Do you make victims of victims?

[Aerissa_Jade]

When someone becomes a victim of a crime, many people will start to excuse the criminal or blame the victim without realizing they are doing so.

At the same time, many know they are doing it and continue to do it.

This is commonly called victim blaming. Both men and women will do it towards sexual assault victims, because they should not have been wearing those cloths or been in this place or they drank too much.

This is an attempt to shift blame from the criminal to the victim.

Many will say those in bad situations got themselves into it, such as trafficking victims can just walk away or call 911.

If they do not, then they are not truly victims.

I am not strictly referring to sexual crimes though, this happens with almost any type of crime. People who carry a lot of cash and get robbed, could be blamed. Why were they carrying so much cash, that is their own fault.

Someone who was conceal carrying, locked their gun in their car because they can't take it in where they are going, it gets stolen. They are a victim of theft and yet others will blame them when their gun is used in a crime.

Virtually any type of crime, someone will blame the victim.

Do you in part blame the victims or wholly? Intentionally or unintentionally. Do thoughts cross your mind, that if they had done or not done (insert whatever) that they would not have become a victim or because they did something they choose to become one?

Yes - I blame the victim entirely as it is their fault.

I blame the victim partially, not entirely but they have some responsibility in it.

No - I never blame the victim, ever... I only blame the perpetuator.

Updates

1 y

i0.wp.com/.../victim-blaming-2.jpeg

[Alessa13]

I hate talk like this, cause it is never the victims fault ever. People always think that they would of done better but if it is a first time of being a victim of that type of crime, no experience and never been a victim like that before how can one do better?

Someone who has been a victim of a crime before can learn and grow from that but when the first time crime is something major it is harder to if it destroys you as a person.

I blame the person who broke the law in the first place to commit the crime. The person they made a victim has 0% responsbility in it.

The law has things built in too that make it harder to protect yourself. If your afraid of your house being broken into while your away, you are not allowed to set traps to protect your property, if you do and you catch a criminal you become the criminal for using a trap. Same thing with your car if you try to protect your car with traps if someone breaks into it, you become the criminal for trying to protect your belongings when they get caught.

The law does not want you to protect yourself in many aspects. In many places you cannot even carry a gun to protect yourself from rape or other violence.

One can learn the bad places if you live near one but if you are a tourist or move around a lot how would you know an area is bad and not to go there?

Too many internet arm chair judges who think they know best.

[Aerissa_Jade]

That is true, many liberal area's do not want people to protect themselves and rely on the police. Which ironically is strange, because liberals don't trust the police.

[melanieeeB]

Not at all!
People be acting like they would have handeld the situation differently and better and talk from their high horses but they (thankfully!) Don't know a real bad situation and they don't know how they would really act if a worse case situation would really happen to them... so you shut the fuck up, hope that the victim gets the help and support that they need and can move on from their trauma and you stay thankfully that you didn't have to be in a bad situation.

[melanieeeB]

I mean you can say how you would act in a ideal situation but you don't know until you are in a real situation. You can also have years of self defense classes and still froze up in fear when facing a attacker or whatever, you don't know

[Aerissa_Jade]

That is perfectly said, as lots of arm chair after the fact people can say here is what they did wrong and why it is their fault, but they weren't there. They have a cognitive bias when it comes to other peoples behavior and they overestimate their own abilities and under estimate the situation that someone else was in.

[melanieeeB]

Yeah I totally agree with you!

[dynamicyandere]

For me, the perpetrator pretty much gets all of the blame. The victim does not get blamed but I do think about possible ways that may or may not have changed the outcome. That’s all speculative though. What is concrete is that the perpetrator committed the crime, so the blame should be on them.


They’re the ones who committed the crime. We would not have any crimes if nobody ever committed crimes.


There would be no victims of theft if people simply did not steal.


As for blaming the victim for their contribution to the situation, it’s sort of just thoughts about prevention. Like turning back time and thinking about whether there was any way XYZ crime could have been prevented.


