On Angels and Victim Blaming in Palmerston North

I am sick and tired of victim blaming. I am sick and tired of seeing directives for women on how to "keep safe". I am sick and tired of seeing resources put into "keeping women safe" while the equivalent amount of energy is not directed towards educating their would-be attackers on not attacking.

Earlier this week I was dismayed to see my own town was jumping on the bandwagon when I read the headline "City angel' to keep eye on women".  It caught my attention because it sounded a bit creepy.  Women need to have an eye kept on them? (I guess we do if you subscribe to the patriarchal notion that we probably shouldn't be out and about by ourselves anyway because we will probably use our evil forces to tempt men to attack us. But I digress.)

The article states that "Young women out on the town in Palmerston North now have their very own "angel" to look out for them....in the hope of reducing harm and victimisation of young women as a result of excess alcohol consumption."  

NO!  Stop right there.

Victimisation is NEVER the RESULT of excess alcohol consumption!  The only reason a young woman is victimised is because SOMEONE ELSE assaulted/raped her. End of story.

Being generous, I tried to interpret the initial sentence as meaning that the 'Angel' would help protect the women from other people (presumably men) who had consumed too much alcohol. But no, it wasn't anything to do with the men - the 'Angel' "would work with young women in particular to make them aware of the harm intoxication can bring, as well as how to stay safe in the city."

I absolutely agree that alcohol can cause harm to oneself. Heck, I have been there. But we need to be clear that alcohol never ever ever causes a woman to be victimised.

The council is putting money into making women change their behaviour, but ignoring the fact that the problem is actually the rapists. In doing this they are putting the blame squarely on the females.  Furthermore, the big issue with this sort of "crime prevention" is that any behaviour change of potential victims simply displaces the crime. As a friend of mine commented, this approach simply says "Don't get drunk girls, stay sober and make sure another girl is victimised instead."

I am just so weary of the same-old same-old "watch out women you need to be more careful" line, when our leaders could equally be saying to men:  "Hey, the vast majority of rapists are men - are you sure you are safe enough for us to let you out on the streets?".

I think the concept is excellent - someone helping out young people in town. Someone educating young people on the harm alcohol does.  But to gender it, to solely focus on females, doesn't solve the bigger problem.  The problem is that we have a rape culture that enables men to justify their actions and leaves women scared to walk through the Square at night. The follow-on effect this has is that victims are made to feel they didn't do enough to stop their attacker and the attackers can lean on our rape culture and point out all the things his victim did "wrong".

(To learn more about rape culture I highly recommend you visit this site)

I would feel far more at ease with this initiative if the same amount of energy was given to having consent conversations and education with the males in town.  If this is happening already and I am unaware of it, then FABULOUS and I will eat my words and issue a hearty apology (whilst also pointing out that that story obviously wasn't worth newspaper headlines).

Come on Palmerston North City Council, where is the money and resources for consent education for males out on the town?  Why must it start with changing the women?  Why is it always about us, and our behaviour?

---