'Tis the season to be ... raped apparently. The police have really outdone themselves this time with a series of adverts in which they effectively tell women (and potential rapists) that it is women who are to blame for being raped if they dare to have a few drinks at the Christmas party. The police of course claim they are alerting both men and women to the fact "a large proportion of reported rape cases feature alcohol as a factor - whether it is consumed by the victim or the offender" but that in itself completely misses the point - it implies there is no distinction to be made in terms of blame between the "victim" and the "offender".
Here are other things that increase a woman's likelihood of being raped:
1) Leaving her specially installed "safe room".
2) Having a vagina.
3) Saying "no".
Where is the police's advertising campaign to get women to stop doing these things?
On top of this the police claim their campaign aims to encourage rape victims to come forward. But with a 5.3% conviction rate and horror stories everywhere you turn, you have to think that what's stopping women coming forward it the fact that they have a genuine understanding of the treatment they really are likely to receive. No mention is made of the women being prosecuted for daring to accuse someone of rape without first collecting irrefutable evidence.
No doubt the police would point to the fact that a second part of the same campaign focusses on telling men that they could end up in prison if they rape someone. But that should really be the only point of the police advertising and of course where the story has been picked up in the press the headlines are all based on "warning" women not to drink too much. Sky News went with "Women Urged Not To Be Rapists' Prey This Xmas", the Metro preferred "Rape warning over festive drinks" with a subtitle that made it clear it was women on the receiving end of the warning.
And how are we supposed to believe that the attitude of the police towards rape victims is improving when even their advertising says the exact opposite?
Monday, November 30, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
29 comments:
"The police have really outdone themselves this time with a series of adverts in which they effectively tell women (and potential rapists) that it is women who are to blame for being raped if they dare to have a few drinks at the Christmas party."
At no point do any of the adverts say that women shouldn't have a few drinks, the emphasis is really on getting so drunk that you become vulnerable, which seems like sound advice for both women and men.
"A large proportion of reported rape cases feature alcohol as a factor - whether it is consumed by the victim or the offender."
A large proportion of all crimes feature alcohol as a factor: http://www.ias.org.uk/resources/factsheets/crime.pdf.
"Where is the police's advertising campaign to get women to stop doing these things?"
Have you even looked at the advice in the campaign?
1) Let your hair not your guard down.
This seems like good advice to me. Yes go out and have a few drinks, get drunk if you want but make sure that you don't put yourself in a position where you become vulnerable. If the police can imprint that message into the minds of women it can only be a good thing.
2) Take a taxi you can trust.
This again is really good advice, I forget the exact figures but a large proportion of reported sexual assault cases come from
unlicensed 'taxi drivers'.
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&ei=sTAVS-bPBcqTjAeI3MmLBg&sa=X&oi=spell&resnum=0&ct=result&cd=1&ved=0CAgQBSgA&q=sexual+assault+unlicensed+taxi&spell=1
"But with a 5.3% conviction rate and horror stories everywhere you turn, you have to think that what's stopping women coming forward it the fact that they have a genuine understanding of the treatment they really are likely to receive."
The perceived problem in the conviction rate has actually been engineered by politicians and is actually much higher than you claim, somewhere in the region of fifty percent although it fluctuates year to year. The figures released to the media actually use the attrition rate not the conviction rate. Just for comparison, the attrition rate for 'Violence against the person' is four percent. Hardly as big a problem as you would be led to believe. For more information you can view the evidence here: http://www.straightstatistics.org/article/how-panic-over-rape-was-orchestrated
"No mention is made of the women being prosecuted for daring to accuse someone of rape without first collecting irrefutable evidence."
If you go to the police immediately after being raped they can gather the necessary evidence to secure a conviction or at least ascertain that a crime has actually taken place. The law is there to protect everybody, in this case to protect the raped and the falsely accused.
I think you really have got the wrong end of the stick with this campaign. The police had a similar campaign with mobile phones and leaving valuables unattended in your car; the whole purpose of them is to instil simple common sense into the general population.
Rape Crisis welcomes the campaign so it seems as though you are trying to find misogyny where there is none.
Oh yes the police are doing a wonderful job blaming women and telling them not to drink too much because they might just get raped.
Apparently consumption of alcohol causes men to commit rape and women to be victims of rape. So what is the answer - perhaps ban alcohol completely.
Fact is alcohol does not cause male sexual violence against women - it is men who commit rape and other forms of sexual violence against women but is there a tagline saying 'men don't become a rapist this christmas - refrain from drinking alcohol.' No of course not because it is all about policing (deliberate pun) and controlling women's right to consume alcohol without automatically being blamed for supposedly causing some 'innocent man to rape a woman.'
No amount of advice to women will reduce male violence against women - because unless and until we focus on men who are the ones overwhelmingly committing these acts of sexual and physical violence against women - guess what? Nothing changes.
I see one commentator believes the police's advice to be sound - but she too misses the point - because irrespective of what precautions women take until such time as men decide they will not commit sexual violence against women or remain bystanders by condoning and trivialising male violence against women - nothing will change.
Yes indeed a number of non-sexual violence crimes do featue alcohol and especially male on male violence when one male consumes alcohol and then commits physical assault against another male. I've yet to see campaigns telling men not to drink and enter the public sphere because if they do they might be assaulted by other males.
