Ake, I did not mistake your meaning at all.   Your analogy still does not hold. I do not consider that men are like drivers in a vehicle unable to stop fast enough to avoid hitting the person who steps blindfolded into traffic.    Thing is, the driver in that instance, is very likely to have to deal with irrational self-blame. The driver is responsible for driving responsibly, but it is never possible, no matter how responsible one is, to eliminate all risk.   No one drives completely responsibly. We are not robots. We can not do perfect risk assessments of every situation. To get into a vehicle, whether as driver or as passenger, is to take risks.



There is a world of difference between blame and responsibility, but it is a difference that many, if not most, people do not get. I spend a lot of time in therapy sessions on working with people to get them to the place they can make the distinction. I mostly work with people who have experienced significant trauma, mostly with men and women who were physically and/or sexually abused as children, but also with people who have experienced adult trauma, mostly domestic violence, assault, rape, or bad vehicle accidents. Some of these people are also abusive in their adult relationships or with their own children.




I think the results reported in the survey mp posted about and linked to reflect 1. the difficulty people have sorting out the difference between blame and responsibility, 2. complex psychological defenses, and psychosocial defenses deployed by victims and those vulnerable to victimization, and by aggressors and those with enough power to be the aggressor (physical, psychological or social) which result in a collusion (spelling?) to maintain a power structure.

Anybody ever read "The Color Purple"?