Poll: Am I to blame

[Flames66]

I have tried explaining that to them but they won't listen-and I think insulting them would just makes things worse in general.As for distancing myself from them that's what I plan on doing but you see their friends with my other friends and we go to school/uni togthere making it harder to avoid them as I would like

Here is my advice. Try once more to politely convince them that you are not to blame and ask them to get over it (not in those exact words, pick wording that applies best to your situation). If they continue to blame you for the incident tell them that they are to blame for getting so drunk that they are incompetent, that you warned them about the dangers and are therefor in no way responsible for their problem and that you will not be going drinking with them again as they are a liability.

You won't get yourself in their good books, but at least they will be someone else's problem. If your/their friends make an issue of it, explain the situation to them once and from then on only answer that you want nothing further to do with them. If they can't deal with that I would advise you to get new friends.

Yep that's really good advice and is exactly what I plan on doing now that what the majority of people has suggested ^_^

"Are you actually going with one of my plans? Are you nuts?! What if we all get killed, I'd never hear the last of it!!"
-The Cat

Good luck to you, I hope it works out.

 

[SecondPrize]

Honestly, it sounds like you just made this scenario up.

What makes you say/think that am I not trustworthy?

That you're a complete stranger on the internet assuming we should trust you in absence of evidence to the contrary has tripped my alarm system.

 

[The Unworthy Gentleman]

Nope, entirely their fault. They walked into the attack, drunk as hell and in a bad neighbourhood; fuck them. Ditch them OP, they sound like absolute wankers and I know something about being an absolute wanker.

 

[A Weakgeek]

My suggestion is to make use of your lucky guess and establish yourself as a prophet. Tell the girls that they will get attacked next night again, then put on a ski mask and carry out the prophecy yourself. Repeat this until people are assured of your powers of clairvoyance. Then abuse your newly found influence to aquire material wealth, and become wealthy and gain followers. Once you have your own cult, blame won't matter.

 

[Astoria]

It's not your fault. You told them not to leave and offered them a lift home if they were patient. There's not anything more you could've done short of tackling them to the ground and forcing them to stay. Everyone knows you don't wander around the streets late at night, even if you're drunk you know that's stupid. I wouldn't feel guilty about it and just ignore anyone who tries to blame you, people just don't like taking responisibility for their own stupid choices.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Did he edit his post or did he never even remotely call them sluts?

He said their clothing was too revealing, so that was his implication, yes.

And I didn't call them slut's in anyway shape or form,I asked them to wait,they asked why,I said it was dangerous,they asked why and I gave the reason's that it was late,they were drunk and that the way they were dressed may cause unwanted attention-nowhere did I say that they were slut's because of the way they dressed and I never said that their clothes were slutty your the only one who assumed all that.

It has been shown repeatedly that the way a woman is dressed has no relevance to how likely she is to be assaulted. So for you to make a big deal about them being dressed revealingly is just insulting and perpetuating a false stereotype. But of course since they did supposedly get attacked, and that proves the factors you misattribute to their attack must be valid.

But if you want to describe someone in the most negative and stereotypical way possible it's going to evoke a certain interpretation, even if you didn't explicitly use the word. I didn't assume it. I inferred it.

 

[knight steel]

Honestly, it sounds like you just made this scenario up.

What makes you say/think that am I not trustworthy?

That you're a complete stranger on the internet assuming we should trust you in absence of evidence to the contrary has tripped my alarm system.

But......but.....if can't trust a complete stranger on the internet who has no evidence then WHO CAN YOU TRUST!!!!

 

[Xukog]

You are not to blame,the attacker is,but they are idiots for blaming you.

 

[Neonit]

Funny, this seems just like that one trick question, where the only correct answer is "The attacker is to blame".
But wth, i'll play along.

You are not to blame. You are not in any way, responsible for the two "lady friends". So you, are completely out of equation.