But it’s all hypothetical, and may or may not have actually prevented the crime.


For example, if a girl were to be walking alone at night in a high-crime area. If she had the option to bring a friend but chose not to, then she’s choosing a higher risk path when she had a lower risk option.


In that case, it’s true that she could have been safer.


But being safer doesn’t mean safe. It doesn’t mean that it would have 100% guaranteed her safety.


At the end of the day, it’s the perpetrators that commit the crimes.


I blame the perpetrator every time, but I do think about whether the crime could have been prevented and if so, how? Though, I do acknowledge it as all hypothetical and it’s very easy to succumb to hindsight bias.


When people blame victims completely, I suppose it may actually be some sort of self-serving ego-boosting behavior.


They look at an event in hindsight, and they claim that they would have done a better job had they been in the same situation. Like watching a horror film and saying that they would survive because they wouldn’t make the same mistakes.


But they don’t really know until they actually find themselves in a dangerous situation themselves. Criticizing others and making claims about their own superior capabilities and intelligence makes them feel good about themselves, at the expense of the victim.


People online like to act like they know better. They can act as if they were in the same situation it would never happen to them.


Prevention has its place, but when it comes to crime, there’s only so much prevention one can do.


How far does one need to go? Never go outside? Live forever in an underground bunker? Sure, that would be safe. But where’s the accountability for the perpetrators then? Law-abiding citizens living underground while law-breakers get to roam free on the surface?


If we are living in a civilized society, then law-abiding people should not need to resort to such extreme measures to feel safe.


The opposite of the bunker analogy would be that law-abiding citizens get to roam free and criminals are the ones who need to be separated from the rest of society. That is how things should be.


But, we live in a society where criminals DO roam free while law-abiding citizens live among them.


Should law-abiding citizens be punished for breaking no laws?


Or should law-breakers be punished for breaking laws?


If it’s clear who should be punished (the actual criminals), why are victims punished by victim blamers?


Again, I suppose it’s an ego-boost thing. People feeling better about their life after judging the misfortune of others. All at the expense of the victim.


Leaving them feeling like the crimes against them are being dismissed or being invalidated. The world turning a cold shoulder.


It’s a heartless thing to blame the victim because it’s not simply entertainment, juicy gossip, drama, a trending story, a hot topic, or even an intellectual exercise… Its a real person going through real hurt. And the collective dismal of the crime will result in real consequences: the victim not getting the support and justice they need.

[whirled_up_girl]

I would never say anybody deserves to be a victim of a violent crime even they did put themselves in a dangerous situation. The criminal is responsible for their violent actions. That being said as a woman I know that at the end of the day a criminal is a criminal. And if they decide they want to do something bad or violent to me it’s really not going to matter that they shouldn’t, that it’s illegal, immoral or unethical. I know if a violent criminal wants to hurt me that they will so I’m am always on my guard, with some kind of weapon and escape plan. I do try to avoid purposely putting myself in danger but it cannot always avoid that, I have to leave my apartment to go to work, I have to come home at night because I work 12 hour shifts. Sometimes I think people use that excuse because they don’t want to accept that violent crimes are going to happen to people they want to believe there is always a way to prevent it. So it’s easier for them to think that a victim is more at fault than the actual criminal. It’s also a tactic that probably defense lawyers use to get the perp off on a lesser charge. It’s frustrating though to constantly hear that.

[Aerissa_Jade]

It reminds me of this temp job I had for 3 months, they did not have enough employee parking so people would have to park way down the road and park on the street, sometimes as far as half a mile away.

Those that started at 6am got the close spots, those that came in after 10 had to park way down there.

This one girl, got stuck a little late one night and had to walk after dark all the way to her car and was attacked and raped. There was no one to walk with her, there was no lighting, what more could she of done?

