In comments to my previous post about the universality of victim blaming, Christina B, who’s studied rape in the context of warfare made clear the piece I realize I was missing

I studied (not extensively) the effect of rape on the social fabric and the reason why it is being used as a tool of war in the context of Darfur, which is a shame based culture.

I don´t want to generalize to all ¨shame based cultures¨, but in the context of Darfur it is the responsibility of the woman´s guardian (father, brother or husband) to keep her safe and pure. It is part of his masculinity, his identity as a man. Hence, when a woman is raped or has consentual sexual relations outside of marriage, culturally, her ¨guardian¨ is seen to have failed in his charge of protecting/controlling her. He has failed as a man, which is why it brings shame on the family. This is the basis of rejecting women/girls who have been raped. It isn´t really about ¨blaming¨ the victim. It is about the man´s inability to ¨be a man¨.

Of course, this particular view of masculinity is based in the idea that women are inferior and that men can´t control themselves sexually. However, the specifics are different than in ¨guilt based cultures¨, and I think it is important to keep that in mind.

She said it here.

In some patriarchal cultures (ahem, America would be one of them even though Christina was speaking specifically about Darfur) rape is used not only to injure and humiliate the actual victim but to humiliate and degrade the men who’s identities are tied up in protecting “their” women. In other words in many cases in the eyes of the rapists the intended victims include the real victim’s custodial men.

And in that context (and against our particular core values) killing, assaulting, or shunning the woman is perceived as a way for the male victims to mitigate their humiliation.

But rather than absolving those male “victims,” (who incidentally may indeed feel victimized) their actions double the horror.

1) Because not only are they totally, um, missing the point, they’re acting in a context where it’s still the victim who’s blamed rather than the perpetrator.

2) However culturally determined, murdering, assaulting, shunning the real victim (or, in America, just declaring she must have “asked for it”) in no way changes the universal dynamic that however broadly the culture defines “victim” it’s the victim that’s being held responsible and being blamed. When, instead, responsibility lies with the perpetrator(s)!

Getting that through our collective thick skulls is gonna take some work, and might take different forms in different cultures, but since its a universal fallacy we can legitimately criticize and oppose it no matter how it manifests.

And the reason I keep beating on this is that getting away from the idea that “she was asking for it” or, I guess in some cases that the custodial patriarch or family was asking for it is necessary in order to move towards the general case of setting expectations for men and holding them responsible for our sexual and sex-linked behavior.