Rape of elderly lady in the news *potential trigger warning* title edited by MNHQ

I'm so disturbed anyone's first assumption is she's lying.

I read it and assumed (and I know this is an assumption based on her age) that something awful must have happened to her and she'd become confused. I didn't know rape doesn't always leave forensic evidence. I just thought there are so many things that might have happened, either sexual assault then or something in the past, that she might be thinking of.

It reminded me of the horrific bit in Jennifer Worth's memoirs where she talks about nursing a woman who'd survived appalling things during WWII then come to the UK. When she was dying, she thought the catheter insertion was some kind of sexual torture. It is awful.

I especially dislike the term sex attack about this sort of thing. Call it rape, attempted rape, sexual assault anything. It's got fuck all to do with sex.

What has upset me about the reporting of this two things...

Firstly, that it made the news at all. Now, don't get me wrong, I would love it if rape were such a rare crime that every single time it happened it made national headline news. But it's not a rare crime, it's a depressingly common one that happens all over the country every single day. So why was this one reported. Yes, as others have said, because she was old. Which busts just about every rape myth out there, and no rape apologist in the world is going to say that a 90-year-old was somehow asking for it. Other cases don't make the news because at the heart of it, the general consensus is that the victim brought it on herself somehow.

Secondly, that every time I've heard it, they have added the disclaimer about no evidence being found. As if the default is that she's probably lying. Because as the rape myths would have us believe, most allegations of rape are false. The only question is, why would a woman of such advanced years make a false allegation? We know why younger women do it - regret after sex, revenge etc etc. But a (probably) asexual elder woman? What a mystery?

So basically, the only reason this is news is because it flies in the face of rape myths. Oh, and it's sensational, because who on earth would want to shag a granny in the first place, right?

So, the same rape myths are now being applied to this elderly woman as would be if this had happened to any of us? Why am I not surprised?

The Police need to explain their media releases on this.

I doubt the woman had any control over them at all.

It's not my impression from the reports that the clothing is being mentioned with a view to finding witnesses - and if the police wanted to appeal to witnesses they could simply say 'this road, at this time', as that is known.

There really isn't any justification of printing these details in the national press as I wouldn't have thought they are likely to get new witnesses through national news reports anyway.

The only function it serves in a national news report is satisfying the curiosity of the knobs who will say 'Oh but what was she wearing?' where the subtext is 'was she responsible for it?'.

Just I haven't seen it but other posters haven't mentioned it was in a "please come forward if you saw anything" style. Like I say, not seen it myself though.

Well quite Bom.

They have swung from one extreme to another, with both extremes doing fuck all to assist with the general situation with victims of sexual violence. Or indeed this actual victim.

A monumental fuckup all around who is letting these idiots talk to the press?

I understand your pov but I don't agree. I think the rape of a very old woman is simply more newsworthy.

There isn't enough time or space to be aghast at every rape, and there never will be. For a rape to be reported nationally it has to have further aggravating factors.

And yes I did physically shudder when I heard the headline. I dont always do that when hearing about violent crime or even rape. I can only apologize for the narrow mindedness of my visceral reactions.

Now that I think about it the reporting of what she was wearing (the Times also carried it, I have just seen it) must have come from a police media release, which was then just mindlessly parrotted by all the papers.

WHY do the police issue this kind of information? It's totally irrelevant and does great harm by promoting the idea that what you are wearing could be linked to whether you get raped or not.

Quite often there isn't forensic evidence after a rape though.

And they still have the Cyril Smith scandal to explain.

Just read the Guardian piece.

WTF are the police thinking of here. They are mishandling this enormously. I am really shocked by their latest statement seriously taken aback. They are now basically making a statement to say "yeah we think she imagined it or something" because there's no forensic evidence?

I am boggling here.

I like the way they basically say she made it up and then sort of sigh and say but of course we have to investigate all reports as if, you know, what a bind.

Superintendent Alistair Mallen, of Greater Manchester police, I am looking at YOU, go on a fucking course or something why don't you.

Well, exactly, Lotta. It seems like the Rochdale police have played this out far too publicly like some kind of media-seeking morality play and the people it'll mostly hurt are women.

Why are the police putting out statements of this nature?

What she was wearing
How far they are getting with forensic evidence
All the rest of it

Oh I dread to think of the sort of comments that news will attract Line Runner

Yes, good thread, and I feel the same as the OP.

The Police are now saying - looking at the Guardian website here - that they have found no forensic evidence that there was a rape. This is all now far too uncomfortably public.

Good thread - I agree absolutely that the reporting has been completely different to if it had been a 20 year old or a 40 year old woman. And in stark contrast to the descriptions of the 'girls' in the Rochdale case and other similar horrific cases.

I guess rape apologists would describe this as a 'real'rape - grabbed off the street, frail and defenceless victim, hadn't been drinking or behaving in any way like a 'slag'etc etc. But then I read that some reports contain details of what she was wearing. What the actual fuck?

But the difference in the level of shock is not the same.

An 80 year old getting mugged attracts less outrage than this crime.
A 20 year old being mugged will be treated in an entirely different way - they will feel able to report it to the police, police public and society will believe them etc etc. Unless there is good reason, no-one will assume or suggest that they are making it all up, or that they were asking for it etc etc

It's like when a vulnerable person - a "proper" victim - is raped it is treated as the worst crime possible (rightly so).
When a woman or girl of child bearing years is raped it is treated as just a standard occupational hazard of being female and really why make a fuss and she's probably not entirely "innocent" in the situation anyway. Unless of course there are other aspects that nudge it into the territory of "proper" victim eg being kidnapped by a stranger and brutally beaten as well.

Of course you are right that crimes against children / the elderly / animals even are seen as worse. But the disconnect here is larger than can be explained solely by that.

Going into detail about what she wore would be like going into detail on whether a victim of a mugger was poor or well off. More outrage if an elderly poor woman had her life savings stolen versus a well off person who could afford the loss? It's still a crime either way, even if the former is more shocking.

I know what the Op is saying...
but take the rape aspect out.
I can think of cases were old people have been burgled/mugged etc and the perpetrators also get called sick and perverted...
It is our expectation as a society that we will protect and not harm the vulnerable - and it is perverse not to do so.

A 20 yr old getting mugged would also not get the same coverage as a 80 yr old.

What she was wearing? Good grief.

I can't envisage a report where a person who is a victim of a different type of crime gets their clothing detailed, unless there is a reason for it ie did anyone see anything can they come forward.

I can only assume it's because it's received journalistic wisdom that any reports on a sex crime has to include what the victim was wearing. They don't tend to do it for children though do they. How do their brains even work.