Hacker News Reader

Comment by king_jester | Hacker News Reader

For those advocating arms (pepper spray, taser, gun, etc.) as a solution, please get some basic facts straight.

* Most people who are sexually assaulted know their attacker and are not attacked randomly on the street. This makes self defense scenarios unrealistic, as there is already some level of trust between an attacker and the survivor

* Most sexual assaults will go without arrests and prosecution. There have already been cases where women have been arrested and sent to jail for self defense (CeCe Mcdonald's case comes to mind), including the Marissa Alexander case where someone fired a warning shot at their abuser and was sent to jail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angela_Corey#Marissa_Alexander_...

* Sexual assault and rape aren't just about incidents, it is about a culture that supports rapists and demonizes survivors and dismantling that culture is the best way to defeat sexual assault

View on HN

Statistics don't comfort the victims that could have done something but were restricted from doing so, usually by people who already live safe lives and want them to be safer.

And your second example basically says 'we will prevent you from defending yourself, so just take it and hope the system saves you'.

And if you think this culture 'supports rapists and demonizes survivors', you are in need of getting your facts straight.

EDIT:

I'm beginning to take this whole thing a bit personal. I learned a long time ago to call it quits when that starts to happen on the internet, so I'm out.

My main point is that most people won't have a chance to protect themselves, although I do agree 100% people have a right to protect themselves. It's important to note that self defense isn't a solution to the overall problem and leave those in circumstances where its difficult to defend themselves without options (e.g. someone with a disability).

My second example was to highlight that people defending themselves faces more prosecution than those actually committing assaults. The system will not help you, generally speaking, if you are a survivor of sexual assault and you are likely to be prosecuted for defending yourself. That is a part of rape culture, btw, the legal indifference towards rapists.

For an overview of rape culture, which is a real thing, see: http://www.shakesville.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html

I re-read all of the comments on here and didn't feel like ANYONE said anything about victims being 'restricted' from defending themselves.

People on here were stating that the woman should get a gun, or get pepper spray, or get a taser. Telling women they need to defend themselves in a certain way and it's on them to get a gun and shoot an attacker is what I and a few others were upset about.

Would you rather tell women they are helpless and that there is nothing they can do but submit to the mercy of men?

You're misrepresenting the Marissa Alexander case. Alexander left the scene of the incident, retrieved a gun, returned to the scene, and shot in the general direction of her estranged husband.

Most US states frown heavily upon indiscriminate gunfire as a communication tool, even in cases entirely unlike that one where the shooter is in danger.

Whose culture "supports rapists"? Speak for yourself.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com