Let's deal with this rationally, OK? Put your prejudices to one side for a moment and have a look at this:

Alcohol Consumption By Country

The USA, you'll note, comes number 20 here in the per capita consumption of alcohol.

Luxembourg comes top.

If you have a look now at rape statistics you'll see that Luxembourg doesn't even figure on the list. USA comes 9th here.

Now straight away that's your correlation out of the water. You have no causality here in your hypothesis.

On any given day around 2 billion people will consume alcohol around the world. By your rationale we'd be expecting 2 billion rapes and other violent crimes a day.

Any suggestions as to why that isn't happening?

The problem is not with alcohol. The problem is the attitude that people take into alcohol with them. The problem is the values that some are taught is acceptable. Do you really, honestly and seriously think that all humans are perfect angels incapable of crime or ill behaviour until their first taste of alcohol turns them into raging animals?

If so, can I have a go on those rose tinted glasses after you please? I'd like to have a look at the world from that skewed vantage.

Um, WHAT? When was the last time YOU were gang-raped, your child was murdered, your home invaded? How on earth did you earn the right to be so dismissive?

I was violently and viciously raped 22 years ago and on the advice of several mental health professionals, I still talk about it sometimes. I want people to bear witness to my ordeal because it validates my belief that there are good people who care, good people who are sorry, good people who would have helped me if they could. Good people who need to know that it CAN happen and DOES happen and do not deserve to have it happen to them.

It's really hard to regain your faith in humanity if you never give humanity the opportunity to support you in your time of need, and if you never return the favour. Burying your head in the sand just tells the world that you're a selfish git who has no interest in the rest of us.

My comment was on somebody telling their neice about this story. Not on what you should tell a rape victim.
I know the bad things that can happen in my life, but I refuse to be afraid of them. I believe that by spreading these stories of people you don't even know only increases the fear people already have when they go outside.
I think fear is one of the things holding people back from what they want to do.

But I'm no talking about people who have had bad things happen to them, like you. I can see how you could have taken my comment personally, but it was not directed at people who have been raped.

But keep in mind that one of the reasons nobody helped in this story was probably because they were afraid to get hurt themselves. ecause they hear stories like that on the news everyday.

You don't know that at all.

It's more likely because of the "bystander effect": everyone assumes someone else will do it, so no one does it.

Or because they were complicit.

We don't know.

Keeping bad events away from people does not make them more likely to help in the event of a bad event. That doesn't necessarily mean it should be pointed out, but it definitely doesn't mean sheltering people when they do find out.

Thats why I said "One of the reasons". But I do agree the "bystander effect" plays an important role.

I think the problem is that the way the media is focused it will allways be pointed out. 50 years ago, you might not have even heard about this if you weren't living in the same state or even the same city.

Would you have heard about it if it weren't for plime?

I wouldn't.

So make sure you're lumping plime in with how "the media" is focused. Plime provides an excellent example: People want to read these stories. If no one did, it wouldn't hit the front page. That is not "the media's" fault.

I am including plime. I'm dissapointed this is on the front page.
And It was implied that the media is guided by what people want to see.

It's like looking at a road side accident and becoming a more insecure driver afterwards.
But if my point hasn't come across by now, it probably never will, so I'll shut up now.

So, if you want to get across the road, do you just walk and expect traffic to move for you? If not, that is fear holding you back from what you want to do... and guess what? It's also keeping you alive.

But you would have someone not be aware of the dangers that they face so that fear doesn't hold them back?

By the same token, can you “not believe” that someone would teach their child about the dangers of being run over by a car if they run out onto the road? It’s the same situation, just to a varying degree of danger versus wants/needs. You need to get across the road to say... get groceries, this may result in death by getting hit by a car. You need to drink with friends at a school event because you want to feel like you belong, you may get gang-raped.

It sucks to have to think about it, and living in fear is far from ideal. But I speak for myself at least when I say that I’d rather live in fear than live with the after-effects of being gang-raped.

Ideally, we as a society should address the rape culture that we live in... but sadly the men who are in power are satisfied with maintaining the status quo, and burying their heads in the sand, instead of addressing the real issues.

If want to change it then go ahead, no one is stopping you from posting front page worthy good news.

ahem


be glad that such a horrific event is news-worthy and deserving of discussion.

The day that a gang rape with witnesses who are more concerned with the free show than to save some girl becomes so common that it isn't newsworthy is a day that I pray will never happen.

You are confusing fear with being aware of situational actors and their possible effect on you. Deciding to not cross the road because there are cars isn't a decision motivated by fear but by reason. If I follow your reason, you would say people who are afraid to ge raped will be safer at school parties where rape might occur.

The problem is that fear will not prepare you or help you in any way. It can and sometimes will happen. Simply being afraid of it or hearing bout it won't change anything.
The only way fear will "help" you is when you let your life be ruled by it, by not going to a party. And as I've stated before I will not live that way.

I consider that to be a faulty ad hominem argument. Just because I can't find anything better doesn't mean I'm not credited to an opinion about the news that is already there.

Try visiting Johannesburg, I think you would find it news-worthy for about a week, after which you would become almost immune to the violence and rape.

With all due respect to everyone who suggested the bystander effect, I disagree. While it may have played a part, the fact that some people who came by decided to join in, implies to me that it was a case of conformity, and as I said earlier, that conformity is heavily influenced by our own rape culture.

What I mean is this; the bystander effect implies that the people who saw it thought it was wrong, but thought someone else would do something about it. But in this case, people were bragging about it, joining in, and reminiscing about it afterwards.
That’s not the bystander effect, it’s not diffusion of responsibility, it’s acceptance of the actions, which is far worse.

I hate to be one of those people, but acceptance of rape is higher amongst younger males than it is amongst adults. There are many reasons why this could be, but honestly after talking to some younger boys about their feelings on rape, it feels as tho they really cannot grasp why it is so traumatizing for women. For some of them it hasn't clicked yet, and their parents have yet to teach them otherwise.

Now I am not defending them at all, I am just saying that it is plausible that they may not have thought what they were doing was any worse than beating someone up on the playground (which is common place). They knew they were in the wrong I am sure, but I'm not sure if they fully understood exactly how this would affect the victim in the future.

Exactly, knew it was wrong, as in: knew they could get into trouble for it. Not that they really had any idea of the repercussions, or even necessarily felt that it was actually wrong, just that some would perceive it that way.

Like when they get into a fight at school, if both parties are interested in fighting (and sometimes even if one isn’t), then they don’t think there’s anything wrong with it, but they know that they could still get into trouble for it; I think it’s a similar feeling.