Radfem 2013 and the MRAs

[MooncupGoddess]

As many of you will remember, the Radfem 2012 conference in London was explicitly open only to born women and consequently attracted lots of condemnation and anger from people who saw this as transphobic. It was kicked out of its original venue at Conway Hall and went underground (very successfully in the end).

This year Radfem 2013 has not explicitly banned transwomen... but instead it's come under attack from Men's Rights Activists, who have staged a demo at the planned venue, the London Irish Centre, while making lots of unpleasant and ridiculous claims about how radical feminists want to murder small boys and the like. As a result the venue is threatening to cancel the booking.

www.mralondon.org/

bugbrennan.com/2013/04/20/statement-from-rad-fem-2013/

I have mixed feelings about the whole trans issue but have no hesitation in declaring the MRAs utter misogynist knobbers and am disappointed the London Irish Centre has seemingly caved into them.

Hi Laz

I have been very polite to you and I do not appreciate your post.

Doctrine, but as rape victims are so highly regarded and always believed in our society, it's little wonder that women are tempted into making false reports....?

Oh, maybe not.

Mini,

PD?

Without going to much in to it, what actual proof was there? that you could put in front of jury and expect a reasonable chance of conviction?

running, I can visualise the numbers potentially involved. I am wanting to know how such numbers are arrived at.

Ah - so you're in the "questioning the accepted crime statistics" game are you, Laz?

Quelle surprise.

Sabrina,

I get where you are coming from on that, but why would the stern report ask for more investigation on false claims?

I'd actually be so bold* as to say if so few actually make it to court, and conviction it could be seen as a very easy way to get someone 'shaken up' by certain people.

Some of the reports I've read seem to indicate that the cases that reach the papers are the ones that (if you like) went too far. The accusers often have other claims behind them which didn't get so far as charging.

One resulted in a jail sentence of 5 years, turned over after 3yrs. This false accuser had made other false accusations under her belt, she changed her name repeatedly, so Police never joined up the dots.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1287534/Innocent-Warren-Blackwell-served-3-years-false-rape-claim-fantasist.html

The false allegations seem to get written off as caused by some sort of social/mental/emotional problem.

*I'm sure this will attract lots of scorn.

I'm afraid I don't click on Daily Hate Links as a matter of principle (after the Philpotts business) - but I would really doubt whether anything in there that is properly reliable.

You could take a look at Keir Starmer's findings on false rape. www.cps.gov.uk/news/latest_news/under_the_spotlight/

Misrepresented by many people, at the time, for whatever twisted agenda they were following (including the BBC Newsbeat ) so I linked directly to the cps website to negate any bias.

The false allegations seem to get written off as caused by some sort of social/mental/emotional problem

Its difficult to get stats on this but some believe that approximately 15% of false accusations are made by women who have mental health problems. DP works with women who have personality disorders (as have I in the past) many have been victims of domestic, childhood physical/sexual abuse. Many have a background in prostitution and exhibit many risk taking behaviours which may also make them vulnerable to a wide range of abuse incl rape and assault. So whilst some may make false accusations, some may actually be written off because there is an assumption that "these" women are apt to make unsubstantiated claims about any number of things. But why might they cry rape when they cry wolf?

Should these women be taken to task by the legal system or do we need to look at the big picture and conclude that there is something very flawed within society that leads to women feeling that "crying" rape might be their only currency. I wonder whether empowered, positive, happy, fulfilled, highly educated, high achieving, respected, validated women make false accusations? I don't think so. I think the 15% estimate is too low.

Just to be clear, Laz, Keir Starmer's report was conducted a long time after the Stern report. It is the "more investigation on false claims."

I do hope that helps straighten the matter out for you.

Cheers Sabrina, I still lament the loss of the times website.

Mini.

If we were all at the top of Maslav's pyramid I am sure we'd all be a lot happier.

And if they are genuinely troubled they should receive help.

It is a delicate balance, I can see how someone would be put off reporting a crime if a recent 'false' was widely reported (which they invariably are) but I'd imagine if you had been falsely accused and named in the papers, you'd want the fact that it was a false accusation broadcast far and wide.

Perhaps more of a reason why such trials could be conducted out of the public eye, or under alias? A perjury case against a genuinely troubled accuser could similarly be kept under the radar of the popular press.

PD? Personality disorder? Sorry, it took me 4 hours the other day to figure out 'PIV'.

Are ALL victims allowed an advocate? Or can they ask for them? Even a trained Saphire policewoman could be seen as 'establishment' so could put off victims.

How many 'havens' are there nationwide? And how are they advertised? ie do School girls get briefed in on them? Uni students on freshers week or simlar?

Good spot Plenty. Not much of a name change those is it?

Running?

