Changes in how rape will be investigated- about time!

Yeah, I wondered what that meant too, DF!

"But men as we all know will most likely take the easiest option and go elsewhere"

what? you mean to prostitutes so they can abuse them instead?
or to women who don't have the self-esteem to object?

most men are better than this - I think you do them a disservice.

Wtaf. Decent women?

Whoops, looks like someone forgot to edit properly. Always a problem when cutting and pasting posts. You remember to change the gender but forget that women don't tend to think of themselves as objects to be bought and sold.

We leave that idea to the mysoginists and MRAs

priced out of the market

Heavens, what a lot of rape mythery from one so new to MN.

" why are there so many women invested in defending this lunacy? It makes no sense to me."

I suspect that it's because many women have experienced rapey behaviour from men whom they consider normal nice men. Some may actually have been raped by those normal nice men. There is so much bullshit around rape and rapists and rape victims, that those women are reluctant to identify their rapists as rapists and themselves as rape victims - they have a vague negative image in their minds about what a rape victim is and frankly in our culture, it's almost as negative as the image of the rapist so they are determined not to identify with it.

It's much easier to adopt the sassy, confident "hey, what's the big deal about an unwanted fuck, I should have just been more careful and other women, so should you, don't come running to me for solidarity". They get the double whammy of not having to face up to some unpalatable truths about how they don't have as much choice and autonomy as they thought they have while we have this rape culture and at the same time, getting cookies for man-pleasing. Job done.

I also think a good many rape victims are likely to be reporting with a touch of the 'but was I really raped?' in them - I know a lot of women who have written off experiences that were undoubtedly rapes as 'just a bad night'. Not saying that they don't have every right to do that, if they want to, but I'm sure if you did decide to report, and it was one of those, then if the policeman showed that he might think you were lying, or that he wondered if it was 'really' rape, you might very well think 'oh fuck it, he's probably right' and go home.

After all, we're shown all the time that loads of people will think you weren't raped if you were drunk, or if you went home with the guy. It's hard not to internalise that to some extent.

Yeah, I am tentative to blame individual officers for systemic problems in respective police regions.

That's my hope with this new legislation. It's not that there are a few rotten apples, the apple barrel is rotten and is in need of replacing.

Also in addition, is it not true that most rape victims carry a lot of guilt? Now just so I make myself crystal clear on this issue. No rape victim is at fault for a single thing, so I am not suggesting for a moment rape victims are to blame for the police not taking them seriously. However without specialised training is it not possible that the average plod's bullshit detector is set off by the average rape victim's natural guilt/shame response?

In which case this all has to be looked at carefully, and the training tailored appropriately.

About 20-odd years ago I was at a party where I got talking to some white men in the kitchen. Turns out they were all coppers, covering Peckham, Camberwell, Brixton. So being a stroppy young coloured woman I got into a bit of lively banter with 'da pigs'.

Anyway, one of them said (and the others agreed with) something that has stayed with me ever since, but I've only really started thinking about recently.

He said -

"Every day, from the moment we go on duty, to the time we clock off, we are constantly lied to. Pretty much everybody we deal with lies to us - the criminals lie to us, and even the victims lie to us - or at least don't tell the whole truth"

The example he gave was of a stabbing, where the police were pretty sure that it was some kind of drug or other deal gone wrong but they couldn't get any coherent story from the victim, so they were pretty sure he was lying too.

I generally aim to stay well away from the police round here so I didn't think much more about this, until I started reading FWR.

Now I'm thinking about this again.

Although a long time has past, and many new policies and procedures will have been passed down from upon high, the fact is the day to day life of a copper hasn't changed much. They are still generally dealing with low-life, and no doubt being lied to, day in, day out.

So I wonder - how can they possibly be the best people to deal with rape victims?

Hmmm, there does seem to be a pattern emerging rufus.......

Lurcio it was all a few years ago, before I had really done any research around rape/sexual assault, although even back then the things she said made me uncomfortable. If it were now, I would feel more confident to challenge her, but its not really worth bringing it all back up now. I do wonder what she thinks about the whole Ched Evans thing.......

will

An acquaintance of mine who is also a serving police officer said the same thing

I remember that thread Petula. Depressing.