The "lady friends" are also not responsible for what happened. They increased chance of it happening, and should probably receive some kind of warning, but are in no way responsible for what has happened. In short - their mistake is being careless... that's in most cases not "illegal" from what i know. Stupid, but not wrong.

And of course the third "hidden party" being the attacker, who has attacked. He/she is to blame.

ps Pointing out that the story doesnt seem real, means nothing about your trustworthiness - having hidden motives is also not illegal

 

[knight steel]

And I didn't call them slut's in anyway shape or form,I asked them to wait,they asked why,I said it was dangerous,they asked why and I gave the reason's that it was late,they were drunk and that the way they were dressed may cause unwanted attention-nowhere did I say that they were slut's because of the way they dressed and I never said that their clothes were slutty your the only one who assumed all that.

It has been shown repeatedly that the way a woman is dressed has no relevance to how likely she is to be assaulted. So for you to make a big deal about them being dressed revealingly is just insulting and perpetuating a false stereotype. But of course since they did supposedly get attacked, and that proves the factors you misattribute to their attack must be valid.

But if you want to describe someone in the most negative and stereotypical way possible it's going to evoke a certain interpretation, even if you didn't explicitly use the word. I didn't assume it. I inferred it.

Well I didn't know that info mind linking to your sources that state that as I would assume that clothing would normally play some sort of factor but I could be wrong.
And I didn't make a big deal of it you are the one doing that-It was one line of dialogue amongst a whole list of reasons I gave them against going,It was hardly the "most negative and stereotypical way possible".

 

[AlbertoDeSanta]

I can believe that this happened, and that's the horrid part of our society. You, who was looking out for all parties, is considered the bad guy. That is horrid. If I read correctly, you tried to stop them from leaving by telling them it wasn't safe (Common sense had obviously left them by this stage in their drunkenness), which it wasn't, and you now get the blame because they still left. Honestly, you aren't in the wrong and anyone who says you are has no common sense whatsoever.

 

[The Event]

Well according to them yeah thats is what I was supposed to do T_T

You mean they have literally said that you should have physically stopped them from leaving?

Yep that exactly what they said-they said that they were too drunk to make the right choice and as the sober driver I should have restrained them and stoped them from leaving by any means necessary.

So you were supposed to assault them to prevent them possibly being assaulted?
I'm not so sure that defence would have worked when it came to court.

 

[Phasmal]

Obviously the attacker is completely to blame, because they would not have been attacked if not for the presence of the attacker.

But I feel that's not what you're going for here. I feel a little sceptical you had to include how they were dressed as if that matters (hint: it doesn't).
To be honest this just feels like another `dem hypocritical feminists dunt no what they want` thread, an invitation to blame these girls, and I've seen it so many times before.

I'm a little disturbed by how eager some people are to blame them. You know how someone dresses doesn't conjure monsters from the fucking ether, right?
And that the person who attacked them is a person, who if reading this forum would be reinforced in their belief it was okay to attack these girls?

We do understand what we're saying here, right, escapists?

Spoiler: Here, some safety tips for my fellow ladies

 

[knight steel]

Funny, this seems just like that one trick question, where the only correct answer is "The attacker is to blame".
But wth, i'll play along.

You are not to blame. You are not in any way, responsible for the two "lady friends". So you, are completely out of equation.

The "lady friends" are also not responsible for what happened. They increased chance of it happening, and should probably receive some kind of warning, but are in no way responsible for what has happened. In short - their mistake is being careless... that's in most cases not "illegal" from what i know. Stupid, but not wrong.

And of course the third "hidden party" being the attacker, who has attacked. He/she is to blame.

ps Pointing out that the story doesnt seem real, means nothing about your trustworthiness - having hidden motives is also not illegal

Hmm thanks for your input-and of course this isn't a secret test that would just be silly >_> <_< yes indeed quite silly

 

[hazabaza1]

Wait wait wait, sorry, but do people outside of internet forums and sociological research actually know that the term "rape culture" exists?

