What can we as a society do about rape (Gisèle thank you)?

[crosscross]

Even as Gisèle Pelicot is shining a light...

Cameras in girls toilets...

rapes every single day in the news...

light sentencing (my rapist brother pleaded guilty, lied in court, so spent zero time in jail)...

Metoo forgotten

70000 men on a site sharing info about how to drug their wives and daughters

Men demanding access to girls' spaces

Evert single day more horrors emerge.

We cannot trust men. And yet we all think not my husband not my son (I even think that when it WAS my brother)

Society's no. 1 problem is male violence (sexual, physical, wars)

What can we do?

Get men talking about this. Why are they not already?
Get all rapists chemically castrated. Why are they not?
What else?
Please please please don't let the Gisèle momentum fade because... (Christmas, politics)

Excuse typos... my phone screen is buggered...

@ChateauMargaux

Don't worry about typos, the gist makes perfect sense. I don't know the answer to your question. In many ways, the existence of the videos will have simplified the prosecutions case. The real time evidence is right there.

For those in the know, would it be possible for the videos to be played in closed court? i.e. The judge, jury, court staff, defendants and necessary solicitors with provision for Gisèle's name to be protected by a worldwide enforcable court order? The rest of the trial happening in open court to ensure a fair trial?

In some ways, this makes sense of the German practice of naming the defendant only by first name (so Dominique P). As happened with Christian B, though, all it takes is irresponsible social media users, and the names are out anyway.

As I said earlier, I do feel she has been incredibly brave, but fear it will come back to bite her. One thing she is right about though, the shame isn't and shouldn't be hers.

At least Dominique has decided not to appeal.

It would have been possible for her name to be kept out of the trial and for the video evidence to be seen in private but it was her wish to have all of the information in the public domain.

I believe we need to be able to see the victims and to see the crimes so that we are not swayed by the lines of defence .... 'it was a game', 'I was bullied into it', 'I was of previous good character'... as one of the family said - 'you can not think the unthinkable'... if we did not see the evidence of this woman who has shared her story, we would have not been able to think the unthinkable and would have been more likely to think the best or least bad of everyone involved, that it was a 'sec game that went wrong'. The defence lawyers wanted us and the judges to see their clients as fellow humans and to identify with them, Gisèle wanted everyone to identify with her.

Allowing them to continue to rape is more inhumane.

@ChateauMargaux

In part I disagree. I wouldn't want to see the videos of what was done to Gisèle. It would feel too much like voyeurism. I'm more than happy to trust the jury on that one, that their guilty verdict, having seen the video corroborates what happened to Gisèle. I hope that they are getting counselling. One of the things I've worried about is whether Dominique shared the videos? Are they already out there being watched?

"The defence lawyers wanted us and the judges to see their clients as fellow humans and to identify with them, Gisèle wanted everyone to identify with her."

Is it possible that both are right? They are people, fellow human beings who have chosen to do a bad thing? Can we understand the concept of love the sinner but hate their sin? What would people say of us at our darkest moment? For me, this case is interesting precisely because of the comments being made.

@XChrome

The European Convention on Human Rights outlaws such treatment. As I understand it, there were countries that used to chemically castrate sex offenders. Breaching Article 3 isn't allowed even when the life of the nation is at risk. And you aren't allowed to breach article 3, even in light of their behaviour. You can't, for instance, send a sex offender to a country where they could be killed, subjected to an unfair trial or inhumane or degrading punishment. That's been ratified time and again.

More though, we aren't supposed to wish harm on our fellow human beings, no matter what they have or haven't done. For those who genuinely believe that the perpetrators should be chemically castrated, that opinion speaks loudly about those who hold it. I don't feel it represents an opinion worthy of respect in a democratic society. If they present so much risk, then remove them permanently from society. A humane Alcatraz?

Fit every vagina with razor sharp teeth set to bite anything that attempts to penetrate without permission.

Where rape conviction statistics quoted above are 2%, I think we have to stack the odds in favour of conviction, I do not think the humanity of the rapists needs to be respected in the courtroom where they are being judged for inhumane actions.

