If you want to productively engage in a conversation, it isn't helpful if you use the weakest possible example for the other side's position to then dismiss it.

If you want to productively engage in a conversation, it isn't helpful if you use the weakest possible example for the other side's position to then dismiss it. That is just a slightly less obvious version of straw-manning. Also, your definition of "voluntary" as "the victim could conceivably have done something to prevent it but didn't" is very unusual and completely useless. By that definition, if someone poisons your food with a poison that is detectable with a test known in the literature, and you then eat it without testing it first, you have voluntarily let yourself be poisoned. If you get shot because you didn't wear bullet-proof clothing, then you voluntarily let yourself be shot. That's neither what "voluntary" normally means, nor would it in any way be a useful definition, as essentially everything that happens to you would have to be considered voluntary.