 

[Flames66]

Did he edit his post or did he never even remotely call them sluts?

He said their clothing was too revealing, so that was his implication, yes.

And I didn't call them slut's in anyway shape or form,I asked them to wait,they asked why,I said it was dangerous,they asked why and I gave the reason's that it was late,they were drunk and that the way they were dressed may cause unwanted attention-nowhere did I say that they were slut's because of the way they dressed and I never said that their clothes were slutty your the only one who assumed all that.

It has been shown repeatedly that the way a woman is dressed has no relevance to how likely she is to be assaulted. So for you to make a big deal about them being dressed revealingly is just insulting and perpetuating a false stereotype. But of course since they did supposedly get attacked, and that proves the factors you misattribute to their attack must be valid.

But if you want to describe someone in the most negative and stereotypical way possible it's going to evoke a certain interpretation, even if you didn't explicitly use the word. I didn't assume it. I inferred it.

Would you mind providing evidence of the supposed lack of correlation between attire and likelihood of assault? The only evidence I have seen shows a fairly direct correlation.

 

[Byte2222]

Blame is an interesting thing. In its strictest sense, the party whose actions merit condemning is the attacker. However, there is a fine line between victim blaming and caution. For young women, such as the ones in the example, travelling on foot at night in a rough neighbourhood carries a risk of being attacked, a risk which is increased if they are intoxicated and/or wear revealing clothing. A decent comparison for the scenario is entering a heavy work area without safety boots: you might be fine, but there is an increased risk of incident. In hindsight, the best course of action would have been for them to wait but, strictly speaking, they do not deserve blame for the incident. They do hold a share of responsibility, as they chose to take the risk, but I'd argue that their actions do not deserve condemning.

As for what you did, I'd say you did all you could. You offered them a safe journey, reminded them of the risk they were going to take and you just couldn't leave your brother behind. As for what you can do now, I think it's better to just not argue any further. There isn't really any defence you can give that couldn't potentially be construed as offensive but I don't feel that you have any responsibility for what happened. Kinda sucks but that's what society is like right now.

 

[Nuxxy]

Maybe it's got nothing to do with 'blame'. Maybe the girls are hurting emotionally because they've just had a traumatic experience and they just want commiseration. They are probably also feeling a little powerless from suffering a personal violation. I'm sure they would love to punish their attackers, but that's probably not an option, and you just happen to be the misdirected target for their justified anger.

So answer this: have you said sorry? Not "sorry it's all my fault", but "I'm really sorry for what happened to you" and "I'm really sorry I didn't try harder to stop you leaving". Follow those sincere words up with "I really hate that things are bad between us now...I really hope those bastards get what they deserve. But for now, is there anything I can do to help you get over it?" You have now shown them that you are also angry, and shown them who the anger should be directed at.

Then ask them if they want to go get a coffee or icecream or something. You will have tried to repair your friendship. If they choose not to take the opportunity, that's their bad, and they are people you can do without.

 

[Tiamattt]

Eh, I would give the OP a little break about the whole not knowing about "how one dresses not affecting their chances of being attacked" thing, it's not really common knowledge or something that people think to look up. And the cherry on top of that is parents like to drill in it into their kids heads that the idea is actually true. Hell I wouldn't mind seeing more evidence about it myself.

As for the "stop them by any means necessary" idea, man that would've gone so bad for you if you tried to physically stop them. They already had a group of people on their side, and I would bet anything that they would scream like a pair of banshees the second you laid your hands on them. And well you can imagine what would happen next.

 

[mitchell271]

You are in no way at fault there. You tried to stop them and gave a valid reason why. Saying be careful about where you are and what state you're in as a warning is not victim blaming. You had to take care of your brother and they were too impatient (albeit drunk and impatient). If they're still mad at you when they're sober, they're not very good people and really exercise their ability to project blame.