Oh hai, Dail Mail fuckwit opinion on rape
Aug. 21st, 2008 12:29 pmSays fuckwit, aisle Daily Mail: ... it does mean that a rape victim who was drunk deserves less sympathy.
OH NO YOU DIDN'T.
He then goes on to bitch about his taxes being used to compensate rape victims. Ohnoes, you know. His precious tax pounds.
So I suppose we must resign ourselves to the fact that a growing slice of our taxes will be handed over to victims of unsolved rapes, while rape itself increases – the inevitable result of the collapse of sexual morality.
But I cannot see why women who ignore the wisdom of the ages, and make themselves more likely to be victims by drinking too much, should get the same size cheque as women who are raped despite acting responsibly.
You, good sir, are a fuckwit and let me explain to you very slowly in your chosen language of English.
1) You are putting the focus on THE VICTIM. What about the guys who drink and then do stupid shit like rape? Not a word about how bad they are for society, I note. No, no. Lets make it all about the victim and not the culprit. So you want to talk about how drinking is bad and a factor in rape? Yeah, make it about the victim and not the culprits who rape while under the influence. Gee, notice something slightly off there?
2) Doing something dumb now gets you less sympathy? WTF is sympathy, some sort of currency with a fluctuating exchange rate? Someone who is a bit 'dim' (to use your words) has as much right to your sympathy as anyone else because what happened to her is equally horrible no matter why it happened.
3) Women who are drunk do no more asked to be raped than women who wear low-cut tops, women who walk home alone, women who live. Women are more likely to be raped just by living, as it so happens. Drinking might put women in a more vunerable position, but so can a lot of other things. If you start deducting compensation for risk factor you might as well deduct some for living in general. Life is risk, because our society is not safe and somehow, we as a women are a bit dim unless we're willing to live life a little less because some guys are fuckwits who rape?
4) Most rapes do not happen between strangers. Most happen between a victim and a perp that know each other. Are we supposed to blame women who trust a guy they know enough to drink with him but not the guy who takes advantage of this trust to rape? If all it takes is a bit of drinking and men can't help themselves, why are not they being locked up as protective measure?
5) 'Of course she is culpable, just as she would be culpable if she crashed a car and injured someone while drunk, or stepped out into the traffic while drunk and was run over.' Ye Gods, your comparison to being drunk and stepping into the road to get hit by a passing car. No woman forces a guy to rape her by stepping into his path. So she got plastered. That does not mean the guy couldn't help himself. He could and he didn't. It's more like the guy driving saw a drunk woman, deliberately turned his car to hit her because he knew her ability to react would be impaired. See the rather crucial difference there? You might say 'oh, if she hadn't been drunk, she might have been able to throw herself to one side and not get hit, so it's a bit on her really'. THE CAR STILL WENT FOR HER. She still got hit. It still hurt just as much if she had been sober when hit.
6) ‘If women want to dress provocatively, then they should be free to do so, and I say thanks a lot to those who do.’ OH BITE ME. I don't dress for you, I don't want your thanks and it's not for you to approve of how I dress. That's always and forever my choice.
7) Binge-drinking and stupid shit happening while drunk IS a society problem, yeah. But it's also something given quite a lot of pass in society, indulged in a 'haha-you-know-what-I-did-while-drunk-last-weekend' way and even pushed to a certain degree. So faulting women for drinking when men do it merrily to the same degree because rape is something to mostly happen to women? Double standards, fuckwit. Heard of them?
8) Your aside about how 'collapse of sexual morality' has lead to more rape? HAI, you don't know that. What you might know is that reports of rape has increased, maybe because women feel a little more supported when reporting it these days. A little. Rape is still hugely underreported and you don't think this was the case in some glorious nostalgic olden times? Don't put the past on a pedastal - everything wasn't better before. And quite frankly, any sort of implication that sexual liberation of women has lead to more rape is disgusting and pinning it on the woman AGAIN. You better not be implying that, you fuckwit.
The comments are full of fail and men going on about how many women evilly accuse poor innocent men of rape to make money. To which I rather like this reply:
The conviction rate for rape in the UK is about 6%. In the meantime, a woman who accuses a man of rape has a 100% chance of getting treatment that accompanies no other crime: she’ll be blamed, she’ll be lectured on what she did wrong and what else she coulda shoulda woulda done, she’ll have her every sexual choice before or after the alleged crime dissected, she’ll be told he couldn’t have meant it because he’s just not really like that, she’ll be told it’s not that serious really and can’t she just let it go for the good of all, she’ll be questioned for her determination to ruin a man’s life for what was really just one little mistake; and that’s from the people who believe her and think they’re on her side.
