I read this last month, there is really nothing to suggest that these women are being reckless or irresponsible, but I am sure many will draw that conclusion from this.
if you're in risky countries/areas - don't travel alone
if you went out your way to be in a safe area/country - then you were simply unfortunate enough to be a victim of wrong place/wrong moment, this shouldn't be rolled into an "adventurous traveling alone and attacked" narrative. if i'm mugged in beverly hills, i don't expect it to be reported as women increasingly attacked while walking alone, it's a one off crime where unfortunately, i was the victim
places of the crimes mentioned in the article:
High Atlas Mountains of Morocco
Costa rica
Thailand
Aukland, NZ
Aukland - does this deserve to be mentioned as a traveling alone narrative or simply an unfortunate crime?
The other 3 areas have varied reps depending on what area you're in, not victim blaming, but the reality is those countries do have various risks, even in tourist or "safe" areas. Why not just be safe and take extra precaution?
Overall, there are people who do throw sense out the window for an adventure (the couple who got killed biking thru one of those middle eastern/central asian countries, the missionary who decided to break the law and try to roll up on the uncontacted tribe off the coast of india), some places you have to be more vigilant as a woman, even if they are generally deemed safe. And for the media, there needs to be nuance between crimes that actually are connected to the status of woman traveling alone (white woman sticking out like a sore thumb in pakistan) vs. general crime (me being shot on the block i live on).