Essay talk:Asking for it

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

So your argument here is basically that if a girl is at a party late at night with some guys, and she gets raped, we should consider it her fault because she was 'asking for it'? Not literally, but in a she-set-herself-up-for-failure kind of way? Damian, this is literally just victim blaming. 'Oh, she shouldn't have been wearing such skimpy clothes'. Victim blaming. 'Oh, she shouldn't have been out so late'. Victim blaming. Yes, she should've thought this through a little better. But it doesn't change the fact that she is the victim, she didn't do anything wrong, and she was raped. It isn't her fault. If she didn't give explicit consent (and, for the record, a drunken 'yes' is akin to a no), if a guy went ahead with a sexual act it's rape. It's his fault. KoiDevelopment (thanks, Love!) 13:24, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

I am not arguing... Of course it is his fault. But why is looking at a situation and pointing out what could have been done differently considered victim blaming?--Kingdamian1 (talk) 14:23, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

My response to pretty much all of this essay[edit]

[citation needed] Christopher (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean?--Kingdamian1 (talk) 14:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Every sentence starting with "many", "most" or "the vast majority of..." needs a citation. Christopher (talk) 16:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


Could the point you are making be put more elegantly as 'You should take responsibility for the situations in which you put yourself - and while criminal activity by others cannot be totally avoided, you should minimise the risks'? And what should be done to create a culture in which men do not take advantage of such situations (much as we have a culture of not causing damage to each other generally)? (talk) 09:48, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes! That is what I mean. Of course rape is disgusting. And we should be trying to eliminate such people. But let me tell you one thing... If someone is raped, I don't think that the pain will be felt less if we blame someone... In other words, would you feel better if it is his fault? Or would it be better if this hadn't happened? We have to reevaluate the positions in which we put ourselves!--Kingdamian1 (talk) 16:04, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Firstly, of course it would be better if such things didn't happen.
No, we should not be trying to eliminate these people. We should be trying to eliminate this (the rapist's) behaviour, to rehabilitate those committing these offences.
Now - in the scenario in play - yes, it is his fault. Your views on whether assigning blame lessens the trauma of the rapee, our feelings on the validity of closure (which I am assuming you are referring to, rather than me feeling better after assigning blame in that hypothetical case of me being the rapee - your phrasing is particularly ambiguous as to the concept you are intending to express) be damned, such things do not apply to culpability. Actions such as rape defile the community at large separately to any impact on the rapee. That is why the state has the power to prosecute such cases regardless of the will of the victim.
To advocate otherwise; to say that she (you are using the phrase 'in which we' but I can't help but think that you are meaning 'in which she') shouldn't be putting herself in such positions in the first place; or to imply that the rapee were in any way "asking for it" is victim blaming, by definition.
Caveat/inb4: Literally asking for sex, ie non-coerced, informed invitation and consent... is not what this discussion has been about. Just to formally close that aspect off.
Daev (talk) 16:59, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
So pointing out what could have been done differently is victim blaming? Ok... If I take MY Koran and spit on it in the face of extremist Muslims... and they kill me... OF COURSE it's their fault, but is it victim blaming if you were to point out what I could have done differently?--Kingdamian1 (talk) 19:55, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
See this. Koi "the spelling's on porpose!" development 20:38, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Taking different examples - it is up to you to take responsibility and not walk through a rough area with your purse/wallet showing etc as against taking reasonable precautions to avoid something bad happening - but still encounter the opportunist criminal. It is up to you (in general) to minimise the risks (but not be so scared that you don't do anything/attract attention as a result) and retain a degree of control. And it is possible to create a culture in which 'causing harm' is minimised.
In the case given there is a clear imbalance/misuse of power - but what about the more ambiguous situations (where someone is persuaded against their better judgement)? (talk) 21:33, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
BoN, so consider your scenario. You walk through a rough area, and you get mugged. But, happily, the mugger is caught, and put on trail. The mugger's lawyer then argues that because you didn't take as many precautions as you could've taken (and you could've always taken more precautions) that the mugger should be let go without any charges, because you were "asking for it." -- Onychoprion (talk) 21:46, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
It does say 'reasonable precautions' (I think there is a doctrine of 'what a reasonable person could be expected to do or understand').
We all take some precautions, but accept when the law of diminishing returns sets in - deterring the opportunist thieves (of various kinds) or taking so much time to protect against very low risks that the thieves win by default. (Discounting the 'muggers attack little old lady who is a black belt in judo/cage fighter' stories).
Is there a case for knowing how much risk one wishes to take - and not going further? If you want to drink, do so, but not so much that you are likely to find yourself in situations that are too risky/where you are taken advantage of? How can the general culture be changed - time was when a woman going out unchaperoned was seen as 'asking for it.' (talk) 10:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
@KingDamian's last.
No, the victim blaming is because you are using the victim's foolishness to argue that the perpetrator is less culpable for their crime. This is what you are enabling and tacitly endorsing. Apologies to everyone for linking to TVTropes.
As for your Koran scenario, as Koi points out this is argument from analogy. The proper use of analogy is in explaining an unfamiliar or misunderstood concept by relating it to one that is familiar/understood, not in providing arguments for an external premise. By continually raising the analogy you are either saying that we do not understand your initial scenario and thus need it explained to us (which is condescending); or you are maintaining that the principle agents in each can be directly and completely matched between scenarios. If it is the latter, then I point out that the contexts of "at a party where there might be a potential rapist" is not a valid match to "confrontation with religious extremist." There are other invalid matches being made, but your analogies would need written in a formal manner to correctly lay out the correspondences you are claiming - and for me to frame your arguments formally and then critique their framing would be for me to put words in your mouth and then claim that as a formal definition of your argument (did you notice how that wasn't an analogy?).
Now, two quotes of yours.
One from your post near the top of the page:
"But why is looking at a situation and pointing out what could have been done differently considered victim blaming?"
The other from within the 'essay:'
"But overwhelming majority of them (especially involving young people) happen in situations that are avoidable. Like, how am I wrong?"
My answer to the first is that what the statement describes isn't victim blaming, but that that is not what you are doing. The victim blaming is because you are stating (in the second quote) that the victim's actions have made the victimization unavoidable (emph. mine).
Daev (talk) 12:04, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
ARE YOU GUYS DOING IT ON PURPOSE???????????????? WHEN did I say we should excuse men... NO PROPER MAN should under any condition force sex on ANYONE... But I am asking... AFTER WE HAVE PUNISHED the man... WHY IS IT bad to point out what the woman could do to avert this tragedy????????????????????/Kingdamian1 (talk) 17:28, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Was Kingdamian1 'asking for it'? (talk) 21:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

