Epidemic numbers? Does something need to happen in epidemic numbers for it to be a problem?
It's often pointed out here that the statistics for stranger rape are vanishingly small. Does that make it less significant? Would you appreciate it if men said 'Well it hardly ever happens so no need for preventative action...'
jacquetta You misunderstood my post actually. I was highlighting feminism's uneasy relationship with the legal system, not suggesting that you were actually campaigning for no trials. 
And why do we need to have real victims? How about acknowledging hurt and injustice wherever you see it, rather than judging the validity of their claim according to their sex, or assuming that people who are concerned about one mustn't care about the other?
I may be wrong, but I thought that feminists would ideally like to see a world in which the sexes were equal and, without diminishing what it means to be female, gender free. But it seems that nowhere are gender lines so entrenched as in feminism.
Your life has been ruined by something you didn't do. Are you female? If so, that's awful. Are you male? If so, get to the back of the queue and how dare you suggest you are a victim too.
Spare the anecdotes aye, we could all be trading anecdotes all night. It's not evidence.
Rape is a special case. Both rape and the accusation of an innocent person having raped are an invasion of privacy in a manner that is unlike any other crime except possibly child abuse. There's no question about that. The courts do recognise it because they grant anonymity to the victim. Until the guilty verdict is passed, the accused is also potentially a victim. It doesn't matter how rarely. Unless the verdict is 'guilty' they are a victim in taking any punishment at all for a crime the court has found they are not guilty of.
This is the unfortunate consequence of, among other things, the 'I believe you' campaign and is, as we have said, unique among crimes except possibly child abuse; we instantly believe the person speaking on their word alone. Feminism has had that effect on many people in society (and I think on balance it's a good thing). But we need to recognise that the impact of 'turning up the volume' of the rape survivor's voice has been to 'turn down the volume' of the accused. To prevent potentially innocent people getting caught up in the crossfire, I believe there are grounds to refrain from publicly labelling a face and a name.
OP, your last post is a case study in bigotry. Men who have not committed rape are entitled to justice and freedom from negative consequences as much as any woman. They shouldn't have to shoulder consequences and be an unfortunate casualty of the feminist cause, simply because other members of their race are despicable people. And thinking this does not diminish my concern for women - that is possible, you know. To care deeply and equally about both sides. In fact, it's the only way you are ever going to win the battle for hearts and minds.
You don't have to stop feeling concern for women - just extend your concern. It doesn't mean we can't throw the book at rapists. Otherwise, how can you, in all seriousness, expect the man on the street to give a flying fuck about you? This is about all of us and about justice, surely, and it goes beyond gender boundaries. If you want a different world, show the way. And no, don't be adorable. Be what you are demanding that they be. Not for them but for yourselves.
tryingtomake I am sincerely sorry for the experience you had, both the event and the aftermath. But please, don't judge the system without having given it a chance. You didn't give the legal system an opportunity to bring this person to justice.