Introduction
Victimology is the scientific study of victims of crime, including their characteristics and behaviors. It is a relatively new field that emerged in the mid-20th century as a response to the growing victimization of individuals and groups. It aims to understand why some people are more likely to be victimized than others, and to develop ways to prevent victimization and help victims cope with the aftermath of crime. Victimology can be viewed as both victim blaming and non-victim blaming. On the one hand, victimologists analyze the characteristics of victims that increase victimization chance (Lumsden & Morgan, 2017). On the other hand, victimologists analyze societal factors that contribute to victimization, which is not victim blaming.
Position
Victimologists seek to understand the victim’s experience and the impact of victimization on the victim’s life. There are several reasons why victims should not be blamed for their victimization. For one, victims are often not able to control the situation or protect themselves from harm. Furthermore, victimization is often the result of larger social factors beyond the individual’s control, such as inequality or discrimination (DeLoveh & Cattaneo, 2017). For instance, people who have a lower social status or who have fewer social connections are more likely to be victimized than those with a higher social class (DeLoveh & Cattaneo, 2017). Finally, blaming victims can discourage them from seeking help or justice, and coming forward as witnesses or victims in future cases.
Furthermore, victimologists believe that understanding victimization can help develop better policies and programs to prevent victimization and support the offended. For example, Lumsden & Morgan (2017) study how a casualty of sexual assault can be re-traumatized by the criminal justice system and have worked to develop policies to protect victims’ rights and prevent further harm. Therefore, the field of victimology is set to support the affected, and not blame them for the evils done against them.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
There are many strengths to believing that victimology is not victim blaming. One strength is that it allows victims to feel empowered and in control of their own lives. Another is that it helps to break the cycle of victimization by giving victims the tools to understand and cope with their experiences (DeLoveh & Cattaneo, 2017). Additionally, this view builds a sense of solidarity and support among victims, as well as fosters a greater sense of empathy and understanding from those who have not experienced victimization. Finally, this belief enables people concerned with law, justice, and order to see beyond individual cases to the wider patterns of victimization (Bilali & Vollhardt, 2019). There is potential to create real social change by challenging the institutional and societal structures that perpetuate victim blaming through this viewpoint.
Weaknesses
One weakness of supporting the notion that victimization is not victim blaming is that it can be used to justify the crime. For example, offenders may utilize this idea to commit unfit acts, which can increase the rates of offenses in society (Griffin et al., 2021). Moreover, many criminals can go unpunished when the justice system sees the fault in the victim, which promotes more grievances (Lumsden & Morgan, 2017). Additionally, this belief can lead to a lack of understanding of victimization and its causes making it difficult to prevent or address the issue.
Moreover, this belief can lead to a lack of support for victims, and they may not report any form of crime done against them. Additionally, this perspective can lead to a feeling of powerlessness, as individuals may believe that they cannot do anything to change their situation (Lumsden & Morgan, 2017). Finally, victimology can be used to justify discrimination and violence against certain groups of people, as it can be used to paint them as responsible for their victimization.
Arguments and Support
Victimology is Victim Blaming
Some people argue that the victim must have done something to deserve the attack, or that they could have prevented it if they had only been more careful. For instance, a victim of sexual assault may be blamed if they were wearing revealing clothing or if they had been drinking. Reich et al., (2022) suggest that sexual assault is often seen as a crime of passion or opportunity, rather than a premeditated act. This perspective leads people to believe that the victim must have done something to invite the attack when in reality, no one ever deserves to be sexually assaulted.
The probability of occurrence of crime is high where heavy alcohol intake is involved. A study by Romero-Sánchez e al. (2018) found that victim blame was more common when the victim had been drinking alcohol. This may be because people tend to view alcohol as a ‘social lubricant’ that can lead to risky behavior. There have been many cases of rape and physical abuse blamed on drunk victims, while the offender claims they prompted it (Griffin et al., 2021). However, it is important to note that no matter what the victim was doing or how they were behaving, the attack was still not their fault.