Yet people blamed her, said she was stupid for walking by herself... like really, they even suspected it was a co-worker that attacked her but he had a mask so wasn't sure in the dark, could not identify anyone.

People like to blame the victim, simply because it helps them to feel safer in the world, is my theory. The thought that it could happen to them is a scary prospect.

[loveslongnails]

Let me ask this question a little bit differently, and l'll avoid the whole "how someone is dressed" thing by making it about a guy. Said guy is out for the night with friends, has a few drinks at a bar and decides to walk home. Or even better, said guy hasn't had ANY drinks and is completely sober. To get home, he KNOWS he has to go through a gang-ridden, crime infested neighborhood that's not very safe, but he decides to do so anyway for whatever ill advised logic he comes up with.

He then gets mugged, beaten, robbed by some gang members and ends up in the hospital. Is it his "fault" he was mugged, beaten and robbed? No, that's the gang's fault. Did his stupid decision have something to DO with him becoming a victim? It sure did. He stupidly put himself in a very bad situation, and suffered the consequences of a stupid decision.

I don't treat that person with less care or concern for his injuries, and I don't badger him for his dumb decision, and the perps should still be held accountable. But he has to understand that he put himself there, and accept the blame for that. Now change the guy to a woman who gets raped after making the same stupid decision. It's heartbreaking.

I think this is a bit different than your example, but I've had folks claim it's the same thing, and I don't believe it is.

[Aerissa_Jade]

It is very similar to a woman, there are two main differences I can think of though.

1st is being sexually assaulted is far worse than getting beat up and robbed. I'd take that any day... if your example the guy was forced to do gay sex with the whole gang, then it could be closer.

The 2nd part is often men can choose to go to places that are not unsafe for them but they are for women. There are places that men can go alone without any issues but a woman going alone, can't and if she does, it is her fault but a man can go the exact same place.

There is no place a woman can go alone and be safe that a man cannot be.

That reduces places women can go by quite a bit.

Then if man or woman goes into a bad situation conceal carrying and kills all the attackers, some will say he/she was in the wrong for carrying a gun and going into that bad area. That had they not been armed or gone there, the dead people would still be alive, thus blaming the victim even more for defending themselves successfully.

What if the man or woman had no idea that an area was a bad choice to go through or maybe they've gone through it dozens of times safely in the past?

It is always easy for others not in that situation to judge what they would of done had they been in it, because they were not in it.

[Daniela1982]

Hmmm, you get a helpful and I get disagrees for basically saying the same thing. The trolls are restless it seems. 😝👎

[loveslongnails]

I really don't agree with some of your logic. An unsafe place is an unsafe place - period. Just because it's "less so" for a man doesn't mean it's wise to assume the risk.
" There is no place a woman can go alone and be safe that a man cannot be." This isn't true at all. That statement is wholly dependent on "where it is, and what kind of community it is". In the biggest of cities, no one is safe in lots of places. I've also been in towns where no one locks their doors or their property.

Your example of arming yourself and then choosing to go into a bad situation that you do not HAVE TO is STILL an example of an unwise decision. Just because you successfully defended yourself because you had better weaponry DOESN'T answer the question - "WHY did you even PUT yourself in that position in the FIRST place?" What if the perps all had AR-15's and you just had a little handgun, and you wind up dead? What do you say then - uh, I should have brought more firepower to a place I didn't have to go?

And lastly, the forced sex aspect? You have no real idea how this plays into things. What if it's a woman and the gang says "Ok, we're going to give a choice - we rob you and beat you within inches of your life, or we fuck you and let you go and you keep your possessions".

Whatever you're about to say, I'll echo your words - no one knows what they would choose to do in that situation, until they're in it. So again I say, don't put yourself in situations like that, women or men, this point becomes totally moot.

