TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Television show Loose Women may face investigation after vote asking ‘Is it ever a woman’s fault if she is raped?’

ukreview

September 9, 2015
41 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://archive.is/ECKQn
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Television show Loose Women may face investigation after vote asking ‘Is it ever a woman’s fault if she is raped?’
Author

ukreview

Upvotes 41
Comments 72
Date September 9, 2015 1:27 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3k8n3q/television_show_loose_women_may_face/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/television-show-loose-women-may-face-investigation.971725
https://theredarchive.com/post/971725
Top posts by ukreview

Government plans tough new jail terms for web paedophiles.....meanwhile, women STILL can't be prosecuted for raping men or boys

437 upvotes
May 24, 2015
/r/MensRights

Men jailed for rape of woman who admitted to being so drunk she did not know whether she had consented to sex

399 upvotes
February 14, 2015
/r/MensRights

UK schools planning to teach kids that women are not in the least to blame if they get drunk, have sex and then say they have been raped.

380 upvotes
March 8, 2015
/r/MensRights

Kudos to these girls! Female rugby team strip off to raise money for muscle wasting charity which only affects boys

284 upvotes
December 30, 2014
/r/MensRights

Protecting children in Thailand’s sex industry - thought it was unusual for UNICEF to feature a male victim

266 upvotes
February 25, 2015
/r/MensRights

Woman stabs man in eye, gets spared prison and now mocks her victim on Facebook

263 upvotes
January 20, 2016
/r/MensRights

Taxi driver suspended and banned from taking children to school after he was reported for kissing and hugging his own DAUGHTERS

211 upvotes
January 20, 2016
/r/MensRights

Woman cleared of child porn offences by jury after court hears she was trying to entrap singer with images. Trying to entrap someone is no defense in UK law. Possession is illegal regardless of motives. Jury ignored law. One law for women....

163 upvotes
January 14, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 10 years ago (78 children) | Copy Link

Information gathering is now wrong? Is pushing the narrative so very important to these psychopaths that even knowing that people disagree causes them "harm'?

[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (60 children) | Copy Link

Yes and yes. The mere suggestion that a woman can increase her risk of sexual assault through her own actions is now basically hate speech.

[–]soulless_ging 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (59 children) | Copy Link

There's a big difference between engaging in risky behavior and being at fault.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

Really? If you engage in risky behavior and get hurt, are you not at fault in any way?

I think the mistake many people make is assuming placing any fault on the victim takes away responsibility from the perpetrator. If I go walking around a high crime area in Detroit in a $2000 suit and gold watch and get robbed at gunpoint, obviously the thief should be prosecuted and punished, but at the same time I was taking an unnecessary risk and should be made to understand that.

What if a skydiver dies because his chute failed? Is he not at fault in some way for jumping out of a perfectly good plane in the first place?

[–]soulless_ging 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

The thing is, getting raped (or murdered or robbed) isn't like filing an insurance claim. You don't get a percentage of fault assigned to you. It's all or nothing.

Even though it would be stupid to walk around a high crime area in expensive clothing, you're legally not at fault for getting robbed. And even though it's dangerous for a woman to walk home alone late at night in a questionable area, it is not her fault for being raped.

To imply any sort of fault upon the victim would mean that the rapist should be less harshly punished in those scenarios, because some of the fault is the victim's. And I don't want to live in a world where we think like that.

I agree that we should teach women not to take unnecessary risks. But that is different from assigning them fault when they've been victimized.

[–]The_Def_Of_Is_Is 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Responsibility isn't a zero-sum game. It definitely is NOT all or nothing. You are incredibly misogynistic for claiming a woman can have no responsibility for the consequences of her actions.

[–]soulless_ging 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I gave one example where a male victim is not at fault and one example where a female victim is not at fault. You can disagree with me about responsibility, but it's just false to say I was being misogynistic.

I would also say that a male who was raped is not at fault. I would not say that he is partially responsible because he shouldn't have been drinking/doing drugs/made himself vulnerable.

