xXUnoriginalNameXx's avatar
INCORRECT.

If the victim had an active part in the crime in question, you can in fact put at least part blame on them.

Situation:

Girl starts punching man in face. Maybe she has a reason, maybe not. Man punches back in self defence.

That girl should take 50% of the blame for the incident as she started it. In fact, it doesn't even have to be a girl; in the opposite situation, the girl hitting back should still be held accountable for her actions!

Everyone actively involved in a situation should take part of the blame, not just those society dictates was the perpetrator!
This is the spirit of justice, holding those responsible for a situation accountable for their actions!
Mintaka-TK's avatar
I do agree with you in that case. Victim blaming is wrong if they did nothing wrong, but if they acted in a way that would provoke someone else, then by all means they have to take individual responsibility.
xXUnoriginalNameXx's avatar
The thing is that we've seen none of this in society. None. No investigations into why a man without a criminal record would hit his wife. Nothing.

That is one of many things that is truly wrong with society.
Mintaka-TK's avatar
I agree with that as well - modern society likes to take either the collective punishment route ("I don't care who started it, you're ALL in trouble!") or the route where everyone jumps to one conclusion and that's it. No-one ever decides to investigate a criminal unless what they did was incredibly shocking - say, a serial killer brutally mudering people. Individual punishment is incredibly important, because it teaches the perpetrator what they did wrong, especially if it's a child. Collective punishment and immediate criticism because of what they did does not help, and only builds resentment.