Victim Blaming

[mrswah]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/victim_blaming

https://www.zurinstitute.com/victimhood


The above topic was mentioned in a thread I was following the other day.

I am aware that, having been born in the fifties, I grew up in a culture where the victim WAS blamed, at least to some extent.  For example, a murder of a young woman in the locality was always a tragedy, but if the victim had met her killer at a disco, and allowed him to take her home in his car that very evening, she was, to some degree, "asking for it."  Same with children who were bullied at school:  some children just had "the type of personality that attracted bullies" (and incidentally, when I retired from teaching ten years ago, that type of thinking was still quite prevalent among even senior teachers).

I understand that thinking on this subject is changing, and that it is no longer acceptable to blame victims for their plight, because they are not the ones who have done wrong.  However, some of what I am reading makes me wonder if we are going too far in the other direction.                                                                                       
  Is it no longer acceptable to warn our teenage children  that walking home alone in the dark is risky behaviour, because if any harm befalls them, they are the victims, have done nothing wrong, were just unlucky enough to meet a bad person ?  Should we no longer be warning them  about the risks associated with getting drunk, because alcohol doesn't cause crime; criminals do?    Should we stop telling elderly people how to spot cold callers and computer scams, because if they have all their money stolen from their bank account, it was not their fault, it was the scammers' fault? If I leave my downstairs window open, and my house gets burgled, yes, it was the burglar who did wrong, but shouldn't I have taken more care to lock my window?

Is crime all down to the perpetrator, or should we be taking some personal responsibility too?

[Caroline]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/victim_blaming

https://www.zurinstitute.com/victimhood


The above topic was mentioned in a thread I was following the other day.

I am aware that, having been born in the fifties, I grew up in a culture where the victim WAS blamed, at least to some extent.  For example, a murder of a young woman in the locality was always a tragedy, but if the victim had met her killer at a disco, and allowed him to take her home in his car that very evening, she was, to some degree, "asking for it."  Same with children who were bullied at school:  some children just had "the type of personality that attracted bullies" (and incidentally, when I retired from teaching ten years ago, that type of thinking was still quite prevalent among even senior teachers).

I understand that thinking on this subject is changing, and that it is no longer acceptable to blame victims for their plight, because they are not the ones who have done wrong.  However, some of what I am reading makes me wonder if we are going too far in the other direction.                                                                                       
  Is it no longer acceptable to warn our teenage children  that walking home alone in the dark is risky behaviour, because if any harm befalls them, they are the victims, have done nothing wrong, were just unlucky enough to meet a bad person ?  Should we no longer be warning them  about the risks associated with getting drunk, because alcohol doesn't cause crime; criminals do?    Should we stop telling elderly people how to spot cold callers and computer scams, because if they have all their money stolen from their bank account, it was not their fault, it was the scammers' fault? If I leave my downstairs window open, and my house gets burgled, yes, it was the burglar who did wrong, but shouldn't I have taken more care to lock my window?

Is crime all down to the perpetrator, or should we be taking some personal responsibility too?

Of course people need to take responsibility for their safety BUT, they wouldn't need to if we didn't live in a world of unpredictability. Regardless of where an individual is or in what circumstances they find themselves, if someone hurts them (or worse), it is not the victims fault. Going down this road, we could end up in a similar situation that led to so many people being murdered by the likes of Peter Sutcliffe - the police didn't seem to take things seriously initially because the victims were deemed to be prostitutes. Regardless of the risky aspect to their life, they deserve to live and be free from violence as the rest of us.

[Vertigo Swirl]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/victim_blaming

https://www.zurinstitute.com/victimhood


The above topic was mentioned in a thread I was following the other day.

I am aware that, having been born in the fifties, I grew up in a culture where the victim WAS blamed, at least to some extent.  For example, a murder of a young woman in the locality was always a tragedy, but if the victim had met her killer at a disco, and allowed him to take her home in his car that very evening, she was, to some degree, "asking for it."  Same with children who were bullied at school:  some children just had "the type of personality that attracted bullies" (and incidentally, when I retired from teaching ten years ago, that type of thinking was still quite prevalent among even senior teachers).