[–]defeasiblefee 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

What kind of conduct would count as being partially the woman's fault she was raped?

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]defeasiblefee 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

But in your example with the mentally impaired minor who was given drugs and alcohol by the woman, isn't the woman the rapist in that case?

I can definitely see how the lines are blurred when both the man and the woman are impaired or if the man is super drunk and the woman is going along with things without saying anything, but the jump from that to flirting being entrapment or meaning she wants sex is drastic and difficult to follow.

Seems like the situations you've provided don't so much blur the lines of fault as much as they call into question whether or not something could be considered rape, and, if so, who the rapist actually is...or maybe I'm misunderstanding.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bullshit. When it comes to people choosing to commit crimes, it is all or nothing. The fault of the crime lies with the person who chose to commit it.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

The thing is, getting raped (or murdered or robbed) isn't like filing an insurance claim. You don't get a percentage of fault assigned to you. It's all or nothing

Wrong, believe it or not responsibility is not a zero-sum game. Obviously telling a victim of violent crime they are at fault for the crime would be cruel, but let's not pretend adults aren't responsible for their own safety. Even children are expected to learn from their mistakes.

Even though it would be stupid to walk around a high crime area in expensive clothing, you're legally not at fault for getting robbed.

Legally no. It would be very strange if the law punished people simply for acting within their rights. However, with rights come responsibilities. I have every right to walk the street with bricks of cash in my hands, but with that right comes the responsibility of dealing with consequences of my actions, anmely, that cash being stolen. The law will punish the thief, but it will not get me my cash back.

And even though it's dangerous for a woman to walk home alone late at night in a questionable area, it is not her fault for being raped.

She is responsible for putting herself in a dangerous situation, not for the rape that occurred as a result. Believe it or not, women are adults just like men and are responsible for their own actions and decisions. I realize we live in a culture that teaches us to both pedestalize and infantilize women, but like it or not they have agency.

To imply any sort of fault upon the victim would mean that the rapist should be less harshly punished in those scenarios, because some of the fault is the victim's. And I don't want to live in a world where we think like that.

You made up that world in your mind. You don't live in a world that thinks like that. That is a strawman you conjured up out of thin air.

I agree that we should teach women not to take unnecessary risks. But that is different from assigning them fault when they've been victimized.

If a woman is fully educated on risky situations, yet chooses anyways to put herself at risk and becomes a victim, should we pretend she did nothing wrong?

This is just plain stupid. I don't know how I can ever get through to you when you clearly see women as children without agency and/or the capability of holding responsibility. Your mindset would be more at home in the 1800s than today.

[–]soulless_ging 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

"Is it ever a woman's fault if she is raped?"

She is responsible for putting herself in a dangerous situation, not for the rape that occurred as a result.

That is all I am saying. Glad we're in agreement.

I gave examples where I said men would not be at fault either, so I don't know why you're insisting that I'm trying to infantilize women.

[–]masterofthehaus 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

But part of the problem with the dangerous neighborhood example is that some people live in dangerous neighborhoods, and maybe they work at night. So it's weird to blame someone for putting themselves in a "dangerous situation" when really they may not have a choice about their neighborhood or shift hours.

[–]soulless_ging 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Agreed, it was just the first thing that popped into my head. You could switch that out with getting drunk/doing drugs/ going home with a stranger, and in each of those the victim would be responsible for putting him or herself in a dangerous situation, but the victim is not at fault for getting raped. The fault solely belongs to the rapist.

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But then who's fault is it? her parents for not having a good enough income to live in a good neighborhood? her for not getting good grades at school to get a scholarship?

We can keep tracing "fault" to infinity, or we can say that we need to teach people to be responsible for their own bodies and safety.

Lets say you teach a kid all growing up that they never have to be careful, and that nothing should harm them. Then release that kid in the savannah to walk among the lions. Is the lion at fault for killing that kid, or are you for insisting that "the world shouldn't be dangerous for you, so don't take any precautions"?

