Victim Blaming

[Roughsoul1991]

A common modern day practice is to resist passing blame on a victim regardless of how the victim arrived at becoming a victim.

“Victim-blaming doesn’t have to involve accusing survivors of directly causing their own misfortune. It can involve the simple thought that you would have been more careful, implying that the tragedy was at least partially their fault.”


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/supersurvivors/201803/why-do-people-blame-the-victim

Another example,

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot blamed retailers for not making safety a priority amid a string of smash-and-grab thefts at retail stores in recent months.


"We still have retailers that won't institute plans like having security officers in their stores, making sure that they've got cameras that are actually operational, locking up their merchandise at night, chaining high-end bags. These purses can be something that is attracting a lot of organized retail theft units," Lightfoot said Monday.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-blames-retailers-smash-grab-thefts

My question is should a victim always be without judgement? Good laws and good policies must understand human nature as described by James Madison and George Washington.

“As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.”

-James Madison, Feb. 15, 1788 (Federalist No. 55)

“We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals.”

-George Washington, Aug. 15, 1786 (letter to John Jay)

When understanding human nature we do not live in a world of moral perfection. We live in a fallen world with a fallen human nature.

Should I in theory be able to keep my doors unlocked? A nation have an open border? An individual walk down a dark alley in a crime infested neighborhood? A women wearing 30% of clothing going to a house party with a bunch of men and everyone is drinking? Depending solely on police with by average a 15 min response time? There are probably many more examples of when we understand human nature, is it wise to practice such behaviors without thinking the probability of human wickedness may arise?

In theory we shouldn't have to worry about others choices but we live in a reality and a world ruled by Satan.

Should people be wiser in understanding human nature? Should some level of blame be on the victim in specific circumstances or never at all? The criminal will always be held accountable but do some bad laws or poor thinking invite crime? For example, gun free zones like schools.

 

[CharliRenee]

My question is should a victim always be without judgement?

No... many of the things that landed me in the position of victim was a result my poor choices. I think we learn and hopefully grow from our wrong doings and wrong doings done to us.

We as a society and individually are responsible to do our part not to bring harm or invite harm. Discernment good, foolishness not so much.

I am not saying the perpetrators are less guilty of wrong doing.

So yes you should keep your door locked. You have me wondering though...

Isn't this a balance thing. A young lady ought not go into dangerous places, by herself, dressing super provocatively....however, there are ppl that harm others without provocation of any kind.

So let's look at domestic violence. Women who have experienced it will admit she pushed his buttons, got in his face, does that mean his hitting her is justifiable, even understandable.

NO!!!

I don't know brother, if we start drawing lines of victim blaming, we have somehow said that we are considering condoning behavior that should never be tolerated for any reason.

We can not do that as a society. We have to give responsibility to the perpetrator or as a society and individually we will have chaos and destruction. It is not pragmatic or helpful to victim blame.

I will say on some levels we have all been perpetrators and victims. No one always loves the way we should. We are flesh, as you so eloquently stated, alway prone to our own weaknesses, let alone our enemy!!

Some lines can not be drawn, though, no matter what anyone does to provoke or not provoke in any situation.

 

[Runningman]

A common modern day practice is to resist passing blame on a victim regardless of how the victim arrived at becoming a victim.

“Victim-blaming doesn’t have to involve accusing survivors of directly causing their own misfortune. It can involve the simple thought that you would have been more careful, implying that the tragedy was at least partially their fault.”


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/supersurvivors/201803/why-do-people-blame-the-victim

Another example,

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot blamed retailers for not making safety a priority amid a string of smash-and-grab thefts at retail stores in recent months.


"We still have retailers that won't institute plans like having security officers in their stores, making sure that they've got cameras that are actually operational, locking up their merchandise at night, chaining high-end bags. These purses can be something that is attracting a lot of organized retail theft units," Lightfoot said Monday.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-blames-retailers-smash-grab-thefts

My question is should a victim always be without judgement? Good laws and good policies must understand human nature as described by James Madison and George Washington.

“As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.”

-James Madison, Feb. 15, 1788 (Federalist No. 55)

“We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals.”

-George Washington, Aug. 15, 1786 (letter to John Jay)

When understanding human nature we do not live in a world of moral perfection. We live in a fallen world with a fallen human nature.

Should I in theory be able to keep my doors unlocked? A nation have an open border? An individual walk down a dark alley in a crime infested neighborhood? A women wearing 30% of clothing going to a house party with a bunch of men and everyone is drinking? Depending solely on police with by average a 15 min response time? There are probably many more examples of when we understand human nature, is it wise to practice such behaviors without thinking the probability of human wickedness may arise?