This commentator is incorrect because in fact the number of men actually convicted of raping a woman/women is 5.6%. It is not politicians who are seeking to hide the facts rather it is how the police continue to 'no crime' innumerable cases wherein a woman courageously reports to police a known man has raped her. The police immediately view her accusations concerning the man with suspicion and all too commonly this woman's accusation is considered not to be credible and hence is 'no crimed.'
Attrition of rape cases occur at all stages of police investigation and only a tiny percentage of men charged with rape are brought to trial of that tiny percentage only 5.6% men are convicted. So this is far from the 50% claimed.
See wwww.truthaboutrape.co.uk for factual information concerning men's sexual violence against women.
I wish the law was in place to protect 'everyone' but unfortunately the legal system was devised by men for men and continues to operate on this basis.
Innumerable women survivors of men's violence committed against them have seen their cases 'no crimed' and no the legal system does not objectively investigate cases involving men committing sexual and/or physical violence against women.
See End Violence Against Women website for factual evidence concerning the scale of male violence against women and why it continues to be invisibilised.
Jennifer I really don't know how anybody can be that naive.
"... it is men who commit rape and other forms of sexual violence against women but is there a tagline saying 'men don't become a rapist this christmas - refrain from drinking alcohol.'"
It is a small minority of men whom have a predisposition to commit acts of sexual violence against women, posters asking these men not to rape people are hardly going to be effective in curtailing their urges. Do we have posters asking paedophiles not to kidnap, rape and kill children? Of course not, but we do have campaigns advising children of the dangers of talking to strangers in an attempt to make them safer through looking out for their own safety. Before you jump down my throat I am obviously not saying that women are as incapable of looking out for their health as children but even the most intelligent of us sometimes need reminding of the simplest things. Yes it may seem condescending to have these poster everywhere telling women to ensure that they don't end up in an unlicensed taxi or to make sure that they do not drink too much but if they manage to stop one woman from putting herself in a dangerous position and therefore stop her from being raped is that not worthwhile?
"No of course not because it is all about policing (deliberate pun) and controlling women's right to consume alcohol without automatically being blamed for supposedly causing some 'innocent man to rape a woman.'
"
This sentence encapsulates everything that is wrong with militant feminism and does women's causes a great deal of harm. How you make the leap from people telling women to be careful of drinking so much that they become incapacitated and thus an easy target for would be rapists to suggesting that a drunk woman would be blamed for making a man rape her is absolutely staggering. I doubt that I have encountered a more inane statement.
"No amount of advice to women will reduce male violence against women - because unless and until we focus on men who are the ones overwhelmingly committing these acts of sexual and physical violence against women - guess what? Nothing changes.
"
Of course it won't, men who have a predisposition to commit acts of violence against women will endeavour to commit acts of violence against women but by giving women advice on how to protect themselves from these men they will hopefully have less opportunity to do so.
"Yes indeed a number of non-sexual violence crimes do featue alcohol and especially male on male violence when one male consumes alcohol and then commits physical assault against another male. I've yet to see campaigns telling men not to drink and enter the public sphere because if they do they might be assaulted by other males.
"
Actually if you head on over to www.drinkaware.co.uk you can see countless campaigns that advise men on the dangers of drinking too much alcohol. There was an advert on the television not too long ago where a man thought that he was superman and climbed scaffolding thinking he was a superhero and promptly fell to his demise; it then told males to know their limits so that they don't end up in a compromising situation much in the same vain as the current campaign aimed at women.
"It is not politicians who are seeking to hide the facts rather it is how the police continue to 'no crime' innumerable cases wherein a woman courageously reports to police a known man has raped her. The police immediately view her accusations concerning the man with suspicion and all too commonly this woman's accusation is considered not to be credible and hence is 'no crimed.'"
Why do you suppose these reports are treated as 'no crime'? Perhaps because no crime actually took place; there have been countless reports recently of women destroying the lives of innocent men by falsely accusing them of rape. How about the female solicitor who withdrew her consent after sex? Both the male and the female consumed the same amount of alcohol, both agreed to sex at the time but the woman decided when she was sober that she couldn't possibly have given consent because she was so drunk. Did anybody stop and ask the man if he was in sound mind to give consent? Could they both have been deemed to have raped each other? What about the women who wait for months or years to report a rape? Do you really think that gives the police any chance whatsoever of securing a conviction? I would be laughed out of court if I filed a report to the police of an assault that happened on me six months ago with no proof.
"Attrition of rape cases occur at all stages of police investigation and only a tiny percentage of men charged with rape are brought to trial of that tiny percentage only 5.6% men are convicted. So this is far from the 50% claimed.
"
This is where you are wrong, if you care to look at the literature I provided you will see that the conviction rate is nearer fifty percent of those actually taken to trial. This is from the Home Office:
"Overall, only 6% of rapes reported to the police result in a conviction. However, 37% of all cases prosecuted as sexual assault result in a conviction for sexual assault, and 59% of cases prosecuted as sexual assault result in conviction for rape or another offence."
Quite a stark contrast to what you claim.
"I wish the law was in place to protect 'everyone' but unfortunately the legal system was devised by men for men and continues to operate on this basis."
So just because the law was written by men it is biased towards men? Well the law was written by white people so it must favour white people. It was written by southerners so it favours southerners. How incredibly naive.
"Innumerable women survivors of men's violence committed against them have seen their cases 'no crimed' and no the legal system does not objectively investigate cases involving men committing sexual and/or physical violence against women.