Human criminals are still at fault for their acts. People are still responsible for their own safety.

[–]soulless_ging 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Or it's the fault of the person who decided to rape her.

A rapist isn't a lion.

No one's saying you shouldn't try to be as responsible as possible for your own safety. masterofthehaus was saying some people inherently live in more dangerous places than others, and that's not their fault.

[–]defeasiblefee 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

So if she is responsible for putting herself in a dangerous situation but not for the rape that occurred, which you just said, doesn't that mean she isn't at fault for the rape?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

She didn't rape herself, a rapist did, although she did put herself in a situation where rape was more likely. She is only at fault for putting herself in danger.

In other words, she only guilty of putting herself in a situation where she was depending upon strangers or acquaintances not to take advantage of her.

This is why we don't put victims on trial for the crimes committed against them.

This is probably getting confusing because of all the hypotheticals going on. Maybe my comment was poorly worded.

Let's go back to the skydiver example. The skydiver isn't at fault for the factory flaw that prevented his chute from opening properly, but he is responsible for putting himself in a situation where his life depended on the chute in the first place.

Does that clear this up, or have I confused you further? I probably should have kept my thoughts to myself.

[–]soulless_ging -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I don't think the skydiver example is a good comparison. There's no equivalent where a rape victim is putting themselves in a situation "where his life depended on the chute," as it were.

Rapists are actively deciding to rape the other person. The chute is an inanimate object. Unless someone fucked with your equipment beforehand, it's an accident, not a crime.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

There's no equivalent where a rape victim is putting themselves in a situation "where his life depended on the chute," as it were.

Sure there is! If you go home with a stranger from the bar after drinking for hours, you're putting trust in them to not rape you.

If you are with your friends and drink yourself into a mini coma, you are depending on your friends to not take advantage of you.

Any situation where you are putting your safety in the hands of a potential rapist fits this analogy.

I realize it's hard to try and ignore the fault on part of the rapist to look at this from the perspective of the victim, which is exactly why I chose an example that involved the failure of an inanimate object.

We aren't discussing whether or not rapists are culpable for committing rape. Nobody here has suggested that rapists aren't at fault. I'm not sure how you keep making that assumption that responsibility is being taken away from the perpetrator. It isn;t a zero-sum game.

[–]chocoboat -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Really? If you engage in risky behavior and get hurt, are you not at fault in any way?

If the risky behavior is "interacting with other humans", then yes. The fault belongs to the person who chooses to rape, and not the person who refuses to treat every man she sees like a potential rapist.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Ah yes, silly me for suggesting people take measures to protect themselves.

Obviously taking basic precautions and making character judgements about the people you surround yourself with is exactly the same as being paranoid about an entire gender.

It's not like it's widely accepted that this is a normal adult responsibility for virtually every other crime.

Good thing you're here to clear this up for us.

(/s obviously)

[–]chocoboat -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Ah yes, silly me for suggesting people take measures to protect themselves.

I didn't say anything about that. Clearly certain choices a person can make are risky ideas that should probably be avoided when possible. But that doesn't make them at fault when the decision to commit a crime is made by another person.

If you play around with a knife and mishandle it and cut yourself, you're at fault. If you stand outside in a lightning storm holding into a metal flagpole and you get hit by lightning, you're at fault. You are making those choices and no other person is involved.

But if you walk into a bad area and you get robbed or raped, you are NOT at fault because the harmful action that happened was an INTENTIONAL CHOICE made by someone else. That person is at fault.

Obviously taking basic precautions and making character judgements about the people you surround yourself with is exactly the same as being paranoid about an entire gender.

I didn't say anything like this either. Enough with the straw men.

It's not like it's widely accepted that this is a normal adult responsibility for virtually every other crime.

