Is it? I think there are times where I’ve thought “yeah the actual problem here is obvious and well-understood, but let me just remind people of something important/useful”. Reading that comment, I never would have thought, “Oh he’s blaming the victim for granting access to her car”. Could be wrong and maybe I assume too much good will on this platform.
I mean, these EVs introduce a whole new problem of remote access, something new to be careful about… So that’s what I immediately thought of, but ah well.
I think there are times where I’ve thought “yeah the actual problem here is obvious and well-understood, but let me just remind people of something important/useful”.
Doing this in the aftermath of something as horrifying as being stalked and abused for years on end is nothing but victim blaming.
Don’t you think this woman knows now that it was a mistake to trust her boyfriend at the time with that access? Don’t you think she feels deep shame that she missed removing his access to the car, even if she knew how to do that in the first place?
It only works to shame the victim and say “I told you so” after the fact. Especially when the comment is only talking about what the victim should have done to avoid being abused.
You want to know what could have avoided this woman being tormented?
The ex-boyfriend choosing not to access her car and stalk and harass and torture her
Why isn’t the comment “Don’t access your exes shit after you break up no matter how angry you are”?
It only works to shame the victim and say “I told you so” after the fact.
You’d be right if he was talking to the woman, but he’s not. So I don’t see how that makes sense. I guess better framing could have helped, maybe? Or maybe it’s a difference in how different people view social media platforms like Lemmy, just a difference in how comments are interpreted I guess. Text is a terribly limited medium for conversation, after all.
Why isn’t the comment “Don’t access your exes shit after you break up no matter how angry you are”?
Going by numbers, wouldn’t there be more potential victims reading this than abusers? I also don’t think a potential abuser is going to look at that comment and do anything meaningful with it. On the other hand, a potential victim could be more cautious.
You’re missing the point and now I’m thinking you’re doing so on purpose.
The focus should be on getting abusers to stop their actions.
Would you tell a little girl that her dress was too short and that’s why she was raped? Would you advise her to wear pants from now on because a dress makes it too easy for a man to rape her?
Hmmm, you know, I think you’re being way too aggressive and making false equivalences. No one said the abusers shouldn’t be stopped. My point is, no one was advising “her”, but rather just lemmy. I interpreted that original comment as a general warning on a public forum to everyone. Maybe I was being generous with that interpretation, I don’t know. I do still think it would be the wrong place to try and prevent abusers as I explained in the last comment.
Obviously, abusers should be stopped, that’s why there are ongoing legal proceedings for the Tesla case (which is what the article is all about). But you need to calm down and read what I’m saying. I think we’re in agreement on the important bits here anyway. I’m mostly just curious about how we interpreted his comment so differently.
Would you advise her to wear pants from now on because a dress makes it too easy for a man to rape her?
This, for example, is a comparison that would never cross my mind in this instance since, from my perspective, his comment was not a conversation with the victim at all or even meant for them. So it registers in my mind as being completely different from the rape scenario.
I need to calm down? I am calm. I’m being too aggressive? Where? Those accusations are textbook ways for men to shut women up in debates like this. It’s not a good look for you to try to paint me as angry and aggressive when I’m not.
It’s not a false equivalence.
The wrong place to try to prevent abusers, but the perfect place to advise potential victims to change their behavior lest an abuser take advantage? Double standards.
The wrong place to try to prevent abusers, but the perfect place to advise potential victims to change their behavior lest an abuser take advantage? Double standards.
I mean, we could discuss the actual facts around what I’ve already described but I now see you aren’t here for that, my bad.
in debates like this
Never was a debate for me, but sure. I’m starting to see a pattern here. It’s fine, we expected different things from this conversation. You’re trying to “prove” something, and I’m trying to understand something. Anyway, take care
Don’t worry, I was the only victim in this conversation but I guess I do blame myself for trying to talk like a normal human being with you. Damn, look at me, victim blaming already. Btw, maybe consider not assuming malice in every conversation? But hey, I don’t expect that from you at this point. You’re probably going to label me a mysogynist instead lol.
Is it? I think there are times where I’ve thought “yeah the actual problem here is obvious and well-understood, but let me just remind people of something important/useful”. Reading that comment, I never would have thought, “Oh he’s blaming the victim for granting access to her car”. Could be wrong and maybe I assume too much good will on this platform.
I mean, these EVs introduce a whole new problem of remote access, something new to be careful about… So that’s what I immediately thought of, but ah well.
Doing this in the aftermath of something as horrifying as being stalked and abused for years on end is nothing but victim blaming.
Don’t you think this woman knows now that it was a mistake to trust her boyfriend at the time with that access? Don’t you think she feels deep shame that she missed removing his access to the car, even if she knew how to do that in the first place?
It only works to shame the victim and say “I told you so” after the fact. Especially when the comment is only talking about what the victim should have done to avoid being abused.
You want to know what could have avoided this woman being tormented?
The ex-boyfriend choosing not to access her car and stalk and harass and torture her
Why isn’t the comment “Don’t access your exes shit after you break up no matter how angry you are”?
You’d be right if he was talking to the woman, but he’s not. So I don’t see how that makes sense. I guess better framing could have helped, maybe? Or maybe it’s a difference in how different people view social media platforms like Lemmy, just a difference in how comments are interpreted I guess. Text is a terribly limited medium for conversation, after all.
Going by numbers, wouldn’t there be more potential victims reading this than abusers? I also don’t think a potential abuser is going to look at that comment and do anything meaningful with it. On the other hand, a potential victim could be more cautious.
You’re missing the point and now I’m thinking you’re doing so on purpose.
The focus should be on getting abusers to stop their actions.
Would you tell a little girl that her dress was too short and that’s why she was raped? Would you advise her to wear pants from now on because a dress makes it too easy for a man to rape her?
Hmmm, you know, I think you’re being way too aggressive and making false equivalences. No one said the abusers shouldn’t be stopped. My point is, no one was advising “her”, but rather just lemmy. I interpreted that original comment as a general warning on a public forum to everyone. Maybe I was being generous with that interpretation, I don’t know. I do still think it would be the wrong place to try and prevent abusers as I explained in the last comment.
Obviously, abusers should be stopped, that’s why there are ongoing legal proceedings for the Tesla case (which is what the article is all about). But you need to calm down and read what I’m saying. I think we’re in agreement on the important bits here anyway. I’m mostly just curious about how we interpreted his comment so differently.
This, for example, is a comparison that would never cross my mind in this instance since, from my perspective, his comment was not a conversation with the victim at all or even meant for them. So it registers in my mind as being completely different from the rape scenario.
I need to calm down? I am calm. I’m being too aggressive? Where? Those accusations are textbook ways for men to shut women up in debates like this. It’s not a good look for you to try to paint me as angry and aggressive when I’m not.
It’s not a false equivalence.
The wrong place to try to prevent abusers, but the perfect place to advise potential victims to change their behavior lest an abuser take advantage? Double standards.
I mean, we could discuss the actual facts around what I’ve already described but I now see you aren’t here for that, my bad.
Never was a debate for me, but sure. I’m starting to see a pattern here. It’s fine, we expected different things from this conversation. You’re trying to “prove” something, and I’m trying to understand something. Anyway, take care
Careful not to victim blame on your way out.
Don’t worry, I was the only victim in this conversation but I guess I do blame myself for trying to talk like a normal human being with you. Damn, look at me, victim blaming already. Btw, maybe consider not assuming malice in every conversation? But hey, I don’t expect that from you at this point. You’re probably going to label me a mysogynist instead lol.