A Little Grumpy About the Pithy Meme

[bedlamhouse]

The current pithy meme going around Facebook seems to be various forms of:

"We live in a society that teaches women to be careful not to be raped instead of teaching men NOT TO RAPE" (this version).

OK, I understand the sentiment, that focusing on what women "need" to do is effectively pre-blaming the victim, when the problem is the men who commit the rape. It also is referring the all-too-common "don't dress like that" sexist bullshit.

But I have many, many problems with it being stated like this, being a member of the penis-afflicted gender.

First is the idea that men are not taught not to rape. I was taught that violence - particularly against women - was wrong (do not commit rape as a violent act). I was taught that "no means no" (do not commit rape as a non-consensual sexual act). I taught this to the boys I raised. I see it being taught to boys being raised around me, and I see both the act of date rape and violent rape vilified in the fictional and factual media.

I find it very upsetting that there seems to be an idea that something which is a crime being committed by men who are acting in an anti-social fashion is happening simply because no one is telling anyone that it is anti-social.

Second is that not blaming the victim does NOT mean one has no responsibility for one's own safety. If I get t-boned at an intersection and thrown out of the car, sure, it's the fault of the person who hit me, but I could have worn a seat belt to protect myself against the possibility. If I get mugged walking through downtown Detroit at 2 am, it's the mugger who committed the crime and (perhaps) society that failed him and forced him into such action, but I should have been taking precautions (like not walking through downtown Detroit at 2 am).

I cannot control the acts of others, no matter how right or wrong those acts might be. I can only control my own actions and how those actions affect my own interactions with others. Some of the actions I can control are ones that keep me safe and are common sense.

Recommending that people take steps to protect themselves is NOT THE SAME as blaming them should something happen when they didn't take precautions. How is saying "don't get blind drunk when you are out with people who might take advantage of you" any different from saying "don't wear black clothing or go with your back to traffic if you are going to be walking on unlit streets after dark"? How is "don't accept a drink from a stranger" any different from "keep your wallet in your front pocket on the subway" or "don't walk into dark alleys alone"?

In a perfect world we would all be able to do things that are nowadays unsafe because of the deviant or irresponsible acts of others. But this is not a perfect world, and I would be criminally irresponsible if I did not teach my daughters how to avoid dangerous situations just as avidly as I teach my sons not to be rapists.

Comments

[filklore-on-lj.livejournal.com]

To illustrate why I find that meme offensive requires me to make a similarly offensive statement. Rest assured it is not something I believe.

"We live in a society that teaches people to be careful not to have things stolen instead of teaching Liverpudlians NOT TO STEAL".

[gwynnyd.livejournal.com]

I don't think it's offensive. I think you don't have to say it that way because the general consensus of society is that the second part of that statement is already the case.

[filklore-on-lj.livejournal.com]

But you are not a Liverpudlian, which is perhaps why you don't find it offensive. I can assure you that many would. Let me put it this way - it is not something I would even whisper in a Liverpool pub.

Equally, I am offended by the suggestion that men need to be taught not to rape. It implies that, lacking such teaching, I could be a rapist, just as my statement implies that, without teaching, all Liverpudlians could be thieves.

[gwynnyd.livejournal.com]

Of course YOU don't need to be taught not to rape. Rapists need to be taught not to rape.

If Liverpudlians never/rarely steal, which is what I assumed you meant by using it as an analogy, then as I said, it does not work because it is already the case. If "society" already agreed that rape was solely the fault of the rapist, the meme under discussion would not work either.

[filklore-on-lj.livejournal.com]

You said "Rapists need to be taught not to rape."

But that isn't what Bill quoted, and that isn't what I have heard so many times in the past:

"We live in a society that teaches women to be careful not to be raped instead of teaching men NOT TO RAPE"

Now if that was reworded to say

"We live in a society that teaches women to be careful not to be raped instead of teaching people that rape is wrong"

I would probably object to it less. But as stated, it is saying specifically that society needs to teach MEN not to rape.

Aside from anything else, it ignores the fact that women are not the only victims of rape.

"If Liverpudlians never/rarely steal"

Liverpool has an unfortunate (and not totally fair) reputation for crime - why it occurred to me, talking to folk I mainly know from fandom, is that I know of at least one SF convention bid for Liverpool that suffered because of this reputation, that "they are all thieves".

So my statement was doing exactly what the rapist statement was doing - observing that some Liverpudlians are thieves (which is patently true, as crime exists there), and then generalising that all Liverpudlians could be thieves if we didn't teach them not to be.

[gwynnyd.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm so sorry, filklore. I had a blonde moment and totally forgot that this discussion was not all about you. How could I be so silly? Golly gee whiz! I forgot about the MENZ!

[catalana.livejournal.com]

Umm, but surely without learning societal norms we *could* commit crimes? I don't see what's objectionable about saying that "It implies that, lacking such teaching, I could be a rapist."

Absent moral learning, I could be a thief or a murderer. Why don't I do those things? Because I have learned (some by direct teaching, some by thinking, some by observing and following examples) that those things are wrong.

So I guess I'm confused about what the problem is here - are you claiming that you were innately born knowing what was right and wrong? Or is it more that it seems to imply a specific *kind* of teaching that you have to go through?

(I may be going too ethics professor-y here; I just tend to agree with Aristotle that virtue is learned, not innate, so I don't see what the problem is with saying that, if I didn't know better, I might do something unethical.)