MovieChat Forums > The Accused (1988) Discussion > Why victim blaming is common in rape cas...

Why victim blaming is common in rape cases


This is a practical explanation. The main reason that victim blaming is common in rape cases is for the simple reason that it's one of a very limited number of activities where motive or intent determine whether or not it is a crime. There's no such thing as burglary/assault/murder/tax evasion between consenting adults. In fact, with rape, sexual intercourse can turn into rape even after consent has been given, so rape is a special kind of crime where the first determination that has to be made is whether or not the activity in question was even illegal. It's also one of the few crimes that commonly relies entirely on a he/she said case. With assault or burglary or murder, there is rarely any question as to whether the crime has been committed. The only question is who did it and can it be proven. With rape, it can be proven that sex happened w/o it being criminal, so the very nature of the activity leaves it open to whether it was a crime, and the fact of the matter is that it can change from consensual to criminal on the whim of the victim. It's a special kind of circumstance, because the motive of the "perpetrator" is never in question. The only thing that makes it a crime or not is the motive of the "victim" - that is in fact the only point of contention, so it should be no surprise that a larger amount of focus is placed on the victim than in other kinds of crimes.

Oh, Tobias - you blow hard!

reply

Below is a comment I made on the "rape" (in quotes because I am not sure it would legally qualify as a rape) in the 1995 movie HIGHER LEARNING. I cut and paste it as a response to your post.

Call me an insensitive male chovinist pig if you want but I think rape needs "degrees".

MURDER has them, you can only get the death penalty for FIRST degree murder, not for 2nd degree murder or manslaughter (which is basically a lower degree of murder) and even for manslaughter you have voluntary and involuntary.

For theft you have Grand Theft, petty theft and grand larceny.

Well rape needs degrees too.

A lot of angry feminists and tough of crime zealots make blanket proclamations like calling for the death penalty for rape or automatic life sentences even castration.

But let's be real. A scandal like what happened to Mike Tyson back in 1991 where 2 people have sex and argue about whether or not it is consensual or someone has sex while drunk then claims they were too drunk to give consent just is NOT the same thing as a predatory or violent rape where an attack is obvious. I actually DO approve of the extremely severe punishments listed above for especially heinous rapes, but not all rapes.

That guy who did not pull out fast enough was NOT the same thing as some of the real sickos out there who REALLY DO deserve to have their genitals cut off.

Even in the totally contrived fictional world of this movie all that happened to the "rapist" was the embarrassment of facing a bunch of angry people yelling at him, he never got prosecuted or expelled. Those angry feminists were carrying signs saying DEAD MEN DON'T RAPE which is a roundabout way of saying this guy should have gotten the death penalty.

So does that mean ALL murderers get the death penalty? So you give someone who commits involuntary manslaughter the same death penalty you would give a serial killer?

Is a woman guilty of rape if she is on top and does not get off of the guy as fast as he would want?
▲ Top

reply

That's an interesting idea I've never considered.

Another thing I'd like to add to my initial post is that rape is also one of a handful of crimes that one can be accused of when no crime, or even the action, has been committed. People are often accused, and sometimes prosecuted, for crimes someone else committed, but most of those cases involve a crime that is not in question. Arson, murder, assault, etc. are usually accompanied by clear indicators that the crime certainly occurred. In the case of rape, a false accusation can be leveled even if there was no sex, and as long as enough time has passed there is generally no way to prove the negative.

Back to your point, I agree with the general concept, but I can't image a political environment in which it could be enacted, and if it was it seems like it could have the unintended consequence of providing more abuse, rather than less. If women realized that a certain type of accusation might offer less life altering penalties they may be more inclined to lord an accusation in a threatening manner.

I want to make clear that I'm not trying to diminish the reality of rape or its consequences. I'm simply addressing an aspect of its cultural ramifications.

reply

I just finished reading a book called PRICE OF HONOR about injustices in the Middle East. That place is SICK. A rape victim there is guilty of out of wedlock sex unless she can prove she was raped, burden of proof is entirely on the victim and in some of those countries rape VICTIMS who have already been horribly traumatized are sometimes put in prison or executed or flogged.

And in most Middle East countries it is written into law that it is impossible for sex between husband and wife to be rape which means if a woman is married even if she was forced into it at a very young age (below our "age of consent") her husband can rape her as much as she wants.

Also, it is VERY common over there for the police to rape female prisoners.