Anyone who thinks the compensation you might get is worth enduring what you go through when reporting a rape has no idea whatsoever what it's like. NO IDEA.
To sum up: Why the everhateful fuck is rape always about the victim and not about the rapist? Maybe because articles like that are written and make angling it on the victim acceptable. You know what? It shouldn't be.
(I so need a BSG WTF icon.)
This concludes the rage of the day.
OH NO YOU DIDN'T.
He then goes on to bitch about his taxes being used to compensate rape victims. Ohnoes, you know. His precious tax pounds.
So I suppose we must resign ourselves to the fact that a growing slice of our taxes will be handed over to victims of unsolved rapes, while rape itself increases – the inevitable result of the collapse of sexual morality.
But I cannot see why women who ignore the wisdom of the ages, and make themselves more likely to be victims by drinking too much, should get the same size cheque as women who are raped despite acting responsibly.
You, good sir, are a fuckwit and let me explain to you very slowly in your chosen language of English.
1) You are putting the focus on THE VICTIM. What about the guys who drink and then do stupid shit like rape? Not a word about how bad they are for society, I note. No, no. Lets make it all about the victim and not the culprit. So you want to talk about how drinking is bad and a factor in rape? Yeah, make it about the victim and not the culprits who rape while under the influence. Gee, notice something slightly off there?
2) Doing something dumb now gets you less sympathy? WTF is sympathy, some sort of currency with a fluctuating exchange rate? Someone who is a bit 'dim' (to use your words) has as much right to your sympathy as anyone else because what happened to her is equally horrible no matter why it happened.
3) Women who are drunk do no more asked to be raped than women who wear low-cut tops, women who walk home alone, women who live. Women are more likely to be raped just by living, as it so happens. Drinking might put women in a more vunerable position, but so can a lot of other things. If you start deducting compensation for risk factor you might as well deduct some for living in general. Life is risk, because our society is not safe and somehow, we as a women are a bit dim unless we're willing to live life a little less because some guys are fuckwits who rape?
4) Most rapes do not happen between strangers. Most happen between a victim and a perp that know each other. Are we supposed to blame women who trust a guy they know enough to drink with him but not the guy who takes advantage of this trust to rape? If all it takes is a bit of drinking and men can't help themselves, why are not they being locked up as protective measure?
5) 'Of course she is culpable, just as she would be culpable if she crashed a car and injured someone while drunk, or stepped out into the traffic while drunk and was run over.' Ye Gods, your comparison to being drunk and stepping into the road to get hit by a passing car. No woman forces a guy to rape her by stepping into his path. So she got plastered. That does not mean the guy couldn't help himself. He could and he didn't. It's more like the guy driving saw a drunk woman, deliberately turned his car to hit her because he knew her ability to react would be impaired. See the rather crucial difference there? You might say 'oh, if she hadn't been drunk, she might have been able to throw herself to one side and not get hit, so it's a bit on her really'. THE CAR STILL WENT FOR HER. She still got hit. It still hurt just as much if she had been sober when hit.
6) ‘If women want to dress provocatively, then they should be free to do so, and I say thanks a lot to those who do.’ OH BITE ME. I don't dress for you, I don't want your thanks and it's not for you to approve of how I dress. That's always and forever my choice.
7) Binge-drinking and stupid shit happening while drunk IS a society problem, yeah. But it's also something given quite a lot of pass in society, indulged in a 'haha-you-know-what-I-did-while-drunk-last-weekend' way and even pushed to a certain degree. So faulting women for drinking when men do it merrily to the same degree because rape is something to mostly happen to women? Double standards, fuckwit. Heard of them?
8) Your aside about how 'collapse of sexual morality' has lead to more rape? HAI, you don't know that. What you might know is that reports of rape has increased, maybe because women feel a little more supported when reporting it these days. A little. Rape is still hugely underreported and you don't think this was the case in some glorious nostalgic olden times? Don't put the past on a pedastal - everything wasn't better before. And quite frankly, any sort of implication that sexual liberation of women has lead to more rape is disgusting and pinning it on the woman AGAIN. You better not be implying that, you fuckwit.
