I would most certainly say that the comments made by the celebrity are contributing to a culture of rape and degradation honestly. Her words make the act of rape one of punishment for "behaving poorly" rather than as a violent act.
I just don't see it.
As mentioned above, I think her use of "will" rather than "might" is unfortunate but other then that I struggle to see the issue. Would there have been the media scrum or outrage there was if she'd simply not mentioned rape and limited it to being non-sexually assaulted and/or robbed? I suspect not... most would have nodded their head and thought it was fairly sensible advice rather than dismissing it entirely.
Baby with the bathwater.
I'm not arguing for more victim blaming, and I'm not sure where you read that at all. I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is to dance around victim blaming and tell young women how to ~reduce their risk~ of sexual assault.
You noted (as implicitly a negative) how men aren't told what to wear, what to do, where to go etc. I mentioned they were (if not as loudly).
You noted how even if that is the case, they aren't blamed when they do such "prohibited" things. I mentioned they were (if not as loudly).
You're pointing out that the genders are treated differently. I don't disagree. But from your phrasing your issue was that the two were treated differently in and of itself. We could solve this issue by treating men the same way women (shamefully) are. It would remove your entire complaint.
Would that be a good thing?
Victim-blaming (for all genders but especially women) is a wrong in and of itself; it doesn't need
to be artificially strengthened by pointing out how others aren't blamed as loudly. Because if that's the argument then it would be neutered by victim-blaming being just as loud for men.
Her quote is appalling, misogynistic, and blaming the victim. You ask if it's good advice for all genders, but she's directly talking to young women. In the same interview she bemoans how girls dress in more revealing clothing, and attacks them for it. How can you even view this as good advice? she's implying that if only young women didn't dress the way they do, or act like lads, then they wouldn't be taken advantage of.
1. This is pushing stereotypical gender roles and creating double standards.
2. She is still putting the blame on victims/potential victims instead of rapists/potential rapists.
3. This advice still completely ignores the fact about how rape happens/occurs.
Most rape happens by people the victim knows. No amount of "good" advice will change that. How is it good advice to minimize your risk of rape by walking in day light, in 'proper' clothing, without flirting when your rapist is your boyfriend or a friend or family member or coworker? Do you see how idiotic it is to give that advice when it does not accurately cover the reality of rape?
1) She specifically pointed out that she didn't condone the "raucous behaviour in young boys". It's simply that the interview had turned to focus on her advice for women.
2) In this previous thread I've pointed out that advice that the style of clothing someone wears has little consequence. I think she was wrong to mention it. But that's only one part of a greater whole. Baby with bath water.
3) She never said that if someone did follow her advice they'd never be taken advantage of.
4) It wasn't an interview about "how to prevent rape". It was an interview about an unrelated topic that then turned to her views on people's conduct on nights out (focusing on women), which in turn moved onto her advice for preventing being taken advantage of when on a night out
. All of the points you make about where sexual assaults take place are right and I don't disagree (and as I mentioned earlier in the thread I think the focus on the "stranger danger" sexual assaults takes attention away from the far more serious wider issues about sexual assault). But none of them apply to her advice which was on a different topic. If her comments had been framed as "this is how to stop women getting raped" then you'd be right. But it wasn't.
And you know what? i'm sick of hearing this is good advice for robbery. Do you have any proof at all that taking these ridiculous advice prevents robbery/theft? And I would throw out her advice too because she isn't giving general advice to a general audience. She was giving specific advice to a specific population, and covering it in sexist and misogynistic language.
It doesn't prevent it; it lowers the chance that someone will be selected as a victim. I believe "Creating the Illusion of Impending Death: Armed Robbers in Action" (1997) by Richard T. Wright and Scott H. Decker is still considered the leading study on victim selection by armed robbers and "Taxing on the Streets: Understanding the Methods and Process of Street Robbery" (2007) by Jo Deakina, Hannah Smithsona, Jon Spencera and Juanjo Medina-Arizaa the leading piece on victim selection by all forms of robbers (although it applies to the UK).
Moreover, from your last comment, are you saying it's bad advice (or at least, advice that should be ignored) to say don't get so drunk you're sick, don't be in a position where you don't have an easy way home/to your next location and don't stagger about in the dark? We could throw in the other usual clichés in there; don't be on your own/don't go off with strangers, don't wander through a part of town you don't know. Not in terms of preventing rape, but in terms of general good advice about life?
I thought I recognized the name, and I think this is one of those 'celeb telling people not to act like a popular character' incidents.
Joanna Lumley is famous for playing Patsy Stone in the hard-drinking 'comedy' Absolutely Fabulous. (Never saw the appeal.)
On this note, Lumley has made clear she detests Patsy as a character. She thought she was a vile creature and was horrified to see her become a sort of role model to people.