[inhua]

if you jump into a lake full of hungry alligators and they tear you apart. do you blame the alligators for being hungry? rhetorical question yes but relevant

even then who is the victim and who is the attacker has a lot of gray area. now watch this scene and tell me who the victim and the attacker is and was it justified later on to ridicule the survivor

https://www.youtube.com/embed/EDx0HTVDPI8

or how about this video? one guy here clearly was the victim but guess what? social media blasted the victim and engaged in victim blaming

https://www.youtube.com/embed/FvdSUbV5pjc

point is everyone has some degree of responsibility for everything that happens to them whether good or bad. when you have control you have responsibility. yes if you are living in Los Angeles and a nuke drops on the city, you still have some responsibility because you could've been living in New York City or Miami or Dallas or somewhere else where the nuke didn't drop. things don't just happen for no reason

[Aerissa_Jade]

In the Joker scene, that is easy. The thugs are clearly the criminals and Joker is the victim. Often criminals try to run away when they realize someone can defend themselves, or will even try to use the law to later on get their own victim.

Everything Joker did was 100% acceptable to me, he did the world a favorite by preventing those thugs from raping someone in the future, had he not been there, they likely would of raped that girl.

They didn't expect a clown to fight back and that is their problem. Ridiculing the joker later and saying he deserved what he got, would be victim blaming.

Only criminals care about other criminals... because they can envision themselves being a criminal and that happening to them, it messes with their world view that people shouldn't fight back.

The second guy, short guy is clearly the victim there. He is a jerk but speaking like that isn't a crime. The guy who attacked him is the criminal. The guy who attacked him, would of been surprised if short guy pulled a gun and shot him... the person who is the criminal is always the first one to physically assault someone or do something illegal in a non verbal fashion.

Sure he has issues but being a jerk isn't a crime.

[caring__1]

Placing blame will never take us to a positive place. People assume once blame has been placed, the issue has been resolved, yet, in reality, nothing has actually changed.

I'm not going to legitimize any insensitive act done by any person, but to move forward, we're more likely to see success if we focus only on our role in the situation, as we can't change things out of our control. Playing the victim reduces the likelihood we'll learn from the experience. By looking at the choices we made, we are able to learn from the experience and come up with alternatives that are more likely to take us where we want to go, when we encounter a similar situation in the future.

Yes, there are situations where one party is truly totally innocent, but, in the vast majority of situations, both people have influenced the results. If I step on fresh dog poop, I can blame the dog or blame the owner of the dog, or I can become more observant while I walk. Which option will increase my likelihood of not stepping in fresh dog poop in the future?

[Daniela1982]

Sorry, but sometimes you read one of these stories about victims and you can't help but say, "play stupid games and win stupid prizes". I also call bullshit on the victims did not have any responsibility for SOME of these stories. You dress like a prostitute and someone is going to try and pick you up. And when you tell them no they aren't going to listen because they think that since you are flaunting your wares like a hooker, that you must want to be treated like one. Women know that men get turned on visually. After all, don't you wear lingerie when you want sex? Women think a guy has a switch that you can just turn off to keep him from getting turned on by a scantily dressed woman. Ain't gonna happen. These woke women who think that they should be able to go topless and wearing barely there clothing any place they like are in for a big surprise. Some pervert is going to track you down and own you, and you will just be another statistic and a story on the news. - "Woman leaves bar with 3 men, is found dead."

[Daniela1982]

I assume the downvotes are by these same woke women who like flaunting their tits and ass. *rolls eyes🙄* 🤣😂

[Jennz6]

Thanks for the advice

[Daniela1982]

@Jennz6 Not advice, just my take on a question. Everyone is going to have their own view.

[Leopard23]

It's not uncommon in today's society for people to claim victimhood status for s myriad of reasons usually linked to narcacism so questions about the circumstances and likelihood of the person claiming to be a victim is right after all if they are lying they are victimising another person or people.

It's like how the Duke Lacrouse team was falsely accused of rape without any evidence when the victim lied, the Media called them rapists and never apologised. Or how about Mattress girl. Or how about Jussie Smollet who claimed white Supremacists beat him up.