The comments are full of fail and men going on about how many women evilly accuse poor innocent men of rape to make money. To which I rather like this reply:
The conviction rate for rape in the UK is about 6%. In the meantime, a woman who accuses a man of rape has a 100% chance of getting treatment that accompanies no other crime: she’ll be blamed, she’ll be lectured on what she did wrong and what else she coulda shoulda woulda done, she’ll have her every sexual choice before or after the alleged crime dissected, she’ll be told he couldn’t have meant it because he’s just not really like that, she’ll be told it’s not that serious really and can’t she just let it go for the good of all, she’ll be questioned for her determination to ruin a man’s life for what was really just one little mistake; and that’s from the people who believe her and think they’re on her side.
Anyone who thinks the compensation you might get is worth enduring what you go through when reporting a rape has no idea whatsoever what it's like. NO IDEA.
To sum up: Why the everhateful fuck is rape always about the victim and not about the rapist? Maybe because articles like that are written and make angling it on the victim acceptable. You know what? It shouldn't be.
(I so need a BSG WTF icon.)
This concludes the rage of the day.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:06 am (UTC)I'm so furious right now I don't think I could even be properly coherent about this. *KEYSMASH* tayrcuw4\6fcch\4et srfcsg!!!!!!!!1
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:16 am (UTC)Seriously, the 'less sympathy' remarks makes me want to punch him in the balls, and I am not that violent a person.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:11 am (UTC)(No, I'm not in a blind fury... if I was, I'd be looking up this bastard's address and checking flight prices to Europe... and besides, this is Peter-fuckin'-Hitchens, we think of this dumbarse as the European Rush Limbaugh... just as deserving of being fed his teeth and getting a taser to the balls).
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:24 am (UTC)Blah. I live in hope this kind of fuckwittery will die out in a generation or two.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:29 am (UTC)We can only hope. Failing that, there's always Viking SMASH!
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:33 am (UTC)I've ranted about it before, but really, society has so far to go still in attitudes to rape and this guy proves it so well.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:59 am (UTC)Seriously, rape/sexual assault is about the shittiest thing done to another human being and a huge part of that is the kind of attitudes you encounter after. *That* is not all right. It's fucked up when I am glad what happened to me was so violent no one would question me, you know? That is seriously fucked up.
Preaching to the choir, I know. I just gotta say these things sometimes or I go a little mad.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 01:24 pm (UTC)Not enough people say stuff like this, not enough people *think* like this.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:35 am (UTC)I can't look at any of the papers myself. They just make my blood boil, especially the way they are towards women and their weight.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 11:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 03:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:07 pm (UTC)GAH. RAGE.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:20 pm (UTC)I hope that last was sarcasm, or I think I'll lose another sanity point.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:11 pm (UTC)Fuckwits like this are still allowed to breathe my air? Effing RAGE to the power of infinity.
*clings*
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:23 pm (UTC)A depressing large amount of people think a bit like him, though.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 05:22 pm (UTC)What *I* did was hang out with my friend, same as I'd done ten thousand times before, and what I expected was to hang out with my friend, same as I'd done ten thousand times before. It IS NOT my fault that that time he up and decided he just felt like taking what he wanted without asking, because he knew if he asked, I'd say no.
Bast
P.S.---can I steal that icon, now that I have space for it? Pretty please?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 09:59 am (UTC)And sure - it's a long time since I made that one, but I think I did post it at some point with a 'feel free to snag with credit'.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:32 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:42 pm (UTC)*hugs*
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 01:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 12:43 pm (UTC)I nearly lost my breakfast when I read about this last week in the UK papers. That a government agency not only made a decision to provide reduced compensation to multiple rape victims who had been drinking, but also claimed that while doing so they were in compliance with agency policies is simply unacceptable
From last week's vomit-inducing Mail article: "Officials at the Criminal Injury Compensation Authority told women their drinking was a ' contributing factor' in their ordeal. The standard taxpayer-funded payouts of £11,000 were cut by as much as a quarter. The rules of the CICA scheme allow payments to be reduced in cases where victims are partly to blame - such as by provoking an attacker."
There are no words.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 01:21 pm (UTC)Looooooooooovely.
And WTF, 'provoking' an attacker? How do rape victims 'provoke' an attacker?
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 01:46 pm (UTC)How do rape victims 'provoke' an attacker?
Clearly by wearing mini-skirts, make-up and smiling in public.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 01:14 pm (UTC)You said pretty much everything I was sputtering and snarling while reading the article.
Still gotta say a couple things though:
**Of course she is culpable, just as she would be culpable if she crashed a car and injured someone while drunk, or stepped out into the traffic while drunk and was run over.
I agree with you totally--The idea of a drunk person being hit by a car in ANY way being the equivalent of rape is totally screwed. It only works if the driver is speeding and aiming for the staggering person.