In theory we shouldn't have to worry about others choices but we live in a reality and a world ruled by Satan.

Should people be wiser in understanding human nature? Should some level of blame be on the victim in specific circumstances or never at all? The criminal will always be held accountable but do some bad laws or poor thinking invite crime? For example, gun free zones like schools.

While victims are not responsible for the actions of their wrongdoer, victims sometimes make bad choices and unsound judgements that got them into trouble. Obviously that isn't always the case though. Sometimes victims did nothing to find themselves in the situation they got in.

Other times, maybe it wasn't smart to go to a party full of people they didn't know and trust and get black-out drunk. Maybe it wasn't smart to walk through the bad part of town alone at night. Maybe it wasn't a good idea to pick up a random hitch hiker.

The reality is that the world is not always a safe place. Our good intentions and naivety to this fact do not always protect us. We should be aware that there are opportunistic predators about and do what we can to protect ourselves. That's why it's important to manage the risks we take to prevent us from possibly becoming victims.

 

[Gideon300]

A common modern day practice is to resist passing blame on a victim regardless of how the victim arrived at becoming a victim.

“Victim-blaming doesn’t have to involve accusing survivors of directly causing their own misfortune. It can involve the simple thought that you would have been more careful, implying that the tragedy was at least partially their fault.”


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/supersurvivors/201803/why-do-people-blame-the-victim

Another example,

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot blamed retailers for not making safety a priority amid a string of smash-and-grab thefts at retail stores in recent months.


"We still have retailers that won't institute plans like having security officers in their stores, making sure that they've got cameras that are actually operational, locking up their merchandise at night, chaining high-end bags. These purses can be something that is attracting a lot of organized retail theft units," Lightfoot said Monday.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-blames-retailers-smash-grab-thefts

My question is should a victim always be without judgement? Good laws and good policies must understand human nature as described by James Madison and George Washington.

“As there is a degree of depravity in mankind which requires a certain degree of circumspection and distrust: So there are other qualities in human nature, which justify a certain portion of esteem and confidence. Republican government presupposes the existence of these qualities in a higher degree than any other form.”

-James Madison, Feb. 15, 1788 (Federalist No. 55)

“We must take human nature as we find it, perfection falls not to the share of mortals.”

-George Washington, Aug. 15, 1786 (letter to John Jay)

When understanding human nature we do not live in a world of moral perfection. We live in a fallen world with a fallen human nature.

Should I in theory be able to keep my doors unlocked? A nation have an open border? An individual walk down a dark alley in a crime infested neighborhood? A women wearing 30% of clothing going to a house party with a bunch of men and everyone is drinking? Depending solely on police with by average a 15 min response time? There are probably many more examples of when we understand human nature, is it wise to practice such behaviors without thinking the probability of human wickedness may arise?

In theory we shouldn't have to worry about others choices but we live in a reality and a world ruled by Satan.

Should people be wiser in understanding human nature? Should some level of blame be on the victim in specific circumstances or never at all? The criminal will always be held accountable but do some bad laws or poor thinking invite crime? For example, gun free zones like schools.

Unbelievers seem tot think that there are no consequences to behaviour or attitudes. I live in a low crime town, except for late at night/early morning at the beach. My home is locked up well during the day and more so at night. The only incident in the last 15 years is when a kid went to every home in the street, trying to get into cars and stealing anything out in the open. He could not get into our home because the gate is padlocked at night. The dog went crazy as he heard the kid try to open the gate. So we suffered no harm at all.

It's a two way street. Governments need to provide security, but people need to do what they can also. It's easy to criticise shop owners. If 20 people walk into the shop, take what they want and go, how do a couple of teenagers prevent that?

The issue starts in the home, the way kids are raised. I see no hope of any real change because there are few, if any, consequences for bad behaviour these days. There never were any good old days. But what I see and hear now appalls me. And I spent 9 years in the military and have a pretty thick skin.

 

[Lanolin]

I think people perish through lack of knowlege and hindsight is always 20/20

some things you cannot know before you experience them though. Which is why young people or those extremely sheltered sometimes have a rude awakening when they find out that the world does not revolve around them.

Job was righteous and yet bad things happened to him. Why was that...did he invite trouble BECAUSE he was so righteous? He didnt know that satan was having a wager with God. Sometimes trials are sent to test us...and to see that we stay faithful in spite of all the dangers and pitfalls.

