Why is it taboo to discuss the responsibility of victims?

Sure.

As strange as it may seem, the sanest option is to take responsibility that we live, that we were born.

We live in this world, we exist. This fact alone presents us with a responsibility. Which is why it seems fitting that we would only cultivate such intentions and actions that are harmless to ourselves and others.

We may or may not be able to prevent a crime committed against ourselves and others, but whether we are complicit in this crime and how well we deal with it afterwards: surely this is within the scope of our abilities.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bells i thought you didn't belive in treatment for.personality disorders?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

No. You are just securing a particular taboo.

I would think that if you would really be so morally superior as you imply to be, then you would be able to analyze taboos.

 

Regarding feelings of self-blame in victims...I skimmed this link, looks good:
http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/selfblameresearch.html

 

It is, apparently, taboo to analyze notions of innocence.

Oh well.

You are, of course, morally superior and all that.

 

And you just keep on misrepresenting ...

 

Note first that this is an abstract discussion of the topic,
not a counselling session for victims.

How one would go about counseling a victim is an entirely different matter.


----------------


There are essentially only four mental and physical states that make innoncence possible: goodwill, compassion, appreciation and equanimity.

Anger, greed, lust, hatred, contempt, confusion are not conducive to innocence.

 

"There are these four ways of answering questions. Which four?
There are questions that should be answered categorically [straightforwardly yes, no, this, that].
There are questions that should be answered with an analytical (qualified) answer [defining or redefining the terms].
There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question.
There are questions that should be put aside.
These are the four ways of answering questions."


Above, I have given you an analytical/qualified answer.
I do not think your question can be answered with a Yes or No.

 

Perhaps because they believe Signal is a moron? Just a guess...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

But she would not be at fault.
In any of the above.
She may have done something supremely foolish, yeah, especially depending on that dark alley.
That doesn't take responsibility off the perpetrator.

My experience is when you lock the car they break the window, anyway.
My old apartment got broken into. I locked the door, they kicked it in.
Again, you take good precautions, it only reduces risk.
One guy I knew at my old job had been carjacked three times. His fault for owning a riced-up street-racer?

I honestly think victim blame is wanting to deny one's own vulnerability to the random unpredictability of violence. So the blamer thinks.." Well, I wouldn't be that dumb/ naive/ gullible / unaware / bad / evil/ loaded with bad karma/ etc..." and so is reassured it would not happen to them.
False reassurance, but totally understandable to want.

From : http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/selfblameresearch.html

 

Well, you are somewhat responsible. You did ask the question, didn't you?

 

Tempting as the prospect is to discuss the culpability of Americans in 9/11 and Jews in the holocaust, I'll skip it for the time being and focus on rape

There are two separate issues here:

1. Reducing the risk of crime
2. Complicity in the crime

The first refers to actions taken which make it less likely for you to become a victim of ANY crime. e.g. walking alone on dark streets at night would be a no no

The second refers to being actively complicit in the crime - like wearing a thong and going in front of a man.

e.g.

Since nudity is inherently provocative any sign of nudity can be considered an incitement to sexual assault

Don’t dress like a slut: Toronto cop

Clearly, the law supports this premise that any woman who behaves in a sluttish manner is "asking for it"

Rape Victim Was “Inviting” Sexual Assault With Provocative Dress, Flirting


So, if a girl was fully dressed and behaved in a retiring, modest, circumspect manner and preferably stayed home, she is less likely to get raped? Is that right?

[insert gratuitous picture of several American soldiers gang raping a fully dressed Arab woman in her home]

Apparently not.

Women just don't learn, in fact, in Saudi Arabia, where the rape victim is given lashes for her complicity in her own rape [and the rapist given a death sentence, btw] women still get raped. So clearly, women are not doing enough to keep themselves from getting raped.

What more should they do?

Nine who admitted raping 10-year-old released by Australian judge: In her ruling, Judge Sarah Bradley told them that the victim "was not forced and probably agreed to have sex with all of you".

Right, so its an issue of consent - all they have to do is just say NO.

So why not start by saying NO to the notion that women are responsible for the poor self restraint shown by men?

We can start here: with this inanimate mermaid who is forced into a bikini, because her boobs are provocative to men. Rest assured, if they could, some men would rape her too

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Hopefully, thats not too graphic an image for sciforums