From: seiffe@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Erica Seiffert)
Subject: Re: Critisizing the victim?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 23:39:46 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.001749.9381@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dcrosgr@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
>In article <Bsvp63.Eq3@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, seiffe@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Erica Seiffert) writes:
>> 
>> 	DC,
>> 	
>> 		I understand your position, however I am trying to point
>> 	out that it is practically impossible for a woman in this socieity
>> 	to avoid a "high risk" situation. ANY situation where in she is
>> 	alone with a man (generally speaking...) can be a "high risk"
>> 	situation for that woman. The point is that the "way the world
>> 	is" a woman can be sexually assulted by her husband, her brother,
>> 	her clegyman, her doctor, her teacher, her boss..etc.  
>> 		A woman has to learn to appraise every situation and every
>> 	person. DC do you ever worry that your placing yourself at risk 
>> 	when you talk with a Professor alone? Do you ever wonder if you
>> 	shouldn't have some one with you when the maintenance man comes
>> 	by to fix something? Do you ever set up a little  emergency "code" 
>> 	system with your friends when you go out on a first date?
>>
>> (etc... deleted)
>
>From what you have said, it looks like a prudent person is constantly
>evaluating her circumtances for indicators that this is not a good situation to
>be in. To use military jargon, when enough red flags go up, you should be
>moving out of there.
>
>You will PLEASE NOTE I have never advocated going up to rape victims who
>stayed when they should have gone and telling them, "Boy, were you ever stupid!
>Most people could have seen that attack from miles away."
>
>I do however, strongly advocate that in an effort to shock a little reality
>into younger femalesby telling them in no uncertain terms, just like we do with
>AIDS and drugs, that if your brain tells you not to be doing something, it is
>stupid to ignore that warning.
>
>Maybe you feel rape victims will be upset becuase they backwards apply a future
>warning to their past actions, and conclude that the message is calling them
>stupid for having been victimized. I can see where that could be a concern.
>
>I, however, am more concerned with lowering the number of victims than with
>watching out for the feelings of those who have already been attacked.
>
>Jugment calls.
>
>If you can find a happy median, that still send out a very clear and strong
>message to immature females, I am sure most of us would appreciate it.
>
>DC
>
>
>


		DC

		I wish you had quoted my entire passage before posting your
		response. However, I will try and restate what I said once
		before to see if it makes anymore sense to you.
		
		If it is a given that in any situation, any person can be
		a possible assaulter, than a woman (men do this to, I'm
		not sure if it is to the same degree because I've never 
		experienced life as a man in this society) must appraise
		each situation and person in order to decide who/what is
		"safe." A woman may label some one as safe, and they may
		not be a threat to her for 20 years, but maybe one night, or
		one day that person suddenly acts contrary to all that that
		woman has judged and then rapes her. That woman's body has
		not only been violated, but her ability to trust her 
		judgement has also been damaged (generally speaking, no
		offense is meant to any surviors out there). The same thing
		goes for any situation that a woman has always decided to be
		safe and then one day it isn't.

		If you want to shock young females into being aware of the
		dangers,DC, then start advocating that they view EVERY 
		situation, not just the bars or the frat parties, but study
		groups, church socials, parades..etc. as a possible 
		threat and that every person, be it their doctor, teacher,
		boss, child-hood playmate, ANY person can be an assaulter.
		
		Therefore, they'll either have to live isolated behind doors
		or make decisions on what situations and which persons to
		trust. If they get raped or assaulted, then they weren't
		being stupid: the situation or person weren't as safe as they
		had thought. I don't blame it on the victims, because quite 
		frankly NO ONE should have to spend time worrying if they are 
		putting	themselves at risk the minute they are with another
		person or walk out the front door. 

		You keep saying you didn't call any rape survior stupid 
		for being in a situation where they got raped. However, the
		word itself, and particularly how you have used it has implied,
		either directly or indirectly (consciously or unconsciously),
		that very same idea(IMHO); that they were stupid..

		Let me ask you something (I'm still waiting for you to 
		answer honestly my previous questions) if for the past
		10 years you lived just outside a quiet little town and every
		day of those past 10 years you left your car unlocked, then
		one day it gets stolen, were you stupid? I wouldn't think so.
		Some where in the course of living where you did, you appraised
		that it was fairly safe to leave your car unlocked, and then
		one day, some one came along and VIOLATED that safety. 

		Perhaps you'll never get the point I'm making, and pehaps
		you don't even care. I don't know, I don't know you. However,
		hopefully I can get it across to someone who needs to hear it.
		
		If nothing else, DC, I ask that when talking about rape don't
		use the word stupid in association to anything other than
		the rapists. Than perhaps some of us wouldn't get so upset.
		Supposedly you are going to be a lawyer someday, therefore
		for your sake I hope you learn that certain words carry certain
		emotional connotations and they way you use them can have an
		emotional impact that may be quite contrary to what you had
		intended. In other words, it's probably not a good idea to
		wave a red flag in front of a bull, if all you want to do
		is get his attention.

		-ems

		***************************************************
		My opinons, like my mistakes, are my own.