I also do not believe that the 'judicial system' (be it in France, the US or the UK) is capable of siding with rape victims and all too often, finds a way of excusing behaviour - they were good men who did a bad thing... and letting them off. Rape is a crime - in the US it is estimated that only 25 out of 1,000 rapist serve time.

If we can shed light on the reality of these crimes, the judicial system may feel obligated to tip the scales in favour of finding rapists guilty.

These and many other violent, humiliating and degrading videos of women are shared by millions of men, every day. Keeping the videos from the press and the public won't protect women, but bringing the crime of rape into the light, to every dinner table where it should be discussed, to every conversation where decent people give their opinion, just might.

https://rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system. (US)

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2024/10/04/french-mass-rape-trial-public-and-press-allowed-to-see-video-evidence_6728201_7.html.

but you are entitled to your opinion..

I think we could start by running a gender equality initiative like the one Caroline Criado Perez described being running Sweden in 2011 - every expenditure of public money had to be examined through the lens of gender. I get so frustrated at the fences, public walkways, cycle paths round my way, that I would avoid using alone as a woman but still have to pay for.

I think this should be extended to a massive review of the legal system which is predicated on very old ideas that we are dragging our way back from. The central concept of our justice system is that it is better for guilty men to go free than an innocent man lose his liberty. In real terms that means that we choose to let women and children (and other men) die. There are umpteen cases of sexual offenders being released in the full expectation that they will rape and kill again: why is it acceptable?

We work off a template that thought that men are basically good unless they are corrupted by bad women/children so the onus is on the victim to prove their character. How many people today honestly subscribe to that belief?

Rape is normalised now. My ex husband raped me multiple times. I'd wake up to him having sex with me. Sometimes I'd wake in the morning and sit up and his ejaculation would come out of me. Sometimes I was very sore, sometimes there was blood. I'd call him out every time and he couldn't seem to see that it was rape. The times I didn't wake and had zero recollection, I now wonder if he'd drugged me. I will never know.

Our son was conceived by stealthing and holding me down by my throat. No regrets with that, he's the light of my life. However, during counselling I was encouraged to report so I did. The police response? "It's your word against his so not much point in pursuing". Absolutely zero point in any of it. I would never ever approach the police again. I will stay single to prevent a repeat of relationship rape. The whole thing is a fucking assault on women.

@Behindthethymes

I agree that the criminal justice system isn't working. As I said before, the countries with the lowest re-offending rates (I don't like the word recividism as I struggle to spell and say it) are those with more liberal attitudes to crime and punishment. Norway, for instance, their reconviction rate within 2 years of release is quoted as 18%, the much harsher US at 70%. Norway is getting something right. What, though?

The problem that you get into - your argument is good, however if you were the one on the receiving end, I suspect you would suddenly disagree. It has to be fair both ways.

@ChateauMargaux

I'll disagree and hope that I can explain why. Rape is a symptom of a much deeper problem. We really need to be addressing the root cause. In my understanding, that's man (and woman's) inhumanity towards other people. I think of Ireland and the political divide that once was (still is?) and the awful acts carried out in the name of God/Country/Football team. It's the same underlying problem.

You can't talk about rape to a three year old - they won't understand. Most three year olds will have some understanding that bullying is wrong. If all parents were teaching their children about responsibilities and holding them appropriately accountable, then when the time comes, the lessons around sexual consent are an extension of what they should have already learned. If we are failing to teach the fundamentals, how can we change anything?

With adults, it's the same conversation - but then look at the mess American politics is in. If they can't get it right, what chance do we have of the knowledge spreading outwards?

@TheFormidableMrsC
I'm so sorry to read of your experience and understand why you would rather choose to be single. I knew a woman who openly bragged about doing similar to her husband. It's the attitude that is the real problem.

I'm the same. I'd much rather be lonely than scared. Loneliness I can deal with, the fear and anxiety was causing active ideation. Take care of yourself.

Agree with this. I think the problem is men don’t want to change… it’s about the exploitation of women to the benefit of men really. And I can’t see how that can change without massive massive massive shift. There’s no advantage to men in change..

