I'm arguing that that's not the case-- it's not usually the one's dressing 'tarty' who get raped. Earlier there was discussion of men and urges and temptation. All I'm arguing is that if the woman says no and makes it clear that she does not want to have sex, she is in no way at fault.
It is not her *fault* however *she* could do *more* to prevent it from happening (only in some circumstances).
So by saying it's "not her *fault*", we can then assume by implication she is NOT to be blamed for it at all. She just could have taken preventative action. I can agree with that (although while I disagree that dressing 'tarty' makes you more likely for rape, I think there are better ways to prevent it).
SupaStarAshI really can't think what to put to this, other than 'maybe' they are part to blame
So from this quote earlier, I can check that 'maybe' off as a 'they are not to blame'.
And there it is. The victim, if she makes her feelings known, cannot be at fault for actions that are ultimately only one person's to decide. She may have been able to decrease her own likelihood of being attacked, but you cannot expect this of people, and hold them accountable. All they are doing by not taking precautions is refusing to allow potential criminals to dictate their decisions.
MagicMan, Women are not to blame, no! However, as I have said, they could help themselves more.
(although while I disagree that dressing 'tarty' makes you more likely for rape, I think there are better ways to prevent it).
I see you've never played a first person shooter then