This is a quite interesting question as are the phenomena underlying the need to ask. Surprisingly, both share an equal role here. The natural human assumption would be that the perpetrator is causing the problem and is thereby the one in charge of circumstances and at least the initial outcome. In actuality, both play an equal role and this is expressed in the wisdom of language in the phrase "It takes two to tango," recognizing that there cannot be a fight unless two or more people are fighting. This implies that there is culpability from both ends of the exchange, and this is born out again and again in the circumstances of human conflict, whether someone is being subjugated and manipulated heavily, or they are equally strong and stand their ground and give as good as they get. In a heated exchange, both are truly influencing all that happens. There cannot be a perpetrator without a victim, and vice versa. So this is a very active dynamic and the two are clearly interdependent. And so, it is possible to stop any conflict by dealing with either victim or perpetrator, and that will cool things off at least, and allow a restoration of order. This is why both aspects are important and it is misguided to think only the victim is in the right. It is often the case the victim has equal responsibility for perpetuating an unbalanced relationship and the continued causing of harm. Becoming enlightened enough to let go of a struggle, in order to free oneself and the perpetrator from further obligation, is an enlightened view and action, and far preferable to becoming a habit.
Please login or Register to submit your answer