Poll: Am I to blame

[Lionsfan]

Did you contribute? Yes. Those girls were your responsibility.

Those women are not his responsibility. They are adults not kids.

His brother was an adult, not a kid, he's not OP's responsibility.

Indeed his brother is not his responsibility.

I don't understand why you quoted me.

Because you responded to a poster calling out the OP for actions[footnote]Fake actions I mean, since we all know this a bullshit fake scenario[/footnote] and you were implying that the OP was in the clear because the girls were adults and not OP's responsibility

So you are saying that the women are his responsibility and thus he should be blamed?

If this really happened, and not something made up, then yes.

When you're the Designated Driver, it's your job to get people home safe, especially if they're supposed to be your friends.

You don't just let them leave, you took them out, you bring them back. Or at least help them get a cab home.

If it was males getting attacked, most of these responses would be "Dude your a shitty friend"

 

[Glongpre]

So you are saying that the women are his responsibility and thus he should be blamed?

If this really happened, and not something made up, then yes.

When you're the Designated Driver, it's your job to get people home safe, especially if they're supposed to be your friends.

You don't just let them leave, you took them out, you bring them back. Or at least help them get a cab home.

If it was males getting attacked, most of these responses would be "Dude your a shitty friend"

I see what you are getting at. But the women made the choice to leave even when he said to wait, and warned them about possible dangers. Others have said already, should he then physically keep them there? What if something happened to his brother? Everyone would blame him for leaving him unattended.

If it was males getting attacked, I don't they would say that at all. It would be the same as this scenario, the guys are just dumb/naive/impatient.

 

[Lionsfan]

So you are saying that the women are his responsibility and thus he should be blamed?

If this really happened, and not something made up, then yes.

When you're the Designated Driver, it's your job to get people home safe, especially if they're supposed to be your friends.

You don't just let them leave, you took them out, you bring them back. Or at least help them get a cab home.

If it was males getting attacked, most of these responses would be "Dude your a shitty friend"

I see what you are getting at. But the women made the choice to leave even when he said to wait, and warned them about possible dangers. Others have said already, should he then physically keep them there? What if something happened to his brother? Everyone would blame him for leaving him unattended.

If it was males getting attacked, I don't they would say that at all. It would be the same as this scenario, the guys are just dumb/naive/impatient.

His brother was just puking in the bathroom and was in a safe bar. I highly doubt anything bad would have happened to him.

As far as your last sentence, the amount of hatred the majority of this site has for women has convinced me otherwise

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Anyway: Drinking is NOT to blame. That's such an ignorant thing to post. Do you think sober people never get attacked?

Considering that they were well beyond buzzed and their inebriation effected their decision , I think that their excessive drinking should share a large part of the blame. Drinking isn't bad, but when you drink so much you become incapable of making safe decisions, then you have a problem.

 

[major_chaos]

HAHA! You think asking everyone to travel around with an entourage isn't particularly absurd?

Considering if I'm out at night its almost always for class or hanging out with friends? no it really isn't. Exactly what activity requires you to travel long distances in the dark alone? Also does "one person who isn't wasted" really count as an "entourage"

statistically unlikely to happen

There was more than one rape and wayyyy to many assaults on the grounds of the nicer of the two campuses for my community college, and that's just what got reported. pardon me if I don't feel invincible.

to the point where you're too afraid to travel alone at night without making various impractical arrangements, you're already a victim.

Funny, I felt more like a victim when I was physically assaulted and robed because I was putzing around in the dark like a moron.

 

[inquisiti0n]

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.

That is so laughably untrue. Do you really think a girl wearing overalls and 3 sweaters has the same chance of getting raped as a girl in a miniskirt? Putting aside the whole psychological aspect as to what rapists are generally attracted to, there exists the simple logistical fact that it's hard to rape someone who's wearing more.

What's a "false stereotype" is the idea that rapists are all just indiscriminatingly raping every girl they can without thinking about these things.

That doesn't mean that girls should dress based on the habits and activity of rapists, but denying such an obvious fact does nothing other than to spread misinformation.


And no OP, it's overwhelmingly obvious that it's not your fault. Though I'm skeptical that a bar full of strangers would be such ardent proponents of stopping whatever "rape culture" is considered to be.

Man, I wish I knew you in person so as to slap the dumb out of you. What are the levels of skin showing and levels of intoxication that all of a sudden become an "invitation" for rapists? "They were asking for it." is really a dick thing to say. Never victim blame.

Any sort of vulnerability (which is what 'waltzing through dangerous neighbourhoods at night while intoxicated' is by the way) in a dangerous setting is an "invitation" for trouble. Rape isn't special in this regard.

