Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber huckleberryhound
    Devout Agnostic.
    11 Sep '17 11:55 / 1 edit
    Hi guys. This question was brought about by Talk Radio DJ Here in Ireland. His Name was George Hook. He's 70, right leaning, and pretty archaic in his thinking sometimes. On Friday he was discussing the rape of a young girl by the British swim team (ref 1), when he says the following

    "But when you then look deeper into the story you have to ask certain questions. Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room? She’s only just barely met him. She has no idea of his health conditions, she has no idea who he is, she has no idea what dangers he might pose."

    "but modern day social activity means that she goes back with him. Then is surprised when somebody else comes into the room and rapes her. Should she be raped? Course she shouldn’t. Is she entitled to say no? Absolutely. Is the guy who came in a scumbag? Certainly. Should he go to jail? Of Course. All of those things."

    "There is personal responsibility because it’s your daughter and it’s my daughter. And what determines the daughter who goes out, gets drunk, passes out and is with strangers in her room and the daughter that goes out, stays halfway sober and comes home, I don’t know. I wish I knew. I wish I knew what the secret of parenting is."

    "But there is a point of responsibility. The real issues nowadays and increasingly is the question of the personal responsibility that young girls are taking for their own safety." (From the Journal.ie.

    I tried to get a recording/transcript but couldn't) (ref2)

    Is it ever right to question the actions of the victim? Even in the efforts of future crime prevention? I'm on the fence here. The victim of rape is never at fault, i get that. And, if we are to help victims come forward we can't make victims of rape go through two ordeals.
    Shouldn't we though promote personal responsibility? And how do we do that without entering into the realm of victim blaming?

    On a secondary point. There have been calls for George to be fired for his comments. Should he be, Yes or no?



    (1) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/07/commonwealth-games-swimmer-raped-woman-passed-around-member/

    (2)http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-rape-criticism-3589574-Sep2017/
  2. Standard member vivify
    rain
    11 Sep '17 12:32 / 7 edits
    It is true women should be wiser about their actions in a world that seeks to take advantage of them. It's just that once an action such as rape takes place, that is NOT the time to chastise her about her decisions. At that point, she needs counseling, empathy and help to recover and make sure justice is done.

    It's fine to extol the virtues of wise decisions to avoid being assaulted all you want; but doing so after a woman has been raped is a different matter, and is a heartless, crass thing to do.

    If you drive an expensive car and get assaulted at gunpoint for it, the proper response isn't "hey buddy, were you even being the least bit smart?" You can discuss how unwise it is to drive expensive cars (or wear sexy outfits) because they invite trouble, but in the end, it's not the victim's fault.
  3. 11 Sep '17 12:45
    Originally posted by @huckleberryhound
    Hi guys. This question was brought about by Talk Radio DJ Here in Ireland. His Name was George Hook. He's 70, right leaning, and pretty archaic in his thinking sometimes. On Friday he was discussing the rape of a young girl by the British swim team (ref 1), when he says the following

    "But when you then look deeper into the story you have ...[text shortened]... passed-around-member/

    (2)http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-rape-criticism-3589574-Sep2017/
    "Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room?"
    Irrelevant. Even if she wanted to have sex with him, it is her right to say no at any point. If she can prove she said no, you (the impersonal you) don't get to ask that

    "She has no idea of his health conditions, she has no idea who he is, she has no idea what dangers he might pose."
    Irrelevant. We don't care if the victim displays poor judgement. We only care about the crime, if it happened and who committed it.

    "But there is a point of responsibility."
    Irrelevant to the case of rape. The rape is not lessened or changed in any way just because the victim was irresponsible. That's their prerogative. The victim is not on trial. The accused is.


    "Shouldn't we though promote personal responsibility?"
    Sure we do. Self defense classes. Social norms that one adheres to, like going together to the bathroom, having a drinking/going out/designated driver buddy (that stays sober), always ordering a cab to go home, not drinking what a stranger offers.
    We have all those.

