Victim-Blaming in Sexual Assault

By Maeve O’Keeffe This article contains topics of sexual harassment, sexual violence and assault. Please skip this article if you feel you may be triggered. We have listed supports at the end of this article. Durham University in England has recently faced backlash after a social media campaign  warning students that “Drink Spiking is dangerous and something that you can prevent from  happening to you and your friends.” The tweet, which has since been deleted, ran with an image  with the bold headline of “Don’t get spiked.” Although now deleted, the tweet serves as evidence of the major culture of victim blaming that still permeates narratives around sexual violence. By promoting the phrase “Don’t get spiked,” as opposed to “Don’t spike,” Durham  University perpetuates the problematic notion that on some level, the victim of sexual assault,  violence, or harassment is at fault. It places the victim of spiking as the active agent in the narrative as if we are all not already trying to avoid sexual assault, every day of our lives.  Examples of victim blaming like this appear every so often in the media, as an ugly reminder of the prevalence of rape myths in our society. In 2018, a rape trial in here in Cork saw the defence barrister reference the type of underwear the complainant had been wearing at the time  of the alleged assault, implying that “a thong with a lace front” was somehow indicative of  consent. More recently in the UK, police commissioner Philip Allott resigned after criticism  surrounding comments he made in relation to the kidnapping, rape, and murder of Sarah  Everard by Metropolitan police officer Wayne Couzens. Allott remarked that women “needed  to be streetwise,” about police officers’ powers of arrest, after Everard’s killer was sentenced  to a life sentence. Though it could be noted that Allott’s comments were intended to with the  safety of women in mind, the crucial issue is the implication that, for an innocent victim like  Everard, not fighting Couzen’s false arrest, or being sufficiently “streetwise” to keep him at  bay rendered her in some way responsible for his actions. This is simply not the case. The  victim is never at fault. Full and total responsibility lies solely with the offender.  Although comments like “Drink spiking is dangerous and something that you can prevent from  happening to you and your friends,” are clearly intended with the best interests of the safety of  potential victims in mind, the direction of the campaigning is entirely misguided. Mitigating  the intention of these comments does not excuse that fact that they give credence to the  incorrect idea that victims can be held accountable for their assault. Nobody is actively hoping  to be spiked, sexually assaulted, or raped. Young women in particular are only too aware of  the dangers of letting their guard down with regards personal safety. From adolescence, when  the first flavours of going out should taste of nothing but freedom and fun with friends, we are told to watch each other’s drinks, to walk each other home, travel in packs, not to get too drunk,  not to wear revealing clothes. We have been conditioned to monitor our behaviour to minimise  the risks of simply going about our daily lives. If we are already doing everything in our power to protect ourselves, then why is it that sexual  assault occurs? Has it not occurred to anybody placing agency on people “not to get spiked,” that maybe, just maybe, it’s less to do with the educating potential victims on avoiding getting  spiked, and more to do with the education and punishment of the predators who are really  responsible? It seems so obvious that the victim should not be blamed for their assault, so why is it that victim-blaming statements are still brandished in discussions of sexual violence? Psychologists  believe that it is to do with the “just world hypothesis.” This refers to the way that we all like  to believe that the world is a just place, where good things happen to good people and only bad  people suffer. It is a natural way to make sense of the world to believe that we deserve what  happens to us. The idea that someone good and innocent, just like us, could suffer the trauma  of a sexual assault threatens this way of viewing the world. We try to rationalise it, by  pinpointing some blame on the victim, so that we do not have to confront the reality that  something bad could just as easily happen to us. Blaming victims helps people assure  themselves that the same thing wouldn’t happen to them, that they would take the precautions  and preventative measures to avoid the assault. Understandably, we hate to think about the idea  that we are just as vulnerable as victims like Sarah Everard.  While some cases garner significant media attention, or online backlash, it’s also important to  note how much victim-blaming slips into our everyday conversations. Each time a remark is  made about how drunk the victim was, or how they were perceived to be flirtatious, or dressed  in a certain way, we undermine the testimonies of the people who have suffered greatly at the  hands of another. Victims of sexual assault are re-victimised by the narratives exonerating the  offender and pinning some degree of blame on the victim. This re-victimisation stems from the  prevalence of rape myths that posit victims as at fault in their assault, or that imply that the  victim is lying about the assault, either for attention or because they are misremembering the  incident, and are unreliable. It can be as subtle as asking how much a victim had to drink, or  alluding to the victim’s relationship to the perpetrator, for example saying things like, “I  thought she liked him, they looked very cosy, they’ve gotten together before.” These rape myths, which excuse, minimalize, or justify sexual aggression, serve only to silence the victims of sexual assault.  