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

And yes it should be given.

Can you tell me where the law states that?

prggy WTF! Where on earth has Toads said that?! All she said was that the 17yo may or may not have raped someone. That is a fact.

Funny how no one ever gets up in arms about about the women who die after a rape. We're just collateral fucking damage. You can say what you want about women without being called 'vile'.

Also re the celebrity rapists. I think a good comparison to draw (although this is DV not rape) is Jonny Depp - when Amber Heard came out saying he's hit her, people ties themselves in knots to make out the ways in which she was a liar. Even on MN one poster said she should have ducked when he threw that phone at her. I can guarantee Amber will never work in Hollywood again. Meanwhile a rapist is hailed as a hero. Whoever says this is not a sexist issue needs their heads checking.

I've reported your attack on toad peggy.
Why is us talking about people being defensive towards rapists upsetting you so much?

peggy

Oh look, a PA nit picking comment I was talking about

yourself

So do you think having to persuade a woman to have sex, and her reluctantly doing it, is fine, because it's technically still a "yes"? Just because the law doesn't provide a script for consent it does not mean it's ok to coerce a reluctant woman into bed.

Someone mentioned upthread about men who've had to do persuading. Thinking back to my youth, this happened to me countless times. Ie I only wanted to go so far and then a "go on it'll be fun" attitude was taken. I don't know if ended up doing it because I used to be a passive person, or because I have been raised in a patriarchal society where men's dicks are seen as being of paramount importance and no one wants a frigid woman....maybe a bit of both. I dunno. But I said yes, reluctantly. I was not raped. But looking back, any man with an ounce of decency would have left it and respected my wishes not just that of their penises. They too are raised in a patriarchy and maybe didn't realise what they were doing was disrespectful. And this is why messages around consent need to change.

I'm sure you'll come back telling me how disgusting I am because poor menz did nothing wrong etc. But anyone who thinks we should not place importance on the way in which women consent or the way men gain sexual relations respectfully, is frankly a misogynistic apologist who I have no time for

Peggy give this a read around the "yes means yes" law introduced in California. I'd rather our laws were based around this, aka enthusiastic consent. So it may not be in the UK but some places in the world have these in place. I'd love anyone to tell me why this is a bad thing I'm sure someone will soon enough

I can't see where Toads did anything like what Peggy is alleging. She seemed very respectful to me - all she did was point out that a rape allegation being withdrawn, and a false allegation being proved are two different things. I don't know why that is offensive or provoking.

And YY to the nit-picking, PinkyofPie. We seem to attract quite a lot of drive by snark. Interesting, isn't it?

Alan Johnson and all the other high profile rape cases recently

Adam not Alan. Alan Johnson (to me anyway) is a hugely respected Labour MP.

Peggy I clearly said in my post that I don't feel comfortable talking about it as the boy is dead so it seems a bit disrespectful to speculate either way.

Where did I attempt to pull apart the name and character of the boy? I never said he was a rapist. The point I was trying to make is that nobody knows what happened.

People are just going to assume that because the allegation was withdrawn and he killed himself that the accusation was automatically a false one which isn't necessarily the case.

Even the boy's uncle doesn't appear to know what really happened. He did say he would like to speak to the girl to hear her side of the story which implies that even he doesn't whether the accusation was true or false.

he doesn't know whether the accusation was true or false.

This post from HairyMoose was ignored so I'm reposting.

"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."

And the list earlier naming people "convicted" of sexual assault contains at least one person who was found not guilty. I've reported as it's clearly libelous, but found not guilly but still thought of as a rapist 20 years later tells it's own story.

Of course there are exceptions but generally accusations of rape (false or otherwise) do not ruin lives.

99% of men accused of rape go on to live completely normal lives.

I'm still waiting for evidence that being falsely accused of rape is more damaging and more likely to lead to lives being ruined than being falsely accused of other crime however...

Tiggy I didn't acknowledge Hairy's post as her husband's story has zero bearing on my point. As I said earlier I sympathise with people falsely accused of anything, but it makes my question no less relevant - why, despite evidence to show false rape allegations are very few and far between, do people jump to the defence of an alleged rapist when they don't do so for any other type of crime.

We can never know if he was innocent because the accusation was dropped. The people accusing the girl of making a false accusation are vile. The grown uncle wanting to have a go at the girl is vile. We are not vile for saying that we can't know the truth.

Someone has started a thread in AIBU about their husband's friend trying to kiss them last night (he actually grabbed her breasts) and people are all over it minimising the assault and 'what if she responded?' And 'but what about false allegations?'.

It's awful.

We can never know if he was innocent because the accusation was dropped, and now he has sadly killed himself.

The people accusing the girl of making a false accusation are vile.

The grown uncle wanting to have a go at the girl is vile.

We are not vile for saying that we can't know the truth.

Doh. Sorry, internet wobbles

YY choc.

I am just so skeptical and quite frankly pissed off with what gets classed as a false accusation and this is no different.

We don't know whether the accusation was false. The only people who know for sure what happened is the boy and girl involved and he's dead now so can't give his side of the story.

But of course she withdrew the complaint and that automatically makes it a false accusation apparently . Because of course there is no reason for anyone to withdraw a genuine complaint of rape .

That along with the fact he killed himself just seals it as a false accusation in most people's minds. Because of course criminals never kill themselves and have never killed themselves...

Again I am NOT saying that he is guilty. I will clarify again; nobody knows whether he raped her or whether the accusation was false because neither scenarios have been proven.

What I am saying that you can't point fingers at the girl and start accusing her of a crime (falsely accusing someone of a crime is a crime in itself but I think people seem to forget that) without any proof either. Innocent until proven guilty should apply to everyone and that includes people who are accused of making false allegations.

Why wouldn't you want someone who may or may not be guilty to carry the stigma of rape for the rest of their lives? What's to be lost if their anonymity is protected?

People want to retain anonymity until found guilty because rape, quite rightly, carries a huge stigma. It is a stigma that should be attached to rapists only, not people who may be innocent. Someone who is accused of rape, whether they are male or female, are often punished by society from the moment the accusation is made, whether they are guilty or not. It may not look like that from supportive comments on a facebook page. But particularly in a small community, employers, family and prospective girlfriends will all view a rape accusation (as distinct from a rape conviction) very negatively.

By all means, throw the book at guilty rapists. But punishments should be reserved for those who are guilty. Because of the nature of the offence of rape, being associated with it in any way is a punishment. And punishments should only be for people who have been found guilty.

Gone

Do you believe in anonymity for all accused?

This is particularly the case in light of the 'I believe you' campaign. I'm not saying the campaign is a bad thing at all, but one consequence of saying 'I believe you' is saying 'I believe the accused party is a rapist'. We don't have that attitude towards any other crime, which perhaps is why being accused of other crimes isn't so devastating for the person being on trial.

For many people, feminist or not, there is a feeling that 'he/she must have done it'. This isn't a bad thing because the pendulum needed to swing away from the cynicism that accusations of rape have traditionally been met with. But it has implications in a court of law and what is newspaper reporting, if not an informal echo of the 'court case' where everyone gets to have an opinion?

Perhaps they did do it but why not weight until there is a verdict before the entire country has the opportunity to respond in this way?

jacques See my second post.

gone what evidence do you have that being falsely accused of rape is worse than being falsely accused of any other crime? What evidence do you have that being accused of rape carries a bigger stigma than being accused of say, I don't know, child abuse or animal abuse or arson or assaulting the elderly?

I keep asking this but nobody has shown me any evidence?

No idea where that random question mark came from

I have no evidence toads. I would include child abuse in this too, actually.

Why do you need evidence? Why do you care, anyway?