"
Of course they objectively investigate rape cases. They objectively investigate every single crime but in order to prosecute people they actually need to be able to ascertain that a crime has been committed; it obviously isn't enough for a woman just to say that she has been raped in the same way as it is not enough for me just to say that somebody stole my bicycle to get a conviction and send them to jail.
People like you are doing women's causes an awful lot of harm and if I were you I would ensure that what I said makes sense before I say it.
" it then told males to know their limits so that they don't end up in a compromising situation much in the same vain as the current campaign aimed at women.
"
Hmm, that should have read 'vein'.
I'm half tempted to delete some of your comments btscl, but i'll answer them for now.
In terms of the reasons why rape cases get downgraded to sexual assault, no crimed and dropped throughout the prosecution process are covered at length in a great book you should read called Carnal Knowledge: Rape On Trial by Sue Lees. Suffice as to say the evidence suggests that rape has no higher rate of false reporting than any other crime, and that the problems are everything to do with the way the police work and the way the courts work.
You mention the fact that many women do not come forward immediately after they have been raped. There are two issues here - the first is simple and medical. Given the violence which so often accompanies rape many women who have been raped go immediately to hospital. Medical professionals perhaps should but typically don't attempt to establish whether a patient has been raped and if they believe they may have been they typically don't collect "evidence". Medical professionals see it as their job to solve medical problems - not crimes.
Secondly rape is a traumatic experience. Many women will not feel able, in the immediate aftermath, to go to the police. Many women block the experience out - convince themselves that it can't have happened. They often blame themselves believing that they "must have" given off the "wrong signals". Others who have been drugged may wake up dizzy and disorientated, unable to clearly remember what happened. They certainly don't want to relive it second by second while a bored-looking police officer asks intrusive questions.
But on top of this - again read the book - getting medical evidence in no way guarantees a conviction. Very few rape defendents deny sexual contact, most claim that there was consent. So the medical evidence is much less important than you suggest.
But the fact is that 80 year old women get raped and so do small children. The victims are not the problem, the rapists are the problem. Police need to face up to this if they are to get to the bottom of problems that permeate their own forces.
This is all quite pathetic. Nobody tells any man not to have a drink.
nobody tells men not to get drunk.
Rape should not happen, drunk or sober. The alcohol angle is beside the point.
BTSCL it is you who is missing the point, you seem to have a stereotyped view of rape. It is not a select few men who are predisposed to rape women. ther is a culture at the moment where rape is normalised. Many men think if a woman has had too much to drink and/or is wearing a short skirt then she is asking for it, in fact they do not even class this as rape. Many men will see a short skirt itself as consent. No wonder normal men rape women when they don't even see it as rape because the woman was drunk. By repeating the myth that only a few "pre-disposed individuals rape women" you have proved the point that most of society stereotypes rape.
The poster telling women to be careful when drinking perpetuates this even more and sends a clear message to men that it is a woman's fault if she gets raped when drunk for drinking too much rather than his fault for raping her. Again he will probably not even see it as rape.
I am sorry but what is naive is to suggest that 95% of rapes reported are made up. Why would so many women pretend they have been raped especially with the low conviction rate, it doesn't make sense. I am not saying this doesn't happen but it is very rare maybe 1-5%.
On the other hand it is easy to see why so many men go around taking advantage of drunk women. It is because they can due to the low conviction rate and also because it is normalised and even encouraged in our culture. You only have to listen to a rap song or read Nuts magazine to see that.
You seem to speak a lot about statistics and yes they may show an increase in the percentage of rape convictions but what we are actually dealing with here is women being discouraged from taking their cases to court unless it is clear cut. There is no increase in convictions just a decrease in the number of more hard to prove cases going to court.
Kate I wanted to thank you and applaud you for the great work you are doing for women's causes. Please keep it up. I think everything you have said makes a lot of sense.
What is naive and what does not make sense is for it to be suggested that the law is not biased to men and white people. Of course the law is biased.
btscl said "Jennifer I really don't know how anybody can be that naive" and, later, again accused Jennifer of being naive.
btscl your arguments do not stand, and are beside the point, this is why you resort to personal attacks because you have no evidence strong enough to counter the blogger's and Jennifer's facts. I have read the pdfs on the links you posted. They only *appear* to back your arguments but do not actually do so; for example you say most crimes are linked to alcohol but the report you reference backs up the blogger's argument, not yours. It shows that the majority of *perpetrators* have consumed alcohol in alcohol-related crimes, rather than the *victims* of crime and it remains the case that where public service media alert victims of crime, it is only in the case of rape of women where potential victims are instructed how to prevent the crime. In the examples you gave, the crimes where victims were advised were not crimes against the *person* by someone else (ie with the implication being that we are responsible for someone else's behaviour) - one was a man who drank too much and jumped from a building under the influence (he wasn't being told that he was to blame for someone else committing a crime *against* him) and the other campaigns related to pieces of property left unattended, they weren't crimes against the person. I have yet to see an advertising campaign (other than the one the blogger complains of) where the victims of crimes against the person are being shown as complicit in the attack made upon them by someone else.
I repeat, your remarks miss the point, which is that rape (most often a crime committed against women by men, when it is not committed by men against children or by men against other men) is not taken seriously as a crime against women and continues to hold outdated notions of disbelieving the victim (whether woman, child or man). This gives a situation where men know they will be unlikely to be convicted if they rape. As for false accusations of rape, you are well aware from your knowledge of crime statistics that false accusations of rape are no higher than any other false accusation regarding other crimes (including murder). Of course it is not right that false accusations be made, but why is rape singled out to be the one crime where the accuser is routinely disbelieved - defendants of other crimes such as murder and theft are equally as likely to lose reputation by being convicted yet the possibility does not sway the jury or judge in other crimes to anything like the same extent.
