10 Tips to Prevent Rape

[coldwed]

Should this leaflet be handed out to the public?

www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2141096

Has anyone ever heard of a barrister trying to argue that a mugger should get a more lenient sentence because his male victim was of slight build, wearing glasses and walking down a dark alley, hence evidently deliberately putting himself at risk?

Yet this kind of defence is regularly trotted out at trials of one kind of crime only: violent crimes against women.

I find that it's not often men who believe it's "the woman asked for it" but other women. (Obviously, apart from rapists, who certainly do seem to believe that.) Anytime I have discussed rape with men they have had a very clear line about what consent is, much more defined than women I have spoken too.

Which freaks me out a lot.

I think there should be more advertising aimed at women which emphasise what consent is.

I think this is fantastic.

"As thought hey just cant help themselves and dont realise its bad"

This is an argument frequently used by the defence in rape cases. The fact that lawyers will present arguments like this in an attempt to make the jury feel sympathy for their clients shows there is public tolerance for this viewpoint.

No of course not, you fool, would anywone say 'don't worry, if you get raped it's not your fault'? Really?

Of course I would say that they should walk home along well lit streets and in company - but not because that will stop them getting raped. Yes, don't take drinks from strangers, yes get a taxi home, yes stay with other people - no to 'don't wear that, you're laying yourself open to being raped'.

Just because it is trotted out as defence does not make it believable, and it shouldnt be allowed in defence, I have no argument with that, my point is that I cannot see why women should not be encouraged to do all they can to help themselves be safe in the first place.

Surely by taking care of their own safety, they are giving opportunist rapists less ability to offend.

So people who get raped gave the rapists 'ability to offend'? And it is possible to take away that ability, is it?

I'm not keen on it apart from the last point which is simply do not rape. I get it but don't like it.

Also It's concentrating on stranger rape when isn't it more likely that a rapist is someone known to the victim?

Please do not call me a fool Elaine, as that is something which I am certainly not, nor have I lowered myself to personal namecalling either.

I would warn my daughter to be careful about where she goes and with whom. I will also warn my son- there are plenty of ways in which men can think of their safety too.

But if anything ever happens I would still expect the blame to be put on the perpetrator, not the victim- and I would not want to feel that it made a difference whether it was my son beaten up by a robber or my daughter raped by a stranger.

shagmundfreud Any counsel who said that would get shot down in flames and the judge would tell the jury s/he (often she) was wrong.

LaWeasel since juries are usually 4/8, 5/7, or 6/6 and it take at least ten to convict you are obviously right and if that freaks you are out we are both in good company.

Wow...

Squeaky, I used to work in the pubs, long before DS. If I didn't have enough in tips, I'd have to walk home. This involved walking home, alone, down an unlit street, usually in heels, sometimes a little tipsy if I'd had a drink or two after work.

What was I supposed to do, camp out on the bosses floor?

FWIW, I went through a stage where I refused to take lifts off male friends. This was as a result of a "friend" who offered me a lift home one evening. I took up his offer, thinking "ohhh, its someone I know, I'll be safe". He tried to grope me, and had it not been for my phone ringing (I'm still sure my ex is psychic, btw) I'm not sure what would have happened.

And let's not start on the fact that over 80% of rapes are carried out by someone the victim knows.

Well it is bloody foolish to think that those of us who don't think it's the woman's job to not get raped would tell our daughters 'don't worry if you get raped'.

Barristers will say whatever the hell they want to get their clients off.

It doesnt reflect 'society'.

I think this leaflet is intended to make people think- why do we, as a society, in our court system, in the press, treat one kind of violent kind against the person as different from another kind of violent crime against the person, and why does this difference seem to be dependent on sex?

Why will a barrister defending a person on a rape charge do his best to attack the morality of the victim and feel this is a profitable course, when this is far less likely to happen with a victim of non-sexual violence, robbery or fraud?

Elaine, if a stranger rapist is lurking down an unlit street near a nightclub, waiting for a lone woman to walk down there, and all the women have avoided the area, got cabs, stayed with their mates, then yes, it has removed his ability to attack anyone. Quite simple really. If the opportunity is not there, then he cannot rape.

Also, squeaky...

Both of my rapists raped me in my own home.

Should us women just avoid the company of men, just to be on the safe side?

I mean, after all... We don't know who's a rapist, and who's not. And we need to protect ourselves...

Barristers aren't fools, they won't say "whatever", they will say "whatever they think might sway it with the jury". And the jury are ordinary peope, they are society.

Squeaky: the determined rapist will then go and break into a house and rape a woman.

No thanks squeaky. The reason I cut off the rest of your sentance is kind of the point.

The point is that it shouldn't be the case that we, as women, are required to "protect" ourselves from rape (or find ourselves being subject to some kind of "she was asking for it" bullshit) rather the onus should be on men not to fucking well do it - or face some actual serious consequences rather than the joke sentences they currently receive.

Complicated and militant stuff eh?

Is the stranger rapist shackled to the unlit street, then?
And the women in the taxis are now at no risk from ever being raped by anyone else?

squeakyfreakytoy Wed 19-Oct-11 10:51:11
"Elaine, if a stranger rapist is lurking down an unlit street near a nightclub, waiting for a lone woman to walk down there, and all the women have avoided the area, got cabs, stayed with their mates, then yes, it has removed his ability to attack anyone. Quite simple really. If the opportunity is not there, then he cannot rape."

Don't you think after he has lurked down this particular alley for a new nights with no success that he might try a different tack? Maybe targetting women he knows, who have no reason to mistrust him? Or do you think he will give up and lead a virtuous life ever after?

No lassylass they cannot say whatever the hell they want but the ethics of the Bar is too big a subject for a MN post.

But there is one exclusively male section of society which regularly makes its view of rape clear: namely the inmates of male prisons. And they don't like it. They like it even less if the victim was a child but men who have raped adults get a hard time too.

Does it sway the Jury Cory?

Do you have any evidence of this?

Or is it just grandstanding militant claptrap?

[hgrin] Irony is power ... Blokes! Keep it zipped as a knee in the groin can cause offense.

I mean, of course... getting a taxi makes you immune to rape