The Jane Doe in the Cornell University rape case could have made better decisions, and that should be okay to say out loud.

We've seemingly become so adamant to protect and comfort rape victims that we become angry when someone dares to suggest that the victim's indiscretions and bad decisions objectively played a role in their victimization. Apparently, this is commonly referred to as "victim blaming."

Whether we want to admit it or not, there are instances where blaming the victim of a crime to some degree, regardless if it's rape or not, is valid. None of us have any right or logic to live our daily lives and think that bad things can't happen to us, or that there aren't bad people who are waiting for us to slip up and let our guard down in order to take advantage of us.

It's not wrong to point out, in this case, that not enough was done on part of the victim to mitigate or minimize the risk of being sexually assaulted. Yes, we know people shouldn't rape, but pointing out the victim's indiscretions and bad decisions isn't the same as apologizing for or legitimizing rape like so many seem to think.

As much as I hate it, we don't live in a society that will ever be free from rapists. So maybe that's something we should keep in the back of our heads before we ever decide to go to a frat house full of horny men and drink and do ketamine? I don't understand the mindset that would think that anyone should be entitled to engage in risky behavior like that and be immune from danger or consequence.