If this really happened, and not something made up, then yes.

When you're the Designated Driver, it's your job to get people home safe, especially if they're supposed to be your friends.

You don't just let them leave, you took them out, you bring them back. Or at least help them get a cab home.

If it was males getting attacked, most of these responses would be "Dude your a shitty friend"

You're actually defending these petulant children who couldn't have waited 15 minutes for a completely understandable reason AND you're gonna suggest that if the sexes were reversed, the answers ITT would've been more sympathetic???

 

[knight steel]

You could have left your brother behind, dropped them of and go back, maybe with some additional muscle. But no, if drunkards want to make bad decisions, let them. You had no obligation to favor any of them over others or serve them just because you would be the only one sane sober.

The reason I didn't leave my brother to drive them is because I was worried for him,he's not the best when drunk and I would never forgive myself if something happened to him while I was away and I didn't trust anyone in the bar to take care of him.Plus the girl's didn't live close by so it would have of been a while before I got back and by that time the bar might have been closed.

 

[DazBurger]

Did you contribute? Yes. Those girls were your responsibility.

Those women are not his responsibility. They are adults not kids.

His brother was an adult, not a kid, he's not OP's responsibility.

Indeed his brother is not his responsibility.

I don't understand why you quoted me.

Because you responded to a poster calling out the OP for actions[footnote]Fake actions I mean, since we all know this a bullshit fake scenario[/footnote] and you were implying that the OP was in the clear because the girls were adults and not OP's responsibility

So you are saying that the women are his responsibility and thus he should be blamed?

If this really happened, and not something made up, then yes.

When you're the Designated Driver, it's your job to get people home safe, especially if they're supposed to be your friends.

You don't just let them leave, you took them out, you bring them back. Or at least help them get a cab home.

If it was males getting attacked, most of these responses would be "Dude your a shitty friend"

Alcohol does not remove a persons responsibility. Besides..

If a part of the group desides to leave, you can only try and persuade them not to so, regardless of gender.
If you attempt to physically force them to stay, that is considered assault.

 

[Dagda Mor]

"The attacker is to blame" is a real cop-out.

 

[DarthSka]

In the end, the attacker holds all of the blame for the attack. However, your two friends were being completely idiotic and put themselves at risk, which is stupid. Unfortunately, rape is such a hot button topic that even suggesting someone not do something like the above situation is somehow regressive and sexist to some. Hell, if I tell you to lock your doors at night, am I contributing to robbery culture? Am I suggesting that if you are robbed, you are responsible? No, but I am saying doing such a thing may help you to avoid that. Same thing here. You gave good advice, you were ignored, and you chose to help your family. In the end, you did nothing wrong whatsoever.

 

[manic_depressive13]

HAHA! You think asking everyone to travel around with an entourage isn't particularly absurd?

Considering if I'm out at night its almost always for class or hanging out with friends? no it really isn't. Exactly what activity requires you to travel long distances in the dark alone?

Getting home from evening classes? Do all your friends take the same classes as you, and live where you live?

Also does "one person who isn't wasted" really count as an "entourage"

No, but "at least three people" does. I'm not very social so rarely hang around with a group. If I'm having a drink with someone it's usually just me and them. So yes, to me that is an absolutely ridiculous proposition.

Funny, I felt more like a victim when I was physically assaulted and robed because I was putzing around in the dark like a moron.

I've repeatedly "made myself a target" by your standards, and I'm yet to be attacked by some stranger on the street. So meh. If you want to blame yourself for what happened that's sad, but ultimately up to you. But just because other people don't feel the need to take unnecessary and impractical precautions doesn't make them responsible for being attacked. You can get robbed during the day. You can get assaulted when you're sober. Your precautions amount to nothing more than superstition.

That is so laughably untrue. Do you really think a girl wearing overalls and 3 sweaters has the same chance of getting raped as a girl in a miniskirt? Putting aside the whole psychological aspect as to what rapists are generally attracted to, there exists the simple logistical fact that it's hard to rape someone who's wearing more.

Lol! How the hell would the amount of sweaters you wear in any way impede someone's ability to rape you? Do you seriously think that it would be so much harder to remove a pair of jeans than a miniskirt? Seriously, how hard do you think it is to take off someone's pants? Maybe one pair of pants isn't enough. Maybe they should be wearing three pairs of pants on top of a chastity belt.

I'll concede that overalls are probably slightly harder to remove than your average piece of clothing, but you can get revealing overalls.

Spoiler

Perhaps that's the answer? All women should wear overalls?

And what are rapists attracted to, pray tell?