No it's not. If you get robbed or beaten or shot, it's not your fault. The person choosing to commit the crimes is the one at fault.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (14 children) | Copy Link

Why don't you go ahead and quote when I said a victim is "at fault" for the crime itself, while we're on the topic of strawmen.

All I have said and meant is that people are responsible for their own safety. Obviously even when proper defensive measures are taken a person is still vulnerable. How idiots like you interpret that as either absolving violent criminals of their actions or placing blame on their victims for the crimes committed against them is beyond me.

The only thing one can "blame" a victim for is knowingly taking unnecessary risks. Placing blame for risky behavior is a hell of a lot different than blaming them for the crime committed against them. Get that through you thick skull. One can take risks and be culpable even if no crime is committed.

[–]chocoboat -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Sure thing. On the topic of a woman failing to take actions to reduce her risk of sexual assault, you said

Really? If you engage in risky behavior and get hurt, are you not at fault in any way?

You then went on to make examples showing that you think the victims of crimes are partially at fault, and not just their attackers.

All I have said and meant is that people are responsible for their own safety.

I agree with this. But "you are responsible for your safety" is not the same thing as "it's your fault if someone else chooses to attack you".

How idiots like you interpret that as either absolving violent criminals of their actions

No one said anything like that.

or placing blame on their victims for the crimes committed against them is beyond me.

You heavily implied that you believe people are partially at fault for crimes committed against them if they failed to take enough precautions.

I don't know how you can say this

If you engage in risky behavior and get hurt, are you not at fault in any way?

and then claim that someone's an idiot and is wildly misunderstanding your words for believing you think victims are partially at fault.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

English is not your first language, is it? Please confirm this.

You have provided zero examples of me claiming victims bear responsibility for the crimes committed against them.

I have stood firm in my assertion that a person is accountable for their own risky behavior and personal safety.

You heavily implied that you believe people are partially at fault for crimes committed against them

No, you made that up in your head. I never implied anything of the sort.

Dude, I'm done. I realize there are lots of people out there who have a fetish for finding reasons to accuse MRAs of victim blaming or rape apology. Whatever floats your boat, but this is just pathetic.

Go troll someone else.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I think that if you chose to take a corner at 50 miles an hour, and came off the road and hit a pole, people would say that was your fault.

I think that if you walked into a black neighbourhood wearing a klan outfit and got beaten to a pulp, people would say that was your fault.

I think that if you get yourself so drunk that you pass out in the street and wake up in the morning to find your wallet stolen, people would say that was your fault.

[–]defeasiblefee 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So which things would a woman do that make you want to say the rape was their fault?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you decide to get shitfaced get raped (as in, you do not consent even while drunk)?

That was your fault for getting shitfaced.

The guy is still a rapist and he still belongs in jail, but to act like there was noooothing you could have done to avoid this is absurd.

It is never a good idea for anyone, man or woman, to get so drunk in public that they cannot look out for themselves. If you want to get drunk in public, you need someone sober watching out for you.

Stumbling home alone, shitfaced, is not smart no matter who you are.

I have never done it, never will do it. And if I ever do, and someone rapes me or robs me? It will be my fucking fault for putting myself in a vulnerable state.

[–]defeasiblefee 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But making a bad judgment call isn't the same thing as being responsible for someone raping you...

We should be teaching young people not to get shitfaced because it is dangerous, but it's only dangerous (aside from health and injury reasons) because of the bad people out there who do things like rape or rob drunk or otherwise "vulnerable" people. So really, how can it be the rape victims fault they are raped, when it was the rapist that was making drinking unsafe in the first place?

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But getting drunk and passing out and finding your virginity stolen is not your fault.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

If I walk down harlem with a thousand dollars sticking out of my pocket and expensive jewelry exposed, I would get robbed. I'm at fault for doing stupid shit that caused the problem, they're at fault for the crime they committed.

See how easy that is? Tell me that you never lock your car or home doors, because to do so would imply that its not your fault people steal. Im guessing you'll still be locking those doors, and blame yourself if someone steals from you because you left the doors unlocked.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I'm at fault for doing stupid shit that caused the problem

No you aren't. Other people choosing to commit a crime against you is not your fault.

