The tone of the coverage of the Reynhard Sinaga case. *Title edited by MNHQ*

[Dogsaresomucheasier]

Just watching tonight’s news. I do not wish to minimise the trauma suffered by the victims of Reynhard Sinaga, but I’m really struggling with the reporting of the case; even from female journalists. It seems so full of empathy and gravitas, when so many female victims go unheard.

men raping women on a semi regular basis is a really hard problem to solve. It’s so ingrained in our society. Our make up as humans. It’s almost an unsolvable problem.

So you'd agree with the OP when she says: "I’m really struggling with the reporting of the case; even from female journalists. It seems so full of empathy and gravitas, when so many female victims go unheard."

I heard just as much empathy and gravitas surrounding John worboys victims.

I don’t think the reporting is the problem here.

The main problem is unless there is video evidence or hundreds of people coming forward. It’s fucking hard to convict anyone of rape unless it’s accompanied with battery. And even then it’s hard.

aroundtheworldyet Tue 07-Jan-20 01:05:58
I think we are on the same side here. So let’s not argue.

Ah, good to hear. Ok.

Whataboutism at its finest

John Worboys allegedly raped/sexually assaulted over 200 women, was convicted and received a minimum sentence of 8 years. Not life.

He was then almost released from prison without informing some of his victims that he would be free. The parole board chair had to resign.

Tell me that there isn’t a huge difference in that case and the current one? Still hundreds of victims, but which ones were put at risk again?

Whataboutism at its finest

www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/whataboutism-origin-meaning

No. It isn't.

John worboys as far as I am aware got an indefinite sentence. Only allowed to appeal for parole if not considered a danger.

Also unfortunately as far as the law is concerned, he was convicted for a fraction of his crimes. The law is the law.
If he’d had been convicted for more crimes it may well have been a very different sentence.

Completely agree with you OP. The reporting of the rapes of females is shameful - and is usually called "sex" in some way (forced sex, i consensual sexual). I don't have to explain why language is SO important in the media. But the word rape has (rightly) been consistently used in this case. Also I never heard anyone doubt the victims story, claim they were "making it up after regretting having sex" or asking what the victims were wearing or what they were doing going to a strangers flat.

The law is the law, and in cases of rape, it seems to be almost universally shit for women.

Don't get me wrong - I think that the male victims of this monster deserve every respect - I just wish women victims had the same respect.

There was a woman who recorded her own rape on her phone - but still the man got found not guilty. Because she wanted it, apparently.

159 sex offences, probably more, of course it’s news worthy.
Rapists and serial killers of women have had the same amount of press.

OP he had 190 victims! 190! We can't swerve the fact that men get raped too - and it is often under-reported by men.

I am sympathetic to anyone in that situation. And I think the recent coverage of the Cyprus case shows that reporters are very concerned and critical of the female victims treatment by the Cyprus court and police.

I think the female rape victims are often reported as silent - whereas here there are lots of direct quotations from victims as to how they felt/feel. I think the problem with how your post comes across is that it's as if the victims should not be treated so well (better than women), the implication being it's just because they're men. TBH I also thought wow we never hear this much from female victims - we never hear anything.

But it's not that these men shouldn't be heard - of course omg they should. I think it's that all reporting of all rape cases should be as sensitive and should offer the victim the chance to say how they feel.

Glummy yes v v good point about the word 'sex'.

I think the unspoken observation here too is that the victims must have been anally raped. This is perceived as more of a violation, and I imagine that, depending on the severity of the force used/disregard for the victim, anal rape has the potential to be more painful.

It is all horrific, though.

We're going a while back here, but there used to be a partial defence to murder of provocation. (It's been replaced now.) Convincing the jury that you had been provoked reduced your charge to manslaughter which gets a shorter sentence than murder. Many critics noted that men managed to get their murder charges of wives reduced to manslaughter for "nagging". A woman saying something too many times was sufficient provocation. Finding out that your wife had cheated on you seemed to be sufficient too.

Interestingly though, in a landmark case, a 15 year old boy failed to successfully plead provocation when he killed a man who had just raped him and was convicted of murder.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DPP_v_Camplin

I've never understood what was going on there. What happened in the jury room?

The difference in the way it is being reported really should be a wake up call to journalists and editors.

One example I've found from a very quick google - 1 in 16 girls in US "forced to have sex" - no they were raped FFS!!

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/2216482-one-in-16-us-women-were-forced-into-having-sex-for-the-first-time/amp/

I think the unspoken observation here too is that the victims must have been anally raped. This is perceived as more of a violation

I think you're right - the courts in the UK have not caught up with "Teen Vogue" fashion for 'anything goes' yet.

I can't say too much about this - but I was witness for prosecution for my friend in her rape case. He was charged with rape, oral ape and anal rape. He got off on the first two - and convicted on the anal rape. The Judge described it as "an unnatural act" in the sentencing.

Agree OP. I was very struck by reporting of the victims being horrified and shocked this had happened to them. The fact is, women so much more expect to be raped that that level of shock isn't there.

You sound deranged

Sooo much better than to fling about accusations than provide evidence for opinions.

Nice, Yarbosucks. Really nice.

We're only asking why female rape victims aren't treated with the same respect.

@BewitchedBotheredandBewildered

I was just about to make the same points. This case really is unique - I do think the reasons you stated are the reasons why this person was able to be so prolific in the first place. Heterosexual men don't tend to consider that rape could happen to them. The rapist was also effeminate and of small build. Not considered a 'threat' to most men.

It's a very unusual set of circumstances.

Not the time or place for 'what about the womenz'.

Agree there has been a different tone of reporting on this, compared to when a serial rapist of women or even a serial child molester is sent down.

There just isn't the respect or assumption that the victims did not welcome the rapist's actions i.e. it was rape. When the victims are women and children. There is always an undertone of victim blaming.

What makes me really angry is that most rapists and molesters ARE prolific as this specimen was. Yet victim blaming means they rarely face justice even if they do get convicted. Sick.