In short, feminists are calling for gender justice and I intend to continue calling for gender justice - and pointing out such blatant imbalances as the one the blogger highlights here - until gender justice is achieved (despite your charge that this is an action of "militant feminism" which you seem to think a bad thing in that you claim it "does women's causes a great deal of harm" (personally, I think attacks on women do women's causes a great deal of harm, completely opposite to pointing out and condemning injustices against women)).
btscl
your comments are really upsetting and either willfully naive or just plain naive.
first of all - the false accusation rate for rape is the same as with any other crime. it is not huge or disproportionate. conversely the conviction rate for rape is lower than most other violent crimes, from what i can remember.
WOMEN ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PREVENTING MEN RAPING THEM. MEN ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
women are vulnerable to rape whether they are drunk or sober, whether they are out on the street late at night or at home.
in my opinion the marketing campaign should focus on how men can be sure not to commit rape.
Ah once again when evidence cannot be refuted one can always resort to personal attacks. However, I will disregard this nonsense and re-state laws have and are still made by men for men and yes it is correct - the laws are being made by white men for white men. Take a look at how femicide is commonly claimed to be instances of men who suddenly lose control of their mind and in a fit of uncontrollable rage murder their ex/current female partner.
However when women kill violent male partners these women are not able to claim self-defence because they all supposedly 'made a free and informed choice to murder the violent male partner.'
But back to that hotly contested issue of rape and why so many men consider it is their right to rape women and then claim 'but it wasn't rape - she just didn't say no sufficiently clearly.'
Firstly, only between 5.6% and 6% men charged with rape are actually convicted of this crime. No it is not a small minority of men because men on average rape approximately 61,000 women each and every year, but of course these can only be estimated since many women rightly do not report a man/men has raped them due to our women-blaming culture. No don't claim these figures cannot be true because I will just direct you to Rape Crisis website or Child and Woman Abuse Studies Unit re: factual evidence.
So why are only 5.6% men convicted of rape? Well for a start read Carnal Knowledge by Sue Lees for an informed and unbiased account of the innumerable obstacles, scepticism and male-centered bias women rape survivors experience and then ask yourselves why is it so many men commit sexual violence against women? Answer is because they can and our male-centered society excuses/mitigates and justifies male violence against women.
Of course the police in their 'advice' have carefully taken a gender neutral approach wherein apparently it is not men's responsibility for not committing rape but rather is one wherein both women and men are supposed to be responsible for preventing rape. Short response is - this is men's problem not women's -deal with it.
Of course we don't have posters telling men not to commit sexual violence against girls and boys because our male-dominant society claims such men are 'sexual deviants - ergo paedophiles' not normal respectable men. Most men who commit sexual violence against girls and boys are normal heterosexual males who had or are still involved in adult heterosexual relationships. Paedophile means 'love of children' - but our male-centered society by creating the myth of the 'deviant paedophile neatly hides the reality most men who rape and sexually assault girls and to a lesser extent boys - are normal respectable heterosexual males. Men such as male family members/male relatives etc. so of course publicising this reality would send shock waves amongst our law-abiding male-dominant society (sic). Shades of Freud again - who wrongly claimed women were hysterical when they accused their fathers of raping and committing sexual violence against them. Freud like many men could not endure the truth concerning men's sustained and systemic violence against women and children.
It is much easier to scapegoat a group which does not have equal or greater power and that is women - because women continue to be blamed and held accountable for men's systemtic and/or institutionalised violence against women and girls.
Where are the campaigns telling men to stay indoors at night rather than going into the public domain? No instead we have continuous campaigns telling women they must restrict their movements, consumption of alcohol etc. because apparently alcohol not men causes men to commit rape and sexual violence against women.
Militant feminism? Ah these tags are so useful when it concerns attempts at trivialising empirical feminist evidence of the extent of men's violence continuing to be committed against women and girls.
I strongly recommend certain commentators take particular note of any rape trials concerning consumption of alcohol because overwhelmingly if a woman rape survivor has consumed as much as a drop of alcohol she is automatically held partially or totally accountable for causing the defendant to rape her. Anyone remember the case of a female student who was raped by a male security officer. The male security officer was acquitted of rape because the female student was drunk and could not honestly say if she had said 'no.' Irrespective of the fact the female student was incapable of even giving 'consent'since she was drunk this apparently made the man's crime of rape a non-crime. Note the male security officer was not drunk - but then the courts were not interested in the defendant's actions/ behaviour but instead were intent of examining the actions/behaviour of the female student.
So, yes - male sexual predators do target women who consume alcohol because these male rapists know their chances of being charged let alone convicted are practically zero.
Do we blame men who drink alcohol and then are subsequently attacked by another male? Of course not - because the law is concerned with determining whether or not a crime has been committed not about apportioning blame to the victim (unless the crime is one of rape when automatically the female victim is blamed unless she can prove she is 110% innocent and either virginal or an extremely elderly frail woman. Age of female victim is irrelevant because we all know male-defined myths wherein pe-pubertal girls are defined as 'enticing innocent men into unwanted sexual relationships.')
