It sounds like splitting hairs to me. The gist of the message is the same.
I think it's less splitting hairs and fundamentally, entirely different.
I understand if someone is just reflexively trying to understand the situation ("why didn't you do X"), but I don't think they're doing the right thing if they're assuming that the reason the bad thing happened is because of some action/inaction on the part of the victim. Ultimately there was a fucking rapist in the picture and that's who we should focus on, not whether the innocent party wore the wrong kind of dress or didn't immediately escalate to acting violently.
I hope with the Terry Crews situation, more people appreciate that sexual assault doesn't just happen because you're not more physically intimidating than the other person.
Fair enough. I really enjoy civil discourse like this. ---