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

What are the grey areas?

Nanna

Unwanted penetration for a woman is often seen as less serious than for a straight man because women are the sex class that is 'for' penetration, in the opinion (which may well not be consciously expressed) of some.

isn't it because there is a significant level of revulsion within our society attached to crimes of a sexual nature?

No there isn't from what I can see. Not regarding young women anyway. There's always "how much did she drink", "what was she wearing", "but she kissed him earlier in the night etc". I don't see revulsion at all

I'm a feminist. I care about women. I care about woeful rape conviction rates. Protecting men from their fear of false accusations of rape isn't my fight. Society really already has men's back on that one, IMO.

This with bells on

The performed revulsion is just another way of excising men - "no rape is a terrible crime committed by MONSTERS. This is just a normal man. He coukd not have done such a dreadful thing."

Then the real revulsion is turned on the dirty little tart telling lies.

Would a move away from either i). adversarial trials or ii). 'innocent until proven guilty' help with the low level of convictions? I don't necessarily mean 'guilty until proven innocent' either. More of a 'neither one nor the other' status of the accused. Are there other legal systems that improve the conviction rate?

The conviction rates for rape cases that come to trial are similar to those of other bodily harm crimes, IIRC.

The earlier steps in the process are important.

Peril knowing that "innocent until proven guilty" applies both ways - a not guilty verdict doesn't mean it was a false accusation;

Peril = people

Why does every single bloody discussion about rape always end up turning into a discussion about false accusations?

People have been falsely accused of all kinds of crimes. Name any crime and I guarantee that people will have been falsely accused of it.

Despite this people don't jump into discussions about theft/assault/child abuse/GBH/whatever it is that is being discussed to say things like "but remember there are people who make things up and lie about these things" or "don't forget innocent people have been falsely accused of theft/assault/child abuse/GBH/whatever it is that is being discussed" do they?

Yet we can't see to be able to have a discussion about rape without someone bringing up false accusations.

Why do people feel the need to constantly bring up false accusations when talking about rape but not when it's other crimes being talked about, no matter how stigmatized those other crimes may be?

^
seem to be able

Pinky just out of curiousity, now that they have been found guilty have there been any comments from their supporters claiming that they are innocent and they have been wrongly convicted? Because it wouldn't surprise me if there has been or will be at some point .

Is there actually any evidence that being falsely accused of rape is worse than being falsely accused of any other crime?

People always trot out the "false rape accusations ruins lives" and "of course being falsely accused of rape is worse than being falsely accused of other crimes" (they then usually go on to compare being falsely accused of rape to being falsely accused of stealing. Because you know obviously rape and theft are the only two crimes that someone could be falsely accused of ) but nobody ever backs those claims up.

I don't doubt that there have been some men who have had their lives ruined because of false accusations but people have also had their lives ruined because of being falsely accused of child abuse and murder...

So what I would like to know is is there actually any evidence that being falsely accused of rape is more likely to be damaging than being falsely accused of other serious crime? Is there any evidence that people falsely accused of rape are more likely to go on to have their lives ruined than people falsely accused of child abuse or murder or torture or animal abuse...?

AFAIK there isn't and I've never found any that suggest being falsely accused of rape is more damaging than being falsely accused of other crime.

Toads after the naming of the victim last night the person who mans the newspaper FB feed seems to be on the ball and is deleting horrible comments so the few that have have now disappeared! They've also stated they will report anyone who names the victim on their page.

Luckily lots of comments showing empathy for the survivor

Toad

Because THE QUESTION WAS ABOUT WHY PEOPLE DEFEND ALLEGED RAPISTS.

God, this conversation is pointless.

Fine: rape is bad. Society: bad.

Why are you shouting at Toads, A11? Maybe if you said which bits enraged you, we could talk about why you disagree, rather than just crashing in and rolling your eyes like a stroppy teen, which you've done twice on this thread now. Anyone would think you didn't really want to engage in a debate.

The men in the OP have been convicted. They aren't alleged rapists - they are rapists.

I think ot comes down to the fact that a large proportion of men, maybe even half?, have had sex with someone they have had to take advantage of, coerce, manipulate or force to have sex with them. Be that through picking someone random who is very drunk at a club and getting her away from her friends who would keep her safe, to making a move on a female friend when she's drunk, to telling lies to get her into bed, etc.

All these men think this is part of "getting sex". It's a very murky spectrum, which not too far along becomes rape. But they can't conceive that they are a bit rapey, so they defend rapists to assuage their own subconscious guilt.

Sometimes I like to imagine that all of the NAMALTers, derailers, hand-wavers, GFs, what-about-the-menzers and any other posters that don't seem to be on a feminist board in good faith, are actually bots or sock puppets whose function is to make posts regurgitating all of the weakest possible woman hating tropes so as to give all of the brilliant, bright feminists here a chance to air all their best rebuttals

PinkyofPie Thu 28-Jul-16 15:52:49
That commentor actually works for a public sector body. I have screen shotted his comment and will be sending to his work

Well done, Pinky.

WilL
This case you posted is absolutely horrendous. It means basically it doesn't matter what a woman says if the man wants sex.

"I was saying no," she said. "I was not coming out all guns blazing. I thought I should be adequate saying no. It should not matter what tone of voice I was saying it."

Ad Feedback

Morgan asked: "Did you mean 'No, not now,' as if you did not mean it?"

"I meant it," she said.

"Were you saying no but not meaning no?"

"I would not say that," she said. "I was also pulling my underwear back up."

Morgan also took issue with an earlier exchange between the pair, in which Kuggeleijn asked whether the woman was "on the pill" – to which she had said yes.

"Did you not recognise that telling him you were on the pill in those circumstances was you telling him you wanted to have sex with him?" he asked.

There are no more false allegations of rape than there are false allegations for any other crime.

www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/campaigns-projects/false-allegations/

Fucking hell that's grim kind

To add to ayeamarok's post, I think that some women who disbelieve rape accusations are also avoiding the fact that they themselves have been raped but it is too painful to accept that not only have they been the victim of a horrific violent crime but that the perpetrator was someone they love and trusted.

The trouble is that ayeamorak is just making up statistics, It's this type of fanaticism that is always used against us.

AyeAmarok said I think ot comes down to the fact that a large proportion of men, maybe even half?, have had sex with someone they have had to take advantage of, coerce, manipulate or force to have sex with them.

Is that a world-wide statistic, or just based in the country where you live? The corollary of that statement is that, wherever that stat is based, fifty per cent of the women have been raped. I have never seen an estimate that high, even on Fwr. It is truly shocking.