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Making myself an easy target is my fault. Please tell me that as you believe that crime committed against you is never your fault, that you never lock your car doors when you park in a parking lot.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

People are responsible for their own actions. Why do you believe the responsibility for a thief's actions lie on someone other than the thief?

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Right. So Im responsible for going to a bad side of town at night and getting robbed because I have 2000 dollars in my hand. You just said people are responsible for their own actions, and my action was to go to a high crime area with a high value object.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And how exactly does this 2000 dollars disappear? Did you misplace it? Did it blow away in a gust of wind? Did you gamble it away?

Or did a different person make the choice to steal it, which would make HIM the one who's responsible, instead of you?

Let's try a different scenario. Suppose you're a UPS driver, and you deliver a package to my door. Suddenly I open the front door and start beating you with a baseball bat.

Was this attack your fault? Do I get to say "I'm not the only one at fault here, he knew that some people are just violent psychopaths and chose to leave his house that morning anyway, so really both of us are to blame?"

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

He doesn't have a reasonable expectation of having a crime committed against him.

Stop trying to dismantle personal responsibility for personal and property safety. People need to look out for themselves, not believe they are immune to crime.

[–]SilencingNarrative 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Using inquisitions to maintain the force of societal taboos about asking the wrong questions is a time honored tradition.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

It's wrong because it's done in a stupid and offensive way. Did this information really need to be gathered anyway?

I mean, would it be right for an American show to put out a poll asking "were the victims of the Boston marathon bombing at fault for their own deaths and injuries?" Who the fuck asks a questions like that? Why would you imply that "yes" is even a valid answer?

The TV show did something stupid and offensive, and got appropriately called out for it. And that's an appropriate response. This isn't "psychopaths pushing a narrative".

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Did this information really need to be gathered anyway?

Yes, knowing the opinions of the public is always useful.

I mean, would it be right for an American show to put out a poll asking "were the victims of the Boston marathon bombing at fault for their own deaths and injuries?"

No it would be more akin to asking if the Texas church deserved to be shot at for mocking Muhammed. Lots of people thought it was a valid question to ask about Charlie Hebdo as well.

Who the fuck asks a questions like that? Why would you imply that "yes" is even a valid answer?

Because some people believe one can provoke a rape and others believe in personal responsibility and taking risk mitigating steps.

The TV show did something stupid and offensive, and got appropriately called out for it. And that's an appropriate response. This isn't "psychopaths pushing a narrative".

So why isnt there an investigation into people asking about the Charlie Hebdo people and their culpability in bringing a known risk down on their own heads? Since this is about women and rape the psychopaths push for outrage where otherwise they'd accept such questions.

[–]chocoboat -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Yes, knowing the opinions of the public is always useful.

There are better ways to survey public opinion than to broadcast a question to millions of people that's worded in a way that suggest it's a legitimate response to say "yes, a woman deserved her rape".

Because some people believe one can provoke a rape and others believe in personal responsibility and taking risk mitigating steps.

Some people think the earth is flat, and some people it should be illegal for a woman to leave the house without a burqa. Who gives a crap what these idiots think?

So why isnt there an investigation into people asking about the Charlie Hebdo people and their culpability in bringing a known risk down on their own heads? Since this is about women and rape the psychopaths push for outrage where otherwise they'd accept such questions.

No investigation has been launched yet, and there shouldn't be one, and won't be one.

You're right, this situation is very similar to the Charlie Hebdo case. And my opinion is the same there: fuck anyone who thinks those people are at fault for being murdered, and anyone who thinks we have to "teach the controversy and let people decide for themselves". There's no debate here - people who choose to rape and murder are the ones in the wrong.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

So you've granted that these people exist. Isnt it better to know how many of them there are in the world than to not?

