I was quoted in the article “Residents’ safety zone is shattered by attack” (Metro, Nov. 12), concerning the sexual assault that took place on Beacon Hill around 3 a.m. Nov. 10. After my brief conversation with the reporter, the question he’d posed as to what I, as a resident of the area, might do differently after the attack lingered in my head for hours.
The implication of questions such as this is that if the young woman who suffered this gruesome and terrifying invasion had been more aware, hadn’t been out so late, had been more prepared, etc., then this wouldn’t have happened to her. She wasn’t attacked because of her behavior, habits, or state of vigilance or preparedness. She was attacked because a man chose to attack her.
Comments
Excellent point, Julia. It is indeed true and uncomplicated, she was attacked because a man chose to attack her. Thank you.
I ask, as the father of three women, are you saying that women should take no measures, bear no resposibility, for their own well-being and safety?
This comment has been removed.
Using good judgement should always be part of the equation. It's illegal and unethical to rob someone, but I still lock my doors.