While the words do sound like victim blaming, id argue that sweeping conclusions that sound like the common rhetoric like “victims can do no wrong” deserve both

While the words do sound like victim blaming, id argue that sweeping conclusions that sound like the common rhetoric like “victims can do no wrong” deserve both careful consideration and some wiggle room. Not to mention that it’s a completely different situation than the usual instances where victim blaming is both toxic and common. The only egregious victim blaming that I can think of would be saying “those whose accounts were hacked were asking for it by being on twitter”. And I hope nobody is saying that. I have a feeling that a vast majority would agree that choosing to send your money to a celebrity’s (apparent) bitcoin wallet for any reason will be tough to feel victim-sympathy for, and possibly asking to never see that money again given all of the well regulated systems and norms of money transfer that we have used for decades to centuries. But I understand that they were still taken advantage of and agree that they are victims. Twitter is to blame here. The only thing they are a victim of is failing to protect their users (whom they have the obligation to protect) in a game where they have the ability to be solely the masters of their own security destiny.