Woman writes a book with her rapist about forgiving him

I heard them both speak on the radio recently. She did make it very, very clear that while she had chosen to deal with her rape by forgiving him, she acknowledged that it was unusual and that women need to deal with it in the way they are most comfortable. She forgave, others will not. She also made it clear that she forgave him for herself, not for him and that forgiveness does not mean forgetting, just choosing not to let it destroy her.

The writing a book together thing I find very interesting and I must admit I do wonder if there is any sort of power imbalance still there. She struck me as a very, very strong woman who has done and is doing all she can to live her life after what happened, and also to draw as much attention to rape an sexual violence as she can and to try to heal by helping others. She talked a lot about the perceptions of rape (the stranger in a dark alley scenario) and of the victim ('what she wears/how much she drinks/walking home alone at night etc) as being so much of the problem in preventing victims from coming forward, in the lack of prosecutions and in the huge amount of victim blaming (and self blame) that goes on all over the globe.

Him I didn't pay much attention too. He said all the right things but whether he truly believes them or not..who knows.

I have not got the Sunday Times article about the book here with me to quote, but read it this morning. Apparently, in Iceland at the time of the rape it would not have been considered rape. I can't remember the exact reason but think it may have been because she did not fight him, as in the law up until recently in Germany.

The background:
She was 16 living in Iceland, he was 18, an Australian exchange student at her school. They became boyfriend and girlfriend in a very romantic way and she lost her virginity with him. Shortly after this they went to the prom, where she had some rum and became so drunk people wanted to send for an ambulance for her. He said instead, he would look after her and take her home. He took her home and raped her over two hours or more. She felt completely powerless and dissociated, half unconscious but watching the minutes of the clock to not have to feel. Two days later he dumped her. She was badly bruised and in pain for some time afterwards. Her life became a complete wreck.

An interesting thing he said was that for a long time he made it seem to himself that it hadn't been rape, but just sex. Looking back he said he'd just thought they had been out at the prom, she was his girl friend, he should be getting sex at the end of the evening and he was not going to miss out on it. He said it was a feeling of entitlement.. However, it seems inwardly he knew it had been rape and felt guilty, because he couldn't get his life-together.

Another point to come from this book which may help against the rape myth/prosecuting barrister line that 'surely if someone has been raped they would never be with that man again', is that before the much later meeting up with him, which she instigated to try to get to the bottom of everything, she seems to have met him for sex on a few occasions as if to try to regain control - this was not shortly after the rape, but I am not sure when. (The victim of Clement Freud mentioned doing that too.)

They were on newsnight this week. I don't think it is about her forgiving him - it seems clear she hadn't forgiven him and didn't think that him being involved in this made him a good guy again - but it was about her moving on. And the point she was making was that there is always a lot of talk about stranger rape and not much talk of rape in relationships. So they are trying to open up conversations and make sure consent is understood. I wasn't expecting to feel comfortable watching but actually I thought the message was about right.

No woman should ever feel pressured into forgiving her rapist, nor any woman feel she should forgive what men do to us.

He can't be prosecuted now. The crime happened too long ago apparently.

I am halfway through the book and came on here to see if anyone else was reading it. The full story is a lot messier than what has been summarised in interviews/ articles.

I am equally intrigued and repelled by what I am reading. Not finished it yet. I can't quite believe that this was a one-off crime and he has never, as he claims, done anything similar to anyone else.

I've just watched the TED talk and don't know what to think. Of course it is her right to choose to forgive or find peace but I feel uncomfortable about that from his perspective as part of the conversation around sexual violence.

But I've soften felt uneasy about forgiveness when I've read of other traumatic restorative justice examples. Sometimes it feels like a way to cope, to move on. That people deny the reality of their emotions.

There is so much that needs to be spoken about around rape - his messages did not feel strong. I felt really irked when he talked about transferring blame, the blame was aways his and that message should stand independent of his/any rapists's self discovery journey.

I feel uncomfortable about what message is in the book for the teenage victims Thordis hopes to reach.

All TED talks are all rehearsed, memorised speeches, though. Organisers want to (insist on?) seeing written drafts months in advance. A good actor can make it look spontaneous, I suppose.

OK - reading that link Devi posted of the interview with them both hasn't made me any more comfortable with him. Those are not the words of a man speaking from the heart, from a deeply-felt place of contrition - are they?

I came on here to see if there was a thread on this after watching their TED talk. I'm not really sure how I feel about it. It is absolutely her right to respond to her rape - and indeed her rapist - in whatever way she chooses and I admire her courage in speaking out. But I can't really get my head around how I feel about his role in all of this. Does he somehow now present as a "good guy" for acknowledging what he did so frankly and publicly? But would he have done so if he had feared prosecution? - is he just doing this because it is "safe"?