 

[Lynx]

All I know is, if I have a friend who refuses to use an antivirus on a Windows computer, I will reformat his hard drive and reinstall Windows ONCE. After that he's on his own.

For people who refuse to take basic precautions, there is only so much we can do to help them.

The question in the case of robberies is, do the store owners know to take basic precautions and refuse, or are they unaware of these matters? Also is anybody making an effort to educate them? My friends here "you need an antivirus if you use a windows computer online" from me all the time, so they have no excuse. A friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend might not have heard that.

 

[SomeDisciple]

When I was in the military there were places we were not allowed to go (even in the US) because they were not considered safe by the chain of command. If you went there, and ended up the victim of a crime... you'd get punished for disobeying a lawful order not to go there in the first place. (Granted, they did not always do a great job of publishing the list of off-limits places...)

In the Torah, if a rape victim doesn't cry out- she will not be held guiltless. Somebody will say, "But, but, but, That's not fair! What if she fears for her life!?!?" Doesn't matter. Faith obeys the Lord. Fear is not an excuse. There's no civilians in spiritual warfare- the enemy comes to your door, and not fighting isn't an option. That premise was in place to discourage people from playing the victim. Realistically, I highly doubt the elders in Israel were executing actual rape victims, whether or not someone heard them cry out- but it's in the law so that you know that is what you are supposed to do and you CAN be punished for being a deceiver or a passive victim.

Whenever a victim is punished, it's never for the crime done to them that makes them a victim- it's always specifically for what THEY DID that they were NOT SUPPOSED TO DO- which might have led to the circumstances of their victimhood, but even if it didn't, there were still not supposed to do it, and they could still be punished even if it didn't lead to those circumstances- and the fact that you became a victim doesn't always get you out of punishment. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Or sometimes you get punished for not doing something you were supposed to do that could have prevented you from being a victim in the first place. Either way, if you end up being punished, it's for disobedience and not for being a victim.

If you go down into the slums under a bridge and wave a Big Mac in front of a starving homeless guy and eat it, saying "look what I got homeless guy!", and he punches you in the face and takes it from you... yeah, the homeless guy is wrong, and the law will probably punish him, but nobody is going to give you any sympathy. You're an idiot! It might not be unlawful to wave a cheeseburger in front of the starving poor, but it's definitely immoral- and I think most people will recognize that, and say you got what you deserved.

The law typically draws the line at physical violence- but the reality is, sometimes non-physical abuse is worse. I'd rather be slapped in the face than sleep deprived any day. Narcissists tend to be very good at harming people or exploiting them in ways that do not leave evidence and provokes their victims to do violence against them or behave irrationally, so that the narcissist can play the victim while being the instigator and aggressor. That's why people that claim they are victims tend to get treated with skepticism, and why judgement and mercy can be slow. Things are not always what they seem.

Should we write people tickets for forgetting to lock their cars and businesses, or for forgetting to wear a belt so their underwear occasionally becomes exposed? Probably not. Can we withhold our sympathy from victims if they became victims by overtly acting like a fool? Sure can.

 

[tanakh]

When I was in the military there were places we were not allowed to go (even in the US) because they were not considered safe by the chain of command. If you went there, and ended up the victim of a crime... you'd get punished for disobeying a lawful order not to go there in the first place. (Granted, they did not always do a great job of publishing the list of off-limits places...)

In the Torah, if a rape victim doesn't cry out- she will not be held guiltless. Somebody will say, "But, but, but, That's not fair! What if she fears for her life!?!?" Doesn't matter. Faith obeys the Lord. Fear is not an excuse. There's no civilians in spiritual warfare- the enemy comes to your door, and not fighting isn't an option. That premise was in place to discourage people from playing the victim. Realistically, I highly doubt the elders in Israel were executing actual rape victims, whether or not someone heard them cry out- but it's in the law so that you know that is what you are supposed to do and you CAN be punished for being a deceiver or a passive victim.

Whenever a victim is punished, it's never for the crime done to them that makes them a victim- it's always specifically for what THEY DID that they were NOT SUPPOSED TO DO- which might have led to the circumstances of their victimhood, but even if it didn't, there were still not supposed to do it, and they could still be punished even if it didn't lead to those circumstances- and the fact that you became a victim doesn't always get you out of punishment. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Or sometimes you get punished for not doing something you were supposed to do that could have prevented you from being a victim in the first place. Either way, if you end up being punished, it's for disobedience and not for being a victim.