I understand that thinking on this subject is changing, and that it is no longer acceptable to blame victims for their plight, because they are not the ones who have done wrong.  However, some of what I am reading makes me wonder if we are going too far in the other direction.                                                                                       
  Is it no longer acceptable to warn our teenage children  that walking home alone in the dark is risky behaviour, because if any harm befalls them, they are the victims, have done nothing wrong, were just unlucky enough to meet a bad person ?  Should we no longer be warning them  about the risks associated with getting drunk, because alcohol doesn't cause crime; criminals do?    Should we stop telling elderly people how to spot cold callers and computer scams, because if they have all their money stolen from their bank account, it was not their fault, it was the scammers' fault? If I leave my downstairs window open, and my house gets burgled, yes, it was the burglar who did wrong, but shouldn't I have taken more care to lock my window?

Is crime all down to the perpetrator, or should we be taking some personal responsibility too?

Yes crime is all down to the perpetrator.  I think the idea that members of the teaching profession (yourself included) ever considered that some children “asked” to be bullied is really quite sickening tbh.  Of course warn of the dangers of certain situations but don’t expect people to lock themselves in their houses and never answer the phone or switch on a computer  in case they inadvertently  “ask” to to become a victim of crime.

[mrswah]

Of course people need to take responsibility for their safety BUT, they wouldn't need to if we didn't live in a world of unpredictability. Regardless of where an individual is or in what circumstances they find themselves, if someone hurts them (or worse), it is not the victims fault. Going down this road, we could end up in a similar situation that led to so many people being murdered by the likes of Peter Sutcliffe - the police didn't seem to take things seriously initially because the victims were deemed to be prostitutes. Regardless of the risky aspect to their life, they deserve to live and be free from violence as the rest of us.

Caroline,I agree with everything you say (well, there is a first time for everything, isn't there ?)   !!!!

I think the "unpredictable world " is here to stay though. It has never been otherwise, nor will it be.

[mrswah]

Yes crime is all down to the perpetrator.  I think the idea that members of the teaching profession (yourself included) ever considered that some children “asked” to be bullied is really quite sickening tbh.  Of course warn of the dangers of certain situations but don’t expect people to lock themselves in their houses and never answer the phone or switch on a computer  in case they inadvertently  “ask” to to become a victim of crime.

.
No, definitely NOT me included (although I can see I didn't make that as clear as I could have done). I was always disgusted at the attitude of the majority of teachers towards bullied children, and it is this, more than anything, that leads me to believe that an anti-victim-blaming culture is a good thing.

Are people taking personal responsibility seriously enough though?  For example, take alcohol. Some of the websites I've been looking at tell me that alcohol doesn't cause crime, people do, and if we say someone shouldn't have drunk so much, we are "victim blaming".    However, everyone knows that, after 2 or 3 drinks, the alcohol starts to speak for you, and leads some people to say things, do things, and take risks that they would not have taken had they not been "under the influence". Tragically, some of these people will become victims of crime.

While I'm not saying they deserved it, I cant help thinking they contributed to the situation.

[Miss Taken Identity]

.
No, definitely NOT me included (although I can see I didn't make that as clear as I could have done). I was always disgusted at the attitude of the majority of teachers towards bullied children, and it is this, more than anything, that leads me to believe that an anti-victim-blaming culture is a good thing.

Are people taking personal responsibility seriously enough though?  For example, take alcohol. Some of the websites I've been looking at tell me that alcohol doesn't cause crime, people do, and if we say someone shouldn't have drunk so much, we are "victim blaming".    However, everyone knows that, after 2 or 3 drinks, the alcohol starts to speak for you, and leads some people to say things, do things, and take risks that they would not have taken had they not been "under the influence". Tragically, some of these people will become victims of crime.

While I'm not saying they deserved it, I cant help thinking they contributed to the situation.

Interesting points Mrswah.

Taking responsibility does play a part, and there is such a thing as mitigating circumstances, how much of your behaviors contributed to your dilemma.

I have exceptions- Rape

a very drunk person is not in a compos metis  state to give consent. The same applies to drugs.
a drunk person crossing the road-staggering perhaps has no chance against a speeding car

There may be more. I agree victim blaming is wrong.

I often hear conversations of people saying I am going to get smashed etc so they do know they are in control of their consumption- unless they have an addiction, but they are not victims of the addiction IMO.

[mrswah]

Interesting points Mrswah.

Taking responsibility does play a part, and there is such a thing as mitigating circumstances, how much of your behaviors contributed to your dilemma.

I have exceptions- Rape

a very drunk person is not in a compos metis  state to give consent. The same applies to drugs.
a drunk person crossing the road-staggering perhaps has no chance against a speeding car

There may be more. I agree victim blaming is wrong.

