Poll: Am I to blame

[Abomination]

OP would have had the authority if this really happened, he was their designated driver. They entrusted him to make sure he got home safely, and he failed. As simple as that. It's like Vietnam, no man gets left behind

Since when did "designated driver" take on the connotation of "protector, caregiver and fully responsible party"? Designated driver means you have been designated to be the driver - thus you will not drink.

And the whole Vietnam War thing? What planet are you on? It's a bar hop, not a fucking jungle war.

 

[Lionsfan]

OP would have had the authority if this really happened, he was their designated driver. They entrusted him to make sure he got home safely, and he failed. As simple as that. It's like Vietnam, no man gets left behind

Since when did "designated driver" take on the connotation of "protector, caregiver and fully responsible party"? Designated driver means you have been designated to be the driver - thus you will not drink.

And the whole Vietnam War thing? What planet are you on? It's a bar hop, not a fucking jungle war.

It's always been that way. As the sober one, your job is to make sure people stay out of trouble, that's why people have DD's, to make sure they get home safe. Not to abandon them

As for the last line, calm down bud, it was a joke

 

[Abomination]

OP would have had the authority if this really happened, he was their designated driver. They entrusted him to make sure he got home safely, and he failed. As simple as that. It's like Vietnam, no man gets left behind

Since when did "designated driver" take on the connotation of "protector, caregiver and fully responsible party"? Designated driver means you have been designated to be the driver - thus you will not drink.

And the whole Vietnam War thing? What planet are you on? It's a bar hop, not a fucking jungle war.

It's always been that way. As the sober one, your job is to make sure people stay out of trouble, that's why people have DD's, to make sure they get home safe. Not to abandon them

As for the last line, calm down bud, it was a joke

Driver is to provide transport and TRY to keep people out of trouble. If you can't see how trying to physically restrain two drunk females couldn't turn into a world of trouble for a sober male then you haven't been paying attention to modern society.

Calm down? I'm not the one who drew a parallel between a bar hop and a war.

 

[Lionsfan]

OP would have had the authority if this really happened, he was their designated driver. They entrusted him to make sure he got home safely, and he failed. As simple as that. It's like Vietnam, no man gets left behind

Since when did "designated driver" take on the connotation of "protector, caregiver and fully responsible party"? Designated driver means you have been designated to be the driver - thus you will not drink.

And the whole Vietnam War thing? What planet are you on? It's a bar hop, not a fucking jungle war.

It's always been that way. As the sober one, your job is to make sure people stay out of trouble, that's why people have DD's, to make sure they get home safe. Not to abandon them

As for the last line, calm down bud, it was a joke

Driver is to provide transport and TRY to keep people out of trouble. If you can't see how trying to physically restrain two drunk females couldn't turn into a world of trouble for a sober male then you haven't been paying attention to modern society.

Calm down? I'm not the one who drew a parallel between a bar hop and a war.

Who said anything about trying to restrain them if this really happened? It's as easy as picking up the phone, dialing 61 13 28 24, and saying "Hey I need a taxi cab at this bar". Or walking outside with them and hailing a cab which is probably driving by to pick up drunks.


And yeah bud, calm down, it's only a joke. It's not even that original bud

 

[Mert Matthews]

Honestly, i think they are completely to blame, not because of their clothing or gender but they have consumed a substance that impairs judgement and their ability to defend themselves.It was their choice to consume it on the dosage which made them choose this option therefore they knew the risks of drinking and still did it, now who is to blame when a guy puts his dick in a open electric cable? I see the same situation, you tried to stop them and told them their reason, their reason was illogical (according to the given information).

You warned them and offered help so you fulfilled your end of the bargain. Also i don't know how it works in US but back in the alleys of Ukraine people get attacked when they are drunk no matter the gender because they are easy targets and people know that and still drink on high doses.

The blame is the one with the choice, you made yours and you respected theirs (even though they didn't know what they were doing but that situation was still their choice) which imo puts blame on them.