It's still moronic[edit]

The problem isn't that we expect people to be vigilant for ways they could be taken advantage of.

It's the fact that the vigilance we demand of women are things we wouldn't even remotely think of restricting men from doing.

  • Drinking at a party. If a guy does it, he's, at worst, being insufficiently productive with his time. A woman is "asking for it".
  • Wear tight clothing designed to accentuate one's best features. A man doing that is at worst, too forward, or more likely too casual for a professional environment. A woman is "asking for it".
  • Walk alone, a short distance, to get home. A man doing it is, literally doing nothing anyone would judge him for. A woman is "asking for it".

It's a huge double standard, that in-net, is intended to use the threat of rape to control the behavior of women in huge ways in a way that deserves scorn for expressing. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 20:49, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

100% agree ^^^^^^^ Koi "I could really use an animator because I have so many ideas floating around in my head" development 20:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
So what should be done about changing attitudes? And to what extent do the above statements apply to 'all people' - I see many women walking around alone and nobody thinks anything of it; and having 'a drink' ditto. Women in the office can dress for summer (and look smart) - but men #have# to wear suits (unless 'creative types' and geeks).
It is the (whatever percentage) of men who take advantage/see women as 'asking for it'/seek to control women who are the problem.
And to what extent is 'excessive drinking' and certain other behaviours in both genders looked down upon/creates a negative impression of that person? (talk) 11:55, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
The main question here is: what will this victim do after someone tells her that she was putting herself in a situation where it was more likely for her to get raped? If women all around the world lived without putting themselves out there, they wouldn't even be able to get out if their homes. In the country where i live, for example, if you take the bus any time of the day, it's already too dangerous for a girl. So yeah, maybe the girl "shouldn't" be drunk in a party at 2 AM surrounded by males, but what is anyone going to do about it?? Arrest her? i can't see where this is going. --Questgalleon196 (talk) 16:35, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


Is this an essay or one of Styrofoam's troll posts? —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 11:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)