The talk is interesting, if you can bring yourself to watch it - here I think though, it is part of the reason I am struggling with this - it sounds so rehearsed, as if he worked out the "right" things to say - but then it would be rehearsed, I guess.

Sorry, I'm rambling.

I don't think there's been a criminal investigation, no. It's not clear. I've no idea what Icelandic law is regarding statute of limitations, etc.

The thing is, the trouble is, it shouldn't take the man owning up and confronting his actions to transfer the blame from her to him. The perpetrator should not have that power.

Indeed. Perhaps her publicly forgiving him will draw attention to the fact that he did wrong her in the first place.

I can only hope that was the idea behind it; as that would be a rather sensible idea. Though I am not sure if it is a good one. It all depends on what the attitudes are and whether this is actually an improvement (= rape is considered a crime) or makes things worse (= men expect to be forgiven for raping)

I'd be much more impressed if he went and handed himself in to a police station and made a formal confession.

Me, too. Talking is cheap.

Sexual violence is almost exclusively a male issue, meaning that it is done by males.
But I don't think that was what he meant?

I'd be much more impressed if he went and handed himself in to a police station and made a formal confession.

But he hasn't taken full blame because he hasn't accepted the penalty for rape in Iceland, as far as I can tell?

I'm familiar with this story. Thordis (the woman) is a fairly well-known writer and campaigner against sexual violence in Iceland.

She seems to be the driving force behind this project. She found and made contact with him 9 years after the rape, she suggested they meet some years later, and she proposed they collaborate on the book. Their stated intention of the book and TED talk is to put rape in the spotlight so that the shame and blame are moved from the woman to where it belongs: 100% on the man who chose to be a rapist.

I'm not sure how I feel about Tom Stranger's involvement, tbh. He takes full blame for his actions as selfish and horrendous, and describes how he spent years trying to minimise to himself what he had done. It's interesting to hear a man own up like this - it's the exact opposite of the Brock Turner denialists of the world - so perhaps it's good to have the example in the public domain. IDK.

I'd probably be more comfortable with his involvement if I knew he wasn't making money out of the project. (Ive no idea whether he is or not).

It may be "erroneous to address sexual violence as solely a women's issue" as he proclaims but it's certainly the case that sexual violence is an issue which affects women far more than men.

Sanctimonious arsehole.

He was from Australia and was there for a short while on some kind of placement or exchange I think.

Where was he from? (Sorry; I will try to read the article later but it sounds to be something that has potential to make me feel sick.)

Not that him being from, well, anywhere would be an excuse, but Iceland is very far away from pretty much everywhere else, so I wonder how they could have been "teen sweethearts" if he was from elsewhere and didn't spend a big portion of his childhood in Iceland?

But, yeah.

There's backwards countries where women are expected to blame themselves for rape, or not consider it rape at all; and then there's countries that are progressive enough to acknowledge that rape is a crime, but whose law systems are very big on reforming criminals and giving them second chances and forgiveness.

Both shit for women.

The focus on forgiveness is all nice and good for countries that have equality (if there are any) but for any oppressed group, it just does not work.
Forgiveness only begets gratitude if you had the power to have the criminal punished in the first place.

He wasn't Icelandic. She was ...

I've read other views suggesting it's societies fault that men don't realise this kind of scenario is rape and that those men aren't necessarily bad people.

Nonsense. Sure, men might not realise that it is considered rape by law (i.e. that other men would disapprove of them) but they sure as hell know that they harm their victim massively.

I do not have a high opinion of people who have no empathy or morals and think they are entitled to harming others as long as the law allows it.

Admittedly, I do not have the stomach to read this article right now, but I am quite sure this was not the kind of nonconsensual sex where a woman offers to have sex she doesn't want because she thinks it is expected. As if it was that, no one would think the man needs to be forgiven, even.

So, must be circumstances where he knew he was harming her. And that's that.

Iceland is, for all I know, a relatively progressive country. Which means that yes, the man knew very well indeed what he was doing, and the justice system is quite likely focused on forgiveness.

Food for thought. Current thinking is

• has she really forgiven him or has she felt pressured?
• I'd have to know a lot more about how rape is understood in Iceland, how women's rights are understood and whether the youth justice system is geared towards restorative justice / forgiveness (which might colour her thinking).
• my jury is out on the rights and wrongs of restorative justice v. punitive justice, but I do think the concept has some merit.
• I'm worried the case may prompt other women to think they should 'forgive' and other men to think they should be 'forgiven'.