Most cases I read about that spew this victim-blaming narrative which is usually about cases where most other people take due-diligence to reduce the chances of anything untoward happening them.
This is just completely absurd.
Statistics show that the brunt of the rapes are committed by acquaintances and family members of the victim.
What sort of due-diligence are they supposed to do?
It's not a matter of blaming the victim of rape for drinking the liter of vodka and wearing the short skirt and flirting with the men in the room, it's about preventing the scenario in which a rape is likely to happen. What were the mitigating circumstances? I think cruising through a march for Muslims wearing a tshirt of Muhammad and not expect to get a punch on the face is moronic. I can't claim afterwards that I have a right to express myself and that they're solely to blame afterwards. That would be completely dishonest.
In my home country, a woman was raped while waiting for a bus at 1am, coming home from university. People said she shouldn't be alone at night.
When a rape happens, people (usually men) claim that the woman should have stayed at home. Or if she was at school, nothing would have happened. Or if she had been in church, nothing would have happened.
Well, a girl was raped in school hours in a school bathroom. A girl was raped at home by her step father. A girl was raped, and murdered, at church by the pastor. A girl was raped by 30 men after being put in a male prison cell for stealing food.
What sort of f*cking precautions and due-diligence should they have taken? What you are doing here is literally blaming the victims for what happened to them, and giving a free pass to the rapist. Because he can't control himself, so the victim should take care not to get raped.
That's rape culture. Boys will be boys, so whoops.
I take measure not to go through certain areas at night as I may be mugged. If I got mugged and I would accept I was partly to blame given the information I had in my possession. But I wouldn't take it too personally upon myself. All people have to have a level of responsibility and accountability.
You get mugged, you lose your cash, ID, whatever.
A girl is raped, she loses her innocence, her trust, her life, her future, her safety, her confidence. She is traumatized for life. How the hell are you equating that? You are literally saying women shouldn't take it too personally upon themselves if they get raped, because they have to have responsibility and accountability in order to prevent getting raped.
See? Your speech is about rape prevention. It's about the victim being more careful so she doesn't get raped.
Why isn't your speech "sh*t, we gotta stop rapists, we gotta teach them that is wrong; we gotta stop rapists from becoming rapists; we got to, as a society, show that rape is not condoned and the consequences are severe"?
Then a white boy, who is on the swim team, rapes a girl, is caught on the spot and is merely given a slap on the wrist, people say "boys will be boys! she shouldn't have been drinking! it will ruin his future!".
What about her future? What about her trauma? He had the choice to not rape her; He chose to rape her. Yet he gets away scot free. How is that society "not condoning" rape?
Then a rich Mexican boy who, with a group of friends molest another teen at a party, are being let go free because "well he didn't even ejaculate! he derived no pleasure from the act! so technically it wasn't rape!".
Tell me again how society doesn't condone it?
It does. If you are rich, elite, have a "bright future" ahead of you, society will bend over backwards to allow you to rape anyone you want.