However, it is a good idea, in this particular case, to take Hynde's comments with a pinch of salt, and to consider the mindset that they came from. Hynde's views on rape may well be what she considers to be a logical interpretation of her own experiences, which she has then applied to all similar situations, in order to be able to make sense of them. Clearly she has spent several years blaming herself for what happened to her, and coming to the conclusion that, if the assault was not the fault of the perpetrators, then something about her own actions or conduct must have triggered it: namely, the fact that she had been taking drugs. As a result, she may then have gone on to speculate that other victims of assault had invited these crimes upon themselves by making themselves 'vulnerable' through drinking alcohol, or wearing provocative clothing. After all, if the men who assaulted her were not to blame for their actions, why should it be any different for other attackers? And, so, the views which Hynde expressed in her interview may have become the only possible explanation.
But this, in turn, begs the question: what about the other people who feel this way? People who have never experienced these things, but still firmly believe that victims provoke attack by drinking heavily, wearing revealing clothing, or simply by not actively dissenting (screaming, fighting back, etc.)? In my opinion, this is simply a version of the same thought processes expressed by Hynde; many people refuse to believe that their are people in the world who are evil enough to commit crimes without a true motive. They don't want to know that there are people who will kill others without a thought, kidnap children from under their parents' noses, or rape somebody simply because they can, or because they want to feel as though they have power. Such mindsets are inherently inhuman, such people cannot possibly exist. And so excuses are invented - 'she was so drunk she didn't know what she was doing; she asked for it', 'he chose to go back with them, he must have known what was going to happen', 'they didn't fight back, so they must have wanted it, really'. These excuses make the perpeatrators seem less unfathomable in the eyes of the public: people can accept criminals as long as they are somehow able to justify their behavior - 'he just lost control, he didn't really know what he was doing'. If people can learn to recognise this harmful mindset, incidences of victim blaming can be dramatically reduced, giving victims more confidence to seek justice against their attackers, and resulting in more successful prosections of perpetrators.
Rape and sexual assault are never the fault of the victim. UK legislation clearly defines these offences as one person engaging in sexual activity with another, without the other person's consent. There is no mention of any exception based on what the victim was wearing, or how they were behaving at the time of the attack. In fact, there are no exceptions at all. They are simply crimes, and they are crimes for which the perpetrators must be punished.
P.S. All this being said, I don't advocate heavy drinking, or taking recreational drugs. Abuse of these substances has been shown to cause a number of deaths due to slips, falls, drowning and road traffic accidents, and a large percentage of sexual assaults take place when the perpetrators themselves have been drinking. Plus, I'm a musician, and I hate to think of the damage that stuff could do to my vocal cords!
Also, I still like The Pretenders' music, even though I don't agree with Chrissie Hynde's comments.
