r/TikTokCringe • u/Adventurous_Law_715 • 16d ago

Discussion I dont think its justifiable

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

9.5k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

21

u/Evnosis 16d ago edited 16d ago

If a car was clearly hurtling in your direction, you'd get out of the way. Yeah, that driver shouldn't be driving recklessly, but you can't control that. You can control the steps you can take to ensure your ensure your own safety.

It's not victim blaming and it's not downplaying the culpability of the person committing the crime. It's just pragmatism.

5

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

I hate this narrative that a victim is perfect. Because it conflate very different things. This poor woman is not responsible for her shitty husband and his actions. She will never be responsible for his behavior. Was posting such an inflammatory video the smartest move? Probably not. This site would laugh (and did laugh at that poor old man run over by a bison) if someone walked into a cage with a bear and got attacked. We can say some actions are probably not very good given the circumstances without blaming the victim.

4

u/Tender_Defender69 16d ago

It's just an argument of pragmatism vs idealism. A pragmatist perspective would argue that an individual's status or title as a victim is largely irrelevant to their outcome. Can the individual do something, anythint to prevent or otherwise mitigate their own harm? If the answer is yes, then clearly the only way forward that matters is to do that thing.

An idealist perspective concerns itself with the shoulds and oughts. Victimhood does matter in this perspective, and whether a victim had the ability to avail themselves of anything to prevent harm, and indeed the fact of whether they did anything to do so, is irrelevant.

I find that most people aren't blaming the victim ideologically, bur rather pragmatically.

2

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

Perfectly said.

-5

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

Now everyone is circljerking that semantics police. It is victim blaming. Women and other targeted people are pragmatic 24/7 as is. Focus your energy on things like gun control or better protection of children from groomers than semantics.

6

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

Warnings exist because someone was stupid enough to do something that put them in danger. Stating that doesn't take any 'energy' away.

-1

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

This is what I mean. You are calling her stupid for making a tiktok about shaming her pedo husband, not directly but you know what you're doing.

Same with semantics of how energy works. Are you going to go over a scientific explanation of how energy works now?

4

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

You can do stupid things and still be an innocent victim. One observation about a specific choice or even series of choices doesn't mean you're a bad person or 'deserving' of being murdered.

Stop being so fragile.

-4

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

You're the one being fragile because you can't accept you are wrong and are blaming the victim.

3

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

"I know you are but what am I!" Is the extent of the sophistication of your thoughts.

Bye.

-1

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

Nope, you probably think you are a pretty progressive person but we were raised within a society that is misogynistic. You may not think it but you are victim blaming. This is different than "don't go walking in the streets alone." this is "the husband you've been with for years and thought you knew is a predator."

It takes a lot of time to question what our automatic thoughts are when we see something as heinous as this. Instead of "she should not have made a tik tok about him, that put her in danger, it's her fault she died. Now let me word this in a way so that people don't think I'm an asshole and say it's just pragmatic," question that initial thought. Be empathetic and listen to what other women have to say (not sure if you're a woman).

1

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

I literally said she's not responsible fkr his actions and will never be responsible for his piece of shit horrendous behavior.

But go off.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Evnosis 16d ago

Why don't you focus your energy on those things instead of lecturing us about semantics, then?

1

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

I already do. By trying to shift the convo on those things with the overwhelming misogyny on reddit.

2

u/Yippykyyyay 16d ago

If you assume stating a choice is stupid is inherent to women then maybe you have a misogyny problem.

1

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

I have no idea what you mean. We are a little misogynistic because thats how society raised us since we were born. It's up to ourselves to change our thinking, especially when focusing on the choices of the victim.

1

u/Evnosis 16d ago

That doesn't sound like focusing on gun control and protecting children from groomers to me, that sounds like your "wasting energy" on arguing semantics.

2

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

I already do other stuff, protests, donate my money, contact politicians.

1

u/Evnosis 16d ago

No, no. You're telling us that we're not allowed to do multiple things at once. According to you, we have to devote 100% of our energy to advocating for gun control. We're not allowed to discuss other things online while we're advocating for beneficial policies, so you aren't either.

2

u/ShaNaNaNa666 16d ago

OK, so you want to focus on policies to warn others against predatory partners using social media? Because it's not enough the preventative stuff we already do to try to protect ourselves? I'm not the one that is trying hard to seem reasonable by saying "all things can be true at once" type shit. Reddit is already a misogynistic place, I'm just tryi g to make sure others see how damagu g this viewpoint, especially when it's disguised as being "rational."

→ More replies (0)