Re: crimes of rape being 'no-crimed' and cases involving women who withdraw their accusations male(s) has/have raped them. Where to start? Well such cases do not necessarily mean a crime has not been committed - contrary to claims. Many women withdraw their accusations because rightly they are afraid of how our women-blaming society will insult and hold them in contempt. Go to abyss2hope.com blogspot for detailed evidence of how and why so many men and many women too believe rape is the easiest accusation to make and why so many 'so-called innocent' men are being targetted by vengeful women. It is all lies of course but then much easier to blame women than to really examine the facts. Or investigate the research of Dr. David Lysak, in particular his paper entitled 'Understanding the Predatory Nature of Sexual Violence.' Or you can always read Carnal Knowledge by Sue Lees to discover why rape myths are so prevalant and why so many women withdraw their accusations against a male rapist(s). Withdrawing an accusation is not proof in law that a crime has not been committed - this little nugget is conveniently overlooked and instead women are treated as liars if they withdraw their accusation.
The law it is claimed, supposedly categorically states that a person cannot consent to sexual activity if they have consumed alcohol and have become inebriated - but sadly the presumption is in fact the opposite. Wherein if a woman is unconscious due to consumption of alcohol she is still deemed to have given 'consent' unless and if she can prove 110% and preferably with independent male witnesses she did not 'consent to the man's penis being forcibly inserted into her body.'
Why is it that prior to any invasive medical procedure the patient has to sign a consent form? And why is it that when drunken males are admitted to a hospital the medical staff wait until the drunken male is sober before asking him to sign a consent form in respect of medical attention. This is the case when such attention can be delayed. Is it to do with informed 'consent?' Yet in cases of rape women in law are always presumed - yes presumed to be in a constant state of sexual consent rather than the opposite.
Women rape survivors have to prove they did not 'consent' rather than the male defendant having to prove he did gain 'consent.' Read Sue Lees book for a detailed discussion of our rape laws. Do not claim the Sexual Offences Act, 2000 now makes it mandatory for male defendants having to prove they did seek informed consent from the woman rape survivor, because there is another clause conveniently giving male rapists an escape clause. It is called 'reasonable person' wherein juries have to decide whether the actions of the male defendant were 'reasonable or not, taking into account all circumstances surrounding the accusation of rape.' Convenient is it not? Because what is and is not 'reasonable' has not been defined by this statute and as we know, 'reasonable' continues to be defined by male-centered notions. This efffectively means if a man claims he did not understand the woman's clear refusal - it was just a case of miscommunication - rather than the man deliberately choosing not to acede or accept the woman's position re: refusing to engage in any particular sexual activity with male.
Another common rape myth is that all women rape survivors should automatically report a man/men has raped them. Such beliefs fuel the scepticism and blatant women-hating against women rape survivors. Ask yourselves would you report to police or to your relatives/friends/partner that a man you know has just raped you? What do you think their reactions would be? Would they listen or would they dismiss your accusations as 'nonsense.' Again read Sue Lees book Carnal Knowledge and then spend some lengthy time learning about the realities of acquaintance rape and why so many rapes are committed by men who know the women they have raped.
Better still, go to Abyss2hope.com's website and then click on link to date rape - because there you will read about the realities of how and why so many women rape survivors do not even acknowledge a man/men has raped them and why so many women rape survivors delay reporting to sceptical and disbelieving society - a man/men has raped them.
The Home Office too misuses statistics because the actual conviction rate is still between 5.6% and 6% not 50% as the Home Office claim. Given that only those cases which are deemed more than 75% successful are taken to trial, the it is not surprising the Home Office can claim 'yes we successfully convicted 50% of males charged with rape.
At every stage of the rape investigation these cases are subject to attrition and therefore only a tiny minority of cases proceed to court and even then the male defendant is more likely to be acquitted than convicted. So the Home Office figures are not accurate or correct. The cases most likely to succeed are minority ones involving stereotypical rape cases - such as deviant male raping innocent pre-pubertal girl or deviant male stranger raping an elderly bed-ridden woman. These are what our women-hating society continues to term 'real rape' not cases wherein known men deliberately target women who have been drinking alcohol because such men know their chances of being charged, let alone convicted of rape are zero.
tEnd result is - yes we live in a rape culture and one furthermore wherein women continue to be blame and held accountable for men's sexual and physical violence committed against them. But any woman daring to publicly hold men accountable for their sexual predatory behaviour is commonly dismissed as a 'militant feminist' or 'a man-hater.' Such terms are not new to me but they are used to try and silence those brave women and girls who refuse to remain silent and continue to challenge men's pseudo sex right to women and girls.
Excuses, justifications, denials are endless and so we must ask ourselves why do so many men and a large percentage of women refuse to accept the truth? Is it because accepting that male violence against women and girls is endemic is too difficult to accept and would indeed cause our so-called 'safe world' to split open. Far easier to bury one's head in the sand and refuse to learn the facts.
One final piece of fact - false allegations of rape are no higher than false allegations concerning other crimes, apart from false allegations in respect of car insurance. Google David Lisak because he and his colleagues have just published inter-disciplinary evidence concerning the widespread belief most women make false allegations concerning a male/males has raped them. Lisak et al debunks these claims by examining evidence from a number of countries including the UK.
But then evidence in itself will not change many men's and a number of women's views - because always, but always women not men are responsible for gatekeeping and preventing male violence being committed against them.
