Epic WTF

Same with short skirts, eh...

No, unless short skirts messes with your judgement the same way alcohol does

But it makes you look like the sort of girl that would be up for a bit, you know.

As privatepatterson writes, "these are qualities that an attacker would seek out in a potential victim right?".

But not saying "no" means saying "yes", of course.

just ham fisted advice on crime prevention

No, it's the NHS, they don't do crime prevention. The objective would have been to get people to drink less, and this was what they thought up to scare people with.

Good point. So if this was a police campaign would it be seen differently?

^ I was just trying to write something like that.

I don't really see the poster as victim blaming, just ham fisted advice on crime prevention. At worst I would say it is the type of campaign that could be used to (wrongly) justify victim blaming by the type of people who blame victims.

EDIT; maybe it is ambiguous enough to be seen as victim blaming.

Without resorting to being a dick, can someone talk me through the line that exists between victim blaming and crime prevention advice.

Same with helmets. Your fault if a drivers squashes you helmetless

Same with helmets. Your fault if a drivers squashes you helmetless

To be fair I suspect on many occasions rape occurs when both the victim and the attacker have been drinking. Exactly how you're meant to untangle the whole web of consent, competence and responsibility is just a fucking nightmare.

Not wearing a helmet on the other hand does not imply anything about your competence.

I have had people insist I must be a dangerous cyclist because I don't wear a helmet, some people assume that what you wear is an indication of competence. This is why some drivers will come closer to people wearing hi viz and helmets, despite the fact they afford fuck all protection.

Without resorting to being a dick, can someone talk me through the line that exists between victim blaming and crime prevention advice.

I suspect that entire books have been written on the subject. With any other crime it doesn't seem to get the same grief, despite the fact that it seems much more clear cut. "Lock your doors" is not seen as victim blaming, despite the fact that nobody, anywhere has ever consented to having their house broken into and their stuff taken. "Don't get pissed because it may well impair your ability to communicate clearly and you'll also probably be around other pissed people whose judgement will be impaired" is unforgivable victim blaming, despite the fact that there's the added complication that sex is something that people do consensually (unlike being burgled). Essentially (as above) it's a fucking nightmare.

It's a nightmare when you're being fucked against your will, for sure.

Probably shouldn't have had that last glass of Pinot Grigiot, I guess.

If I were to go out and have a gin and tonic, and somebody decided to rape me later that night, I'd fit that one-in-three statistic, regardless of whether I was drunk or had lowered inhibitions or was completely paralytic and unable to say no or not.

The implicit suggestion is that it's too dangerous for women to go out and have a few drinks. That's why it's victim blaming.

Why you're leaving the house unaccompanied, I don't know.

Your head is covered at least, I hope?

My head is always covered but now that you mention it I might have accidentally flashed a bit of ankle, fuck. My claim will never stand up in court now.

Should have been wearing chastity pants.

Should have been wearing chastity pants.

Do cycling shorts count?

How many of those rapists were also drunk. Perhaps "1 in 3 rapists had alcohol in their system at the time - don't drink or you may be one yourself" can be the next campaign.

that campaign is from 2006. it's awful, but it's long since been debated and presumably been pulled as a result.

http://stevehynd.com/2014/07/29/the-nhs-and-the-blaming-of-rape-victims/

Just to be clear.

The fact that a large portion of rapists will themselves probably had a couple too many drinks, is fine. Right?

I see the counter point. But to me this is a horrible ad.

Too slow.

Great minds, etc..

If I were to go out and have a gin and tonic, and somebody decided to rape me later that night, I'd fit that one-in-three statistic, regardless of whether I was drunk or had lowered inhibitions or was completely paralytic and unable to say no or not.

The implicit suggestion is that it's too dangerous for women to go out and have a few drinks. That's why it's victim blaming.

Thank you, that makes sense.

Thank you, that makes sense.

Same.

How many of those rapists were also drunk. Perhaps "1 in 3 rapists had alcohol in their system at the time - don't drink or you may be one yourself" can be the next campaign.

There are better ads that have been around for a short while, like this;

My head is always covered but now that you mention it I might have accidentally flashed a bit of ankle, fuck. My claim will never stand up in court now.

I may have misread this. And pueriloled a little.

I haven't actually seen any images of this poster up or indeed any that look like physical copies rather than digital files. It doesn't exclude the content which was probably honestly meant as a warning but given the wider context is unacceptable - but was this just one small group/location's poor attempt at public education? it doesn't seem like it got much actual use otherwise people would show it in situ...

^ yer - greenhell's posted that it's actually an old campaign, and it's just resurfaced again thanks to viral meejah and that.