I dont blame actual victims for being victimised but it's a mistake to blindly walk through this life unaware of the dangers with no responsibility for yourself.

[genericname85]

i think you're confusing "victim blaming" with showing a person the ammount of controll and accountability that they do actually have.

so if you're a store owner and all your shit is stolen cause you didn't lock the store at night, are you to blame for your own robbery? of course not. and you can not controll thieves, cause obviously they are acting criminal and we are already fighing crime as best we can and yet it still happens right? so we have to protect us against crime.

so telling you that locking your door would prevent robberies isn't victim blaming. it's not saying tha trobbing your store cause it's not locked is ok. it's just showing you the ammount of control and acountability that you have for avoiding robberies.

so like you are a victim if you decided not to lock your store and got robbed. but also you're an idiot that should make sure your store can not be robbed so easily. that doesn't mean at all, that robbing your store is ok and that "you deserved it".

[Aerissa_Jade]

Personally, I'd rather leave the door unlocked and have a big bear trap inside or maybe a hidden spike pit to protect my belongings, but the government doesn't want us to protect ourselves here.

Locks will not stop someone who is determined, but a well placed trap will.

Locking a door and someone picks it or smashes a window to steal stuff, does that really matter or make a difference? They are still the victim and being too trusting does not make someone an idiot.

What do I now though, I'm evil and love the bear trap idea, come in the next day, if the person is still alive... execute them and dispose of the body. Never had to become a victim and did society a favor.

[genericname85]

so my thoughts on that is: making a trap for someone to get hurt seems wrong to me. so like it is your explicit goal to hurt someone. and that is in my opinion wrong, even if they have to do something wrong to actually get hurt by your trap. but you did intend for them to get hurt, so that's wrong. 2 wrongs don't make a right? right? and this is a totally different discussion than the "personal defense" discussion, cause your life isn't at risk there.

[Aerissa_Jade]

Property is at risk though, and I'm totally fine with hurting or killing someone to defend my property, as it often cannot be replaced, unless the state wants to reimburse me for failing to protect my property.

As I won't have money to simply go out and replace it and even if they catch the criminal, odds of them reimbursing me while in jail is slim to none. Best to just kill or maim them, then send them to prison. Society will be far better with one less criminal in it.

After all, no crime, no one gets hurt and they chose to get hurt by taking that risk.

[genericname85]

there's insurances for property. money can be paid back. live and health is gone forever.

[genericname85]

i agree with killing someone who's basically threattening your life by invading your living space... but that argument isn't true for a store unless you litterally live in there too.

[Aerissa_Jade]

Insurance doesn't get your heirlooms back, plus it rips you off for things that are not heirlooms... it will say here is what we think the value is, so what if it will cost twice that to replace it, we only give you what it is worth.

Stores I get having insurance, as they sell generic things that can be replaced, I was referring to at home property. Heirlooms passed down through many generations that cannot be replaced, no amount of money will replace it, because it cannot be bought anywhere.

I can't buy a hand made blanket from my dead grandma at any store.

Far as I'm concerned, criminals lives have less value than my property. Totally fine with their live being gone forever, it doesn't need to be replaced, we wouldn't want a criminal to be replaced.

[genericname85]

anyway :D i have statet my opinion. there's really no point in arguing opinions :D

[Aerissa_Jade]

Thank you

[LindsayR07]

This is a difficult question to answer because as a rape victim myself, while I have never and would never blame another rape victim, I have and do constantly blame myself. In two of these cases I have even gone as far as to absolve my rapists of blame all together because "I knew where I was going, I knew what they wanted, and I knew they could just take it, so I knew not to go."

Logically I know it is never the fault of the victim that their attacker has no respect for the social contract, but, maybe I hold myself to a higher standard of thoughtfulness and preparedness than I do other women.