Willferrell - did you ever ask your friend why she thought this. I mean, the Home Office's own estimate is about 2%, in line with false reports for other crimes like burglary.

A buddy of mine's sister is a police officer, who works in whatever unit or department that tends to deal with these cases, and she is of the opinion that a certain significant percentage of allegations is false (I've not retained the precise number as I believe it's bullshit).

A friend of mine (who really is a lovely woman in all other respects) worked in the rape/sexual assault unit and said exactly the same thing She was very disbelieving and sceptical about the women who reported rapes. I kind of felt i couldnt argue with her as she was the 'expert' who was dealing with these cases every day.

I have no idea if this attitude was shared by her colleagues, but she didn't last very long in the unit, less than a year I think. She left to go into a completely different division, and said that working in sexual crime was 'not for her'.

Lurcio experience on MN suggests that if you suggest such a t-shirt on here you're likely to get the response that "you're too ugly and/or arrogant for my dp to rape you"

Maybe I should get a T-shirt made saying "If I want your penis in me, I will let you know. Otherwise, assume the answer is no." But apparently that's way too complicated and will lead to lots of men being prosecuted for, I dunno, accidentally lying on the floor with an erection while I trip and impale myself on their erect penis.

It's just so bloody baffling. I've had loads of consensual, enjoyable sex in my life. Never has it occurred to me to "climb aboard" a man who was paralytically drunk, or lying there motionless and not participating, or saying "you know, I'm really not sure about this." And (because I've been lucky enough not to have been raped) none of my sexual partners have done this to me. Why are there all these people out there making out that it's complicated? I mean, I can see why a certain subset of men might be invested in defending the idea that it's all massively too complicated for anyone who isn't a rocket scientist to get their head round (the 6% that are rapists and want a useful defence to ensure they never even make it as far as court), but why are there so many women invested in defending this lunacy? It makes no sense to me.

Good christ.

"The bit that stood out for me and had me screaming at the computer screen was where she comments that a drunk women can't give consent and therefore isn't it a double standard to expect a really drunk man to be able to follow appropriate cues. "

This is just a massive logical error though. Because a drunk woman CAN give consent. It's just that one of the ways a person can become unable to give consent is through being drunk.

If the standpoint was 'a drunk woman doesn't know if she wants sex or not' then that would be one thing, and it would then be slightly more fair to ask how a man is supposed to know whether the woman wants sex. That is, however, not the argument. The argument is about women being at a point where they cannot fight off an attacker or even are unconscious. And the fact that it is quite easy to tell when a person is at this point of drunken-ness. Especially when you're having sex with them. And even if it WAS about the woman being uncertain, where the FUCK is the harm in saying 'if you're not sure, make sure, or don't have sex.'

And yes, your point about drunk driving/other drunk crime as well.

People seem to have this blind spot where they forget that someone who has been raped has had a crime committed against them. They aren't on trial but of course they are

There was a piece in The Times today too. Also written by a woman. The bit that stood out for me and had me screaming at the computer screen was where she comments that a drunk women can't give consent and therefore isn't it a double standard to expect a really drunk man to be able to follow appropriate cues.

It was mind boggling to me that a drunk driver can be held accountable. A drunk person who hits someone can be held responsible. A drunk person who decides to damage property can be charged. But of course, if you rape when you were drunk it's just one of those things!? WTF!!!!

Yes Dervel, it's just guidance to beef up what the Police and CPS should have been doing anyway, which is looking at how the accused knew he had reasonable belief in consent.

It's a real shame that it has been misinterpreted as some kind of change in the law, or that men are now guilty until proven innocent, or that, in order to have sex now, you need written consent in triplicate, or any of the other rape myths that seem to have been pedaled out.

Just clarification on the investigation stage of rape allegations(no change from how it should have been done), not in how evidence will be treated in court.

It might be illuminating to your Police friend, who, if I'm honest, shouldn't be working anywhere near women who have been raped, her lack of belief will be palpable for women who already know they won't be believed, and might even be contributing to women not going through with prosecutions. (Thus 'proving' her point)