    "And how do we do that without entering into the realm of victim blaming? "
    by promoting these norms to all as a matter of education, not by not making an issue of what the victim did after it happened. Not using the victim's actions as an attenuating circumstance at the trial.
  4. Subscriber Wajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    11 Sep '17 12:48
    Originally posted by @zahlanzi
    "Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room?"
    Irrelevant. Even if she wanted to have sex with him, it is her right to say no at any point. If she can prove she said no, you (the impersonal you) don't get to ask that

    "She has no idea of his health conditions, she has no idea who he is, she has no idea what dangers he might p ...[text shortened]... after it happened. Not using the victim's actions as an attenuating circumstance at the trial.
    You could force the victim to have counseling too.
  5. 11 Sep '17 12:54
    Originally posted by @huckleberryhound
    Hi guys. This question was brought about by Talk Radio DJ Here in Ireland. His Name was George Hook. He's 70, right leaning, and pretty archaic in his thinking sometimes. On Friday he was discussing the rape of a young girl by the British swim team (ref 1), when he says the following

    "But when you then look deeper into the story you have ...[text shortened]... passed-around-member/

    (2)http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-rape-criticism-3589574-Sep2017/
    Nonsense. Women should continue to meet with strangers, get drunk, and head back to their apartment.

    Nothing to see here.
  6. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    11 Sep '17 19:05
    Originally posted by @vivify
    It is true women should be wiser about their actions in a world that seeks to take advantage of them. It's just that once an action such as rape takes place, that is NOT the time to chastise her about her decisions. At that point, she needs counseling, empathy and help to recover and make sure justice is done.

    It's fine to extol the virtues of wise de ...[text shortened]... (or wear sexy outfits) because they invite trouble, but in the end, it's not the victim's fault.
    === You can discuss how unwise it is to drive expensive cars (or wear sexy outfits) because they invite trouble, ===

    In that case, you're answering the OP's question with a "yes."
  7. Standard member vivify
    rain
    11 Sep '17 19:58
    Originally posted by @sh76
    === You can discuss how unwise it is to drive expensive cars (or wear sexy outfits) because they invite trouble, ===

    In that case, you're answering the OP's question with a "yes."
    Only if you ignore where I disapprove of this after a victim has been raped.

    Way to cherry-pick and misquote someone.
  8. 11 Sep '17 19:59
    Is it right to question someone who willingly goes to work at the WTC even when they know it is a target for terrorist attacks?
  9. Subscriber huckleberryhound
    Devout Agnostic.
    11 Sep '17 20:50
    Originally posted by @kazetnagorra
    Is it right to question someone who willingly goes to work at the WTC even when they know it is a target for terrorist attacks?
    ...and the False equivalence award goes to. . .
  10. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    11 Sep '17 23:56
    Originally posted by @huckleberryhound
    Hi guys. This question was brought about by Talk Radio DJ Here in Ireland. His Name was George Hook. He's 70, right leaning, and pretty archaic in his thinking sometimes. On Friday he was discussing the rape of a young girl by the British swim team (ref 1), when he says the following

    "But when you then look deeper into the story you have ...[text shortened]... passed-around-member/

    (2)http://www.thejournal.ie/george-hook-rape-criticism-3589574-Sep2017/
    The way an issue is framed has a huge effect on the way it is interpreted. This story is set out in a way that can only lead to a suggestion that the victim is responsible for placing herself at risk. It is crying out for that response.

    However, the way the story is told is not simply factual. It is very prejudicial.

    "Why does a girl who just meets a fella in a bar go back to a hotel room? She’s only just barely met him. She has no idea of his health conditions, she has no idea who he is, she has no idea what dangers he might pose."

    Well, phrased in that way, those are not neutrally stated facts - they are a series of value judgements, which are not without a point, but not balanced either.

    Men rape women in diverse situations. Women have been raped wearing a nun's uniform while in a convent. They have been raped walking to work. They have been raped at home by their husbands. They are raped because they are women and the rapists are men, that is all you need to know about why they are raped.

    In the scenario of this story, a young woman makes herself available for casual sex to a young man in a social environment where such encounters are almost certainly very common and quite normal. She is not having sex on her own. She and he are having sex. He has only just met her. He does not know her health status. He has no idea what her background might be. Such casual sex takes place all the time and in another context it is fine to debate why this is undesirable and unhealthy. For a great many young people of both sexes, this is reasonable behaviour. We may tut and mutter all we wish from behind our screens but that is life for many people.

    However, it is simply not part of the normal pattern of behaviour among young people engaged in such casual sex to subject the women to a rape.

    Is it more likely to happen in this context? I don't know - show me the evidence first. Show me that more rapes arise when the woman is drunk and having casual sex, rather than when the woman is drunk and going home to bed, or the woman is sobre but the men are drunk, or ....

