Whenever a sexual violence occurs, a chilling social phenomenon always comes as scheduled: there are always a large number of voices in the public opinion field, not condemning the perpetrator, but turning to questioning the victim - "Who made her wear exposed?" "Is she still going out so late?" "I deserve it to go to that kind of place."
This argument that attributes sexual violence to victim behavior is like a collective psychological ritual that maintains a distorted social and psychological balance through the stigmatization of victims. Behind this phenomenon of "condemning victims" is a complex psychological defense mechanism, social power structure, cognitive bias and cultural myths, which require us to conduct in-depth psychological analysis and deconstruction.
1. Just the Fallacy of the World: We need to believe that the world is fair
The most core psychological mechanism is the "failure of the fair world" proposed by Melvin Lerner. People have a strong psychological need, believing that the world we live in is fair, just and orderly, and good will be rewarded, and evil will be rewarded.
Psychological Protection Wall: This belief provides us with a sense of security – as long as I act properly (dress conservatively, don’t come back late, don’t drink alcohol), I can avoid similar harm. Attributing the victim to the “misbehavior” is actually building a protective wall psychologically to make yourself believe that “this thing will not happen to me because I am different from her.” Acknowledging that sexual violence can happen randomly to anyone, regardless of their behavior, can bring enormous uncertainty and anxiety, which many people are psychologically unbearable.
Controlling Hallucinations: Condemn the victims to satisfy our desire for a sense of control. If the harm is preventable (by changing clothing, behavior), then the world is predictable and controllable. This hallucination is much more reassuring than admitting that some harm is completely beyond personal control.
2. Cognitive shortcuts and basic attribution errors: simplifying complex reality
The human brain tends to adopt cognitive shortcuts to simplify complex social reality, which leads to systematic bias in our attribution.
Basic Attribution Mistake: We tend to attribute other people’s behavior to their inherent traits (she is exposed in dress → she does not love herself), rather than situational factors (someone chooses to commit rape). This error is particularly evident in cases of sexual violence—we focus on the victim’s behavior rather than the perpetrator’s choice.
Post-Smart Bias: After knowing the result (rape occurred), people tend to think that the result was predictable and inevitable (“I knew something would happen to dress like this”). This illusion of "I already knew it" reinforces the accusation against the victims.
III. Miserable culture and the reproduction of gender power structure
The argument of “exposed clothing leads to rape” is deeply rooted in the control of women’s body and sexuality in patriarchal culture.
Physical discipline and gender socialization: This argument is essentially a means for society to discipline women's bodies. By linking sexual violence to specific behaviors (wear, time, place), society sends a clear message to all women: your bodies are dangerous and need to be strictly controlled; your freedom is limited and requires constant compromise for your own safety.
Sexual objectification and body separation: objectifying the female body into a "temptation" or "the thing that triggers sin" actually denies the right of women as a complete subject. This thinking separates the female body from her personality—the body can be evaluated, blamed, and even seen as “self-inducing” harm, while the will, safety and dignity of the body’s owner are completely ignored.
Moral Double Standards: Society has profound double standards for men and sexual moral standards. Male sexual impulses are seen as natural and difficult to control (“men are wild animals”), so women have the responsibility to manage male desires; while women’s sexuality and body are highly moralized and need to be constantly monitored and restrained.
4. Group psychology and depersonalization: a hotbed of cyber violence
In the online environment, the phenomenon of condemning victims is often particularly intense, which stems from the special dynamics of group psychology.
Depersonalization and spread of responsibility: Internet anonymity leads to depersonalization, and individuals feel that responsibility is spreading and making extreme remarks are more likely to be made. Collective condemnation forms a "cyber mob" effect, and personal judgment is replaced by group emotions.
Moral superiority and self-display: Public condemnation of victims (“I wouldn’t wear this way”) becomes a way of moral self-display, and individuals confirm their own moral superiority by drawing a line with others’ “misbehavior”.
Echo chamber effect: algorithm recommendation and group polarization continuously strengthen similar views, forming a closed information loop, making the argument of "condemning victims" a "consensus" among some groups, further excluding the voices of sympathy for victims.
5. Secondary harm to victims and silence culture
Condemning victims is not only a psychological phenomenon, but also a tangible social consequence.
Secondary trauma: The victim has suffered physical and mental trauma, while public condemnation causes secondary damage, which makes the victim feel ashamed, blamed and self-doubted, seriously hindering psychological recovery.
Culture of Silence: Fear condemnation has led many victims of sexual violence to choose to be silent and dare not report to the case or seek help. According to statistics, most cases of sexual violence have not been reported, and the cultural atmosphere of condemning the victims is one of the main reasons.
Judicial barriers: This social concept often penetrates into the judicial system and affects case handling. The victim needs to constantly defend his character, not the perpetrator is responsible for his actions.
6. Deconstruction Myth: Going towards a truly empathetic and just social response
To break this cycle of condemning victims, multi-level psychological and social work is required.
Education is based on consent concepts: fundamentally transforming sexual culture, from “No means No” to “Only Yes means Yes”. The basis of sexual behavior should be positive, voluntary consent rather than default or silence. Dressing, time, place, etc. have nothing to do with consent.
Clarification of data and facts: Studies have repeatedly shown that the main predictor of sexual violence is the perpetrator's tendency rather than the victim's behavior. Rape occurs in various situations, with the victims having various ages, dress and behavioral manifestations. Emphasizing this helps break the illusion of a “just world”.
Develop empathy: Develop the ability to look at problems from the perspective of victims through narrative, education and media. Empathy is not sympathy, but understanding the experiences and feelings of others, which requires overcoming our natural psychological defense mechanisms.
Media Responsibility and Discourse Reconstruction: The media should avoid unnecessary emphasis on victims’ clothing and behavior, and instead focus on the perpetrator’s responsibilities and systemic factors. Change the way of asking questions - from "Why did she wear that?" to "Why did he choose to rape?"
Support survivors to speak out: Create a safe, supportive environment where survivors can share their experiences without fear of being condemned. These true stories are the most powerful tools to break prejudice and stereotypes.
Conclusion
The question of "who made her wear exposed" is itself a wrong proposition. It mistakenly equates sexual violence with sexual impulses, mistakenly transfers the responsibility for crime from the perpetrator to the victim, mistakenly simplifies complex social problems to personal moral issues.
Every comment that “dresses exposed and causes rape” is an enhancement to the culture of sexual violence, an implicit forgiveness to the perpetrators, and a threat to all potential victims. What really needs to be discussed is never the length of a woman’s skirt, but the violent behavior of men; it is not the norm of women’s behavior, but everyone’s right to physical autonomy and dignity.
Breaking the cycle of condemning victims requires each of us to examine our own inner prejudice and fears, challenge the misogynistic logic embedded in culture, and bravely stand on the side of the victim, and make a clear statement: No matter what she wears, where she goes, how much she drinks, what she says-the only person responsible is the one who chooses to commit the rape.
Only in this way can we move towards a truly safe and just society in which everyone - regardless of gender - enjoys freedom from fear and the basic right to pursue happiness. This is not only a necessary measure to protect potential victims, but also an inevitable path to liberate all of us from the cultural dilemma of gender-based violence.