This is a topic that I'll discuss quite a bit more, expand upon and even make revisions upon as I explore my perceptions, the evidence for this ideology, its prevalence in the courts and its political manifestations.
This is a subject that is commonly discussed but rarely ever pinned down. It's a topic that rarely even gets a second thought throughout society for its easily accepted points and politically correct thinking.
I am talking about Victims. "Victim" represents a wide-swept group of people who are perceived victims and soon-to-be victims of society at large, be it through assumed perceived societal views such as “rape culture” or even the blown out of proportion views of domestic violence.
Rape culture (in my personal opinion) is an idea that is used by the media and midsandrists to create hysteria and divide society as a whole into two ideological groups: rape victims and their supporters and then rape supporters and the perpetrators of said crime.
Domestic violence is a crime that is, in its own way, quite prevalent in society but is only exposed as a one-sided crime: Males victimizing female demographics. I'm not saying that domestic violence does not occur with that paradigm, but most feminist media portrays only a fraction of the story in regards to family and personal violence within the home. But those are topics for another day.
Instead, I'll turn to the topic at hand which is Perceived Victimhood.
Within this ideology I've identified two major demographics and their positions within it:
- Victims and soon-to-be victims.
- Perpetrators and soon-to-be perpetrators.
Those two major demographics can then be split into four, but I'm not going to do that at this moment.
Victims and soon-to-be victims are a demographic that is given special rights in modern society that allows them to get away with various, abhorrent crimes and justify them by using whatever perceived crime (or potential future crime) against them as a reason.
Recent cases of this occurring are not hard to find and include Catherine Kieu cutting her husband's penis off and, despite the motives, this was celebrated in various forms of media, not limited to television such as The Talk. Now, in that case specifically, there is no question that the crime occurred. Instead, the law is being skewed as a political arena to lessen the severity of the crime by essentially saying, “He deserved it.”
Perpetrators and soon-to-be perpetrators are a demographic that stand as a justification and reason for violent crime committed by the victim demographic, regardless of whether or not the perceived crime had occurred and been dealt with in an appropriate manner in a court of law. The most common crimes the perpetrator is said to have committed is rape (and its various manifestations) and domestic violence of some sort.
It is not hard to find where individuals find justification, especially with the popularity and prevalence of vigilante justice films where rape and abuse victims find justice-- not through the law, mind you-- through calculated murder, torture and even counter-rape with an “eye for an eye” perspective.
Movies such as Hard Candy portray a young girl who systematically tortures and then kills a man because (spoiler) he and another fellow raped and killed a young girl. She justifies being a vigilante by a perceived “soon-to-be victim” or victim by proxy by even orchestrating a meeting with the man. Rather than have the crime reported and dealt with in an appropriate manner, she goes out of her way to “deal with it” herself, seeing the law as either not effective or inappropriate.
Let's say that the events that unfold in this movie were reenacted and committed today. It would not be hard for her to get away with the crime or at least have the sentence reduced with our current justice system for a number of reasons.
She could argue that he attempted to assault her.
She is underage and thus not responsible for her actions.
Temporary insanity in response to the encounter.
He was guilty of the crime anyway. (All the evidence was in his house.)
Another demographic-- which is technically not part of this ideology, but nonetheless an active part-- is the White Knight: individuals (usually male) who fight on the behalf of Victims to save them and obtain justice on their behalf without the court of law, or publicly defend their actions against a percieved perpetrator.
White Knights often jump to the defense of Victims on the Victim's word, assuming it to be gold and the hard truth. They usually believe that a woman would never lie about rape or violence committed against her, or that the Victim demographic can do no wrong. The White Knights will then use that word or accusation to incite violence or revenge through proxy on the Victim's behalf.
I've personally witnessed all of these demographics and interactions and have even feared for my own life on the word of a perceived victim.
This is an ideology that seems to exist as an arm of misandrism in that it believes the emotion or justification behind a crime should either make the victim not responsible at all or reduce responsibility of the crime.
Until our justice system suffers a major overhaul where a crime receives fair sentencing for the crime committed rather than the justification for it, we'll continue to see personal vigilantism, crimes of passion and retribution occurring at increasing rates.
Should women complain about not being paid as much as their male counterparts when there are no complaints about not getting the same sentencing? Why are crimes being measured because of the reasons or justifications behind them? Shouldn't the crime speak for itself and be measured on that account alone?
Another note in temporary closing of this subject is personal accountability (which I will also talk about at a later date). We are all responsible for our actions.