@babyproblems
There’s no advantage to men in change..

I absolutely agree with this - it's the same problem with the Police and courts as expressed by @TheFormidableMrsC . What is it that's needed to make it advantageous for change? It's clear tough punishment doesn't work, so what does?

It's clear tough punishment doesn't work, so what does?

I’ve two lines of thought on this. The first is that it’s far from clear at all that tough punishment does not work, because we’ve never had tough punishment for violence against women and girls. Someone’s already mentioned the rape conviction rates- 2%. Men get off for accidentally falling over and accidentally letting their dick slide into position, and because they have their future ahead of them. Plus even with a conviction what punishment do they get? Let’s face it, if they have a male cellmate in prison it probably gives them boasting rights.

The other is that this is what an awful lot of women are asking and the only answer seems to be not to engage with men: 4b in Korea, and the falling birth rates. We can’t live with men in equality and justice, so what’s the point of them.

As for trying to blame Gisele because she brought the glare of open publicity, that’s sickening. Would you feel the same about Gandhi’s idea of civil disobedience, which has long been suggested only worked due to the British free press and publicity?

Mentioning Gandhi and the injustices of imperialism shows that there truly is a problem with the inhumanity of male apes which has been playing out for millennia now. It can get better and worse at different times and different cultures - were clearly in a time of authoritarian crackdown around the world - but the deadly male potential is always there.

I think that there should be far tougher penalties for the kind of crimes that are predictive of escalation.
I’m thinking of obvious examples like flashing, or non lethal strangulation. If those kinds of acts carried 20+ year sentences, we’d go a long way to addressing these problems.

That sort of approach to crime has been applied (zero tolerance/ three strikes, etc) in ways that matter to powerful men. The problem is that they don’t address, and in fact exacerbate, systemic inequality.

But the concept exists. It could be built on.

The first is that it’s far from clear at all that tough punishment does not work, because we’ve never had tough punishment for violence against women and girls.

The difficulty with your statement is that re-offending statistics show that tougher justice doesn't work. Countries with tough justice, like the US and UK have higher recividism rates. That's well known.

I'm struggling with these repeated calls for tougher justice rather than effective justice; specifically as it demonstrates a form of social sadism - the purpose of tough justice is retribution, not healing or restorative justice. You become part of the problem.

Have you been following the gang crackdown by the El Salvadorian President Bukele? In the short term extremely tough justice has transformed the country. However, in the longer term, it hasn't resolved the problem. Those gang members will be bitter and angry, and if released without effective rehabilitation, the civil war that will follow will be horrific. Everyone, men, women and children will be in the line of fire. They know how to use violence and will use it.

How do we rehabilitate society? And to be clear, it is society. In the first instance, banning websites that promote illegal sexual activity. That needs co-ordination internationally otherwise those who wish to access it anyway will use technology to side step the restrictions.

We also need media companies (BBC, ITV, Channel 4, etc) to be an active part of the discussions. Rather than producing material to titilate, let's get programs that educate. We need a message of sexual responsibility. Channel 4 have begun doing some work on this, some of their more recent programming has focussed on the damage being done to women. Campaigning for more of this, and having high profile stars as part of it will help.

Think of Gregg Wallace and the recent scandals with him. How about as part of his punishment he has to be an active part of television programmes that look at the harm being done to women, and he has to honestly promote them. Think of the message that he could deliver, the talking points as he understands the harm he's done publicly and then turns his life around in the spotlight. The message being if he can do it, so can you.

Would it work? I don't know, but I do know what we are doing isn't working.

Men need to bring men up to be better.

It’s all very well bringing up our sons to be decent men, but once in high school our influence is weaker and peers bring each other up, I think this effect is underestimated.

If boys are brought up in a world that accepts porn, prostitution, the sex trafficking that feeds that, in a world that accepts men being in WhatsApp groups that share porn, beheadings, deeply ingrained misogyny, and really sick shit that too often features women, then honestly what do we expect?

I don’t see any change to this until men feel the need to change, and at the moment there are too many women speaking out about how sorry they feel for men with the changes feminism has brought on them. WTF. If things are shit for men right now it’s of their own making. I don’t know why women are expected to take the blame for it, and to fix the mess they’ve made!