I often hear conversations of people saying I am going to get smashed etc so they do know they are in control of their consumption- unless they have an addiction, but they are not victims of the addiction IMO.

There are varying views on whether or not people are victims of their addiction: some think it's an illness (which would make the sufferer a victim), and some think otherwise. Personally, I don't think it's helpful to addicted people if they are encouraged to think of themselves as ill, but I'm sure others will disagree.

As for rape, nobody ever consents to it, whether under the influence or not, so the rapist is always  to blame, IMO.  However, I do believe others should learn from the experience of rape victims, and not take unnecessary risks------such as being under the influence of drink/drugs, or going home with somebody on a first date.  There are far too many tragic  stories of people who met the wrong partner, and who ended up assaulted or murdered.

[Miss Taken Identity]

There are varying views on whether or not people are victims of their addiction: some think it's an illness (which would make the sufferer a victim), and some think otherwise. Personally, I don't think it's helpful to addicted people if they are encouraged to think of themselves as ill, but I'm sure others will disagree.

As for rape, nobody ever consents to it, whether under the influence or not, so the rapist is always  to blame, IMO.  However, I do believe others should learn from the experience of rape victims, and not take unnecessary risks------such as being under the influence of drink/drugs, or going home with somebody on a first date.  There are far too many tragic  stories of people who met the wrong partner, and who ended up assaulted or murdered.

I would agree many addictions are bourbne from some form of obsessional behavior- how some people become addicted to drink and others don't.  when social drinking becomes a necessity without socialising (drinking large amounts alone)then something is a miss IMO.

There are far too many tragic stories about people losing their normal safety compass when out drinking or taking 'social' drugs- however, it can only be said  to such people. Do not be so trusting- stay safe, as there are people who will harm you.
That is not to say it will be their fault if they meet such a person/group who will harm them.

[G-Unit]

If someone doesn't fasten their seatbelt and a drunk driver hits them head on and they both die are they both victims?

[Miss Taken Identity]

If someone doesn't fasten their seatbelt and a drunk driver hits them head on and they both die are they both victims?

I would say  they both knowingly took risks and lost. Victims of their own actions I would suggest.

 It is like the Diana accident- some still claim a secret society did it or the Royal Family did it. I see it for what it was a very tragic accident bourn  from drunk driver- fast driving and not wearing seat belts.  Added she was being used by that lying sleaze bag Al fud and his son. Who I believe tipped off the paps. JUST MY OPINION.

[G-Unit]

I would say  they both knowingly took risks and lost. Victims of their own actions I would suggest.

 It is like the Diana accident- some still claim a secret society did it or the Royal Family did it. I see it for what it was a very tragic accident bourn  from drunk driver- fast driving and not wearing seat belts.  Added she was being used by that lying sleaze bag Al fud and his son. Who I believe tipped off the paps. JUST MY OPINION.

So drink driving is a risky action but getting off your face on a night out isn't?

[Miss Taken Identity]

So drink driving is a risky action but getting off your face on a night out isn't?

The difference  being  the drink driver knows there is a chance he/she may harm or kill him/herself or others they are the perpetrators if you like.

 Do many males who get rat arsed bother about being raped? If not, why should females be concerned. They are not putting themselves at risk, it is the rapists who are the wrong doers.  IMO

[mrswah]

If someone doesn't fasten their seatbelt and a drunk driver hits them head on and they both die are they both victims?

I suppose they are both victims, and we would call a case like this a tragedy, rather than blaming them.  However, if the drunk driver survived and recovered, we would call him/her a criminal, and the person who died would be called a victim who might have survived had he or she worn a seatbelt!

[G-Unit]

The difference  being  the drink driver knows there is a chance he/she may harm or kill him/herself or others they are the perpetrators if you like.

 Do many males who get rat arsed bother about being raped? If not, why should females be concerned. They are not putting themselves at risk, it is the rapists who are the wrong doers.  IMO

I support the principle that women should be free to behave any way they like within the law, but the facts are that getting drunk and incapable adds to the risk that they'll end up as the victim of a sexual predator. I think it's better to take precautions.

[mrswah]

The difference  being  the drink driver knows there is a chance he/she may harm or kill him/herself or others they are the perpetrators if you like.

 Do many males who get rat arsed bother about being raped? If not, why should females be concerned. They are not putting themselves at risk, it is the rapists who are the wrong doers.  IMO

The rapists are the wrong doers AND the women are putting themselves at risk, I'm afraid. They are not doing anything wrong, but they are making it easier for wrong to be done to them.