Also the blame also rests in the attacker because he choose to attack but the main blame rests as always is the people who created the conditions for this result to occur which is society as a whole.

The reason the girls blame you is simply psychological imo, they knew their situation would give them a bad name if they admitted fault which would reduce their value in friend circles eyes,which they will probably avoid at all costs, by putting a blame on someone they reduce the pressure of their guilt just like a lol player blaming his team for his bad performance. I am not officially studying psychology(nor have i ever offically studied) but from what i read, this seems to be the case.

 

[Aetherlblade]

Their fault.

You did what was right, you stayed with your brother and encouraged them to stay. They didn't.

Now, I do believe all women (and men) should be able to go anywhere they like wearing anything and be completely safe doing it. Wearing revealing clothing and being drunk shouldn't be an invitation.

But it is. I'm sorry, but that's the world we live in. It would be like if I strapped some steaks to my shirt and wandered outside here at night, insisting "No, the wolves and coyotes won't hurt me, just because I look tasty."

I'd get eaten.

I'm not victim blaming... Well, maybe I am a bit. Because as much as we want to live in an ideal world, we DO NOT.

Of course the attacker is to blame too. He should be shot and done with, because although animals have a thought process too humans have more sense. Some people choose to ignore it, some people lack it all together though.

It's the world we live it, and people need to accept that.

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.

It's not called victim blaming, I think it's called being realistic. Intoxicated people are easy targets. Add to that being pretty and dressed to emphasize your stong points and it DOES make you a target. Most women (and men) know this, and because of this travel in groups when it's late. Specially in a bad neighbourhood. If you know this and willingly take the risk to go out alone through a bad neighbourhood, then yes I agree that you are being dumb.

 

[kuolonen]

snip

It's always been that way. As the sober one, your job is to make sure people stay out of trouble, that's why people have DD's, to make sure they get home safe. Not to abandon them

As for the last line, calm down bud, it was a joke

So, instead of leaving to two women sober enough to walk, leave your brother who is passed out into bar's bathroom? Why, pray tell, do women get preference in this hypothetical situation? They didn't get "left behind" they left. If calling the taxis was an option, why couldn't they have done it themselves?

As for a point you mentioned earlier, about the whole women hating thing on escapist, how people wouldn't have blamed men in this situation? If this case had been two drunken guys getting mugged and losing all their possessions, after telling the OP to sod off when he encourages them to wait for him to chaperon blighters through it, I would say it was not his fault, and the dicks deserved to get mugged.

No, being drunk does not grant you holy protection from being criticized. You are supposed to drink while knowing your limits, as in, when you start acting like a fucking idiot. If you cant drink without getting yourself and/or others in danger outside your home, then stay at your home and drink on your couch.

 

[Lionsfan]

snip

It's always been that way. As the sober one, your job is to make sure people stay out of trouble, that's why people have DD's, to make sure they get home safe. Not to abandon them

As for the last line, calm down bud, it was a joke

So, instead of leaving to two women sober enough to walk, leave your brother who is passed out into bar's bathroom? Why, pray tell, do women get preference in this hypothetical situation? They didn't get "left behind" they left. If calling the taxis was an option, why couldn't they have done it themselves?

As for a point you mentioned earlier, about the whole women hating thing on escapist, how people wouldn't have blamed men in this situation? If this case had been two drunken guys getting mugged and losing all their possessions, after telling the OP to sod off when he encourages them to wait for him to chaperon blighters through it, I would say it was not his fault, and the dicks deserved to get mugged.

No, being drunk does not grant you holy protection from being criticized. You are supposed to drink while knowing your limits, as in, when you start acting like a fucking idiot. If you cant drink without getting yourself and/or others in danger outside your home, then stay at your home and drink on your couch.

The fake brother wasn't passed out in the bathroom, he just "needed 15 minutes". The fake girls could have called the taxis, but as the sober one, and the one everyone was trusting to be responsible, OP should have called a taxi. It's what a responsible DD does, and what a decent person and friend should automatically do.