In the meantime I will continue to do my best for my sons, to call out misogynistic behaviour each and every time it happens, and I will teach my daughters to have high expectations for the men in their lives.

What is or isn't "humane" is somewhat arbitrary. It's not clear to me that castration is somehow inherently less humane than locking someone up for years on end (in constant contact with the very worst people in society), and yet we allow the latter as a punishment for serious crimes. Our society has decided castration is unthinkable, but it could very easily decide otherwise.

Men's sexual freedom doesn't have to outrank every other consideration. It certainly doesn't have to outrank women's safety.

You grossly violate someone else's bodily integrity, why should you get to keep your own?

Men's understanding of women's place in relation to themselves within society starts from birth.

Little boys see that their working mothers will likely take the lions share of the menial tasks at home.

They can see adult males are physically stronger and can intimidate women easily.

They hear that most of the top wealthy people in the world are male.

They know that 99% of the top sports people who earn millions and are idolised are male.

They can see that women are expected to wear clothing and make up and generally take much greater care of their appearance than men, for male gaze.

They see that women are expected to take up less space than men, just one train journey would confirm this.

They see the magazines on the shelves in the shops, full of images of old white powerful men and young skinny pretty women scantily clad.

They can see that most functional items such as seat belts, cabinet heights and jar cap sizes, to name but a few, have been designed around the average male.

They see the news reports where women are murdered across the world by men for being female.

They know that even if they don't work hard at school they will earn more than their female equals.

They hear adult men talking over women and then see that the men are being listened to over the women.

They see that a woman will likely take her husbands name upon marriage but it is incredibly rare for the man to take hers.

They know that the definition of 'having sex' is all about males putting their penis into a woman and males ejaculating because that is the very definition of having sex. Nothing about the woman's enjoyment in that phrase at all.

Can we change any of these things?

Some interesting comments here. It’s clearly a deep deep deep intrinsic issue for humans and I can’t help but feel women’s’ value and also their inferiority to men is because we are the ones who have children; and no one values that really. It will only be seen as valuable by men when we don’t have enough people to work/pay/ make capitalism function. I don’t know if I really believe we’ll end up in a grim Handmaids tale scenario or similar but I can’t think of any other reason why the men of the human race would change when there is no benefit to them in womens’ empowerment & equality. I wonder if you really asked most men, how many would say that womens’ empowerment is actually worse for men in both professional settings and in day to day small life context. Very happy to be told I am wildly incorrect!!!

The difficulty with your statement is that re-offending statistics show that tougher justice doesn't work. Countries with tough justice, like the US and UK have higher recividism rates. That's well known.

There are too many nuances and subtleties in that statement for the simplicity of the conclusion that male violence against girls and women cannot be punished.

i realise of course that we have returned to the Victorian days of the law existing solely to protect wealth, but I wonder if you do?

More equal societies have lower crime rates full stop, and countries with greater public trust have lower re-offending rates too.

I repeat, male violence and sexual crimes are virtually legal at this point. They are also encouraged by the values of this modern excuse for ‘society’ - of course it is not a society equally for everyone - to specifically target women. We have never had tough punishment for such crimes. There is no specific evidence that it would harm women and some circumstantial that going easy on men does, as pp’s have shown that most will offend when they can get away with it. The damage to women’s morale that sexist values alone causes is also well known (or was).

Generally speaking when we say "we" we mean women. It won't change until men step up.

What if it were an option available, instead of an additional five years prison? Giving the prisoners a choice to reduce their sentence if they want to opt in cannot be inhumane.

That's already been done for some time in the UK. Some sexual predators can volunteer for chemical castration.

I believe arguments against it are that predators don't molest because of sex but power and control and you can rape with objects.

That’s very interesting. I can see reports of trials around 2017 (I don’t think they got time off their sentence) but can’t see anything about what happened after that. It seems that they mostly offered SSRIs, and only more powerful drugs in certain cases.

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2013/jan/18/chemical-castration-soft-option-sex-offenders