poster campaign aimed at men cuts rape rate by 10%

On a completely personal level, regardless of statistics and proven changes, I am very glad to see a poster campaign like this. If nothing else it will help to get the message into the general cultural mindset that no matter what the circumstances, if a man engages in sexual activity with a woman without her clear consent it is seriously wrong. It seems clear to me from various conversations I've had with both men and women that a worrying minority of people believe that there is a genuine "grey area" in the issue of consent. I've even heard women who have clearly been raped try to minimise and excuse what's happened to them by saying "But I was drunk, and I didn't say no," etc etc. At the very least a victim of rape might look at a poster like this and realise once and for all that what happened to them was wrong. That can only be a good thing.

Basil I think the campaign is a good thing and I don't think the fact it focuses on hetrosexual rape by men is a problem, given the prevelence of that crime. But I don't think your arguments above are legitimate. Male rape of men is quite prevalent in the gay community. And it works the same way it works in the heterosexual community for the most part - men with more status and power have sex with men with less status and power without their consent. They have sex with them when they are drunk and high, they coerce them into sex and they force them. Just as women are raped. Men are more likely in our society to see themselves as entitled to sexual gratification and it isn't limited to the heterosexual community.

And despite the headlines about this campaign, the evidence in the article does not support the claim that the posters are the reason reported rape went down. The poster campaign was one part of an overall effort to cut rape that had several components. It is always exceedingly difficult to know what the impact of a particular action was in a situation like this. The posters may have had an impact or may not - there's no way to know from the facts presented.

I think Basil has a good point.

All men know that they shouldn't grab someone in a dark alleyway. Not everyone knows that if someone is too drunk to properly say yes then they should stop. Even if they think that they would probably say yes.

I think use of "sexual assault" is actually quite sensible. It's a less familiar term that is still clearly a crime and a bad thing to do, but it doesn't lead to the same knee-jerk reactions.

Hmm. The reason you don't need a campaign telling men not to rape other men, is because on the whole, they know it's wrong. They know other men are human beings like them and it would be wrong to rape them. They don't know that about women, that's why they need to be told, incredibly.

And this poster tells them. What sort of sense would it make to have a poster telling men not to rape other men? They already know they shouldn't do that. Men who rape other men, are violent criminals. Men who rape women otoh, are often perfectly normal men who simply don't see women as quite as entitled to the bodily integrity which they take for granted for themselves and other men.

That's why this poster works. It tells men who might otherwise think it's OK to shag someone who is drunk, that this is actually rape. Incredibly, they didn't fucking REALISE that before they saw this poster. They don't need to see a poster with a man lying there drunk because they already KNOW that if they penetrated that man, they'd be raping him.

It's got nothing to do with denying the existence of male rape or lesbian sexual assault. It's about speaking to normal men with normal assumptions and challenging them. And it worked - it lowered the rate of sexual assault and rape by 10%. Do you really think a public education campaign in this vein, would be appropriate and as effective, in challenging the reasons for lesbian sexual assault or male rape? I don't, because the dynamics and assumptions around those are completely different, to those around men raping women.

I also think it's perfectly valid to do an information campaign based on one group or one problem. Every year, the govt. does masses of campaigns targeting drunk drivers. But people don't complain that actually, they should be targeting speeding drivers, or drivers without insurance or whatever - you can't target everyone in the same ad, if you want the message to get through. If you want to do a campaign to target lesbians who assault other lesbians, then you need to do that separately to one which targets men who assault women. It's a different issue and needs different treatment.

I agree with the idea, but I dont like the ad.

If I could design one it would be a of a bloke attempting to take advantage and then she turns and its his sister/gf/mother. someone he wouldnt want it done too

that might make them think again.. it could so easily be his sister, or mother etc

Wasn't Tom Cruse reputed to have a, er, 'relationship' with hamsters?

Raping by hamsters or raping of hamsters?

You'd have to have a pretty small penis to rape a hamster.

I think we should have a discussion about hamster rape here

It's rare, but it exists

Who is thinking of the hamsters ?

