Let me preface this by saying it’s not really about a bank robbery.
That being said, imagine the following scenario, an extended metaphor of sorts:
A person is in need of some money. They believe they need a large quantity of money to truly fulfill their needs. So, instead of going out and fighting for a job in the tough economy, with so much competition, they prepare to rob a bank. They see this as a smarter and quicker alternative, because they know just how to get away with it if things go badly. As they enter, guns held high and voice on full volume, the teller has no choice but to hand over the money, assuming they'd like to keep their life.
The teller could reach for the police button, but they fear they may not make it to see if the police even come at all. The teller begs the robber to stop repeatedly. The robber replies with an "admittance" that they really need this and it's okay to give the money to them, and that it might be "the right thing to do". The teller is too afraid and confused to disagree. The robber forces the money out of the teller and makes their way out of the bank. The robber escapes, but is eventually tracked down and brought into custody. They are charged with armed robbery, but they are not sent to prison, even though there is clear and undeniable evidence against them. After investigating the crime scene, many reasons and motives were brought into question. It would seem everyone wanted to know why the bank didn't better prepare themselves for such an attack?
The teller just seemed to hand over the money, no questions asked. They were too easy to overpower. The bank overall should have dressed itself out better, so as to not attract any criminals who may think them easy to rob. They left themselves wide open, looking ready to take in any sort of person who needed their money. Maybe they were understaffed, and didn't have anyone but that teller to make the judgement calls in a high energy situation like that. That could have really affected the overall cognitive atmosphere of the bank if just that frightened and uncertain teller was having to make all the calls.
But, don't banks like giving away money? Certainly it makes them feel good, giving away something to make someone else feel better. And the robber was just doing what robbers do. It really seems just a little too easy to rob a lot of banks nowadays. There's so many of them, some are bound to get robbed and that's just how things go. Some banks carry small, easy to hold weapons as protection but that sometimes doesn't even do the trick.
Some of this is quite hypothetical, but I'd like to think that you, the reader, are smart enough to understand that the robber is still at fault. In fact, it's all of the robber's blame to take. After all, it was the robber who came in and forcefully took something that wasn't theirs to take.
The bank certainly didn't want the money stolen, and the teller pleaded for them to stop, but the robber forced it out of them. The bank could have prepared better for these situations, but we know these situations shouldn't arise, right? We're all taught not to steal, from very early on in our lives. Yes, some continue to do it, but we make their crime known and punish them for it. So why don't we do that for rape?
The general populace agrees that rape is definitely a bad thing, and should be stopped, but there's a divide on how to go about preventing it. We teach that rape is bad, but we don't teach that it is wrong. So in turn, we prepare the possible victims as best we can, in hopes that the untaught or the vile won't harm them. With the majority of victims being female, we've been teaching them to wear less "provocative" clothing, so as to not attract the attention of the males who just can't seem to control their urges. Much like the bank described above, many feel the need to find flaws in the preparation of the victim, never drawing back to the criminal's complete guilt.
Do you see where I'm getting with this? Why don't we fully blame the rapist the way we blame a bank robber? We don't refer to a bank robbery as "20 minutes of action", because we know that banks don't like giving away money that isn't going to who it belongs to, so how could forced intercourse be considered "action" when one of the parties doesn't even consent to it? We don't tell banks "Theft is kinda like the weather. If it’s inevitable, just relax and enjoy it", like how Texas gubernatorial hopeful Clayton Williams described rape. We don't blame banks for being understaffed during a robbery, which hinders their overall thought and power to defend (it's a metaphor, let's remember). So why blame alcohol or other date rape drugs (yes, alcohol used in this manner qualifies as a date rape drug)? If they don't want it stolen, unconscious or not, you shouldn't steal it. Simple as that. There's no term like "legitimate rape" for robbery, because if either happens, it's legitimate enough as fact.
There are instances where the facts are lies, and the perpetrator in question is in fact innocent. But thankfully, we have security cameras and science to determine if the allegations are true, and it's rare when they aren't. We punish armed robbers for their crime in full, but are more lenient towards rapists, fearing the impact of prison on them. Not to mention, it seems easier for these robbers to make a getaway if they’re affluent white males, who have a reputation to uphold or a team to support (because a quality team needs one specific player to succeed, right?). There's no such thing as "theft culture", where people view theft as normal and inevitable, saying banks are "asking to be robbed" and that "robbers will be robbers". It just doesn't happen.
I just have trouble seeing the sense of it all. Why are we blaming bank robbers for robbing banks but not rapists for raping others? True, sex is not something necessarily tangible, an object to be stolen. But it's still stolen isn't it? And the fact that it's not physical personally bothers me even more. In my humble opinion, the key difference between robbery and rape is you can return money and stolen goods; you can't return stolen sex. Rape is a crime and a big one at that. So why are we not treating it as such?
I imagine there are many answers to these questions that I repeatedly ask. I know I'm not alone in thinking this way, but it's rather heartbreaking when I see those who can change it think differently. I hear too many reasons for why it's the fault of the victim, and seen too many times where the blame is evaporated into the air once all is said and done. I love and believe in people, but I know we can do better. We have to.