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

If you feel a need to collect that information, you should approach it the right way. Do a scientific survey. You don't just bring it up on a TV show and phrase it in a way that's going to piss a lot of people off and imply that you think this is a question without a settled, agreed-upon answer by everyone who isn't a moron.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Whether you think theyre morons or not is immaterial to the usefulness of such publicly available surveys. Who's to say those really interested in this area are honest with their reporting. Youre also saying an attention based economy, like television, should refrain from attention grabbing behaviors in regards to certain subjects.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

There is no usefulness to surveys like that.

Youre also saying an attention based economy, like television, should refrain from attention grabbing behaviors in regards to certain subjects.

Yes, because pissing off your viewers and getting them to stop watching your show and petition advertisers to stop doing business with you is not a smart idea business-wise, and it's not smart if you care about your public image.

It's simply offensive to people to raise questions like "do you think rape victims deserved to be raped" as if you don't know the answer and there's a debate to be had on that topic.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Since some people do believe a woman can provoke a rape there is obviously still a conversation to be had. Just calling them idiots doesnt change their position or their conviction towards it.

[–]chocoboat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

And my position is "fuck that". When an issue is so clear cut and what's right and wrong is so blatantly clear, I have no interest in paying any attention to the idiots and trolls who have taken the wrong side.

I don't need a debate on whether Osama bin Laden was justified when he planned the 9/11 attacks. I don't want to hear from the retarded fucks who think rape victims are at fault for someone else's choice to rape them. It's an idiotic waste of time to listen to some fundie talk about how the Earth is 6000 years old. These things are settled issues, and fuck anyone who thinks that we need to pay more attention to the people who spew logic-free bullshit like that.

[–]raxical 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Is it ever the woman's fault?

No it's not her fault that a crime was committed against her just like it's not someone's fault for being burglarized or assaulted.

Does she share part of the blame, bear some responsibility or carry out unwise actions which put her at a higher likelihood of being raped?

Possibly. It would depend on the situation just like if you locked all your doors and set your alarm but were still burglarized while at work, you bear no responsibility for what happened, whereas if you left your doors unlocked and made it obvious you were gone on vacation, you should take some responsibility for what happened.

It depends.

[–]192873982 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

There are multiple ways where it could be the womens fault.

  • The woman wanted to live out some rape fantasies but couldn't say stop, because she did not declare a safe word for him to stop, and he thought it was part of the game. This is also his fault, he didn't declare a safe word either, but he is not more guilty.
  • More generally if there is no way for the man to tell that she is not consenting, but she did have a way to do it, she's responsible, e.g. if she's too shy to say anything.
  • The woman covertly gives the man a drug that makes him lose control.

These cases are not that likely, the possibility is much higher that it's not her fault at all, but she did encourage it. (compare: if you go to syria now and you get killed, it's not your fault, but you did encourage it)

This encouragement cannot be avoided, and in fact should not be fully avoided. We all have to take some risks, to make a nice life possible, otherwise leaving the house would be wrong, because you might get killed in a car accident.

But some high risks should be avoided, so we need to discuss what a responsible person should be able to to, and how we can ensure it.

An example for a high risk would be meeting a known convicted sex offender that you met online alone at home.

[–]soulless_ging 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

The last example that you gave was so ludicrous that I'd have to say the woman was incompetent to stand trial, and therefore also not at fault.

The first three scenarios you gave were ones that I'd have a hard time calling rape. I think we can reasonably assume that is not the kind of thing the show was referring to when they took this poll.

[–]192873982 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

They might not have been refering to that, you are right, but it also was not excluded in the answer.

That's the main problem, these people are offended, but did not thing enough.

The definition of rape is sex without one of the participants consent, either because it couldn't consent (age or whatever) or because it didn't consent. This definition can be fulfilled in the first three scenarios. In the first point, because consent can be revoked at any time, in the second and third point because she didn't consent.

And even stupid people have to stand trial, unless they are retarded. The last example was intentionally exaggerated.