SQ, I think any amount of rape is a problem, it doesn't have to be rampant.

It was quite difficult to find figures for victims of female rapists, given that (1) it's under-reported and (2) females can't legally be rapists. But...

This American report from 2010 found that 1.4% of men were raped in their lifetimes (that's 1,581,000 people), and 22.2% (that's 25,130,000 people) suffered some 'other sexual violence' (pg. 19), including being made to penetrate, sexual coercion, unwanted sexual contact, and 'non-contact unwanted sexual experiences'.
The majority of male rape victims suffered under male rapists, but for the "other forms", the majority reported female perpetrators in (pg. 24):

• 79.2% of forced penetrations (4,317,192 victims)
• 83.6% of sexual coercions (5,689,816 victims)
• 53.1% of unwanted sexual contact (7,060,176 victims)

I would include forced penetrations and sexual coercions as being rapes, even if it doesn't meet the legal definition. I've certainly seen men nagging their wives into sex (coercion) being called rape here, and rightly so imo. So I would guess that those 5,689,816 male victims of sexual coercion by a female would probably see it as a problem.

An international study of college-age men and women found that "the rates of verbal sexual coercion against men by women are consistently estimated to be between 10 and 20% ... whereas physically forced sexual intercourse by women against men is estimated to be between 1 and 3%" (pg. 404)

So there are some figures.

"And why you think this is as big a problem as men raping men, women and children."

I don't, and never said it was.

"My understanding is that most rape and sexual assault is carried out by men"

Absolutely right, all the figures show this. But just because one problem isn't a big as another problem, doesn't mean it isn't still a problem, iyswim.

Good grief, only 14 posts talking about how to prevent rape before we get to 'this is all a feminist conspiracy' type nonsense. One of these days someone will crop up on a b/f thread to tell us it's all wrong because it's a feminist conspiracy to oppress men who are longing to lactate if only women would stop oppressing them or some such codswallop.

Your original comment was this

"I don't like that it completely disregards and minimises male and female victims of female rapists (the implication that your rapist must be 'that guy')."

I would be interested to understand how much of a problem rape perpetrated by females is in society. Do you have any figures? And why you think this is as big a problem as men raping men, women and children. My understanding is that most rape and sexual assault is carried out by men, but if you have evidence to the contrary then that will certainly be interesting.

SQ, I infer you're talking about my post?

I think it's a valid criticism to point out that these campaigns almost always imply a male rapist and a female victim. It might as well say to victims whose experience didn't match that, that their experience wasn't rape.

If everywhere you look, the only picture you see of what a rape constitutes is 'male rapist + female victim', that must be horrible. It tells male victims (around 8-10% of recorded cases) that they weren't victims, it tells victims of female rapists (big issue in, e.g. the lesbian community, but completely unacknowledged and/or ridiculed in the mainstream) that she wasn't a rapist.

I don't think it makes me less of a feminist for saying it.

Sorry if you didn't mean it as a dig, I've just gotten used to anything non-hetero, non-woman=victim attracting 'menz' accusations.

Ah, that would make sense

< scrolls and scrolls back >

I imagine Jux was picking up on an earlier post that everyone else was carefully ignoring

"Women....don't grow a penis"

That could work

I totally see the need for a series of "Women: Dont be that woman who helps or forces a man to penetrate a non-consenting person" posters.

Good God, it takes a large stretch to conjure up a tiny little complaint about these ads such as "it doesn't address the female rapists"

Jux...what happened there, mate ?

Sorry x-post . Slow typer!

Yes I am aware of that eccles. That's why I said a campaign directed at rapists as Jux said.

Ah, x-posts.

The poster mentions sexual assaults so needn't be directed solely at men, Scallops.

Sorry just reread that and what I meant is that in the UK it is only men that can be rapists. So "Don't Rape" campaigns would be targetted just at men.

Well in the UK rape requires a penis so if this poster were to be directed at rapists here then it would be all men, Jux.

Jux?

That sounds much better dilys.

i always felt that the old ones were just money spinning idea for TFL

Plus when those posters were up you were prob most at risk in a black cab anyway