Perhaps one of the most dangerous and pernicious rape myths involves victim blaming i.e., that the victim not the perpetrator was to blame for the assault.
Unfortunately, a common response for many, to hearing about a rape/sexual assault is to ask, “What was she wearing?” There is still a widespread belief that if a woman dresses in a provocative or sexual way there will be men who are unable to control their sexual urges and be compelled to have sex with her whether consensually or not.
As we will discuss later, rape and sexual assaults are more about exerting/demonstrating power and control, and dispensing anger, than about sexual gratification. Also, the idea that men aren’t able to control their sexual urges and are given “no choice” when confronted with a women dressed in a revealing and/or enticing manner has no grounds in reality and is merely a mechanism/argument to let those who commit sexual assaults a way out from taking responsibility for their crimes.
This is a common perpetrator excuse, along with blaming alcohol/drugs as the reason a person having committed a sexual assault. This was an argument that both Brock Turner and his father made in 2016, during his trial for sexually assaulting an unconscious female student, who he’d offered to walk home, after a party.
His/their claim was that if he hadn’t been “binge drinking”, he wouldn’t have been guilty of what his father described in a letter to the judge as “twenty minutes of action”. A letter which never once mentions any concern for the woman he victimized/sexually assaulted and attempts to paint his son as a victim who should be treated leniently.
In 1958, Marvin Wolfgang published Patterns in Criminal Homicide. Wolfgang’s study, based on 588 homicide cases in Philadelphia, found that in approximately 28% of cases, those killed had initiated the confrontation that led to their death.
It was found that those within this group had provoked their killer by either verbally or physically abusing them in some way. In many of these interpersonal disputes both the offender and the victim knew each other (a common theme in violent crime, including rapes and sexual assaults).
Wolfgang used the term victim-precipitated homicide to refer to these events. This term isn’t intended to assign blame to the victim but seeks to highlight the role of interaction and conflict in the lead up to a homicide.
Whilst one of the results of his study/research was to bring the importance of victimology into police investigations and criminology, some have argued that the concept of victim precipitation risked victim-blaming, especially in cases of domestic violence or other sensitive contexts, such as rape and sexual assault.
Unfortunately, when such studies as these come into the media and become more widely known a game of “telephone” occurs with much of the context getting lost, as the “message” is simplified, and the idea of victim-precipitation takes hold in areas where it is not applicable or relevant e.g., the idea of victim-precipitation is applied to the way a person dresses, with the implication being that if a person had dressed differently they wouldn’t have been targeted etc.
Sometimes, people will try and make such an argument, whilst qualifying it by stating that whilst the victim wasn’t to blame, they could have avoided being attacked by dressing differently.
When we consider that most women are raped in private places such as their homes, where they are most likely to be wearing comfortable, everyday clothes, the argument that rapes and sexual assaults occur due to being dressed “provocatively” has little substance to it.
Neither does the view that a woman’s clothing is a signal of consent e.g., “If she was dressed like that, she must have been asking for it.”
There is a travelling art exhibit, which debuted at the University of Arkansas on March 31st, 2013, called “‘What Were You Wearing?’ Survivor Art Installation” that was inspired by a Mary Simmerling’s poem of the same name (about a rape/sexual assault which happened to her).
The exhibit was created by Jen Brockman and Dr. Mary Wyandt-Hiebert. The exhibit contains recreations of the clothing that those who were sexually victimized were wearing at the time of their respective assaults., along with a brief account of who the assailant was and/or where the assault took place etc.
Other common forms of victim-blaming include statements/questions like, “Why was she alone, late at night?”, and/or “What did she expect was going to happen to her if she got so drunk?” Everyone has the right to be in a public space in any state of intoxication without being victimized, whether sexually or otherwise.
However, one of the ways we reduce the risk of being victimized regarding all forms of crime, is to eliminate vulnerabilities that threats can exploit e.g., if we leave a window open or a door unlocked we create a vulnerability that a burglar could exploit, or if we leave our car unlocked with our possessions in it, we create an opportunity that someone who carries out thefts from cars could take advantage of (this is referred to as victim-facilitation).
This doesn’t mean that if our house is broken into, or our assets from our car are stolen, that we are to blame or responsible for these things happening. However, we should recognize that our actions or lack of actions helped facilitate the crime. If there are ways we can reduce our vulnerabilities concerning all aspects of our safety we should take and apply them regardless of gender.