It's the question of intent..Is harm intended. But, that would focus on the perpetrator and we can't have that.
But the first part...Equating a rape victim with a drunk driver? That makes me homicidal. A drunk driver disregards not only their OWN safety but the safety of others. BIG difference.
Something else that bugged me...
**Our society is based on self-restraint. We can be provoked and still behave ourselves.
So a woman who is dress in a visually appealing way and having a beer is...provoking males to sexual violence?
Yet again, I feel like he's accusing victims of a violent crime of more than just "stupidity"...He's suggesting intent and wrongful action on their part.
Beyond that, how drunk does he consider drunk enough to be "culpable"?
If I go out to a bar and have two drinks, I will not get behind the wheel of a car. I know my judgement and reflexes are slightly impaired. But I am certainly NOT drunk enough to be confused about whether or not sex is consensual (...actually, as trashed as I've been, I've yet to reach that point).
If I'm jumped on the way to someone ELSE'S car or someone I think is a trustworthy friend does something fucked up, I'm less able to defend myself.
Am I to blame?
Actually, what if I were physically or mentally disabled? I would be more vulnerable EVERY time I went out...Would I be at fault just for going out at all?
I think I'll have to try calling into work, "Hey, I've got a bad headache so I'm not at my physical peak and might be raped. Don't want to do anything "dim", ya know?"
Point being--You start blaming the victim, who knows where it will end. You could always have done something different, doesn't mean you're to blame or that it would even have changed the outcome.
**Anyone who thinks the compensation you might get is worth enduring what you go through when reporting a rape has no idea whatsoever what it's like.
I do have to admit that I'm a little confused about the idea of monetary compensation...It's just not something I'm familiar with. Of course it's not worth any amount of money so how is compensation determined? Here it would be a civil matter instead of a criminal one and I'm embarrassed to admit that I don't know if someone can sue for being raped.
Seems to me it would be most fair to base it on things like lost wages/physical and mental treatment needed--Trying to base it on "pain and suffering" would almost be insulting.
Also, are the perpetrator's assets ever confiscated to foot part of the bill? To me, that seems like both deterrent and a way to defer the cost that DOESN'T blame the victim.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 01:37 pm (UTC)So that's what the guy is on about. The cases where the rapist is not caught or convicted, the victim still gets compensation but from the state. I think you have to appeal for it to some sort of state agency - usually, the lawyer the state grants you will do all this for you. I don't know what the amount is in the UK or what the process is exactly, but it sounds similar to Norway's. It's all granted under the law.
Yeah, his drunk driver comparison is just... It does come across a bit like rape victims play a part in the rape in his eyes, which is the sort of thinking that enables the shit that rape victims often face. For the fail, truly.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 01:51 pm (UTC)Wow, what an awesome system! Much better than here where you'd have to go through two trials--criminal and civil if you wanted compensation. We had to do that with a vehicular manslaughter case over a drunk driver a few years ago and it was awful to relive that TWICE, ya know?
**The cases where the rapist is not caught or convicted, the victim still gets compensation but from the state...
Hmmm...I can almost see the guy's point (minus the alcohol element) in cases where there's no conviction, though not in cases where the perpetrator can't be found.
I mean, it's a hard call...Do you risk people abusing the system or risk someone who needs the help not getting it? I say the latter, but I can see an argument both ways at least.
**It does come across a bit like rape victims play a part in the rape in his eyes, which is the sort of thinking that enables the shit that rape victims often face...
EXACTLY! Assuming that rape cases are on the rise because of the actual number of sexual assaults and NOT because of an increase in women reporting these crimes, I would blame it on this sort of attitude rather than "loose morals."
I just don't like to see ANY gray area on these things...It encourages gray areas in male thinking about a woman's rights over her body, which is just dangerous. Cliche though it may be, no really does mean no.
Drinking is a cultural staple...I think, instead of this bullshit, men should be taught that, should they have any idea that a woman is drunk enough she might not be aware of what she's consenting to, it's THEIR responsibility to not go there.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 02:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 02:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 02:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 03:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 04:44 pm (UTC)There are no words for the seething rage I'm feeling right now. I'm one of those people who were "a bit dim", because I was a manic, unmedicated 15-year-old who was pissed at her parents and hitched a ride from some guy in the middle of the night. Yes, it was stupid. Does that make my emotional trauma any less than someone who was smart?
ad;sfk;aweio;ahkl;jdfHATE.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 10:04 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 08:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 04:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-22 08:32 am (UTC)