This is what the police should have publicised - warning men not to venture out at Christmas:
http://feministlawprofessors.com/?p=12965
Lastly - men read Stopping Rape: A Challenge to Men by Rus Ervin Funk. Who, by the way is pro-feminist so of course his views and challenge to men must be automatically dismissed as those of a man who has been seduced/manipulated by women-hating feminists!
I think you all need to re-read and understand the things that I have said. I will answer you all individually to avoid any further confusion.
First Cruella.
"I'm half tempted to delete some of your comments btscl, but i'll answer them for now."
Could you please tell me which comments you found particularly offensive? I believe that my comments were reasonable.
"Suffice as to say the evidence suggests that rape has no higher rate of false reporting than any other crime"
I never claimed that rape had a higher incidence of false reporting than other crimes.
"In terms of the reasons why rape cases get downgraded to sexual assault, no crimed and dropped throughout the prosecution process are covered at length in a great book you should read called Carnal Knowledge: Rape On Trial by Sue Lees."
There are obviously reasons why accusations of rape may be downgraded to sexual assault, just as there are reasons why prosecutions for sexual assault result in the conviction for rape.
From the Home Office:
"However, 37% of all cases prosecuted as sexual assault result in a conviction for sexual assault, and 59% of cases prosecuted as sexual assault result in conviction for rape or another offence."
That means that 96% of sexual assault cases taken to trial result in a conviction, for either sexual assault, rape or another offence.
"Medical professionals see it as their job to solve medical problems - not crimes."
All hospitals have DNA collection equipment, if you were to walk into a hospital and tell the staff that you have been raped they would collect DNA.
" Others who have been drugged may wake up dizzy and disorientated, unable to clearly remember what happened"
Again if you go to a hospital upon waking up they can test your blood for the presence of GHB, rohypnol etc.
"They certainly don't want to relive it second by second while a bored-looking police officer asks intrusive questions"
That's a rather sweeping statement about the collective mindset of police officers.
"Very few rape defendents deny sexual contact, most claim that there was consent. So the medical evidence is much less important than you suggest."
There are other pieces of evidence that can be used to build a case such as the signs of struggle, bruising cuts etc so if you can identify the man that has had sex with the woman and prove that it was forcible then you're half way there.
Louise:
"BTSCL it is you who is missing the point, you seem to have a stereotyped view of rape. It is not a select few men who are predisposed to rape women"
What you are saying here is that all men or the majority of men are predisposed to rape. I find that statement offensive.
"Many men think if a woman has had too much to drink and/or is wearing a short skirt then she is asking for it, in fact they do not even class this as rape."
Where did you attain this remarkable informtion? Did somebody survey the entire male population without me knowing about it?
"No wonder normal men rape women when they don't even see it as rape because the woman was drunk"
If there is consent between the two adults regardless of quantity of alcohol consumed it is not rape. I've had sex with people whilst under the influence of alcohol that I would not have sober but this does not mean that I can withdraw my consent afterwards.
"The poster telling women to be careful when drinking perpetuates this even more and sends a clear message to men that it is a woman's fault if she gets raped when drunk for drinking too much rather than his fault for raping her."
This doesn't send a message to men that it is the woman's fault. I'm a man and I didn't get that message from the campaign. Please don't speak for us, we are more than capable of interpreting things for ourselves.
"I am sorry but what is naive is to suggest that 95% of rapes reported are made up."
Re-read what I said, I never said 95% of rapes reported are made up.
"On the other hand it is easy to see why so many men go around taking advantage of drunk women."
Do you mean by actual rape or having consensual sex?
"It is because they can due to the low conviction rate and also because it is normalised and even encouraged in our culture. You only have to listen to a rap song or read Nuts magazine to see that. "
If you could point me to an article in Nuts or a mainstream rap song that states that it is ok to rape women then I will eat my hat.
"You seem to speak a lot about statistics and yes they may show an increase in the percentage of rape convictions but what we are actually dealing with here is women being discouraged from taking their cases to court unless it is clear cut."
The police will not take anything to court that they cannot prove. You cannot possibly convict somebody on word alone. Can you provide me with some literature that states that more women are being discouraged from prosecuting now than let's say ten years ago?
"What is naive and what does not make sense is for it to be suggested that the law is not biased to men and white people. Of course the law is biased."
So if I steal £100 from my employer I will get a slap on the wrist but a black person because they are black will receive a prison sentence? Same if you switch the black person for a woman? Really? Are you sure?
I will respond to the others when I get time.
Joy:
"btscl your arguments do not stand, and are beside the point, this is why you resort to personal attacks because you have no evidence strong enough to counter the blogger's and Jennifer's facts."
The things Jennifer posted are not facts. People are confusing the attrition rate with the conviction rate. The attrition rate is the percentage of all reported cases that get a conviction, in this case, 6%; the conviction rate is the percentage of cases taken to trial that result in a conviction, in this case around 50%.
"for example you say most crimes are linked to alcohol but the report you reference backs up the blogger's argument, not yours."
Really?
"Victimisation
Being under the influence of alcohol increases the likelihood of being a victim of crime as well as being a
perpetrator."
The point I was making was that alcohol is not just a factor in rape. Point proved I do believe.
"it is only in the case of rape of women where potential victims are instructed how to prevent the crime...
hey weren't crimes against the person. I have yet to see an advertising campaign (other than the one the blogger complains of) where the victims of crimes against the person are being shown as complicit in the attack made upon them by someone else
"
http://www.drinkaware.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/6286/A4-poster-hires.pdf
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WBdAHtC5_M&feature=related
Just from a quick Google search.
