to be utterly shocked at the attitudes to rape expressed on BBC 2 today?

[WriterofDreams]

Today, Jeremy Vine discussed the "slut walk" protests organised by feminist groups in response to the comment made by a Canadian police officer who told a group of lawyers that women should avoid dressing like sluts to help prevent rape. He spoke to the editor of "The F word" who unfortunately didn't give a very good argument IMO and failed to make the point that blaming the victim of any crime is just plain wrong. What really shocked me though were the views expressed by listeners which for the most part centred around the idea that scantily clad women are asking to be raped. One man actually said it was men's biological urge to have sex and women are exciting that by dressing like "sluts" and so they basically deserve what they get.

Frankly the whole thing made me sick. I was abused as a child so I know how much a victim tends to blame themselves for what happened. To tout this point of view is only to increase the suffering of victims IMO and does nothing to actually help decrease rape seeing as rape is very very rarely the "down a dark alley" scenario so beloved by many but is more often committed by friends, relatives and lovers who couldn't give a toss what their victim is wearing.

AIBU to think focusing on what women is wearing is basically blaming women for rape and in fact totally pointless anyway as there is no proof whatsoever that scantily clad women tend to get raped more often?

Parakeet, the legal definition of rape is penetration without consent. Therefore it is about doing something against the express wishes of the of the victim or under the assumption despite express consent that a woman wishes to have sex. Therefore it is about having the rapist's way with the woman's body regardless of what the woman may say out loud or regardless of what she may feel but not say. Therefore is is about a male doing whatever he wants to with a woman. Domination, in other words.

I recommend the work of Nicholas Groth, 'Men Who Rape; The Psychology of the Offender', and this article fyi.

StewieGriffinsMom When I say my friend is a court reporter she is the person who sits at the front of the court and transcribes everything said/done in court. She does not work in the media. She is greatly affected by her job and is taking a sabbatical for 6 months starting this September.

Yes a lot of cases do not make it to court but here in the New York region things are improving. There is a case going on right now where two police officers have been accused of raping a female. The police officers gave evidence yesterday and used the excuse of 'there was consent'. Even on fox news this morning the presenters had raised eyebrows when they introduced the news item. Considering that the presenter is the son of the NYC Police Commissioner and it is Fox news, I was expecting them to back the Police officers. It will be interesting to see how this case works out. I doubt this case would have made it to court 5 years ago.

No-one believes the consent crock, deep down. And there were two officers? Yes, a woman who didn't know them from Adam wanted to have sex, with both of them. Because women are always up for it and nothing turns a woman on like a uniform, no matter what her personal circumstances are, how her day is going, how long it's been since she encountered the uniformed officer, blah blah. Even Fox wouldn't buy that.

The issue of consent shouldn't really be a grey area. If a woman is up for sex she will be enthusiastic and at the very least co operative. Surely a man who has any skill or knowledge in the bedroom will recognise when a woman isn't fully participating? I know a couple of times I've been distracted during sex and my DH has noticed straight away and asked if I was ok and if I wanted to stop. A man who just ignores his partner and carries on regardless of whether she is actually participating clearly feels entitled to his pleasure and has no regard for the feelings of the woman. I believe that a woman has the right to withdraw consent at any point during sex, even if they are already in the middle of it. The idea that consent is absolute and once you have said yes you have to go through with it is just sickening and totally gives the message that men must be catered for no matter what the feelings of the woman

It's fairly clear to me that the 'no-means-no' message has got through to the vast majority of men. I am 48 now and remember being told it when I was a teenager.

However, I also agree we need to go further and giving teenagers the sensible advice from want2b might not be a bad idea. Setting your own boundaries and being clear and vocal about what you want and don't want. Of course, this does not abbrogate the responsibility of men to stop if a woman changes her mind and it won't stop someone intent on rape. However, I DO wonder how many young women end up in a difficult social situations or going through with sex when they don't really want to because they haven't been clear about what they want and don't want.

I recall reading about the experiences of a young gay man in London in the 1980s who felt he had been violated and 'raped' by older gay men he met on the gay club scene. Being young and inexperienced he didn't have the confidence or know how to set boundaries and was basically taken advantage of. He was looking for loving consensual physical relationships but the experience was often unpleasant for him - even though he had always given consent and no police officer or jury would have given him the tme of day if he had made a complaint. If he had known how to set boundaries and clearer about what he wanted when he gave consent his experiences would have been very different and far more pleasant.

Nothing to do with what clothes he was wearing either.