I also strongly disapprove of the term STATUTORY RAPE. Sure we need a law about not having sex with underage people but the word RAPE is so inflamitory that it can make a person who sleeps with someone below an arbitrary "age of consent" seem like a monster. It would be like calling manslaughter "statutory murder".

Our legal system needs a theasaurus badly on the term "consent". Yes I get there is an "age of consent" but an underage person can still "consent" in the sense that you were not holding them down and forcing them through physical strength while they were either frozen in fear or shock or uselessly struggling. There needs to be one term for consent where there was no physical force or overt threat (like gun to head or date rape drug) and a DIFFERENT term for just being below the "age of consent". We need 2 definitions of the word consent so they do not get confused with each other.

As unfair as it would be to be convicted of rape when the sex was really consensual there are some people who were exonerated even though NO RAPE OCCURRED AT ALL OR IT WAS DONE BY SOMEONE ELSE. Those teens who got convicted of raping the central park jogger were somewhere else at the time and finally got about 8 million dollars restitution each.

reply

All good points, but I'll take exception with a portion of the statutory rape issue. I'll first preface by saying I don't know what the age of consent really ought to be. Eighteen sounds about right, but I know it's sixteen in some states and I don't know that most sixteen year olds are that much more mature than fifteen year olds or fourteen year olds, but I do know that - on the average - there's a big difference between the emotional maturity of an eighteen year old and a fourteen year old, so I'm not gonna argue about that. There is also a huge difference between an eight year old and a fourteen year old, but it is still possible to gain consent, through trust and grooming, from an eight year old and there is nothing about that consent that remotely makes the interaction, in my opinion, OK. So I'm not in favor, at all, of abandoning the concept of statutory rape. I do think it needs to be reexamined in many cases, but there is certainly a place for it.

reply

I was just saying that the ugly word rape should only be used if there is physical force and there needs to be a different legal term to replace the TERM statutory rape, not that sex should be legal with children.

Personally I think 16 is the most reasonable age of consent 18 is unnecessarily high.

reply

That makes sense

reply

The law already does recognize degrees of rape. If you rape a child for example you get a harsher sentence.
All rapes are violent. Having your body penetrated by another person against your will is painful and potentially traumatising. There are no mild rapes.

The vast majority of rapists plan their crimes in advance and know that they are making the person do what they want. Sometimes that involves getting the person drunk.


It's a myth many believe that people are frequently jailed just for sex with a drunk person. You can only be jailed if the person is incapacitated by alcohol. I've never heard of a case where someone was jailed when an adult who could walk, speak in sentences and knew what they were doing had sex with them and nobody has ever been able to provide an example of one to me either.

It's a myth that you can be jailed for rape for pulling out after a couple of seconds. Name me one case where that has happened. (If you say Maouloud Baby that was a case where 2 boys held a girl against her will and Maouloud Baby watched the other boy rape her. The media just chose to twist it to make it seem like Maouloud Baby was convicted for not pulling out right away).

As for Mike Tyson do you know that he tried to flee the state after immediately leaving his victim even though it was 3am and he was booked into the hotel for the weekend? That he's been accused of sexual assault other 8 times (by Arlene Mooreman, Pam Pinnock, LaDonna August, Virginia Foster, 2 women from Clerk County who were never named in the press and his ex)? That multiple witnesses said the victim was traumatized that night? That Tyson has described himself as a man who likes hurting women sexually, has taken advantage of women, would like to rape his victims mother and even basically described himself as a rapist? That 2 forensic experts who examined Desiree Washington testified that they believed she was raped based on her injuries? That he has a long history of molestation (including molesting Teddy Atlas' 12 year old sister in law)and violence towards women, including attacking women who turned him down for sex? So it's hardly a scandal that he went to jail.

reply

plumlogan

All peer approved research shows there are just as many (or as few) false accusations for other crimes as there are for rape.

Victim blaming is different from disbelieving, although they can be collected. With the case this film was based on it was proven she was raped, but people blamed her for being in a bar and for the rumors she kissed one of the men who raped her.

reply

[deleted]

I'm talking about the real life case. In the real life case there were rumors, but no proof, that she kissed one of them.

If you think that as soon as a man kisses a woman he can't help but force sex on her against her will you have a very low view of men. Most men are better than that.

reply

What? Just because a woman kisses a guy doesn't mean that she wants to have sex with him. If you honestly think that and you are not just trolling you need serious help.

reply

Because humanity is very flawed and far from perfect and we are our own worst enemy.

reply