A Hidden Marks survey conducted by the National Union of Students in the UK found that  50% of students who had been seriously sexually assaulted did not report their assault due to  shame or embarrassment. Following a traumatic assault, the idea of being exposed to disbelief,  character dissection, and sympathy towards the perpetrator can make many victims reluctant  to disclose their assault to the authorities. Given the re-traumatisation and mental health  difficulties that can accompany having to recount memories of a traumatic incident, it is  understandable that many victims choose not to report their assault. Even if the perpetrator is  found guilty in the eyes of the law, the victim risks further distress from subtle insinuations  that their behaviour invited attack, or that their account of events is simply unbelievable. This  makes it so important that we challenge rape myths and victim-blaming when we encounter  them.  One of the most infamous cases of victim-blaming in recent years was the trial and coverage  of the case of Brock Turner, who sexually assaulted an unconscious Chanel Miller behind a  dumpster in Stanford University in 2015. During the trial, Miller was exposed to what she described as an assault of questions, dissecting all facets of her life and behaviour on the night of the assault, from what she was drinking, to what she had eaten that day, and what she was wearing. Turner’s defence hinged upon the rape myth that because Turner was blacked out because of alcohol, that her testimony could not be relied upon, even though there were two witnesses to the assault; two Swedish students who managed to perform a citizen’s arrest on Turner. As Miller subsequently pointed out in an interview, “Rape is not a punishment for  getting drunk.” Miller suffered not only the trauma of the assault and the way it was handled by the authorities but also the trauma of her experiences being treated as unreliable in the courtroom. The double standards showcased during Turner’s trial for rape were astonishing. Miller’s alcohol consumption was cited time and time again as a reason to discredit her account and character. Meanwhile, Turner’s character was spoken about in reverential terms, as the “happy-go-lucky” friend and a shining star of the swimming team. Kate Manne draws upon this case  as an example of the phenomenon of “himpathy” in her compelling feminist books “Down  Girl: The Logic of Misogyny” and “Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women.” According to Manne, ‘himpathy’ is the inappropriate sympathy to male perpetrators at the expense of their victims. Think of how the reputational damage suffered by individuals accused of rape is  brought up during media reports of rape trials, or how inappropriate behaviour from male  friends is dismissed because he’s a “good guy really.” Why is it that when a girl is sexually  assaulted while drunk, she is blamed for the assault; “What did she have to drink? What did  she expect?” while when a man commits sexual assault while drunk, his drunkenness is used  to excuse his harmful behaviour; “He was drunk, he didn’t know what he was doing, he’s not  normally like that.” We are told that rape accusations ruin lives, as though rape does not also ruin lives. Carelessness, drunkenness, intoxication, clothing choices, attractiveness; none of these things justify rape or sexual assault. We need to let go of the narrative that the choices women make render them responsible for the reprehensible actions of sexual offenders. The brutal reality is that until potential perpetrators are challenged for their behaviour, it does not matter how vigilant women are concerning their safety.  I would argue that the idea that women are somehow responsible for assault by wearing  “provocative” clothing or underwear, or going out and getting drunk does a disservice to the majority of men, too. Rape and sexual assault do not occur instantaneously when a man encounters a drunk woman in a short dress. Most men can control themselves and can be relied upon to treat others with the respect and dignity they deserve. Rape and sexual assault occur when predators decide to exploit the perceived vulnerability in innocent victims. Once again, I  reiterate, the only person to blame for sexual assault is the perpetrator.  We need to redirect the focus of campaigns surrounding women’s safety. The issue is not that women aren’t streetwise enough, or that women are not trying hard enough not to get spiked on nights out. The issue is with the type of person who spikes drinks or kidnaps women walking home. This reframing of how sexual assault is perceived is urgently needed to support victims and call out the actual problem. Becoming aware of the subtle ways in which victims are held accountable for their assaults is important so that these misguided perspectives can be challenged. Combatting rape myths will facilitate the healing and justice processes for victims of assault, by letting them know that they will not be judged or viewed as even partly responsible. The Bystander Intervention programme in UCC highlights the problematic nature of victim-blaming and combats the rape-myths that still sadly exist in our society. You can sign up today to complete the Bystander Intervention module on Canvas. If you have been affected by any of the topics mentioned in this article, here are some of the  services available locally to support you: Visit your local Sexual Assault Treatment Unit, with details available on the HSE website. UCC Student Counselling - counselling@ucc.ie Rape Crisis Network – 24-hour helpline number is 1800778888 Sexual Violence Centre Cork - the freephone number is 1800 496 496 for those calling from  the Cork area, but the centre can also be contacted by texting 087 1533 393 or emailing  info@sexualviolence.ie