What's a "false stereotype" is the idea that rapists are all just indiscriminatingly raping every girl they can without thinking about these things.

Citation needed. Where is the evidence that they think about these things in the way you think they do.

 

[Paradoxrifts]

So I ask you Escapist Am I to Blame?

Bros before hoes. Literally, in this case. In ten or even twenty years down the track your brother will in all likelihood still be your brother, while it is situations just like this one which will weed out your true friends from the untrustworthy chaff.

 

[major_chaos]

Getting home from evening classes? Do all your friends take the same classes as you, and live where you live?

It's really not hard to find one or more people in my night classes who share my reservations and who I can get along with so we can get at least most of the way through the badly lit parking garage in a group.

No, but "at least three people" does. I'm not very social so rarely hang around with a group. If I'm having a drink with someone it's usually just me and them. So yes, to me that is an absolutely ridiculous proposition.

I said "ideally" three, but two people, at least one of whom is sober is still highly preferable to alone.

If you want to blame yourself for what happened that's sad, but ultimately up to you.

I'm confused as to why I wouldn't. I put myself in a situation and (quite literally) paid the price.

impractical precautions

They really aren't

You can get robbed during the day. You can get assaulted when you're sober.

Yes you can, but its less likely. refusing to do anything at all if there isn't a perfect solution is poor logic. Its like saying "well I can still get sick even if I wash my hands so I'm just never gonna wash my hands, cuz why bother". And yes I am aware that its "statistically unlikely" I'm going to be attacked on a regular basis, but its also "statistically unlikely" that I will be struck by a car, but I'm still gonna show reasonable caution when crossing a road.

 

[manic_depressive13]

I said "ideally" three, but two people, at least one of whom is sober is still highly preferable to alone.

"Watch me drink this. You can't have any because I might get raped."

Yes you can, but its less likely.

Is it? From what I've been able to find violent crime is just as likely to occur during the day.

According to the NCVS, crime happens at all times of the day and night, though particular crimes exhibit different patterns. Violent crimes occur between 6 A.M. and 6 P.M. in 52.7 percent of cases. Simple assaults occur 57.6 percent of the time during these same hours, as do 42.2 percent of aggravated assaults. Approximately two-thirds (63.2 percent) of rapes/sexual assaults occur at night. Most property crimes occur during the day, except for motor vehicle theft, which occurs 71.7 percent of the time at night.

http://www.libraryindex.com/pages/447/Victims-Crime-WHEN-WHERE-DOES-VIOLENT-CRIME-HAPPEN.html#ixzz0IGGRjnPa&D

refusing to do anything at all if there isn't a perfect solution is poor logic. Its like saying "well I can still get sick even if I wash my hands so I'm just never gonna wash my hands, cuz why bother". And yes I am aware that its "statistically unlikely" I'm going to be attacked on a regular basis, but its also "statistically unlikely" that I will be struck by a car, but I'm still gonna show reasonable caution when crossing a road.

If I'm someone who never washes their hands in this analogy, you're someone who obsessively disinfects their hands every time they touch something, then blames both themselves and others for not being clean enough if they get sick. Sometimes shit just happens.

You still haven't told me how you would have avoided getting mugged had you been sober.

 

[Callate]

It sounds as though you did every reasonable thing in your power to prevent harm from coming to people who chose to ridicule you for it.

They ought to be ashamed of themselves. You can blame someone for warning you that something will happen or for letting something happen for failing to warn you and at least be consistent. But at the point you're doing both, you're a hypocrite who's abdicating all responsibility. That's not even feminism in any real sense- it's just a self-centered unwillingness to have a stake in your own actions.

 

[inquisiti0n]

That is so laughably untrue. Do you really think a girl wearing overalls and 3 sweaters has the same chance of getting raped as a girl in a miniskirt? Putting aside the whole psychological aspect as to what rapists are generally attracted to, there exists the simple logistical fact that it's hard to rape someone who's wearing more.

Lol! How the hell would the amount of sweaters you wear in any way impede someone's ability to rape you? Do you seriously think that it would be so much harder to remove a pair of jeans than a miniskirt? Seriously, how hard do you think it is to take off someone's pants? Maybe one pair of pants isn't enough. Maybe they should be wearing three pairs of pants on top of a chastity belt.

I'll concede that overalls are probably slightly harder to remove than your average piece of clothing, but you can get revealing overalls.

Spoiler

Perhaps that's the answer? All women should wear overalls?

And what are rapists attracted to, pray tell?

What's a "false stereotype" is the idea that rapists are all just indiscriminatingly raping every girl they can without thinking about these things.

