To our modern ears, perhaps not; but such a position clearly made sense to
the authors in the period in which this was written. Compare, for
instance, the actions taken against a rape vicitm as described in
Leviticus. As I recall it, if she is attacked "out in field" --where
presumably no one could hear her if she cried for help-- then she has
recourse against her attacker. Whereas if she is raped closer to town
--i.e. where she could, at least in principle, have cried for help-- she
is essentially guilty of adultery.
Needless to say, such despicable views are not unique to ancient times...
N