A Rape Victim Is Never, Ever, EVER At Fault For Being Raped

A few minutes ago I read a news article that has me a bit upset. Apparently, a 16-year-old girl in Ohio got wasted and two football players, one white and one black, aged 16 and 17, decided to assault her and carry her around by her arms and legs. People around them took pictures and videos of the boys harming this girl and talking crudely about what they had done. Nobody stepped in to stop them and nobody reported it to the police. No action was taken whatsoever until the victim herself learned of what happened from her ‘friends.’ What kind of friends watch something like this happen and don’t do anything to stop it?

There are so many things to be upset about in this case: the fact that is happened, nobody stepping in to stop it, nobody reporting it to the police while it happened, nobody reporting it after it happened, people wanting leniency because these boys play football, people blaming the girl because she was drunk, people saying the boys’ lives will be ruined now that they are labelled sex offenders, people threatening the girl because she reported the crime and wanted the boys punished, her so-called best friends claiming she is an alcoholic and a chronic liar and so many more things.

The thing that upsets me the most right now, though, is that the defense attorney argued that the girl consented to sex because she drank heavily and never actually said no or asked the boys to stop. Uh, right. So, as long as I’m unconscious and unresponsive, any boy can do with me what they chose? Or is that just with football players? And does this only apply to being unconscious from drinking alcohol or does it also apply to sleeping medication, pain pills, date-rape drugs and just plain sleeping deeply? Really, this needs to be clarified because I’d like to know what inaction of mine converts into consent for sex. I mean, if my simply not saying no because I’m not in a state to know what is going on around me means I’m consenting to sex, I’d better make darn well sure that I’m awake and alert 24/7 so that I’m never unaware of my surroundings and what others around me are doing. Because this is totally realistic and doable.

What. An. Idiot.

I’d really like to see that guy run out of the legal profession for coming up with such an idiotic and illogical defense strategy. Saying a girl who is impaired consents to sex because she didn’t say the word ‘no’ is basically saying a girl with her mouth taped shut consented to sex because she didn’t tell the guy to stop. And what about mentally disabled girls? The ones who have diminished mental capacity and don’t understand things the way the rest of humanity SHOULD can’t say no to something they don’t understand. And what about the girls who do not possess the ability to speak? They can’t say no. They can’t tell someone to stop doing something or that they don’t consent. So does this mean boys can do anything they want to them? Does this mean a woman who is being told her child/friend/family member/etc will be killed if she doesn’t perform a sex act is consenting because she doesn’t say no? Where is the line? Where is the dang black and white line of right and wrong?

It just makes me sick that this attorney is not the only person who thinks and rationalizes this way. So many people want to excuse bad behavior by saying it was the victims fault either by the way they were acting, the way they were dressed or the fact that they were inebriated. We don’t let people get away with killing people because they were driving drunk. Why should we let people get away with raping someone because one party, or both, were drunk? So many reasons are come up with to blame a victim. It doesn’t matter what a girl (or boy) does, if she says no or is coerced or impaired or incapacitated in any way shape or form and a boy commits a sex act on her, that is rape. Plain and simple. If a girl starts having sex and decides to change her mind, THAT IS HER RIGHT! The boy needs to stop right then and there. If a girl is dressed like a slut, that doesn’t give a boy the right to rape her. If a girl is drunk, she girl doesn’t have the capacity to consent to sex and any sex act performed is considered rape.

Now, anyone who knows me knows that I speak out pretty strongly about girls dressing skanky and that I think girls are opening themselves up to being victimized by wearing revealing and ‘barely-there’ clothing. While I think that dressing and acting that way opens a girl up to being a victim and that the chances of a girl being raped are higher when she is wearing clothes that provide ‘easy access’, at no time have I ever believed that a girl dressing like that gives anyone the right to rape her or perform any act on her that she isn’t fully aware of and consenting to.

And, yes, I do believe that girls who are scantily clad give off the impression that they are ‘easy’ and ‘willing’, but at no time have I ever believed that a girl dressed that way and giving off that impression is also giving her consent. Just as boys have the right to choose who their sexual partners are, every girl has that same right. Just because a guy decides a skankily-dressed girl is cheap, easy and available, it doesn’t mean she really is. If she says no, walk away.

The same goes for flirting. Just because a girl flirts and talks dirty and plays the game, it doesn’t mean she wants to follow through. Some girls are just out for the thrill of the chase and that’s all they want. Guys need to understand and accept that. Sure, I think it’s bad business to play that game, but it still doesn’t give any guy the right to rape a girl because she was leading him on. Guys lead girls on all the time and most of the time nobody gets hurt. Why, then, is it an acceptable excuse that a woman was asking for it because she flirted and engaged in some form of dirty conversation? This is not acceptable. If she says no or tells the guy to take a hike, that’s the end of it, game over.

Another item used in blaming a girl is how many sexual partners she’s had or other sexually-related activities she’s engaged in in the past. Why is that even relevant? Why does it matter? If she said no, even after initially saying yes, her decision needs to be respected. It doesn’t matter how many people she’s said yes to in the past. It doesn’t matter if she has previously posted sexual pictures of herself or sent them to other people. It doesn’t matter how many wrong or stupid decisions a girl has made in her life. If she doesn’t explicitly agree to and desire the specific sexual encounter in question, rape has been committed. Rape is rape, regardless of how promiscuous or sexually open the victim is. Everyone has the right to say no and everyone has the right to decide when and where they want to engage in sexual activity.

I could go on and on. So many people try to blame the victim and justify why a guy rapes a girl. When does it end? If a girl says no at any point, any further action by the guy constitutes rape. If the girl is not able to say no or even comprehend what is going on, that constitutes rape. If the guy threatens, abuses or uses any means of coercion, that is rape. It’s that simple. Which is why it’s so hard to understand why rapists get away with what they do sometimes. This girl choosing to get drunk doesn’t mean she is consenting to sex. It’s like saying someone who got in a car and drove down the road in consenting to get hit by a drunk driver or someone who is driving dangerously. It’s not logical and has no grounds of even being decent. Victim-blaming is dirty and underhanded and those who engage in it should be ashamed and disgusted with themselves.