Why are people so defensive towards alleged rapists?

[PinkyofPie]

If you're charged with a crime that goes to court, unless there's a reason to retain anonymity (such as it involves your child therefore naming you effectively names them) the press can name you if they wish to do so. Be it burglary, assault, theft or rape.

So why, every time a rapist is on trial, do people hop about saying "innocent until proven guilty" "they shouldn't be named they're tarred for life now" etc. But literally NO other crime.

A few days ago my local paper posted a picture on their FB newsfeed of 2 men on trial accused of raping a 18yo in the park. The above comments were there and even calls to "name and shame" the victim and also "will she get sentenced if they're found not guilty". Perhaps because "not guilty" does not mean innocent and if the law worked that way even fewer women would report rape than there is now

One of the men accused also posted mocking both the trial and people who actually had sensible comments. I looked at his profile, which is public, and there's lots of people saying "good luck mate" for today (verdict) and memes about liars getting their comeuppance.

Today both men were unanimously found guilty by the jury in just 7 hours.

No comments so far on the post about their guilt.

Can anyone offer an explanation as to why people take this attitude with rape, and only rape? The poor survivor has had to read all that sympathy for them

Would it be any different if Cliff had been questioned for murder or serious assault? Michael Barrymore anyone?

There are plenty of men out there who have suffered very few consequences for not being convicted of rape. Even those in the public eye.

Yet rape is held up as 'special'. I wonder if its because, in the vast majority of cases it is women doing the accusing.

*I really don't understand what people found so perplexing about the Ched Evans case.

He had sex with a woman so drunk she couldn't consent.*

Well, it would be the end of the story, but evidence has been presented to cast some (and I don't know how much) doubt on it. Is that really too hard to understand ? I have my own thoughts as to the nature of such evidence, but I'll keep it to myself for now.

And the the 'stigma' attached to rape is always bandied round. But in reality people believe the rapists when they say they haven't done it. That doesn't strike me as stigma.

Even in Jimmy Savile's case, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary people still believe half the allegations have been made up.

FreshwaterSelkie

Of course it isn't, but the notion that an accusation of rape effectively has no significant impact on the target of that accusation is quite clearly nonsense.

It's not a competition to see what is more important - both can be problems of differing scales. I just think it's totally insane to think that one isn't an issue at all.

But there generally is evidence of sex, hell, the man often admits to it (because he knows he's unlikely to get convicted).

In any case - which is worse? If I say that you punched me, tell everyone, and it turns out you didn't, or if you, yourself are punched, and no-one believes you? Because I'll go sticks and stones being worse than being called names.

What evidence is that then, cad?

James the CPS have published figures here which show that in a 17 month period from 2011, there 5,700 convictions for rape in the UK. Now rapes are notoriously difficult to get a conviction for, this does not mean they have not happened though, so the actual number will be far higher - according to rape.org, 85,000 women a year are raped and sexually assualted.

The number of people found to be making false accusations in the same time - 35. But yeah, poor menz

Re - Cliff Richard - I'll save my sympathy for the many women and men who don't get justice for their rape or sexual assault, as opposed to a millionaire whose name has been cleared. Kevin Webster and Ken Barlow (sorry don't know real names) were accused and acquitted and are still in work, men's lives are not ruined.

Yet rape is held up as 'special'. I wonder if its because, in the vast majority of cases it is women doing the accusing.

Absolutely. You never find victim blaming in a case where a man is accused of raping another man

scallopsrgreat

I think the overwhelming issue in Saville's case was less the stigma of "rape" and more the suffocating deference to authority and power in the BBC and, more widely, in British culture during the period when Saville was committing most of his crimes.

Of course it isn't, but the notion that an accusation of rape effectively has no significant impact on the target of that accusation is quite clearly nonsense.

Maybe people should not commit crimes then they won't have the impact of being accused.

I'd like to reiterate - in any criminal case, a "not guilty" verdict does not mean a judge or jury believes the perpetrator is innocent - a smidgen of doubt indicates that a "not guilty" verdict is appropriate.

It's because generally people think the reputation of a man is more important than the distress of a woman.

What evidence is that then, cad(no)?

The evidence referred to by the Court of Appeal - Lady Justice Hallett said the judges heard "fresh evidence" during the appeal hearing on 22 and 23 March.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-36099522

PinkyofPie

^James the CPS have published figures here which show that in a 17 month period from 2011, there 5,700 convictions for rape in the UK. Now rapes are notoriously difficult to get a conviction for, this does not mean they have not happened though, so the actual number will be far higher - according to rape.org, 85,000 women a year are raped and sexually assaulted.

The number of people found to be making false accusations in the same time - 35. But yeah, poor menz hmm^

Your logic is all over the place. The fact that you accept the figure of 35 false accusations as a hard limit (an offense that is also notoriously difficult to prove), yet are happy to accept a much higher and more amorphous figure for incidents of rape. You can't have it both ways. There were likely far more than 35 false accusations during that time period, but hey, they're menz, so fuck them, right?

I'm not for one moment saying they are issues of an equal severity, and I totally agree that the real number rapes in is far higher than those that are reported. I'm just asking for a little consistency.