I am questing only two statistics. 38% of victims never tell anyone... so how is the figure arrived at?

9 out of 10 are not reported... so how is the figure arrived at?

Neither figure is sufficiently explained. If you have a link, I'll read it.

I've read about the havens, so are we saying only 1 out of 10 reported crime to these establishments then go to the police?

Good spot Plenty. Not much of a name change those is it?

No, it's making me wonder why you bothered

I think the unreported figure comes from the British Crime Survey.

Indeed it does Plenty. Here.

Because you're worth it.

British Crime Survey.

50,000 people isn't a very large group to investigate, in comparison to the population of the country. Even a small trend could extrapolate massively.

What procedures are in place to ensure the claims are even true?

A small trend like lots of women don't report rape?

Yup. It's a trend repeated in every survey carried out.

So why not report it properly, but bring it up in surveys?

Which other surveys?

"So why not report it properly, but bring it up in surveys?"

Are you really unable to work that one out yourself Lazarus?

According to the American Medical Association (1995), sexual violence, and rape in particular, is considered the most under-reported violent crime
The most common reasons given by victims for not reporting rapes are the belief that it is a personal or private matter, and that they fear reprisal from the assailant.

"A 2007 government report in England says "Estimates from research suggest that between 75 and 95 percent of rape crimes are never reported to the police."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#Under-reporting]

Plus I think you may also have to take into account that many vulnerable and younger women have absolutely no idea what actually constitutes rape or coercion. Teenagers are growing up believing that women should always be available to men, should never say no, to do so is very uncool and boys are growing up with an even greater sense of entitlement to sex.

Why do women not report? That is a good question Laz, and I respond by referring you back to the misogynist police and the reports like those into the Sapphire Unit where women were not believed. Then I'll add about people like Jimmy Saville's, John Worbuoy's and many other serial rapists victims who came forward and were not believed. Then finally, I'll refer you to Ched Evans's victim, who was believed, but was vilified by his fans and named on twitter, despite being legally entitled to anonymity.

I'll happily link to some more surveys - including threads on here about the prevalence of sexual assaults - but I fear that would pointless. You'll just make out we're all lying.

And all of that isn't even touching on the victim-blaming that is rife in society when it comes to rape victims. What were you wearing? - how much had you drank? - did you go home with him/invite him in? - had you been flirting etc etc.

This victim blaming culture means that women will actually blame themselves for their own rape for "putting themselves in that situation" and so will be more reluctant to report.

Plus, as has just been mentioned, many victims are young and vulnerable and may not even name what has happened to them as 'rape. Even though it was.

When Mini said "it would be easier if I could just understand what your motivations are in being here?" you responded Lazarus by saying "My motivation? I've left a predominately male environment, that by accepted terms is probably heavily 'violently masculine' (still don't like the term).....Oh, and I like to think I am Libertarian, but will sometimes veer left or right depending upon topic."

I really don't see how that follows
Could you explain how leaving the armed forces and being right wing motivates you to Mumsnet, FWR and this particular thread- because it isn't self-explanitory.

Mini,

so why are they not introduced to this sort of thing (at an appropriate age) perhaps as part of a development class at school?

Should parents receive help to ensure their kids know what a loving and trusting relationship actually is?

Sabrina, there is a distinction you are missing I feel.

They may have been believed in the interview room, but ultimately their story must convince a jury beyond reasonable doubt.

Your mention of the famous people is interesting. I assume I am beyond the pale because I believe the accused should be allowed to keep their privacy (in this case I am purely talking about rape cases) but there was a Guardian or Independant piece I read about 4 hours ago that actually used the ched evans case.

I am unfamiliar with the full details of the case, but I understand that it didn't take long for his fans to release the name of the complainant. Also (I may be right I may not) wasn't this the case where female fans thought the alleged victim was 'lucky'?

Basically the jist of the article was, that famous people would actually be easier to bring to trail without their name being released. They are famous so can use this to hammer their accuser before they even get to trial. That's before you bring in their fans, who in this case were unbelievable.

It seems that jimmy saville may also have been seen as 'untouchable' due to his fame. If complete secrecy of the case could have been assured, would his victims have come forward? When there could have been a chance to prove guilt to the standard required, and thus a conviction.

Check out #Ididnotreport on Twitter to find out a few reasons why women don't report rape.

As for poo-poohing the British Crime Survey - I'm guessing Laz knows something the police and the Home Office don't, because they both accept those figures as being statistically robust and reliable.

You haven't read any of the links have you Laz?

Or you are wilfully misunderstanding them.

The point of the IPCC report into Sapphire was that they weren't even believed in the interview room.

Nor were Jimmy Saville's victims. And many others. Care to check into Operation Yewtree? And how so many historical rapes are now being prosecuted?