Blaming Women for Being Raped

[jeffrey]

This has my head ticking. Ryan, why are you so adamant to defend rapists?

 

[Ryan2065]

Actually, you've stated that children are incapable of being responsible for themselves.

Really? Please quote exactly where I have said that. I went through every post that I have made up to this point and I have never said anything of the sort.

My claim has always been this... Children are not able to reason as well as adults so they can not be as responsible for their actions as adults.

So, let me get this straight... Saying "Children are not able to reason as well as adults so they can not be as responsible for their actions as adults." Is the same to you as saying... "children are incapable of being responsible for themselves." Please educate me as to how those two statements are the same. I do not see it at all.

The Law would agree with the former position. Prosecuters frequently demand that children be tried as adults; plenty of states are altering the age of criminal accountabiliy; Your submission that "the law agrees with me" is false.

?? The fact alone that there are two separate courts, one for kids and one for adults shows that the law believes that children are not as accountable for their actions as adults. Prosecuters press charges on children as adults when the child murders someone in cold blood. The line is not set in stone when one child attains reason compared to another child. Again, please give evidence to your claim that children can reason as well as adults.

If you can't build some (be it mishappen) construct or guide for how and when one can absolve or transfer "responsibility", i cannot move any further than "uh-huh" and "nuh-huh" positioning. You've refused to provide anything resembling an argument.

Im sorry, what are we argueing here? I thought the argument was "Are some women partly responsible for their rape." Please let me know if I'm wrong. Not really sure how the "age" of someone has to do with this argument.

Your evidence is grossly overated. I've no need of evidence, for i haven't even made a point. I've queried your position, tested its resiliency if you like, and get accusations of misrepresentations (another zealot's tactic).

I'm sorry, why are the only points you seem to want to address are the ones that have to do with children being abducted? I thought this thread was on women being raped.

Now, having reread the thread (again), i'm considerably less inclined to even bother with you. You've been happy to continuously misapply the word "responsibility" (we all have dictionaries too, ya know).

How am I misapplying the word? I have ALWAYS stated that I am using the "cause" definition of the word.
From the www.m-w.com (merriam-webster)

Main Entry: re·spon·si·bil·i·ty
Pronunciation: ri-"spän(t)-s&-'bi-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : the quality or state of being responsible : as a : moral, legal, or mental accountability b : [size=-1]RELIABILITY[/size], [size=-1]TRUSTWORTHINESS[/size]
2 : something for which one is responsible : [size=-1]BURDEN[/size]

So its the quality or state of being responsible, in this case it would be morally. Now, lets look at the definition of responsible.

1 a : liable to be called on to answer b (1) : liable to be called to account as the primary cause, motive, or agent <a committee responsible for the job> (2) : being the cause or explanation <mechanical defects were responsible for the accident> c : liable to legal review or in case of fault to penalties

I only quoted the one that had to do with what I was saying. It says responsible is defined as primary cause. When one says that they share part of the responsibility, with these definitions it means that morally they share some of the responsibility, ie, the rape could have never occurd if they had not done something morally wrong to the guy.
I have always stated that I was dealing with the "causal" part of the definition of responsible and have never misrepresented this word. Please do quote where I have (for I've noticed I seem to type one thing and you seem to read something else)

Most of us have been too polite to point out such obvious failure of vocabulary; occasions intended to clarify said word have been met with abuse, denial or just ignored.

? So are you saying that I have misrepresented the word? please do let me know if I have.

I'm actually getting sick of accounting for all the tiniest details that you insist are irrelevant, for reasons still unexplained. I've spent enough time on this, and you've done little but whine and repeat useless scenarios: You've presented NO substance in the least, and given you're treatment of my and others arguments/critiques, I'm decidedly happy to let the thread speak for itself...

It is quite funny... I have asked a few times now this one question that you have never answered...

I'm sorry, my argument has always been "In some cases women might bear some responsibility for their rape." You have been disagreeing with me on EVERY step of the way, so I only assumed you thought differently than what I have been saying. Or are you in agreement with what I say?

I'll put it in different words for you mr. guy. Is there any circumstance at all that can ever happen where a woman would bear some responsibility for her own rape? IE. Is there any circumstance at all where a woman can have some responsibility on causing her own rape?

 

[Sunstone]

This has my head ticking. Ryan, why are you so adamant to defend rapists?

To be fair to Ryan, I don't think he sees his position as defending rapists. He's said repeatedly that even if the victim is partly responsible for her rape, the rapist deserves to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

BTW, my own position on this is that women can and should take reasonable precautions against rape, but that the rapist is wholely culpable for the rape, even if the woman does not take reasonable precautions.

 

[Ryan2065]

This has my head ticking. Ryan, why are you so adamant to defend rapists?

I am not defending rapists at all. I am only saying that even though bad things happen to people, sometimes the person who the bad thing happened to could of played a part in causing this. This isn't in defense of rapists at all as I have stated many times.

 

[Ryan2065]

To be fair to Ryan, I don't think he sees his position as defending rapists. He's said repeatedly that even if the victim is partly responsible for her rape, the rapist deserves to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

BTW, my own position on this is that women can and should take reasonable precautions against rape, but that the rapist is wholely culpable for the rape, even if the woman does not take reasonable precautions.