Also, I never said being drunk excuses you from criticism. I just don't think making up fake scenarios to badge-hunt and hate on women is cool.[footnote]Psst - Your last sentence, about drinking within your limits and not being a fucking idiot? Yeah, you can apply all of that to the fake brother too, not sure what you were getting at there. unless it was some vague anti-drinking statement[/footnote]

 

[kuolonen]

snip

So, instead of leaving to two women sober enough to walk, leave your brother who is passed out into bar's bathroom? Why, pray tell, do women get preference in this hypothetical situation? They didn't get "left behind" they left. If calling the taxis was an option, why couldn't they have done it themselves?

As for a point you mentioned earlier, about the whole women hating thing on escapist, how people wouldn't have blamed men in this situation? If this case had been two drunken guys getting mugged and losing all their possessions, after telling the OP to sod off when he encourages them to wait for him to chaperon blighters through it, I would say it was not his fault, and the dicks deserved to get mugged.

No, being drunk does not grant you holy protection from being criticized. You are supposed to drink while knowing your limits, as in, when you start acting like a fucking idiot. If you cant drink without getting yourself and/or others in danger outside your home, then stay at your home and drink on your couch.

The fake brother wasn't passed out in the bathroom, he just "needed 15 minutes". The fake girls could have called the taxis, but as the sober one, and the one everyone was trusting to be responsible, OP should have called a taxi. It's what a responsible DD does, and what a decent person and friend should automatically do.

Also, I never said being drunk excuses you from criticism. I just don't think making up fake scenarios to badge-hunt and hate on women is cool.Psst - Your last sentence, about drinking within your limits and not being a fucking idiot? Yeah, you can apply all of that to the fake brother too, not sure what you were getting at there. unless it was some vague anti-drinking statement

If you cant call a taxi why even go to taxi post? How are you even able to walk the space in between if dialing the numbers is too much a challenge? But yes, it would have saved op the trouble if he had done so, but then we are assuming drunks would have complied.

Fake or not, you yourself are debating whether or not the actions were right, and debate is good. Even if the starting premise is lies, it is believable, aside from the missing option of phone call.

As a side note, why do you love footnotes so much? The brother had drunk so much he was physically incapable of complying with DD's request. While drinking yourself to that state is stupid, he (presumably) still following designated drivers lead. Some people's personalities change quite a bit under the influence. If you get rebellious attitude when you get drunk, you are not a person who should get drunk, and should not blame DD for your own behavior. You cannot help puking your guts out if you go overboard, but you can, or you sure as should be able to, hold on to basic reasoning like don't punch people in the face or follow the sober one's lead. The former makes trouble for sure, but not as much the latter, which can lead to more serious situation than puking on the sofa.

In short: Drinking till you are incapacitated = stupid. Drinking and starting to behave like an ass? = Really Fucking stupid.

 

[Troublesome Lagomorph]

I'd say that you did all you could, but they jumped the gun into a real bad situation. You did your best, but that didn't change their bad judgement.

 

[Wicky_42]

It's stupid to go wandering around bad parts of town intoxicated. You can be a privileged young white male and it's still a really stupid idea. Especially when someone flat out warns you of the risks. That said, it's still the attacker's fault for attacking them; they're just evidently not that smart, especially when they turn around and lash out at the one person who tried to look out for them.

So, attacker to blame for attacking, stupid people are stupid for putting themselves at risk and turning on those who tried to help, sober people need to learn to not deal with drunks

 

[Catrixa]

So, I know the situation has been resolved, but I thought I'd mention: The only thing you did really wrong was misinterpret why people get raped (really, it has nothing to do with how they dress and everything to do with simply being female in an accessible location). That being said, if they didn't want to listen to your warning, that's their issue. You are Car King. You decree what goes on in relation to your car. Leaving them in the middle of nowhere is generally a rude thing to do, but if they don't want to wait for free-gas-and-wheels-time, you shouldn't be responsible for what they do after.

