Arguments that the victims of crime might share responsibility with their offenders are common in victimology. Outline and discuss the concepts of victim blaming and victim defending

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

If a victim has taken steps to reduce the risk of victimization, she is considered blameless in the crime. In situations where the crime is a rouse, either for financial gain or to cover up another crime, the ‘victim' would be considered responsible. Victim blaming incorporates those crimes where the victim is seen as being involved with the offender somehow in the commission of the crime. Victimologists describe a three stage through process with victim blaming beginning with the idea that there is something wrong with the victim in terms of their behavior or attitude. Second, these differences are considered the reason for their victimization. Third, victims are assumed to want to avoid future victimization through changing their behavior or attitude. The underlying belief to this thought process is a justification for others in society; a reasoning for why crime would not happen to them. "She was a victim because she acted carelessly. I don't act carelessly; therefore it won't happen to me". The idea of a just world reduces fear of victimization. Victim defending argues those who blame victims are overstating the extent to which victims are generally involved in the crime. In addition, they argue the advice given to reduce victimization is not realistic given the conditions of, for example, inner city neighborhoods where risk may not be avoided. Two arguments tend to go with victim defending. First is the concept of offender blaming where the full responsibility is given to the offender for the crime. The second is system blaming. This concept advocates the institutions in our social system are to blame.