[–]soulless_ging 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The definition of rape is sex without one of the participants consent, either because it couldn't consent (age or whatever) or because it didn't consent. This definition can be fulfilled in the first three scenarios. In the first point, because consent can be revoked at any time, in the second and third point because she didn't consent.

This is true, but in general you can't convict someone for a crime that they didn't reasonably know they were committing.

If you have sex with an underage girl but can prove that she showed you a fake ID, then you're probably not getting off scott-free, but you won't be convicted of rape.

If neither party agreed to a safe word, I don't think a jury could reasonably convict the man of rape.

If you're making out with someone, take off your clothes, and continue to have sex with that person without ever resisting in the slightest, you would have a terribly hard time proving you were raped.

And if you're given a drug that makes you lose control of yourself, you're not responsible for your actions, and you would not be convicted of rape.

I think all of these things would be excluded, because the question presumes the rapist's guilt is definitive. None of the examples you gave are definitive (except for the wildly exaggerated one). And yes, stupid people have to stand trial, but insane people don't.

[–]192873982 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You are right. I think they would not be convicted in the first three cases, but does that mean we wouldn't call it rape? Or is rape not illegal, only illegal rape is illegal, just like killing if not illegal in all cases (e.g. self defense)?

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, the last example is ludicrous because it begs the question of whether they engage in sex or rape. If she has sex with him on purpose, as a sex offender, it still isn't rape just because he's called sex offender.

[–]soulless_ging 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

What does this have to do with this sub?

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

The general push to reduce or even eliminate female agency in these types of situations has had repercussions that have negatively affected men as a class. You need go no further than the differential treatment of drunken sex, by gender, that we're seeing on campuses in the US, these days.

If there's two parties having sex, and one cannot legally have agency for her actions due to her gentle XX chromosomes, then by default the legal onus falls on the other party, right?

Well, that other party is overwhelmingly men, and the onus is falling on them unfairly.

[–]soulless_ging 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I just don't understand the outrage/supposed differential treatment, because the question "Is it ever a woman's fault if she is raped" presumes that she was definitely raped.

We're not discussing hazy situations/grey areas of consent.

A woman was raped. Was it her fault?

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

We're not discussing hazy situations/grey areas of consent.

To the contrary, most sexual assaults live in this grey area. Very few indeed are as black and white as you seem to want.

Let's flip this corollary around and see if you can't examine it from another perspective. If I know my brother is a drug addict, how culpable am I if he has a relapse, if I:

a) Let him live in my home during recovery, ensure there's no booze, smokes, drugs, or avenues to obtain such in my home, and ensure he's visiting his counselor as scheduled. He bypasses all that, finds a route out, and gets himself some smack.

b) Let him do his own thing, keep my liquor cabinet stocked the way I normally have it, leave my little bag of pot around, and leave it up to him to make it to his counselor. He takes advantage of my laissez faire attitude towards his life and pretty easily scores himself some smack.

c) Buy some heroin and leave it on the counter. He just fires it up.

In the end, it's only the addict who decides to take that plunge, and the bulk of the blame has to lie with that addict, but I'm pretty confident that you can see how my own culpability in this situation climbs with each step. I may never go to jail for c), but if I pull that shit on my brother, everyone around me as every right to call me to the mat for being an asshole, don't they?

The onus to protect yourself to mitigate risk and legal culpability are two different things. You don't get to escape the former because the latter lies with your rapist.

[–]soulless_ging 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That is a crazy comparison.

Are you saying people who decide to rape are in just as little control of their actions as drug addicts are?

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's not as crazy as you think.

The prison population is chock bloody full of people with FAS, psychological disorders like NPD, ASD, or ASPD, ongoing drug and alcohol addictions, prior histories of abuse, etc. It's not really that "out there" to suggest that the people who commit these crimes have some pretty big drivers to do so. Issues with impulse control fill our jails, reliably.