[Aerissa_Jade]

Sorry you had to go through that too, never fun and never healed... at least I never will be.

It is also hard to consider giving up your freedom to not go somewhere, when others can go places with no fear of being harmed. One thinks to yourself, why should I stay home and not go there, its not fair that others can without issue.

[Jennz6]

@LindsayR07 sorry you had to go through that, I know because it happened to me too

[LindsayR07]

@Jennz6 counseling helps, but I also feel very alone in all of this. Your comments help that

[Fuentes]

I don't but I'm not gonna be the victim of any crime, that perp is going to be the victim. Which is why I'm never approached because they know imma die for all this and I'm taking them with me, let's go meet Jesus, cause you wanna play in traffic. It can really all go up today.

[Aerissa_Jade]

If you do kill any attackers, the libs will still blame ya, they'll be all like, he knew not to go there and he was carrying a gun, so he planned to kill some people who'd be alive had he not gone there.

Thus victim blaming cause they'll say you should of not gone to the bad area and then no one would be dead.

At least you won't care, cause you survived and made society a little bit better by taking out some trash.

[Fuentes]

Lol let them, imma lay the demonstration everyone gonna think twice about running up on me either gotta put me on house arrest or a short little bid. But when I'm free they all gonna know it can happen again hahaha

[TheVigilantFox]

I always stick up for the victim in any situation.


If an adult hurts a child is it the child’s fault?
If an adult grooms a child did the child go about it wrong?


If a woman is r**ed do you blame her for wearing a short skirt?


If a man is attacked did he deserve it?


You should always stick up for the victim and not the ahole who did the crime.

[AMS700CX4u2]

Some people think of society as a cornfields free for the picking. Take what you want and if the ones you are stealing from are not strong enough to defend their property then that is their fault. It takes society back 200 years. The sad thing is that once victimized often there is no restitution, sometimes the victim adjust his or her thinking to accept the offensive behavior as the new normal.

[Keishio]

That's not blaming the victim or excusing the criminal but they are words of caution. If people think they can go out and get black out drunk and nothing bad will ever happen to them because doing bad things is wrong then they're naive. Granted sometimes awful things just happen but keeping your wits about you in a public environment, dressing appropriately and avoiding areas you know carry a reputation is sound advice for both men and women. It's was something my parents instilled in both me and my sister at a young age.

[lightbulb27]

It depends really.

You should be able to leave your property unlocked, and do what you want. Anyone taking it is a thief and people obstructing you, are wrong.

But in reality, you hvae to deal with corrupt humans.

I often when I see people harmed by police, I will put part responsibility on the citizen, I put part blame on all the other criminal citizens that make police dangerous, and I put some on the police and their management.

[LazerBean]

If we never address how people can take control of their lives and protect themselves from being easy victims, we end up creating more victims. Telling people that they are powerless and can do nothing to protect themselves is the opposite of caring and promoting safety and equality.

[exitseven]

people have the obligation to behave responsibly towards their fellow human. If they do not it is on them.

[KostasKouvalis]

Maybe not so much of crime. Sometimes, but usually not. But I 100% victim blame victims of racism, unless the victim happens to be White. Maybe this is hypocritical, but I don't give a shit. And although the individual may not necessarily be a bad person, their race in general does a lot of bad things, so I think they should put some responsibility on themselves. They commit crimes and violence and act like assholes, then are surprised that people are racist against them

[Agape93]

Only the perpetrator. Victims are NOT culpable for the actions and desires of others.

[Snakeyes7]

Prevention is one of the best cures. I don't agree with telling people it's their fault for being a victim of the actions of others but there are usually lessons to be learned so that the chances of thar happening again will be significantly reduced.

I don't think that is victim blaming, that's like telling a little kid not to eat raw meat after got salmonella.

[nawtee_me]

I try my best not to but I am sure that I have said something like if you had not been there it would not have happened... Mostly to my son if he gets in a fight at the bar...