I have been knickerless with several men I didn't have sex with (teenage fumblings) - it didn't give them the right to stick their cocks up there without my permission, and funnily enough none of them attempted to.

As I have said before, I have SN and sometimes misinterpret situations, I was in bed with one guy, we got a bit carried away, I realised 'oh crap, he thinks he's getting sex' (I was a virgin at the time and didn't really want to lose it with a mate I'd just started snogging until I knew him better and we were a proper couple, rather than friends with benefits). I stopped, said I thought we were moving too fast. He didn't then get arsey and say 'well, you were lying, clothed, on this bed with me, kissing me and letting me finger you so now you aren't allowed to say no, you've given me consent for the rest so that means I get to do what I want regardless of what you want'. He said 'ok' we watched a film and then he went home.

I had a male friend at Uni who lost his virginity pretty late (20s), beforehand a very drunk girl made a pass at him at a party. He decided she was far to drunk to consent so he didn't have sex with her and came home. He really wanted to have sex but he knew it was wrong, all his male housemates, including my DP said he'd done the right thing - you don't have sex with someone who's so plastered she keeps passing out because she can't give informed consent.

Yes means yes is a much better message than no means no.

True MoreBeta - I think an awful lot of women and some men have been in a situation where the did actually consent so it wasn't rape per se but in truth they didn't want sex at all and were pressured into it. Young girls especially need to be taught that it's ok to want to protect their bodies and that they don't have to give them to men in order to be cool or accepted among their peers. They also need to be taught to stand up for themselves in difficult social situations and to be given the confidence to say no at any point in a sexual encounter without feeling like a "prick tease" (ohhh how I loathe that term!!!).

It really surprises me to read threads on the relationships forum from grown women who feel compelled to give their partners sex in order to keep the peace - both men and women need to be taught that no one has an absolute right to sex and that if a partner doesn't want sex, no matter what the relationship, that it's not ok to pressure them or to expect them to give in regardless of their feelings.

I've been reading this post since last night, had to take a break because my connection went down.

Slavewife, you might have been scantily clad, I was wearing jeans, a jumper, black shoes and my dad's coat that he gave me as I'd recently left my XH with nothing. I wasn't his first victim either, he didn't care what I was wearing, it all came off. He was 19, the rape officer was in her 30s and she said she had never felt like she did sat with him with anyone else, she said being in the same room with him she knew he was a rapist. I think it unnerved her with her age and experience being made to feel like that by a teenager.

I have to absolutely disagree with the idea of a "yes means yes" campaign because without doubt its positive message will be twisted to mean that if someone says yes at any point then that yes is absolute and the person can't change their minds. Can't you just see small minded idiots spouting "yes means yes" in defence of some famous person who went too far with someone who got naked? In their minds a yes in the club would mean a yes in the bedroom and that definitely should not be the case.

The thing is most normal people don't need a definite yes or no, they're able to judge at all points in an interaction, especially an intimate one, how the other person is feeling and work from that. A person who says "I didn't realise she didn't want it" is either completely deaf and blind or just plain lying IMO. It's very very obvious when a person isn't fully participating in or enjoying sex and most men will pick up on that straight away. The ones who ignore those signals and carry on shouldn't be allowed near women IMO.

Want2bSupermum in the UK they have to be 80% sure of a conviction before they will take it to court. If you know your attacker, met them and went somewhere with them or aren't black and blue you're not likely to get past the CPS.

Yes, confuddled, a rapist will rape and give themselves whatever "excuse" they feel like. A woman's appearance is convenient to seize upon, but as your experience shows, it's mostly down to the victim's pure bad luck at coming into the rapist's radar. Nothing the victim did conjured up a rapist, including wearing revealing clothing. Decent men don't rape.

I have been in bed with men a couple of times - bed-sharing for convenience sake - and in both cases they made a few cautious overtures. But when I made it clear I wasn't interested (by turning my back on them and saying "night night") neither pursued it further. Decent men don't rape, even if a woman has voluntarily got into bed with them.

want2b it was this category:

"The unclear consent rapist - these are men who think a girl who has given the green light but the girl hasn't. These are the cases that make the news because the evidence is so thin and it is up to the jury to decide. My friend said that it is often the result of a female not being in a fit state due to drink and/or drugs or consent being given and then withdrawn later. In my friends opinion, due to the ambiguity of the evidence, judges are relucatant to hand out a stiff sentance. These guys normally get 10 years at most."

