal and professional relationship creates more scope for her fears.

Similarly, you say that the second woman could simple choose to quit her job after the first attack (which is possible but not without risks and consequences of its own). You don't suggest that the first woman could choose to stop going jogging, even though that would be less impactful that quitting a job. Obviously neither action should be automatically expected of either victim and their choosing not to do that, for whatever reason, doesn't make them in any way responsible for their being attacked nor does it make their attackers any less responsible.

You seem to have an issue given your second example is based on real people (I'm not aware of the case in question though) and you seem to be reflecting your personal opinions on that case (consciously or not) rather than addressing it neutrally or logically. You project the idea of the second victim being a "gold digging modern day prostitute" but the fact remains that even if she was an actual prostitute, it would be equally criminal for someone to sexually assault her.

If the sex was consensual, (as you suggest, with zero evidence) it wouldn't be sexual assault and the man would be the victim of the false accusation (though then it wouldn't be a valid or honest comparison with your first hypothetical). If any instance of sex wasn't consensual though, even if they'd had consensual sex previously, the act would be criminal sexual assault or rape and, again, the actions of the attacker would remain entirely his own responsibility. Any questions about the actions or motives or the woman would be entirely separate.

 

[Nakosis]

Why blame anyone? We are all victims of ourselves. The rapist had desires, urges they couldn't control. The other had fears they could not set aside to call the police after the first time.

One paid for the consequences of their actions. The other paid for the consequences of their inaction. Folks do what they do because of feelings, emotions, desires that are not under conscious control.

While it is always necessary to deal with the consequences of our actions, it is not necessary to place blame. Neither could have done anything other than what they did. You assume one had and the other did not.

 

[epronovost]

I tend to think if a victim capitalizes in some way, ie; tolerates the abuse to obtain some benefit, then that victim must share at least some ofthe blame as there was something to gain.

I personnaly blame the abuser twice more. They basically dangle a reward and abuse trust and faith for getting even more out of their victim. In such scenario, a victim can be so blinded that they only realise they are being abused after several instances and if/when they do, they tend to minimize it in the hope the payoff is finally going to come or worst that the inverse promise can turn out to be just as likely (if you were promised good references, bad references can also be created as a vengeance). In other words, they aren't just sexualy assaulted, they are also frauded. I don't blame less a perpetrator for being better at lying and manipulating than your average sexual predator.

 

[PureX]

In this scenario, I blame the “victim” 70% and 30% on the “criminal” although I don’t really consider him a criminal in the true sense, yeah he abused his power and all messed up stuff but, she had plenty of time to stop it. Had she complained after the first time I would not have blamed her at all.

I see no difference between these scenarios except the stated threat of extreme bodily harm in the first scenario and the implied threat of destroying the woman's livelihood in the second. And I don't see at all how this changed your mind about who is to blame. Or who is a victim. Clearly both women are victims, and both men are rapists. And the number of occurrences, or the means used as force, is not relevant to the matter of guilt.

 

[Earthtank]

You have to understand how power and trauma work. Why would any woman report any assault when what happens to women are that they are immediately attacked, disbelieved, and asked what they were wearing. Who's going to believe her?

Who says they are immediately disbelieved? do you have stats? Also, women are asked that they wearing, doing, and a whole other plethora of questions in order to gather evidence and put the whole thing together, not used to shame them or make them seem crazy. When women are telling the truth and everything adds up they are believed. The system is not perfect (as nothing is) but for the most part it works in these situations.

 

[Earthtank]

What facts are missing in your scenario? There are at least 2 variables you haven't touched on.

please elaborate.

 

[Earthtank]

I tend to think if a victim capitalizes in some way, ie; tolerates the abuse to obtain some benefit, then that victim must share at least some ofthe blame as there was something to gain.

And that's my main point in certain situations. Hence the difference between the 2 scenarios

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

please elaborate.

´
What are the exact laws? Did the athlete keep the bargain?

 

[Earthtank]

So you're so embarrassed by your real opinion that you're not willing to be open about it? Maybe you should consider why that would be.

No by no means that is was i said.

The first issue is that you're assuming that there is some fixed amount of blame to be distributed, that if a victim does something wrong, that somehow makes the actions of their attacker less serious.

I truly do not think you either read my full post or understand my stance as I do not believe this would have been something you would say. In regards to "fixed amount of blame", as I said in my post "Let’s look at the criminal and the victim separately" what is meant by this is let's see how each person might have aided or added to the situation through their actions or lack thereof. There isnt alway blame to be distributed, look at scenario 1 vs 2

The simple fact is that a criminal, assuming they're sane and not acting under any duress, is 100% responsible for their criminal actions regardless of what anyone else did.

Agreed but what constitutes a "crime" or a "criminal" in scenario 2?

You seem to have an issue given your second example is based on real people (I'm not aware of the case in question though)

Google: Antonio brown sexual harassment, However, i did say its loosely based off the case, not 100%

and you seem to be reflecting your personal opinions on that case (consciously or not) rather than addressing it neutrally or logically.

After stating and setting up the scenario I gave my opinion. And even if you want to disregard my opinion the facts of this scenario are still the same.

You project the idea of the second victim being a "gold digging modern day prostitute"

Yes because in this scenario she has already acknowledged the fact that there was actually something promised at the end. Prostitute exchange sex for money while this trainer was exchanging whatever she classified as "sexual assault" in hopes for getting famous among other athletes

 

[Earthtank]

I see no difference between these scenarios except the stated threat of extreme bodily harm in the first scenario and the implied threat of destroying the woman's livelihood in the second. And I don't see at all how this changed your mind about who is to blame. Or who is a victim. Clearly both women are victims, and both men are rapists. And the number of occurrences, or the means used as force, is not relevant to the matter of guilt.

So let's focus on scenario 2, so you are saying even though she went back multiple times after she claims she was sexually assaulted an she admitted that she could actually prosper in return that she is still 100% free of any blame at all?

 

[Earthtank]

´
What are the exact laws? Did the athlete keep the bargain?

Keeping the bargain is irrelevant to this particular scenario. How did her silence and constant return back to her "job" attribute to what she claims happened?

 

[Earthtank]

One paid for the consequences of their actions. The other paid for the consequences of their inaction.

And that is one of the main points I am trying to make

While it is always necessary to deal with the consequences of our actions, it is not necessary to place blame.

I disagree here, if you want to play the victim card and cry multiple "sexual assault" and do NOT wish for it to happen again you need to understand how after the first (maybe even second time) how did you contribute to this going on more than once or twice. If no one ever thinks they are wrong they will never change their actions, if thye never change their actions the results will repeat themselves.

Neither could have done anything other than what they did.

Again, disagree, if I get punched or sexually assaulted once or twice i better and i did not like it i better have plan for make sure it does not happen a 3rd, 4th or 5th time.

 

[epronovost]

So let's focus on scenario 2, so you are saying even though she went back multiple times after she claims she was sexually assaulted an she admitted that she could actually prosper in return that she is still 100% free of any blame at all?

Is someone who lost a lot of money to a frauder more to blame than someone who lost just a little? Why are we to assume in the context of your second example that the sexual predator isn't an excellent manipulator? Why is she to realise at each and every single point cognisant that she is being preyed upon?

Let me make another example. If you lent four time money to a person who promised they would refund you with interests and never did. You have been frauded four times. That doesn't mean that at number 1 to 4 you were aware you were getting frauded. In the end, you will accuse such a person of frauding you out of money on four occasions and having someone tell you "then why did you gave him money a third and fourth time?" is frankly extremely stupid. At that speed you might as well blame the victim of scenario one for not being an expert in hand to hand combat capable of kicking the *** of a random violent stalker.

Furthermore, if the person borrowing the money was basically playing heavily on your inferior hierarchical status and lack of financial knowledgge and connection perhapse even preying on your fear of something bad being revealed about you, are you more to blame? You are making a complex situation ridiculously simplistic for the benefit of leavying blame on a victim of sexual assault for no apparent reason.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Keeping the bargain is irrelevant to this particular scenario. How did her silence and constant return back to her "job" attribute to what she claims happened?

Well, depending on the law and whether he kept the bargain, it could be a sex crime.

I.e. she kept her side of the bargain and he didn't and because it involved sex, it could be classed as a sex crime.

 

[crossfire]

Who says they are immediately disbelieved? do you have stats? Also, women are asked that they wearing, doing, and a whole other plethora of questions in order to gather evidence and put the whole thing together, not used to shame them or make them seem crazy. When women are telling the truth and everything adds up they are believed. The system is not perfect (as nothing is) but for the most part it works in these situations.

This is a local story fom 2013 that still makes my blood boil: Young woman was raped by a serial rapist, police gathered evidence of rape, then turned around and charged the girl for filing a false report and the court ordered that she be psychologically brainwashed into doubting that it ever happened. Then whoops! The Colorado police catch the serial rapist and he has a photograph of the young woman tied up with picture ID in the photo, and want the unprocessed evidence the local police had gathered before they turned on her.
Rape victim suing Lynnwood police | HeraldNet.com

 

[Earthtank]

This is a local story fom 2013 that still makes my blood boil: Young woman was raped by a serial rapist, police gathered evidence of rape, then turned around and charged the girl for filing a false report and the court ordered that she be psychologically brainwashed into doubting that it ever happened. Then whoops! The Colorado police catch the serial rapist and he has a photograph of the young woman tied up with picture ID in the photo, and want the unprocessed evidence the local police had gathered before they turned on her.
Rape victim suing Lynnwood police | HeraldNet.com

1 story isn't a trend nor can it be used as the standard. As I said, the system isn't perfect nor are the people in charge, mistakes have been and unfortunately will continue to be made but, the majority of cases are not like this one.