Citation needed. Where is the evidence that they think about these things in the way you think they do.

Rapists (the stranger/random kind) simply don't have the luxury to take their sweet time so of course the easier the clothing is to remove, the better it is for them. I'm not saying sweaters + overalls = unrapeable, I'm just talking about if a rapist had 2 choices between one in a coat and one in a miniskirt. All things equal, he'll go after the easier target, which wouldn't be true if clothing didn't matter.

And really, you're being deliberately obtuse. A rapist wouldn't even need to take off a miniskirt, just what's underneath it, which is wayyy easier than pulling off someone's pants while they struggle against you. You really think a rapist's mind is just sooo obsessed and occupied with rape that they wouldn't even notice something this basic?

 

[major_chaos]

"Watch me drink this. You can't have any because I might get raped."

First off all, I'm totally saying that out of the blue next time I'm drinking with buddies just to see their reaction, so thanks for that. Second, unless you are drinking everclear there is plenty of room to have a few drinks without being wasted

Is it? From what I've been able to find violent crime is just as likely to occur during the day.

I would like to see those statistics broken down more, for example, how much of that day crime statistic is made up of things that occur indoors or cases where the perpetrator knows the victim. It seems to me that outdoor/stranger crime would not be as comon during the day for simple lack of opportunity reasons.

If I'm someone who never washes their hands in this analogy, you're someone who obsessively disinfects their hands every time they touch something, then blames both themselves and others for not being clean enough if they get sick.

I have been known to act that way during flu season >_>

Sometimes shit just happens.

And sometimes you can make shit not happen, so its always worth trying.

You still haven't told me how you would have avoided getting mugged had you been sober.

I wasn't drunk, just dumb enough to walk more than needed, alone, in what I knew was a shit neighborhood at 10PM.

 

[manic_depressive13]

Rapists (the stranger/random kind) simply don't have the luxury to take their sweet time so of course the easier the clothing is to remove, the better it is for them. I'm not saying sweaters + overalls = unrapeable, I'm just talking about if a rapist had 2 choices between one in a coat and one in a miniskirt. All things equal, he'll go after the easier target, which wouldn't be true if clothing didn't matter.

And really, you're being deliberately obtuse. A rapist wouldn't even need to take off a miniskirt, just what's underneath it, which is wayyy easier than pulling off someone's pants while they struggle against you. You really think a rapist's mind is just sooo obsessed and occupied with rape that they wouldn't even notice something this basic?

Uhuh. What protective value does a coat offer exactly? Plus five to resistance? And is taking off someone's pants significantly harder than just taking off someone's underwear? Sweatpants are more modest than short shorts, but would be easier to remove because they have elastic. Revealing clothing doesn't automatically equal easy access, and modest clothing can often be easily taken off. I'm still going to need some evidence for your ridiculous claims beyond "It makes sense to me".

I would think that a rapist would be looking for someone who appears easy to overpower.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

The attacker's fault only. Stupidity is one thing, and they do seem utterly stupid, but that doesn't make it their fault they got attacked. THAT is victim blaming just there.

You, you have no fault. They are at fault for disregarding your (in retrospect) sage advice. But it is not their fault they got attacked; it is no-one's fault but the attacker's. So, yeah, you're more or less faultless. They're not, but they're not worth blaming. And the attacker is the only person who has any proper fault for those girls being attacked.

 

[rbstewart7263]

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.

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

I feel the same way. Sorry, OP. You almost had me convinced right up until you said that a bunch of randoms in a bar started yelling at you for "victim-blaming" and encouraging "rape culture". After that the whole thing just sounded completely tailored, like the sort of story that someone would invent after getting annoyed in a thread about gender issues.

Since we've only heard about this scenario from the perspective of one person - and to be honest it does sound like something that's being posed as a hypothetical to start a discussion rather than a thing that actually happened - I didn't bother voting. A little too far-fetched.

If you are telling the truth and this whole bizarre thing actually happened just as you said it did, you of course have my apologies.

Yeah I admit looking back on what I typed it does sounds absurd/made up but I promise you it did happen-also I read your comment in your avatars voice which gave me a good laugh so thanks for that

They probably have that old fashioned view of womanhood that allows them to do dumb things and then blame the man for not "being a man" and manhandling them back in the car. I got one of those its a chore reminding her that she is a human being with a brain and that her vagina is not a copout for her being responsible for her actions.

Id say its 70 30 between them and the attacker. Mostly the attacker. I dont want to victim blame but I cant say that they were smart either....hmm toughy.

actually take that back. its not really there fault at all but there is still no excuse for them tempting fate either.