PinkyofPie

Maybe people should not commit crimes then they won't have the impact of being accused.

I was talking about people who are falsely accused.

Or it can work the other way like it happened to my DP who was wrongly accused of rape which has destroyed his life as he's got PTSD and his bipolar progressed from the stress of a three year court case when he didn't even do it. He was obviously found not guilty but it was such a traumatic experience for him as well as for her as she had to try remember her story and he would have faced 15 years in prison if found guilty. She had to live with that but she couldn't retract what she said as she was too afraid of the consequences as it went so high up. He can't even work in his profession anymore as he cant cope with any stress now.

No, your logic is all over the place, James.

Your position seems to be that the motivations for lying about rape would be the same for men and women, and should be treated the same.

Let's look at what is involved in a rape accusation. A woman says she's been raped. This woman lives in our culture where rape myths abound - that it only happens to sluts, that it’s something that she wore that caused it, that she had a drink so it’s her fault, that she didn’t make her no clear enough, that she led him on. If she reports it, she’ll have the humiliation of a rape exam, being quizzed by police, perhaps being disbelieved by them. She’ll have her sexual history raked over by strangers, She’ll have to stand up in court and tell a roomful of people what happened when she was naked and vulnerable. She has to stand and look her accuser in the eye. Maybe he goes after her, or gets his family to do so. Her reputation in her local community might be ruined, because people think she maliciously set out to get a man in trouble. Every motivation in the world is working towards telling her NOT to report a rape that actually happened, never mind making up one that didn't. So for a woman to lie about being raped, that's what's she's taking on.

For a man to lie about rape, all he has to do is say "she consented". And the majority of the population will probably believe him.

Whose lie is harder? Whose lie has the most impact on their life?

The two motivations aren’t at all equal. I don't think we remotely have to start with the belief that she said he did, he said he didn’t, so it’s 50/50 really. It’s not like saying “Oh, Jane said she went to Tescos, but I saw her in Waitrose”.

Culture is weighted towards believing men about rape.

Good post Freshwater.

I think there are a horrendous number of men who have raped someone but who simply can't bring themselves to accept that they're rapists so they see similar acts from others as being fine and make excuses and divert blame. I also think that there are a lot of non-rapists who make excuses for behaviour that is indicative of a liking for sexual violence because the people they're excusing are their loved ones. Then there's the fact that when we're talking about a crime that is predominantly committed by men towards women, we refer to the offenders widely as 'men' which inevitably gets people defending husbands, sons, brothers, etc, despite those people not being accused. And, very sadly, there are simply people who won't accept the definition of rape as being anything other than being dragged into a dark alley and assaulted and beaten by a stranger.

James sadly this isn't the first time I've had to state the obvious things to MRA-style responses. But here it goes again...

My logic is not "all over the place". Can I see evidence of why false accusations are "notoriously hard to convict"? Re rape - as previously stated rape.org have stated, from various reliable sources, that 85,000 people a year are raped or sexually assualted. Yet in a 17 month period only 5,700 convictions. So around 1 in 21 people who are raped or sexually assualted get justice. Where are your stats re false accusations, or is it pure speculation?

But for the sake of objectivity, let's forget about who isn't convicted and look at who is - 5,700 vs 35. So for every 162 men convictes of rape, 1 lerson has been shown to lying about it. So, can you help me out as to why people are so convinced that more women exist making up allegations than men do who actually rape? Despite evidence to the contrary? Why is rape such a special case?

Answer: because it affects men, and as someone said earlier men's reputations are more important than women's distress

There seems to be a general feeling in this country that there are large numbers of false rape allegations. There aren't.

Most women who say they have been raped, were raped. Whether their rapist gets convicted or not is, of course, another matter entirely. I have seen many get off.

YY Maybe. Rape apologists always know a mate who it happened to etc and because they're their friend take their word for it, and believe this to be a problem with women the country over.

It doesn't occur to them that very few men will go "yep I raped her", a man's word is to believed and a woman's word is distrusted.

And people deny there's a patriarchy ha!

In other news, the rapists from the OP have been given 10 years and 12 years. Someone give that judge a hand shake!

Good news on the sentencing, Pinky. I'm sure their defenders won't be happy about that at all.

PinkyofPie

MRA? Really? Suggesting that men who are falsely accused of rape might be damaged by that accusation makes me a Male Rights Activist?

So, can you help me out as to why people are so convinced that more women exist making up allegations than men do who actually rape? Despite evidence to the contrary? Why is rape such a special case?

You are stating the complete opposite of what I said. No where did I claim that there are more false accusations of rape than genuine instances of rape. That is ridiculous.

James, your higher concern for the (as evidenced) very few people (could be men or women) who are falsely accused of rape than your concern for the huge amount of women are raped and so many men get away with it smacks of MRA, yes.

Obviously being falsely accused of anything must be horrendous and I have sympathy for those people - however this has NO bearing at all on the experiences of women who are raped.

I didn't say you thought more women accused men than those who are actually raped - I'm saying that train of thought is part of our culture, and I can't figure out why because it only ever seems to be regarding rape. So going back to the question in my OP, any ideas why rape is treated so differently to any other crime?

Oops - when I said "could be men or women" I meant those do the accusing, not being accused.