'Rape' in the media

[Lastofthepodpeople]

Hello Mumsnet feminists,

I hope someone can answer a question for me. I've seen quite a few references to rape in newspaper articles -one most recently today in the Metro but I can't find the link - where rape is referred to as 'rape' in the headline.

My first thought was that it was because any allegations have not yet been proved/gone through court and it was a legal thing, but that makes no sense because I don't see headlines talking about 'assault', 'mugging' or 'burglary' where the crime has just occurred.

Is there a genuine reason for this that anyone knows? Because I can't think of one.

I have to post and run but will check in later.

Can't see it, sorry OP. Of the only two in quotes, one is a quote and the other is a colloquialism.

You would need to see the paper edition really ecclesvet.

OP yes I notice this a lot and I try and put it down to it being unproven (benefit of the doubt) but I find that wears a bit thin after a while. I think there have been threads about this before.

The way a lot of the press reports rape leaves a huge amount to be desired. For so many reasons. This thing that you raise comes from the same place I think as where in the US that senator wanted to change the name from rape victims to rape accusers in all cases except where there had been a guilty verdict in a court of law.

I have never seen this, I'm not in the UK though. The media can't say it's rape unless it has been proven, but there's no reason they can't say alleged rape/rapist or something less ridiculous than 'rape'. I suppose the difference between rape and other crimes is that often it's not just the guilt of the particular defendant that's in question, but whether a crime actually took place at all. It sucks.

This is something I've noticed for years and wondered about. I have seen some where there isn't an alleged rapist, named or not, and will be in reports that are along the lines of 'A 'rape' was reported in x last week'

I guess it is just because the automatic disbelief that seems to come with rape reporting.

I was just looking for the link to this article as a good example of this. I'm pleased to see it's been edited since I first read it.

The headline originally read: 'Michael Hitchin accused of stranger sex' and the only mention of the word rape was in the blue side headline, where it referred to the victim as an 'alleged rape victim', even though Hitchin had been convicted of rape.

I've been really looking since yesterday, and I can't find anything like this here (NZ). The papers/tv often say that someone was raped, without even saying alleged, although alleged comes up too.

I was watching crappy tv last night, a police reality show, mostly drunk people falling over. The have a couple of crimewatch type segments during the programme. One was a sexual assault. It wasn't an unusually violent attack, and the victim had left a bar with the man sometime in the early morning. She then decided she wanted to return to the bar and started walking back, but turned and waited for the man. The victim says he then grabbed her and attacked her, she eventually stopped fighting and told the man to do whatever he wanted. The presenter (a retired policeman) didn't say it was an 'alleged' assault, he said the offender (not alleged offender) they are looking for had sexually assaulted the woman. Thinking back, this is a fairly typical representation of sexaul assault on this programme, and in the media in general.

I was feeling pretty happy with the way rape is represented in the media here, then I thought about it a bit more. You only ever see stranger rape on programmes like that, and the rest of the media covers predominantly stranger rape too, and, in particular, attacks involving violence. I suppose there are practical reasons (they only need the public involved if they don't know who did it, and it's more interesting and newsworthy), but it does give a skewed view of rape as something rare, that is perpetrated by 'abnormal' men.

Not at all relevant to the OP...I'm not sure what my point is...just thinking as I type...

I've noticed that in the media rape is often referred to as assault which makes it seem a much lesser crime like a slap or a kick but of course it can virtually end a woman's life.

The whole rape issue need a major shake up eg woman offficers to police rape victims as they would take it much more seriously, also woman would be much more likely to report rape if they knew they would see a woman doctor ansd woman police officers. I know I would.

Also I applaud the governments advert about rape but it needs to go a whole lot further eg sexaul adssault in school needs to be on a par with the real world and not just hidden away with minimal punishments. Boys then get the idea that they can get awauy with 'touching' girls.

also the recent discussiiobn on rape is a good thing we need to keep it in the public eye.

Rape and sexual assault/assault are different. In NZ only penetration with a penis is rape, I think it's the same in the UK (did a very quick search on legislation.gov.uk, so I could be wrong). I suppose they use the official definition in reporting even if it's an attack that most people would call rape.

In Australia they're trying to implement legislation that if a young girl is 'groomed' into performing sex acts that are taped as a form of rape. When I was attacked by an internet predator they wanted me to be the scapegoat for this. At 14, I just wasn't brave enough.

However I do think it is a fantastic idea. There are more forms of rape than just penetration; like when (rare, I know) a woman rapes a man.