If you go down into the slums under a bridge and wave a Big Mac in front of a starving homeless guy and eat it, saying "look what I got homeless guy!", and he punches you in the face and takes it from you... yeah, the homeless guy is wrong, and the law will probably punish him, but nobody is going to give you any sympathy. You're an idiot! It might not be unlawful to wave a cheeseburger in front of the starving poor, but it's definitely immoral- and I think most people will recognize that, and say you got what you deserved.

The law typically draws the line at physical violence- but the reality is, sometimes non-physical abuse is worse. I'd rather be slapped in the face than sleep deprived any day. Narcissists tend to be very good at harming people or exploiting them in ways that do not leave evidence and provokes their victims to do violence against them or behave irrationally, so that the narcissist can play the victim while being the instigator and aggressor. That's why people that claim they are victims tend to get treated with skepticism, and why judgement and mercy can be slow. Things are not always what they seem.

Should we write people tickets for forgetting to lock their cars and businesses, or for forgetting to wear a belt so their underwear occasionally becomes exposed? Probably not. Can we withhold our sympathy from victims if they became victims by overtly acting like a fool? Sure can.

Torah has a very wide meaning in Judaism. One meaning is instruction as opposed to 'The Law' as understood by many Christians. It ranges from the five books of Moses through to the supposed Oral law that was claimed to have been given to Moses in addition to the written tablets and on to just about every writing study or mention of the Torah until now. In fact according to this last definition this post I am now writing is Torah. The Oral Law eventually
came to be written down because so many Jews were persecuted and killed it was no longer safe to depend on subsequent generations to be around to pass it on. The down side to this
is that once something is written it can be misunderstood tampered with and ignored by anyone who has a mind to do it. All this supposed Oral/written material now forms what is known as the Talmud which consists of a large number of people arguing with each other and goes on in many volumes. Some of which contains very unpleasant remarks about Christ and Christians.

What Christ said on the road to Emmaus was based on the Hebrew Scriptures and other known writings in current use at the time. Not on the Talmud.

 

[SomeDisciple]

What Christ said on the road to Emmaus was based on the Hebrew Scriptures and other known writings in current use at the time. Not on the Talmud.

Amen. I just added that as my signature line- I didn't have one before. I just find that story particularly awesome, and funny that Jesus pretty much did what the kids today call "benevolent trolling". When they were in Jerusalem, he could have just showed up and been like "hey! Where you guys going?" But, no... he hides his identity and walks with them seven miles and then disappears- knowing they are gonna walk all the way back while it's getting dark. But you know that they were so excited that they didn't even care they had to go all the way back. You would think that they would have been like "Foolish and slow to believe??? We're 2 of his closest disciples! Who is this guy?" but I think they were just so drawn in by hearing the truth of the word that it never occurred for them to ask.

 

[Roughsoul1991]

Thank you everyone for your input. I was just wondering how everyone felt.

 

[Gideon300]

I think people perish through lack of knowlege and hindsight is always 20/20

some things you cannot know before you experience them though. Which is why young people or those extremely sheltered sometimes have a rude awakening when they find out that the world does not revolve around them.

Job was righteous and yet bad things happened to him. Why was that...did he invite trouble BECAUSE he was so righteous? He didnt know that satan was having a wager with God. Sometimes trials are sent to test us...and to see that we stay faithful in spite of all the dangers and pitfalls.

Job's problem was fear. What he greatly feared came upon him. Job was also self righteous, doing his utmost to avoid offending God. Those who are born again realise (or should realise) that it's not what we do that counts. It is what Lord Jesus has done for us.

God graciously met Job. What did God say? Basically, "Job, I'm God and you are not". Job knew about God. Then he came to know God as the real, living Person that God is. Job suffered much, but he was greatly blessed after the ordeal.

 

[Blain]

Many times my own misfortunes was my fault the thing that defines this universe is cause and effect if the effect was misfortune or a problem often times it is because we caused it.
True this isn't always the case but more often than not we need to stop playing the victim and take responsibility

 

[Roughsoul1991]

It is crazy to me how it seems our culture wants to remove any responsibility for someone's choices. This same line of thinking has promoted abortion on demand to protect the physical feelings of sex without the responsibility of reproduction. The pregnant mom is the victim almost if they blame the child.

Everyone wants to be free to do what they want without responsibility and as soon as the bad choices bite them in the rear they blame others. Worst part is that our culture wants to remove any blame.

Of course, this is only in a case by case scenario with different variables but we should know the difference between someone acting in ignorance versus arrogance or someone who by all appearances was just in a bad place at a bad time.

 

[p_rehbein]

Victim blaming is a slippery slope. Use caution when choosing to do so........