I've been told all my damn life that people rape, think anything with boobs is a free target, and that going out without those things in mind (or a handgun, proper training, and a concealed-carry license) is a stupid idea. Should reality be this sexist? No, and that's why people say, "teach men not to rape!" Will those ideals stop someone from assaulting you, if you're out at night and look vulnerable?

 

[Chaos Isaac]

I'll say they're mostly to blame. Not for the attack itself, mind, but for ignoring warning and generally getting plastered on a school night, and then walking off to make themselves vulnerable for said attack.

The attacker(s) are entirely to blame for the attack. But if they had decided to be just a little patient so your brother would be good, it could have been avoided.

 

[hazydawn]

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

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

As sad as it is, thanks to the overabundance of trolls on the internet very few people on the net are trustworthy.
And your scenario just reeks of it. It seems like one of these topics: "Help! Does masturbating really cause blindness!?".
Of course, all of your story could be true, but why the hell do you need strangers on the internet to vote on it if the answer is so obvious? Can't you do that alone? Even if I believed this story to be true I'd suspect you of asking this question solely for the sake of sharing the story.
I don't want to be offensive but quite frankly threads like this one are retarded. There I said it.

Fake or not, you yourself are debating whether or not the actions were right, and debate is good. Even if the starting premise is lies, it is believable, aside from the missing option of phone call.

Hey that's also a thought I had when I pondered whether troll threads are a waste of time or not.
And I'd agree that they aren't IF there is something reasonable to debate, which isn't the case in this stupid scenario.

 

[snowfi6916]

Hey OP. I've been waiting to respond to this until I talked to other people about your story. So here's my view.

As far as the actual part about them being attacked goes, no. It's not your fault. Not at all. It is also not THEIR fault (the two women) for being attacked. The only people who should be blamed here are the people who attacked them.

However, when you said that "you are wearing revealing clothing", that is victim blaming. You are saying that because they are wearing something sexy or "slutty", they are going to be attacked. And that's wrong. Most rape cases involve women who are NOT dressed in anything close to "sexy". It also has nothing to do with them being drunk, because women have been raped when they were sober. So, in that regard, you were being an asshole.

Yes, it's shitty that they are trying to place the blame on you, because like I said, the ONLY blame that should be cast is on their attackers. But that doesn't mean that they are at fault either.

If you had simply said "I really don't think that's a good idea... we should stay together.", and LEFT IT AT THAT, that would've been fine. But because you brought what they were wearing (and in essence their gender) into it, you were being a jerk. So when they started yelling at you about victim blaming and misogyny, they were 100% right, because that's what you did.

But, your question about being blamed for the actual attack, like I said, is not your fault or theirs. It is the fault of the rapists themselves.

 

[inquisiti0n]

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.

Obviously there's a difference between wearing a coat and not wearing one. Who knows, maybe it gives an extra 5 seconds for a chance to escape? If it was that easy to rape someone, there would be a lot less "attempted rape" cases. The "ridiculous claim" I'm suggesting is that rapists merely assess the situation, much like every other criminal, rather than indiscriminately raping anyone who looks female regardless of attire.

The point about them looking for women easy to overpower is moot since I was talking about clothes being the only distinguishing factor between 2 possible targets, all other things equal (or at least negligible in the eyes of a rapist).

Yes, I am defending them, because OP's fake actions were horrible. He essentially abandoned the girls because he didn't feel like walking outside with them to catch a cab, or calling one for them.

And as far as your last sentence and gif, there's people in this thread who are posting that they wished the fake women would have gotten more hurt, so yes, I do think if the fake victims weren't female, there would be a lot more people calling out the OP

Someone who chooses to go off on their own is not being "abandoned." He's not their babysitter, and why wouldn't they be able to hail a cab by themselves? The lack of sympathy for these idiots has to do with their behaviour; I dunno where you're getting this imaginary reverse-whiteknighting idea from.