Victimology is not Victim Blaming
Some risky behaviors and environments expose a person to greater possibilities of crime. For instance, exposing dress codes for women coupled with heavy drinking has been associated with higher chances of rape. However, there is no justification for an offender who commits the crime, despite the actions of the victim. Victimology has been critical in bringing attention to the needs of victims and in advocating for victim rights. A victim-centered approach recognizes that victims are not responsible for their victimization and that they need and deserve support (Bilali & Vollhardt, 2019). This includes identifying characters and surroundings that attract crime and helping people to avoid such without enforcing condemnation on them.
LGBT service members are more likely to be victims of violence than their heterosexual counterparts, and this is especially true for transgender individuals. The perpetrator hypothesis posits that victimization involving LGBT service members is not due to their sexual orientation or gender identity, but rather to the fact that they are often targets of hate crimes or other forms of violence (Castro & Goldbach, 2018). This theory is based on the idea that the perpetrators are the ones who are responsible for the victimization, not the victims.
Recommendations
Despite the belief that offenders should be blamed for crimes, some recommendations can ensure that there are fewer risks to people. For instance, it is important to educate people about how to protect themselves from becoming victims of crime. This can include teaching people about what to do if they are attacked, how to report suspicious activity, and how to be aware of their surroundings (Bilali & Vollhardt, 2019). People should also practice safe drinking habits, avoid provoking people who could potentially harm them, and ensure to be inappropriate moral behaviors.
Moreover, parents should be role models to their children, and help them understand the dangers of substance abuse and conflict resolution to lower or prevent cases of childhood and teenage physical or sexual abuse that have been linked to a lack of proper understanding of such matters. Besides, Schools should provide a quality education that helps children develop a strong sense of self-worth and respect for others. The community should work together to identify and solve problems that can lead to crime by supporting and participating in programs that aim to prevent crime. It is essential to note that criminals are not born, but rather they are made (Reich et al., 2021). Many factors can contribute to someone becoming a criminal, but it is ultimately up to the individual to choose whether or not to commit a crime.
Conclusion
To conclude, many factors contribute to victimology and victim blaming. Some of these include individual, relational, community, and societal factors. Additionally, there are many different types of victimization, which can make it difficult to identify and address the issue. However, it is important to remember that victimization is not the victim’s fault and that victims should not be blamed for the crimes committed against them. Furthermore, it is important to remember that victims are not to blame for the crimes committed against them. Victimization can have a lasting impact on the victim, and it is important to provide support and resources to help them heal.
References
Bilali, R., & Vollhardt, J. R. (2019). Victim and perpetrator groups’ divergent perspectives on collective violence: Implications for intergroup relations. Political Psychology, 40(S1), 75–108. Web.
Castro, C. A., & Goldbach, J. (2018). The perpetrator hypothesis: Victimization involving LGBT service members. Military and Veteran Mental Health, 145–156. Web.
DeLoveh, H. L., & Cattaneo, L. B. (2017). Deciding where to turn: A qualitative investigation of college students’ help-seeking decisions after sexual assault. American Journal of Community Psychology, 59(1-2), 65–79. Web.
Griffin, V. W., Wentz, E., & Meinert, E. (2021). Explaining the why in #WhyIDidntReport: An examination of common barriers to formal disclosure of sexual assault in college students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(15-16). Web.
Lumsden, K., & Morgan, H. (2017). Media framing of trolling and online abuse: Silencing strategies, symbolic violence, and victim blaming. Feminist Media Studies, 17(6), 926–940. Web.
Reich, C. M., Pegel, G. A., & Johnson, A. B. (2021). Are survivors of sexual assault blamed more than victims of other crimes? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(19-20). Web.
Romero-Sánchez, M., Krahé, B., Moya, M., & Megías, J. L. (2017). Alcohol-related victim behavior and rape myth acceptance as predictors of victim blame in sexual assault cases. Violence Against Women, 24(9), 1052–1069. Web.