Sounds like you agree with the picture then.

Not sure how to answer within the parameters you've set out here

Haha, I mean I've read most of this thread and realized that my views would likely be in the minority. FWIW I'm completely against the defendants in this case.

My bigger gripe is just that the sense of entitlement (can I even call it that) where people have this idea that "nothing I do has any negative consequences and anything bad that happens to me is 100% outside my control" is annoying and sort of wrong, in my opinion.

It's terrible if you consider the girl's behaviour as lessening the seriousness of the crime. It sounds as if you don't think the crime is that serious in the first place, and are latching onto the girl's mistakes as rationalization for that.

As an analogy, let's say you do in fact walk home through a dangerous neighbourhood for some reason, and you get mugged and beaten up. The police catch the guy and convict him. Would you show up to the sentencing and ask the judge for lenience because you shouldn't have been there in the first place?

I get your point and in general agree. The problem comes in when this type of "blame" is used to excuse behavior.

If I leave my car unlocked and park in a high car theft area, is it my fault when the car gets stolen? Should the thief get a lesser sentence? No, of course not. But by not taking simple/basic precautions, I basically paid an idiot tax by making it more likely I'd go through my car being stolen.

So if a girl gets black out drunk with complete strangers at a bar known for shady characters, is she asking for it? **** no. But she just paid a steep idiot tax if she is assaulted.

I'm not sure that applies so much here, as most people assume they are safe with friends even if they drink to excess (which is also dumb but a very common dumb).

The problem is that by shifting any blame to the victim, some would use that to excuse the offender. It's a completely different type of blame or responsibility tho. One is the responsibility to take care of yourself and make your own life good. The other is the responsibility not to hurt others. They don't always coincide but when they do, the victims lack of self care (deliberate or accidental) does not excuse the offenders responsibility to abide by the law and common decency and refrain from offending.

Nah, I think the crime was very serious.

And no, I think that would be silly. I would consider myself a bit of an idiot to have been there, though and would put a non-zero amount of the blame on myself for being dumb enough to have walked through that neighborhood.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make! Thank you for saying it a lot better than I could.

It's completely possible that the rapists 100% deserve everything they get (and more), and yet the girl could still have been a moron when it came to her behavior. Again, I'm not saying she was- but I'm saying it's possible, and that's the difference.

This isn't a scenario where there's exactly 100% of blame to be spread among the different parties involved (rapers, parents, culture, girl, others?). Everyone can be at fault, and the fact that one party completely deserves their punishment doesn't lessen the extent to which another party is to blame.

What she said and what you're saying are not the same.

BIBLE BELT ******ED FOOTBALL HS COMMUNITIES WITH NO ECONOMY AND ******ED PARENTS WHO ONLY CARE ABOUT THEIR KID BEING A SUPERSTAR FOOTBALL PLAYER, AND ARE TO ******ED TO RAISE A CHILD.

So true had to yell.

not to say there aren't normal people in said communities, and this little group of douchebags are obv an extreme bad apple situation, but the way the apha male testostrone dick sucking competition is creates a horrible sense of whats okay in these young kids with their whole lives ahead of them (talking about all hs students). Yes I am exaggerating, but i do have some merit in what im saying imo.

Anyone itt ever play at a high level (as in you were important to the team) for a major HS in a bible belt community care to comment on what its like in that environment? I am sure a lot of this is in my head, but you must at least admit that there needs to be a lot of change?

Perhaps, but do people even read capped posts anymore?

Is her point not to say that people have the responsibility to not be idiots, just like people also have the responsibility to not be rapists and that just because one of those conditions is violated doesn't make the other one true?

This also gets dicey specifically when you talk about sex offenses, though. A lot of victims suffer a lot of self doubt and guilt, and "blaming" them is potentially hugely traumatizing. Even with victims who did nothing wrong, there is still that blame. And I know where of I speak here. I was raped. I did nothing wrong except trust the wrong person but even that can be debilitating in your own screwed up, traumatized brain.

Ever rape prevention class talks about being smart about your surroundings and not getting wasted and stuff like that. And that's all things you can blame a victim for as such. But that NEVER excuses someone from committing a sexual assault. And frankly, I doubt you could ever blame a victim in this spot more than she (or he) blames her/himself.

And I'm not saying blame in the sense that "it's X% your fault that this happened"

I'm saying blame in the sense that it's on you to make sure you aren't acting like an idiot

Nope.

Right, of course this is all true. I suppose my point (and idk if this has been addressed elsewhere in the thread) is that this whole situation is very ****ed up and to break it down to as black and white as "LOL @ the kids it's 100% their fault" seems wrong. I dislike the way people (and especially the media) treat things as either/or, with no in between.

So basically you're saying rapists will rape less if you're not "asking for it"? I thought that mentality dissolved in the late 80's?

I'm not a rape apologist and I don't mean to sound like I'm blaming the victim, but

I find it a little absurd that some people seem to think there's this absolute dichotomy where if you're not 100% against rape and only blame the rapist and think that there's no value at all in teaching people that putting yourself in dangerous situations is probably not optimal behavior (NOTE: This is not me saying they "ask for it"), you're a rape apologist.

I understand the point you're trying to make about risk management but this case isn't the appropriate arena. She was unconscious, definitely drunk but possibly drugged -- everything that happens to her after that point is 100% the rapists' fault, as you would give someone 100% of the credit for protecting her rather than ejaculating onto her chest and taking a photo.

The dichotomy is between people who don't blame the victim at all, and people who blame her to any degree.

Damn RJ, why you so smart? Should be changed to Philosophy Major RJ.

What about everything that took place in the lives of everyone involved up until that moment? Obviously if she was drugged this becomes a different story.

It would be risky behaviour and a poor decision for a woman to show up alone, really drunk, wearing a short skirt and low-cut top at a party full of horny highschool and college guys she doesn't even know. If she gets raped, it is still 100% not her fault and she bears 0% of the blame.

I think this is where I'm at right now, with regard to my opinion

-The girl is 0% to blame for her rape
-The rapists are close to 100% to blame for the actual rape itself
-The rapists are significantly less than 100% to blame for being crappy human beings
-The girl (likely, assuming she wasn't drugged) put herself in a more dangerous than normal situation, showing a lack of judgement at least this night. Being a teenage girl, this of course doesn't necessarily mean she's an idiot- just kind of foolish and naive.

The first and last statements are really the ones that I feel are important