"I repeat, your remarks miss the point, which is that rape (most often a crime committed against women by men, when it is not committed by men against children or by men against other men) "
Women also have a penchant for abusing children: http://www.metro.co.uk/home/764937-rise-in-women-child-abusers.
"is not taken seriously as a crime against women and continues to hold outdated notions of disbelieving the victim (whether woman, child or man)"
It's not a case of being disbelieved, you need to understand that the police need to ascertain that a crime has actually taken place, they need some form of corroborating evidence, i.e., evidence of a stuggle, drugs in the system, witness etc.
'despite your charge that this is an action of "militant feminism" which you seem to think a bad thing in that you claim it "does women's causes a great deal of harm"'
Stating that all men are likely to rape is preposterous, making wild jumps from warning women that they could become vulnerable if they drink too much to:
"controlling women's right to consume alcohol without automatically being blamed for supposedly causing some 'innocent man to rape a woman.'
"
is absurd. That is what does feminism harm.
"your comments are really upsetting and either willfully naive or just plain naive.
"
They are not intended to be upsetting, more matter of fact and if you read any of the things that I have posted you will see that my information comes from reliable sources, i.e., the Home Office, the Insitute of Alcohol Studies etc not some statistics on a feminist website.
"first of all - the false accusation rate for rape is the same as with any other crime. it is not huge or disproportionate."
Again if I must reiterate what I have said before, I never said that it was higher than any other crime. Please actually read what I say instead of reading what you want me to have said.
"WOMEN ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR PREVENTING MEN RAPING THEM. MEN ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS."
Nobody is saying anything to the contrary, however, would you agree that I am not reponsible for being mugged but I am more likely to be mugged if I am drunk and thus an easier target?
"women are vulnerable to rape whether they are drunk or sober, whether they are out on the street late at night or at home. "
Women are more vulnerable to rape of they are drunk and out on the street.
"in my opinion the marketing campaign should focus on how men can be sure not to commit rape."
You make it sound like any normal man might just be walking down the street and suddenly think that he fancies a quick rape. Believe me I am a man and we don't work that way. I might look at a woman and think that I would like to have sex with her but I don't want to rape her. Just because they vast majority of rapists are men doesn't mean that the vast majority of men are rapists.
Posters asking rapists not to rape are really not going to be effective.
Sorry for the deletes - they were in error! Argh, I'm going to have to recreate my two part comments...
I came upon this via F word and what motivated me to comment was wondering what motivation btscl had for coming to a feminist's blog and making pronouncements on what is damaging to feminism.
1. btscl comes here as a man as above, and write reams to try to 'educate' us, and dares to say: "I'm a man and I didn't get that message from the campaign. Please don't speak for us, we are more than capable of interpreting things for ourselves." Yes we know men have been interpreting the world for the rest of us people in a pretty big way before feminism came along. btscl, please take your own advice and don't tell feminists what to think about feminism or about violence against women. We'll make our minds up ourselves.
2. btscl said: "From the Home Office: 'However, 37% of all cases prosecuted as sexual assault result in a conviction for sexual assault, and 59% of cases prosecuted as sexual assault result in conviction for rape or another offence.' That means that 96% of sexual assault cases taken to trial result in a conviction, for either sexual assault, rape or another offence."
This is just drawing an awfully wrong statistical conclusion. I think you just need to do the sum again! (Use a calculator if you have to).
3. "The attrition rate is the percentage of all reported cases that get a conviction, in this case, 6%; the conviction rate is the percentage of cases taken to trial that result in a conviction, in this case around 50%."
No. Again, in statistics the attrition rate is the ratio of lost subjects to the number of subjects at the start of a study. So if we are studying what happens to reported rapes, the attrition rate is the rate of cases which are dropped at any stage. Attrition of reported rape is HIGH in this country and it is showing an increase every year. It is not 6%. By saying that you are implying 94% of reported rapes go through to trial, which is false. It is bizarre that you went out of your way to reiterate that we feminists became confused about the word attrition when you are the one misusing the word.
3. "[Cruella said:] 'Medical professionals see it as their job to solve medical problems - not crimes.' All hospitals have DNA collection equipment, if you were to walk into a hospital and tell the staff that you have been raped they would collect DNA. 'Others who have been drugged may wake up dizzy and disorientated, unable to clearly remember what happened.' Again if you go to a hospital upon waking up they can test your blood for the presence of GHB, rohypnol etc."
As a hospital doctor I say Cruella has got it bang on. It is not clear what point you are trying to illustrate by saying hospitals have equipment. From a public health and crime reduction point of view it is essential that better facilities are made more available to all victims of sexual assault - this is not currently the case. The best practice model in this country are SARCs which are at present a postcode lottery.
4. '"Many men think if a woman has had too much to drink and/or is wearing a short skirt then she is asking for it, in fact they do not even class this as rape.' Where did you attain this remarkable informtion? Did somebody survey the entire male population without me knowing about it?"
There is growing evidence that a lot of things have happened without you knowing about it! If you are setting out with the aim to challenge feminists about rape, at least read some literature on the subject. Yes, surveys have happened. Yes, those conclusions were drawn. Do a Google search.
And once again in statistics, the object of carrying out a 'survey' is precisely to avoid asking 'the whole population' the question.
5. "If you could point me to an article in Nuts or a mainstream rap song that states that it is ok to rape women then I will eat my hat."