But, is the comparison between an addict who slips vs. a predator that attacks because the situation is so ripe for success it's irresistible, really so far apart that you can't see the comparison?

If so, then try the situation where someone's walking in the woods. If you walk alone, without a bell, with no bear spray or other weapon, and you walk in direct contradiction of the signs around indicating that there's bears in the area, and that they have been behaving aggressively, and you encounter a bear and you feed it ... are you more or less culpable if you get mauled than a person who took all those precautions and still got mauled?

It's the bear's fault, obviously, but are we allowed to point out that the first hiker was a moron and the second was mostly bad luck?

[–]soulless_ging 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It's the bear's fault, obviously

That's all I'm saying (though it disturbs me that we're now comparing human rapists to bears, but that's besides to point.)

The rape is the fault of the rapist. Obviously people should not put themselves in dangerous situations. But I take serious issue with saying that the rape is in any way the victim's "fault."

But again, if the question isn't whether a woman got raped, but whether it was her fault, why does this have anything to do with Men's Rights?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I explained that in the first reply. It's a dichotomy. Every bit of responsibility you eke OFF of women goes ONTO men. Any concerted push to absolve women of personal responsibility for their actions, or to absolve them of personal responsibility for their safety, means that onus falls on someone else.

While, in a rape, this might be OK because the rapist gets the bulk of the blame, anyway, in any scenario short of rape, this fucks over the guy. We're now at a point where a lot of scenarios that aren't rape are being called rape, and it's men paying the price.

[–]soulless_ging 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Okay, but this article is very clearly talking about convicted rape. I think it's a wild leap to apply the logic here to other situations.

[–]theguywhoreadsbooks 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Questioning the feminist narrative means career suicide. This sub would like to change that

[–]ukreview[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

what you mean with your question is that the issue of rape and the effects of rape laws on men can't be a matter of public debate anymore because the feminists say so and you have no problem with that

[–]soulless_ging 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The linked article has nothing to do with the effects of rape law on men.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wow, you really don't like the idea that someone would disagree with the leftist narrative. What do YOU have to do with this sub?

[–]BruceCampbell123 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I remember when having a different opinion wasn't a crime.

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

74 complaints... that's not very many. Granted I've never heard of this show, so it may be a lot up against it's viewership.

And since when is asking a question, even if it's one you may not like ONE answer to a bad thing to be offended by? Most people voted "no". Where's the rejoicing that most people said no to an "offensive question"?

Ofcom is likely to consider the poll under section 2 of the broadcasting code covering harm and offence. Section 2.4 of the code says: “Programmes must not include material (whether in individual programmes or in programmes taken together) which, taking into account the context, condones or glamorises violent, dangerous or seriously antisocial behaviour and is likely to encourage others to copy such behaviour.”

I fail to see how the question qualifies.

“Instead, they’ve reinforced myths and stereotypes with this ill-considered, insensitive and insulting poll.”

What a stupid cunt. How does a question reinforce anything? Especially when the response is overwhelming "No, it's never women's fault if she is raped".

I'd be curious to know the actual intent of the poll, because people tend to have a hard time wording things when rape is concerned.

I could easily see the intent being that they wanted to know if people thought women were responsible for themselves and the events leading up to their rape.

If a woman decides to stay at a party with strangers she just met, instead of leaving with her friends. If she decides to continue to drink even though she can barely speak... these things she is responsible for. And she puts herself at risk. If she is then raped, she isn't responsible for the rape itself, but she needs to take ownership of her mistakes and the fact that those mistakes lead to the moment where she was vulnerable enough to be raped. And had she made other choices, she would have avoided it. [in my hypothetical, not every rape situation can be avoided of course]

We are responsible for our own well being and we all have the agency to take actions to lessen the risks. Some things we can't fully control, but we can at least try to be safe and smart.

We lock our doors, which is sometimes enough to prevent a theft. Sometimes it isn't, but it's better than not locking our doors at all.

We have a duty to ourselves to learn from traumatic experiences.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter