So in the wake of a massive public spotlight on rape, the priority apparently is to protect the reputations of the tiny % of men falsely accused of rape

[FastidiaBlueberry]

FFS FFS FFS

Is it very cynical of me to think that this new demand to enable anonymity for men accused of rape (most of whom are guilty, but get off anyway) is a psychological need to re-establish what is most important to these woman-haters?

Stop talking about the mountain of rape victims who never get justice and FGS start talking about the anthill of men who get falsely accused.

Enough of Steubenville, Delhi, Frances Andrade, Jimmy Savile's victims, the 1 in 4 women who are raped or sexually assaulted.

Let's get back to talking about the really important issues - the miniscule number of men who will be falsely accused of rape or who will be the victim of mistaken identity. Fools, don't you know they're more important than all those rape vicitms? That that's a much bigger issue? So what 25% of women are subjected to rape or sexual assault? So what if 85-90% of rape victims don't report? So what that of those who do, only 6% get a guilty verdict even though only between 2-6% are lying or mistaken? Let's get some perspective on this - men matter more than women, stop imagining they don't.

Fuming but off to bed.

Not legally wonderwoman.

A rape victim is not a rape victim, s/he is Crown Prosecution Services Chief Witness.

Hence the outrage of some like Frances Audrade being told that she was not allowed to seek counselling in case it affected her testimony. Her only importance was as a witness, her welfare was irrelevant.

Why would I ever what anyone to know what happened to me.

I went ahead with taking it to court because I feared that he would meet some other young girl and do the same to them. I meet him at 18 and had a 5 year marriage. The assault I reported was not the worse he did to me but I could not face saying out loud the rest. Don't think I ever will.

The police were great to me looked after me really well, but like many over survivors talking about it was what would have stopped me reporting it.

They told her she could not have therapy! Well good thing she did have a broken leg (no to hospital treatment). We live in a mad world.

Sorry, just thought it was a difficult thing to go through alone but I can see what you mean.

sorry, did not

Sorry you had a horrible experience WW. You were brave to go to court

apple1234 re: male supremacist society - more than 2 women every weekare killed by current or ex-partners - that's more than soldiers in Afghanistan. This govt is cutting refuges and social housing for women to move to. Women's Aid say that paying Universal Credit to one family member, usually the man, will lead to financial & emotional abuse and domestic violence

The other argument against anonymity for the accused of rape would be that it sets rape apart from other violent crimes. But why on earth should it be seen as a special case of violence??? Wait, I know the answer: it's a violent crime against mainly women, that's not "real" violence in our patriarchy. There seems to be violence against men on the one hand, and violence against women which we have called domestic violence or intimate partner violence or sexual violence.

Someone will come up and point out very usefully that domestic violence etc can happen to men as well. True. My point is that is because it mainly affects women, it has a different status, which is most likely not to the victim's advantage. Giving people accused of rape (mainly men) a special status (anonymity) strengthens this weird notion that sexual violence is a special case of violence even in the legal system.

It's late, sorry if this isn't terribly coherent, but I'm sure some of you will get my point.

I can't help thinking that we should protect the victim and until conviction we don't know if that is the accussed or not.

?

Protect victims of rape = good plan.
What does that have to do with people accused of rape? That almost reads as if, when a person complains of rape to the police, if it gets to the stage where someone is arrested and prosecuted, the victim in proceedings is the arrested party. So for a different crime. Eg a child is rescued from forced work, the victim in the scenario is the person prosecuted for enslaving the child. Is that what you meant? Clarification would be good.

You cannot decide everyone that is accussed of rape is guilty because they are a man. You cannot decide that every woman who says she has been raped is telling the truth because she is a woman. you must look at the evidence.

All I Am saying is that it is becoming the norm to presume guilt in rape cases and that is wrong.

Well, what you wrote was that in rape cases, the person accused of rape is the victim, and they should be protected until conviction.

It is an unusual stance.

You are aware that men rape other men and children as well as women, are you?

Maybe you need to expand on your post to include that fact.

So from your posts I understand you to mean:

When a man is accused of raping a man, woman or child,
He is a victim,
And should be protected until he is convicted.

Like I say, an unusual approach, but I'd be interested in hearing your reasonsing behind all of it. Also what you want to do for the men women and children who report rape. Are they victims too? Should they be protected? You haven't mentioned your views on what should happen to them.

sydlexic Many people are presumed to be guilty of crimes by the community without even an accusation. Ask any minority.
Why is being wrongly accused of rape more devastating then being wrongly imprisoned for a non-rape crime?

No, when a man is "falsely accussed of rape" he is the victim. When he is rightfully accussed the person raped is the victim.

At the point of accusation we do not know which statement is true and should not decide without further evidence.

I don't agree that to be accused of a violent crime against the person is as bad as being a victim of it.

The norm for rape victims is to not get any justice at all - only 6% will see their assailant convicted - either because they don't feel they can report it, or because the CPS won't go to trial because of 'lack of evidence.' Often the evidence needed to prosecute serial sex offenders is gained by further victims coming forward having seen their attacker reported in the media.

Syd, do you also believe in anonymity for the accused when one man is prosecuted for allegedly beating up another in a pub?

From what I have been reading a lot of people seem to think that when the cps says 'lack of evidence' this means guilty but can't prove it. This is not always the case sometimes it is just 'no evidence'. Does that not sometimes mean the accused is just not guilty.

Also judges on historical cases often though out of court cases due to no evidence. We life in a country where there is no time limit on charging but the goverment and police destroy there own archive records other a certain date.

On other sites they have used human rights and said it is sexist that the women in rape are not named but men are. As only men can rape (under law rape is done with a penis??) it has been said that naming is sexist. Do think people forget men/boys can be raped too.

A no naming of anyone for any crime until conviction maybe better. The cps could have a point score form to decide if it was in the public interest to name before then.

In an ideal world then I would agree with anonymity for anyone accussed of anything, until proven. I don't think it is possible to achieve.

WW I think the sex discrimination argument is the other way round - as it's men who are charged with rape, if rape defendants had anonymity when other defendants didn't, that would be a group of males getting different treatment.

Syd, why impractical for crimes in general but you would want an exception for those being prosecuted for rape?

It is not sexist to not name the (female) victim and name the (male) rapist. You are assuming that same treatment means equal treatment. As it stands, the victim and the rapist however are not on an equal footing, and fair treatment of the victim (like giving her anonymity) is an attempt to achieve that equality, or remove some of the inequality, rather than creating an inequality that didn't exist before.

I have been in both situations here...I was abused by my uncle as a child...I was raped when I was 14 years old and My hubby was falsely accused.
I know the horror of rape and I know the horror of watching an innocent man being accused of rape. THEY ARE BOTH AS BAD AS THE OTHER !
Where do you get the idea that women reporting rape ect are not believed ??
Come there are dedicated police units round the country, its not something which is swept under the carpet. Why are all the men being arrested in operation yewtree ...because women ARE believed.
I am a women born a long time ago....Women of today need to learn this world is a hard place, see both sides of rape, whether its real or false people get hurt.