    Maybe the only thing that matters is that the woman was vulnerable and the rapist was prepared to take the opportunity for rape.

    This is just one of the infinite variety of situations in which women can be raped. The woman's behaviour is not relevant. That proposition is based on the objectionable premise that men who rape have been provoked or tempted or seduced into raping by the behaviour of the woman.

    So to answer your questions, no, the woman's behaviour is not a consideration in rape, any more than a nun's sexy uniform in the titillating context of a convent is a consideration in rape. That's partly because rape is not really even about sexual attraction - it is about violence and aggression.

    As for your journalist, he should be sacked or at least re-educated by any decent and responsible news agency because he set up this story in a distorted way in order to frame things to the disadvantage of the rape victim. The last thing we need is more rape apologists in the media.
  11. Standard member shavixmir
    Guppy poo
    13 Sep '17 11:25
    If women don't want to be raped, they should stay att home dressed in garbage bags or burkas.

    Oh, wait....
    Yeah. Thought so.

    What you all mean is that if a woman doesn't do exactly as you think she should do, it's either oppression of women or she was asking for it.
  12. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    13 Sep '17 14:28
    Originally posted by @whodey
    Nonsense. Women should continue to meet with strangers, get drunk, and head back to their apartment.

    Nothing to see here.
    What the hell is wrong with you? Seriously.
  13. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    13 Sep '17 14:32
    Originally posted by @finnegan
    The way an issue is framed has a huge effect on the way it is interpreted. This story is set out in a way that can only lead to a suggestion that the victim is responsible for placing herself at risk. It is crying out for that response.

    However, the way the story is told is not simply factual. It is very prejudicial.

    [i]"Why does a girl who just ...[text shortened]... e disadvantage of the rape victim. The last thing we need is more rape apologists in the media.
    Amen. I totally agree. Yes, with all of it.
  14. 13 Sep '17 15:54
    Originally posted by @huckleberryhound
    Rape. Is it ever right to question the actions of the victim?
    It's always a before and it's always an after.

    In this scenario, this is the before:
    I have a super duper BMW with extra everything. I drive to (*insert your favorite bad and dangerous neighborhood*) to enter a drugstore to purchase a bottle of whiskey. I intend to buy it in just a few minutes so I leave the door open, engine running, and my bag with some money in it. However, it took longer than I thought, because the line was long, and I happened to know the salesman so we had a nice chat, so after half an hour I payed and exited the store to go home. But I didn't find my car. It was stolen.

    Comment: I know very well that it is forbidden to steal a car, so why should I close and lock the door to my car? I was sober, I didn't violate any laws. So I felt safe to do what I was doing. I didn't do anything wrong, right?

    And this is after:
    As I was a victim I went to the police office to report the theft. And they laughed at me! They said I was to blame and explained that they wouldn't do any report writing.
    I went to the insurance company and the more or less the same, they just laughed at me!
    My friends laughs at me, they think I am an idiot!

    But I am the victim here, I didn't do anything wrong! I can see in the law that it is forbidden to steal a car, it's written in black on white! So why blame me? I'm a the victim!

    There is always a before. Don't rely that others don't do things that are forbidden by law. Suspect the worst that could happen. Don't be naïve.
    And there is an after. If someone has done wrong with you, then they are the ones to blame. Only because you have made a mistake doesn't imply that others can benefit from your mistake.

    Before my daughter go to the party, I ask her to be careful.
    If my daughter comes home raped, I will never blame her for anything.

    Before my son lend my car, I ask him to be careful.
    If he wrecklessly let the car be stolen, I would ... what would I do?
  15. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    13 Sep '17 16:03 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by @fabianfnas
    It's always a [b]before and it's always an after.

    In this scenario, this is the before:
    I have a super duper BMW with extra everything. I drive to (*insert your favorite bad and dangerous neighborhood*) to enter a drugstore to purchase a bottle of whiskey. I intend to buy it in just a few minutes so I leave the door open, engine run ...[text shortened]... I ask him to be careful.
    If he wrecklessly let the car be stolen, I would ... what would I do?[/b]
    ...and the False equivalence award goes to. .

    The fact is that car theft is indeed theft and nobody says otherwise. Similarly rape is rape.

    Sure fewer people (not nobody) would lose their car if the car stayed at home in a locked garage. Fewer (not nobody) would get raped if they stayed at home in a locked garage. But neither is a realistic scenario.

    In the real world, however ...