Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Reporting on the BBC (and elsewhere)

30 replies

SevenZarkSeven · 19/07/2014 10:49

Just noticed something on the BBC today.

There have been many thread where it has been raised / touched on about media reporting of sex crimes and how many on here feel that a lot of reporting seems to imply that the accusation is all a bit dubious, because of the whole woman "raped" type headlines, with the "".

And noted that often it seems to be that "proper" victims will be described as having been raped, while other victims will have been "raped".

Others say that while it is an accusation it needs to have the "" and this is a legal thing and in no way is meant to imply that anyone might be making anything up however that doesn't stack up for me as I'm sure the "" are not applied consistently in situations or across crimes.

In my heart I feel that many reporters, when reporting sex crimes, think well I need to put it in "" as these often turn out to be untrue. Not consciously even, maybe.

Anyway, today on the BBC is an article about victims right of appeal that says this:

"Among the 146 successful victims' appeals were 80 cases of violence and 27 involving alleged sexual offences."

It just made me so mad! What do you feel about this? Given that the media shape public opinion, this sort of stuff sends a strong message, right? What can be done?

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
JustTheRightBullets · 21/07/2014 08:19

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MontyGlee · 20/07/2014 23:04

I don't think I'm wrong at all.

I'm sorry to hear about your experience.

JustTheRightBullets · 20/07/2014 17:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Sicaq · 20/07/2014 17:49

Agree with a PP about the inconsistent use of "alleged". I've never heard a news report of an alleged burglary.

JustTheRightBullets · 20/07/2014 17:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

JustTheRightBullets · 20/07/2014 17:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MontyGlee · 20/07/2014 17:40

It's rarely a disputable aspect of violence that the act itself occurred; the question of consent to violence is highly unlikely. However, rape may or may not have occurred when the act of penetration took place. There's a clear difference and Carol is correct to highlight it and shouldn't be flamed.

fejexu, on the other hand, is clearly just being a prat.

JustTheRightBullets · 20/07/2014 17:30

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

caroldecker · 20/07/2014 17:23

I was only positing a potential reason for the difference in reporting, not my position on the matter

caroldecker · 20/07/2014 17:23

I was only positing a potential reason for the difference in reporting, not my position on the matter

Bifauxnen · 20/07/2014 13:47

At least she did get jail time, instead of eg. Being told to buy the child a bike as compensation.

Original poster
SevenZarkSeven · 20/07/2014 09:50

There were threads about this case at the time with a lot of posters concerned about leniency. I shared the contact details for the government office that you can complain about unduly lenient sentences.

I am surprised to hear that the judge on this case was a leading feminist, although I guess it's not that surprising given the huge numbers of feminists in positions of power in the UK. I mean I can't think offhand of any judges who aren't feminists Wink

OP posts:
JustTheRightBullets · 20/07/2014 09:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AuntieStella · 20/07/2014 08:37

I agree that the linked news article could have been better written. But I'm not sure that including a basic guide to the law on sexual offences would have clarified any particular aspects.

You seem very interested in this specific case. Has there been a transcript / case report (or whatever it's called) on it?

fejexu · 20/07/2014 00:45

One more thing the url says she is jailed for having sex with an 8 year old (shouldn't that be rape, or are women unable to be rapists?)

Yet the article doesn't say sex and only says sexual activity.

So did she or did she not have sex with an 8 year old child? Is she a rapist as well as a pedo? If yes, shouldn't she spend more than 12 months in prison??

fejexu · 20/07/2014 00:41

She was jailed but can be released after only 12 months.

Her lawyer said " "Her immaturity at 21 means she cannot accept the facts yet.".

What is that supposed to mean? 21 year old women aren't mature enough to take responsibility for their own actions?

fejexu · 20/07/2014 00:37

www.herefordtimes.com/news/regional/herefordshire/11086362.Herefordshire_woman_jailed_for_having_sex_with_eight_year_old_boy/

Why is it when a woman sexual assaults an 8 year old boy it it's called "sexual activity" and not "sexual assault" or "molesting"?

Oh yeah I forgot, under the "patriarchy" women aren't responsible for their own actions. According to feminism she isn't a pedo she's just a victim of the patriarchy rolls eyes

The judge gave her leniency because she stopped molesting "sexual activity" with the child on her own terms (after 5 years). Perhaps the child was getting too old for her she realized the error of her ways and deserves leniency?

And that pic they posted of her grinning with a tab in her mouth sickens me.

I wonder What would happen if the genders were reversed? Would a pedo man be afforded leniency if he stopped after 5 years?

Original poster
SevenZarkSeven · 19/07/2014 17:19

Yes true. I don't think you're going to get a sorry but a guilty verdict would be a good start.

OP posts:
JustTheRightBullets · 19/07/2014 17:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
SevenZarkSeven · 19/07/2014 17:00

Justtherightbullets i agree it's got to be all or none in the reporting, consistent. Otherwise you are sending quite strong messages to your readership which are quite dangerous messages.

I am so sorry for what was done to you.

OP posts:
Original poster
SevenZarkSeven · 19/07/2014 16:57

You can wallop yourself in the face carol, and look like violence has been committed against you.

You can say your lost stuff has been stolen when it hasn't (and indeed people do for insurance purposes).

I don't think your argument holds much water really.

The difference of course is that people including reporters are primed to disbelieve females of childbearing age when they report sex offences, in a way that does not tend to occur for sex offence victims outside that group, or other crimes full stop.

The person writing this article didn't look at the detail of the 80 crimes they classified as violent and see that each one had evidence of violence, and then at the detail of the 27 categorised as sex offences and see that in all cases there was no evidence and the defendant was arguing consent. That just didn't happen. Maybe you are making some of the same assumptions as the reporter? Worth thinking about.

OP posts:
JustTheRightBullets · 19/07/2014 16:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

JustTheRightBullets · 19/07/2014 16:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

scallopsrgreat · 19/07/2014 15:51

But there is often plenty of evidence rape has taken place too caroldecker. It isn't an invisible crime. I'm pretty certain that it wouldn't be alleged burglaries either. Yet often you've got to take the victim's word that a burglary has taken place. So not buying that.

Plus they are confirming that these people are victims of the crime they state, otherwise why would they have been successful in their appeal?

caroldecker · 19/07/2014 14:38

I think that where the offence is proved, but not the perpetrator, they do not need to use alleged. I would suspect for the majority of rape cases not involving "proper" victims, the alleged offender is claiming consent, therefore there is doubt to whether a crime took place. If you are punched, there is violence, even if the perpetrator is unknown.

Swipe left for the next trending thread