This is exactly what I am saying. I don't even think someone who took no precautions against rape should be considered partially responsible for the rape. Those that I think have some responsibility are the ones who know what they are doing greatly increases their chances for rape but they do what they are doing anyways.

I do not think that many cases of rape are like this, but to say that there is never, never been, and never will be a case of rape where the woman partially caused the rape to me is quite wrong. I believe I am just open minded enough to realize that in some circumstances a woman can be partially responsible for her own rape. I never believe a woman can be fully responsible for her own rape, because then she would have wanted it to happen, and it would not be rape.

 

[jeffrey]

Reminds me of what a lawyer tried to say to our safety man at work. A man ran a stop sign, plowed into a truck. The man hired a lawyer, he called our work, tried to sue our company because if our truck had not been going through that intersection at that point in time, his client never would have hit him.

common sense. The least common of the senses.​

 

[Ryan2065]

Reminds me of what a lawyer tried to say to our safety man at work. A man ran a stop sign, plowed into a truck. The man hired a lawyer, he called our work, tried to sue our company because if our truck had not been going through that intersection at that point in time, his client never would have hit him.

Yes, except I am not trying to blame the women for the rape...

 

[jeffrey]

Yes, except I am not trying to blame the women for the rape...

The trucker was not responsible in any way. A woman is not responsible for being raped. The analogies you give are with people doing every day things, legal things. Like operating a train. Or driving a car. Rape is not legal. Operating a train is. See the difference?

 

[jeffrey]

Most rapes happen to women by people they know. Most of the time in their own home. Any rape crisis center will tell the victim that THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM as the rapist or his lawyer would have them believe. Read the sites that help women that have been raped. I find it disturbing attempting to try and put ANY responsiblity on the woman. It's what the crisis centers say a rapist will attempt to do.

 

[Ryan2065]

The trucker was not responsible in any way. A woman is not responsible for being raped. The analogies you give are with people doing every day things, legal things. Like operating a train. Or driving a car. Rape is not legal. Operating a train is. See the difference?

Yes, the analogies I give are with people doing everyday things and then a crime happens... The analogies I give are of people who knowingly put themselves in harms way just for the "thrill" of it. When this happens, even though a crime happens against them, it was an easily forseeable event so to me some of the responsibility of the crime is on them.

Most rapes happen to women by people they know. Most of the time in their own home. Any rape crisis center will tell the victim that THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORMas the rapist or his lawyer would have them believe. Read the sites that help women that have been raped. I find it disturbing attempting to try and put ANY responsiblity on the woman. It's what the crisis centers say a rapist will attempt to do.

Have you read anything that I have posted yet about what my position is on this? As I have stated many times, in most rapes that happen the victim is not responsible for the crime that happened against them. In the same way that in most crimes in general, the victim is not responsible for the crime committed against them. Rape is a very horrible thing, and because of this people are trying their best to be politically correct. This is why I am trying to compare it to things that are less horrible. If a person can be partially responsible for a crime that was commited against them, like robbery, then surely they can be partially responsible for a crime like rape that happened against them?

Again, my position is that in SOME situations a woman might be PARTIALLY responsible for the rape that has happened against her. Is it your position that there can never be any case ever where a woman is not partially responsible for the rape against her?

 

[sonflour_2001]

Here is another situation that I think everyone can agree with.

If some kids are playing chicken with a train and end up getting hit, who is responsible there, the person running the train or thie children?

If you say the children, are they not responsible because they are putting themselves in a situation that they know is more dangerous?

Now lets say that same train operator of the train is actually able to stop the train before it gets to the kids. He decides not to and speeds up to hit the kids. Would the kids not still bear some of the responsibility? They put themselves in that situation.
This is the same argument I am using for rape victims. Some women are like the kids on the track. They like to go out and play with guys, ie leading them on and knowingly putting themselves in dangerous situations where, with the wrong guy, there is a possibility of rape. These women do realize that they are putting themselves in a situation where they might get raped because they do know that there are people out there who rape others. In a perfect world this would not be the case, but I still do believe that SOME of the responsibility is on them if they are the ones that cause the circumstances of the situation (ie knowingly taunting shady guys for the thrill of doing something "dangerous")

No matter what the victim should never be blamed for the actions of someone who has no control over himself. There is no "leading them on" No means no. That's it! If the man can't control himself then he is to blame entirely. Period. As for the man with the million dollars counting his money, while walking down the street, he is in no way responsible for someone's stupidity and crass action if he were to get robbed. That's their lack of control. No blame can be put on him. He did nothing to provoke such an act. We live under the assumption of freedom, and the right to live unaccosted by others even if others may wish to accost us for any reason.

For instance, say there's two people who are mutual enemies but live in the same area. One day one of the men goes to the market. He knows that his enemy works in the market, but he still goes because he wants to go shopping. Oneday, they inevitably meet and his enemy hits him. Was he responsible for his enemies' lack of control? No, not at all.
What I'm trying to say is that it is the offenders responsiblity to control him or herself at all times. I don't care if a woman is walking through a prison wearing nothing but melted chocolate. Is it probable that she'll get raped? Of course. Is she responsible? Nope. It was not her choice to get raped, but it was their choice to rape her.

It was, however, her choice to wear chocolate...

Dee