Or POSSIBLY these men are lying and they knew full well what they were doing and are saying that it was all a misunderstanding to try and get away with it. Why is there no room in your categories for "normal" men to knowingly rape? Given that is what happens most of the time. This idea that rapists can only be violent drug addled psychopaths, and that if a "normal" man is accused of rape it must simply be a misunderstanding the poor chap, it's nonsense.

Beta - she and the court psychologists think it relates to the fact men can believe what another man is capable of, and see the woman as a victim. The women judge the other woman for being a 'slut' or for 'having asked for it' by being drunk, dressed in a miniskirt etc. Pretty horrendous when you think about it, but women are always more scathing of each other than men are, in general. That attitude was compounded by the radio show on yesterday.

I rarely get an opportunity to quote Mean Girls, but as the teacher in that says: 'Stop calling each other sluts and whores, it only makes guys think it's okay to call you that too.' By damning other women as being culpable due their clothing etc, it's mitigating the rapist and creating circumstances where rape is expected and somehow more acceptable. It's never okay if a girl says no, no matter what.

Florence - Personal responsibility my fucking arse!

A Big Issue vendor who raped and cut a student after she agreed to celebrate his being housed was yesterday locked up indefinitely.

Michael Murphy, 39, of Grosvenor Road, Forest Gate, who has a string of convictions for violence including the killing of his father, harboured 'murderous fantasies against women.

The attack came after he was befriended by an 18-year-old student while he distributed the copies of the weekly sold by the homeless.

The Old Bailey heard how Murphy lured the girl back to his new flat where he plied her with drink before raping her and cuttining her back more than 33 times with a 12in carving knife.

Murphy was arrested after he fled to Manchester but was traced through The Big Issue.

Dr David Hamilton, from Rampton hospital where Murphy will be held, said Murphy 'harbours murderous fantasies against women. If he was released the public would be in grave and immediate danger. He has a psychopathic personality disorder.

The above case happened during the day.

then 12 yrs later..... the same man

Wednesday June 10 2009

A 54-year-old convicted rapist and killer from Manchester, who escaped from a psychiatric hospital in the UK in 2006 and raped a tourist in a Dublin hotel has been jailed for life.

Michael Murphy was on the run when he punched and raped the English woman in the bathroom of her hotel room in March 2007.

Mr Justice George Birmingham, in handing down the highest penalty, described the offence as truly appalling.

How much personal responsibility would you put on these 2 victims?

The grey area / coercion type scenarios are all very interesting but I just want to remind that the rapes reported to the police are not of these types. Women know the rape myths, they know what people and the police think. They understand that if they have been raped by someone they know, someone they were happy to do stuff other than full sex with, if they were drunk etc etc it is going to be very unlikely to go anywhere, and they know that reporting rape is a difficult experience. Women who are raped do a self-screening process - they judge for themselves whether it is worth reporting or not - and the vast majority of women who are raped don't report it, many never tell anyone. So the cases which get to the police are in the most part cases where the woman thinks there is a reasonable chance of it getting somewhere - she said no, she has injuries, he followed her home etc etc etc. So while the "grey area" conversations are interesting, these are not the cases that the police are generally dealing with IYSWIM.

I'm not sure what your point is SardineQueen. Surely the issue of consent and women's safety still matters whether it's reported to the police or not?

Of course it does.

I just know that on threads like this conversations often veer off into talking about "grey areas" and specific situations with people arguing whether they are/aren't rape, and that feeds into an idea that the low conviction rate is because silly drunk women are being silly and then go "running" to the police. We have already had that suggested on this thread. But in fact that is not the case at all.

Talking about different situations is all well and good but people should never forget that in the vast majority of cases when a woman reports a rape to the police it's a pretty clear cut case.

The fact that women are doing this self-screening is a big problem as it masks the true extent of the problem.

Yes. A friend of mine was raped, and she "self-screened" as you put it, and decided not to report, because she thought there was:
a) little chance of prosecution, never mind conviction, and,
b) a possibility that any investigation would result in him retaliating against her.

And so another bastard roams freely.

WriterofDreams/StewieGriffins - I agree with your point that men in a close relationship of a reasonable duration should be able to 'know without receiving a definite yes or no' that their partner is not enjoying sex. I know I would definitely know.

However, I dont think if was on a jury that I could convict a man of rape where a woman did not give a definite indication either way or if she said yes but actually admitted she privately felt she didnt really want to. I could only convict in those circumstances if there were some evidence of coercion, violence, physical restraint or if the woman was incapacitated with drink or drugs so she could not properly give consent.

SardineQueen - your point is well taken that in RL there are relativelyfew grey area cases such as I describe above because in reality they are filtered out by the victim/police/CPS before a jury ever sees them.