Huffington Post posted an article on October 19th about how a Texas Congresswoman claims that "[she] think[s] that many times, men get away with this [sexual assault] because they are allowed to get away with it by the women.”
This is a pure example of victim blaming. And what's crazy to me, is that this woman is supposedly someone who agrees that sexual assault is real and should not be tolerated. She believes that people need to be held accountable for their actions in regards to this and that victims need to be fought for. She seems to hold the idea that there is no excuse. So, why is she still part of the problem?
She claims to come from an "old school perspective."
She believes that how you dress and act can be an invitation, or perhaps confusing for men. She also claims that women let men assault them and get away with it by not cooperating with the police. By not reporting it, assault victims condone the behavior. And yet, she claims that she is a proponent of victim's rights, and that women who are sexually assaulted need to be validated, and that the person responsible should be brought to justice. But by believing the former, she is part of the problem.
You cannot be an effective advocate if you're still questioning the victim.
You just can't. I don't care how much you tout your affections for women's rights and support sexual assault victims, you're still part of the problem if you think that it's even remotely the victim's fault or problem that this happened. Because, as Huffington Post has said in their article, sexual assault isn't about sex; it's all about power. It's a violent act. You could be dressed and act as conservatively as humanly possible, and it could still happen. You could be a man, and it could still happen (because YES, men get assaulted too). You could try your hardest and fight back, and it could still happen. You could be stone cold sober, and it could still happen. You could be doing everything "right," and it could still happen! If you even remotely think otherwise, you're part of the problem here.
I understand that people believe the victims, but they also have their questions. "How/Why did this happen?" they might ask. They want to understand the inexplicable because they want to validate why it hasn't/doesn't/won't happen to them. "Oh," they say, "I won't wear this particular outfit, or drink tonight because I don't know these people super well, or this bar is sketchy. I'll be okay then! I'm being responsible." And they think it won't happen to them, but that's "why" it happened to someone else. They think the semantics matter-- they're not being "irresponsible" with their safety, so they are safe.
But the thing is, the semantics don't always matter. Because really, if someone wants something like that badly enough, they take it from you. The "how" or the "why" no longer apply here. It doesn't matter. And questioning a victim's actions, when they are probably already beating themselves up over it, is just making it worse. You're not helping; you're hurting. And it doesn't matter if you're "on their side." It just doesn't. Because trying to explain or rationalize irrational and harmful behavior isn't helpful, it's harmful. It's part of the problem. So next time you want to ask a victim, "how/why did this happen?" instead ask them how you can help them. Understand what happened (not how/why it happened) and understand them, rather than trying to explain and rationalize the situation. Don't be the one who contributes more to the problem.