During my forays into the online world, I often come across fundamentalist sites. I have mentioned here previously the Botkins sisters from Visionary Daughters, but I do also read others that I do not wish promote on my site, for varying reasons.
Like all things, fundamentalism has many different shades, and this is evident in the wide variety of blogs that I have come across. However, in the number of years since I was firstly, a fundamentalist, and secondly, since I began reading fundamentalist blogs, I have noticed a slow, but steady slide, to a more more conservative, restricted type of living. To be frank, I find this trend concerning - particularly for the women and children that find themselves trapped in abusive situations thanks to these restrictions, and what ultimately boils down to peer pressure and and far too high expectations.
Tonight, I came across a blog, which I found particularly triggering. By His Grace and For His Glory is written by 17 year stay-at-home daughter, who is definitely on the more extreme end of conservatism.
One of her entries is of particular interest to me, in that it is highly judgemental/critical of sexual abuse victims, and completely ignores the facts of abuse: including that most abuse happens at home by people that are known to the victim. She neglects to mention the incidents of abuse within the home, portraying that all abuse happens outside the home at school or work.
NOT ONCE does she ever consider the possibility that the father/husband is the person carrying out the abuse.
NOT ONCE does she offer an alternative for the girls that are abused at home.
NOT ONCE does she consider the fact that, at times, your safest option is to leave and cut off all contact.
She writes in the comments of the same article:
For example, a woman wears terribly provocative clothing and a man thinks that due to her attire, she would be willing to begin a sexual relationship with him (this is what that sort of attire is saying about the wearer thereof, whether she intends that or not). He therefore pursues such a relationship, but she fights back while he does so-thus, a terrible rape occurs. This kind of situation can-and most certainly does-occur. This rape occured-in part-because of the woman's attire. I am not placing all blame on her! She didn't force him to rape her. But, the rape perhaps may not have occured were it not for her attire. Do you understand what I'm trying to say? Perhaps another example or two would better illustrate my position.
It's like when a young woman dresses immodestly and when young men stare at her body, she gets mad. Obviously, the young man shouldn't be lusting after her and should definitely instead look away. However, the girl wouldn't receive this sort of attention if she were dressing modestly rather than putting a stumbling block in front of the young man.
Let's consider a hypothetical situation. Let's say a woman knew that a man guilty of rape lived in a certain house in her neighborhood, and each time he was in his front yard to mow his grass, she would walk by in immodest attire and wink at him. One day he rapes her. Is he to blame for this abhorrent act? Of course he is! But is she not partly to blame for enticing him and tempting him, rather than staying far away from him and leaving him alone? I believe she is, to a degree.
If I had said all victims were to blame, yes, that would be horrifying. But I simply said that *some* were *partially* to blame. That is sad, yes, but factual nonetheless, I believe. Part of the problem here is that we live in a savagely feministic society which hates men and tries to blame them for anything and everything. I'm not saying you do this, I'm simply saying that this is the condition of our culture and a pervading stance therein. Therefore, when one says that yes, men should stop lusting, but women should stop dressing immodestly and thereby encouraging them to lust, people get angry. They want all the blame to be on the men. While some blame should be put there-they are responsible for their own actions, after all-not all belongs to the man.
NO victim is to blame for their rape or abuse. Even if the victim was naked, there is NEVER an excuse for rape. EVER. The blame is solely on the rapist: NO means NO.
I didn't get molested when I was dressing immodestly (ie, as I dress now). I got molested when I was dressing modestly. It isn't ever about the clothes, it is about the control.