I don't read 'Nuts'. But I do listen to rap. I'm pointing you in the mainstream direction of DMX.
'I'm gunnin for your spouse, tryin to send that bitch back to her maker, and if you've got a daughter older then 15, I'ma rape her, take her on the living room floor, right there in front of you, then ask you seriously, what you wanna do?'
DMX is not telling us it is ok to rape. He is using rape as a lyrical theme (asking us what we want to do, more to the point). Using rape as a theme is common in our society and known as rape culture. The producers of mass media produce it, and people whose opinions are not yet formed learn from it. I think this is what Louise was referring to.
6. "Posters asking rapists not to rape are really not going to be effective."
Now there is you, having accused someone else of making a sweeping statement, making one of your very own.
Rapists do not spring from the womb as rapists. Their beleifs like yours and mine are formed by their experiences and what they see around them. Reminding all people about the need for obtaining consent prior to sex is reminding them that rape is unacceptable.
Hope your hat tastes nice BTSCL
"Take her From Behind while Savaging her Neck like a Jack Rabbit" (Loaded)
"Take her to a Motel Room and Bang her like a Beast" (Nuts)
"Get your Girlfriend to Dress Up like a Prostitute and Hang out on a Street Corner" (Front)
"Women Fantasise about Rape and Animals" (Maxim)
"We’re Searching the Land for the Hottest Virgins!" (ZOO)
Lyrics that encourage rape
"smack that, all on the floor
Smack that, Give me some more
Smack that, till you get sore
Smack that, ohh oh oh oh oh
Ohhhhh, looks like another club banger
They better hang on when they throw this thing on
Get a little drink on
They gon' flip for this Akon shit, you can bank on it"
(Akon Smack That)
"She she, she want it, I want to give it to her .....
Look at the way she shakin' shakin'
Make you want to touch it, make you want to taste it
Have you lustin' for her, go crazy face it
Now don't stop, get it, get it
The way she shakin' make you want to hit it " (50 Cent She Want it)
"That girl is so dangerous
That girl is so dangerous
That girl is a bad girl
I've seen her type before
That's her the big dog
Tryin' to get
Her little kitty to purr
Ex-man lookin at me like
I'm Lucifer
Cause he know I will deal
With his case yes, sir....
Body's like weapon....
I'm trying to give
That girl something, cha)
Ohh, bad to the bone
Everything locked
Like a two three zone
I wanted to make
My black snake moan
Talk a little bit
And take that home
She bad
And she know the deal"
(Akon Dangerous)
"Nigga look what dun’ happen since your bitch dun’ chose
My wrist dun’ froze I’ll show you how I get them hoes
I’ll spit that G that be fuckin with their brain
Have ‘em on a track when it’s freezing in the rain
Scream on a bitch with the nerve to complain
Like bitch you dead wrong
If you catch a date you be warned
You said you want the finer things in life
You gotta go out and get it
And I’ll be right here waiting when you come back with it
You see I was born to break a bitch"
(Snoop Dog PIMP) - In fact this one is even worse because it encourages forced prostitution.
"Bitch ain't shit but a hoe in a trick
Bet you no one ain't trick if you got it
You know we ain't f**king if you not thick
And I cool your ass down if you think you're hot shit
So rolex watch this
I do it 4 5 6 my click
Clack goes the black hoe pimp
And just like it I blow that shit
Cause bitch I'm the bomb like
Tick tick
Yeah!!"
(Lil Wayne Got Money)
Some might say - "Of course it won't, PEOPLE who have a predisposition to commit MURDER will endeavour to commit MURDER but by giving PEOPLE advice on how to protect themselves from these PEOPLE they will hopefully have less opportunity to do so."
However is money spent on educating the public? No, the focus is on exposing these people and bringing them to justice. If rape is a crime like any other then there should be no difference in the way it is handled.
Also, just a quick note that GHB is only detectable up to 12 hours after oral admission, making it very difficult (and sometimes impossible) to detect in time.
I am also higly offended by your tone when speaking about 'the signs of struggle, bruising cuts etc' as evidence that 'it was forcible'. May I remind you that rape is defined in England and Wales as 'intentionally to penetrate with his penis the vagina, anus or mouth of another person without that person's consent'. You may note that force is not specified in this definition, only consent.
You say that women are more vulnerabel drunk and on the street - that may be where they are more obviously vulnerable. However I know no one who has been raped by a stranger while drunk - but I do know several people who have been raped by people who they know in their own home or in the home of this 'friend'.
"it implies there is no distinction to be made in terms of blame between the "victim" and the "offender"."
No, it doesn't. It's just trying to raise peoples awareness.
If I get pickpocketed in Regent St, I'm still a victim of crime. But I know that the odds are that the perpetrator won't get caught, I could do with the hassle, so when I'm in a crowded area, I keep my hands in my pockets. Avoiding being a victim of crime says nothing about the relationship of perpetrator and victim.
The Sky headline "warned not to make themselves easy prey for rapists" is spot on. Rapists won't attack a woman in a group of women in a well-lit area. They go for women walking alone in badly lit areas.
It's much better to just not give rapists the opportunity (and more effective) than to try to deal with the judicial system. I'd much rather see 20 women not get raped, than see 1 extra conviction of those 20.
"Rapists won't attack a woman in a group of women in a well-lit area. They go for women walking alone in badly lit areas."
No, much more commonly they go for women they know/have met in surprisingly relatively public areas or in one of their homes.
Post a Comment