Chrissie Hynde blames self for being raped

It seems like rape culture fosters a climate in which rape apologists latch onto the sincere safety-mindedness of people like Mister44 who just want their daughters to have every defense against the very horror for which the apologists are apologizing. This is bad enough when it’s someone at low risk of personally being targeted (such as a man not in prison), but almost does more damage when it’s someone who’s actually a rape survivor.

Two categories of this argument. Mister44’s pragmatic no you shouldn’t need to, but until the world is a better place, watch out for predators. And Chrissie Hynde’s victim-blaming you brought it on yourself by doing X. Two very different arguments, but unscrupulous apologists gladly will and regularly do twist the former as support for the latter position, even though it objectively isn’t.

2 Likes

I hesitated before posting my musings. Aside from the fact that I don’t have much psycho-based stats and/or research on this, this is going to be a long, tiring week of work for me…sigh. And comments on this topic benefit from long consideration and editing before posting. In any case… I’m trying to understand, really, by opening dialogue.

You coulda, shoulda also pointed out that rape isn’t necessarily/usually sexual. The victim’s dress or behaviour often has no bearing on the rape. Rape is a crime of violence, not sex. And the rapist’s defect is poor or non-existent impulse control, usually.

Here, I’m trying to understand ms. Hynde’s self-blame. I know next-to-nothing about her. The Pretenders’ music wasn’t my cup of tea at the time - it was getting much air play, so I’m familiar with it.

But, again, to quote the The Hollywood Times article about the particular rape she was talking about:

“Technically speaking, however you want to look at it, this was all my doing, and I take full responsibility,” Hynde said. “You can’t f— about with people, especially people who wear ‘I Heart Rape’ and ‘On Your Knees’ badges. … Those motorcycle gangs, that’s what they do.”

“If I’m walking around, and I’m very modestly dressed and I’m keeping to myself, and someone attacks me, then I’d say that’s his fault. But if I’m being very lairy and putting it about and being provocative, then you are enticing someone who’s already unhinged — don’t do that. Come on! That’s just common sense.”

Now, go back to my question: If I walk into a bar - not a hipster bar - and act all Bruce Lee…and get beat up. Don’t I have to accept some responsibility?

This happened to a friend of mine, except that he did the beating up. He was taken to court by the victim, and (mind you, this is my friend’s retelling of what happened) he asked the victim one question: “Where did you get that black belt you had wrapped around your karate uniform? - Uh, the store,” came the reply, “I’ve never taken karate classes.”

The judge threw the case out, telling the victim that he deserved the beating he got. Mind you, that was a Canadian court, so YMMV.

Except Rock was making a joke about white people’s fear of black neighborhoods. What she said was that it was her fault she got raped. It’s not her fault. And she wasn’t making a joke.

3 Likes

Sorry for the misunderstanding, but I was more arguing against the “we” than the “tolerate”. A better choice would have been “The US Government”, or “Authority”, since “we” implies the people. Though even “tolerate” is weird in this context, since we are pretty much powerless outside of small actions or rich/powerful individuals or organizations. I don’t tolerate the Saudi’s views/treatment of women… but… what does that actually mean?

I didn’t mean to seem overly argumentative, or to erect a strawman. Sorry if I came across as such.

Why bother? That’s a waste of time and energy that could be used for more constructive and positive purposes.

I know - I did it after I was raped.

You certainly have to accept responsibility for “acting all Bruce Lee”. Doing so may very well be foolish and inadvisable.

But in terms of legal and moral culpability for the beating – that’s squarely on the shoulders of the one doing the beating. How could it be otherwise?

If you attempt to intimidate someone (which is different from just trash talking them or acting tough), and the other party attacks you out of a perceived need to defend themselves, then you certainly have to accept some responsibility.

Bad judge. Bad ruling. But irrelevant to the current argument.

Edit: re-reading, it sounds completely made up:

  1. It sounds like a civil suit? Why didn’t the guy press criminal charges?
  2. Why was the defendant asking the plaintiff questions? No lawyers?
  3. The guy never took karate classes but dropped probably $150 or more on a gi and belt? And wore them to a bar? Was it a costume party by chance? And, if so, doesn’t throwing the case out seem rather stupid?

I guess if it was a civil suit and the guy was suing for damages or something it might make sense to throw out the case if the only thing really hurt was his pride. That’s a little different from legal or moral culpability, though.

I think this thought experiment is a giant waste of time, though. Let’s get your thoughts on the object level discussion. Are women partially responsible for rapes or sexual assaults committed against them due to, say, how they’re dressed?

Then what is the point of the “fighting words” thought experiment? What are you trying to get at with it?

Citation sorely needed.

If it’s true that a vast majority of rapists spend time isolating and incapacitating their victims (as seems to be the case), then obviously “non-existent impulse control” is not a factor. Planning and executing such an assault over the course of even an hour suggests very good impulse control.

3 Likes

That’s exactly what it’s saying, let alone your bizarre choice for a racist aside and appeal to Trump voterdom.

A false feeling of control over the variables of an ultimately uncaring world, I guess? :frowning:

1 Like

I don’t have control of the variables of any world. I know enough to know I don’t know a whole helluva lot.

Of course, if she believes that SHE was at fault for her OWN rape, then it follows that she believes that anybody else who found themselves in a similar situation would also be at fault. She says because she was hanging out with bikers in her underwear, she should take responsibility for her rape? Fuck that noise. Once again, there’s a difference between saying “I made some foolish choices, and I wouldn’t recommend that anybody else hang out with bikers in their underwear. That’s risky behaviour, don’t do that.” and “I’m at fault for being raped, because of my choices”.

7 Likes

I just… /sigh… if we accept the premise that women “dressing provocatively” are responsible for their own sexual assaults, then are we not also accepting that all men are a little “rapey”? Seems to me you can’t have one without the other…

3 Likes

That’s when the pisspants #notallmen gets trotted out by the same shruggers slash “didn’t have it coming… but had it coming” woman-blamers.

1 Like

I don’t think we’re arguing here. Just that maybe it makes the nihilistic chasm of life easier to accept if you pretend that people get raped for what they’re wearing versus because they were there at any time, at any place, wearing any outfit.

No, that’s not at all what she said. She said there were things she could have done to make herself safer. That is a far cry from saying “What happened to me was my fault.”

That response is beneath contempt and I won’t dignify it with an explanation. Have a nice day.

Because she was careless, “risky” or whatever, yes. That is the passive implication of these sad statements.

2 Likes

Let’s just pull a quote:

In other words - if I wasn’t dressed so provocatively, it would be his fault… But since I WAS dressed provocatively…

And another quote:

8 Likes

So weird why posters here are so eager to invent a new reality.

3 Likes

If only you put so much thought and concern towards your earlier post.