Lest we forget, the most used defense by a rapist:

"Well, if she hadn't been dressed like that, i wouldn't have done it. She was asking for it."

Yeah, be real careful with victim blaming

 

[Nehemiah6]

A common modern day practice is to resist passing blame on a victim regardless of how the victim arrived at becoming a victim.

In the day and age that we live in, the idea that everyone is a victim has become commonplace (at least in the West). This is particularly true about criminals who plead that they have committed heinous crimes because they were victimized in childhood (whether true or false).

The sad fact is that many people choose to become victims rather that ensure that they will not be victimized. Take the case of the women who started the #MeToo Movement. They made deliberate choices to be in the presence of predators, and probably dressed provocatively, and even drank alcohol in a partying atmosphere. Did they really think they could walk away from such a dangerous situation? Take the other case of single women jogging on city streets in the early morning hours. Anyone with an iota of commonsense would know that this is simply asking for trouble.

As to Lori Lightfoot's smart remarks, why did not all the business owners in Chicago make a concerted effort -- long ago -- to have her removed from office by any and all means, since she already established a record of being a totally irresponsible mayor? The whole point of civil government is to protect citizens from criminals (or rotten cops) with an effective police force. But that is not what is happening at all today. Hardened criminals are being released with abandon, and politicians have been calling for defunding the police. That is insanity. Smash-And-Grab has become the norm in many cities in the USA.

 

[tanakh]

In the day and age that we live in, the idea that everyone is a victim has become commonplace (at least in the West). This is particularly true about criminals who plead that they have committed heinous crimes because they were victimized in childhood (whether true or false).

The sad fact is that many people choose to become victims rather that ensure that they will not be victimized. Take the case of the women who started the #MeToo Movement. They made deliberate choices to be in the presence of predators, and probably dressed provocatively, and even drank alcohol in a partying atmosphere. Did they really think they could walk away from such a dangerous situation? Take the other case of single women jogging on city streets in the early morning hours. Anyone with an iota of commonsense would know that this is simply asking for trouble.

As to Lori Lightfoot's smart remarks, why did not all the business owners in Chicago make a concerted effort -- long ago -- to have her removed from office by any and all means, since she already established a record of being a totally irresponsible mayor? The whole point of civil government is to protect citizens from criminals (or rotten cops) with an effective police force. But that is not what is happening at all today. Hardened criminals are being released with abandon, and politicians have been calling for defunding the police. That is insanity. Smash-And-Grab has become the norm in many cities in the USA.

'Many people choose to become victims' ?

How many exactly?

What do you suggest? Should western society adopt the ways of the Taliban?

 

[Roughsoul1991]

Victim blaming is a slippery slope. Use caution when choosing to do so........

Lest we forget, the most used defense by a rapist:

"Well, if she hadn't been dressed like that, i wouldn't have done it. She was asking for it."

Yeah, be real careful with victim blaming

I believe everyone who has posted has shared this caution. This is the common mantra so it isn't hard to forget.

Many of us are talking about how our culture tries to erase any responsibility from the victim.

For example, I like/dislike the concept of car insurance.

If you get into many different wrecks then your insurance will go up. Unfortunately, if too many in a period of time get into accidents, it may cause everyone's insurance to go up regardless of driving history.

It is good they are held accountable but also bad others must pay for there reckless behavior.

In a society, one's actions are hardly left in a void where they do not affect others.

 

[Nehemiah6]

How many exactly?

Your guess is as good as mine. But too many.

 

[Nehemiah6]

"Well, if she hadn't been dressed like that, i wouldn't have done it. She was asking for it."

Do you really think that dressing provocatively is not an invitation for trouble? Or do people simply think that irresponsible actions have no consequences?

 

[p_rehbein]

Many of us are talking about how our culture tries to erase any responsibility from the victim.

Maybe it is a matter of defining victim?

If you get into many different wrecks then your insurance will go up. Unfortunately, if too many in a period of time get into accidents, it may cause everyone's insurance to go up regardless of driving history.

Ok, IF none of the accidents are my fault, that makes me the victim. So I must be to blame for the accidents because I chose to purchase and drive a car?

In a society, one's actions are hardly left in a void where they do not affect others.

Ok, but isn't the guilty party the one who should be held accountable for any injuries sustained by others? Is the victim partly to blame because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, or some such?

As for auto accidents, there is a reason the Insurance Companies and Law Enforcement came up with "No Fault" accidents. This happens when both parties are equaly responsible, right? Fault can not be blamed on either, for both are equally guilty?

But then, neither would be a "victim" either..........