Judge - 'women must be careful'- help me argue against my Daily Mail quoting mother argh

[af2000]

I'm not really sure if this is going to make sense.

Having coffee with my mother, grandmother and SIL today and the subject somehow came around to rape and the recent case of an outgoing judge saying that young women need to be 'more careful' (in the context of avoiding getting raped).

They were all saying that they agreed with the judge and that the subsequent outcry about her comments were taken out of context and that she was actually right. I tried to argue that she was not right and that women should not have to 'be more careful' and that it once again came around to the fact that we have an intrinsic culture of victim blaming here, even when we don't think we do. They all dismissed my comments, as usually tends to happen.. they think I am just a ridiculous liberal I think

Can you help me with the argument I was trying to make? But in a more convincing/articulate way. I know what I am getting at but I feel foolish and ganged up against and like my current post pregnancy brain is no longer up to a good bit of debate 😕

I am a man, and it's not in the least bit sexist to point out men rape.

However where the judge is coming from is that in criminal cases the burden of proof is beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore whomever brings forward a prosecution will always be at a disadvantage in proving their version of events.

I think it must frustrate a lot of judges as I believe they are well aware how many rapists get away with it, but their hands are tied on the burden of proof. So they say things like this in a desperate attempt to move the needle somewhat. However we do operate on the principle of better 10 guilty men go free than 1 innocent man is jailed.

It is clear however something has to change as in the way things are reported in the public psyche a not guilty verdict indicates the woman was lying and made a false accusation. What is interesting is there is always a huge fear of libel/slander when rapes are reported. When actually a false accusation is also criminal and any suggestion of such will effect a woman's reputation negatively yet people freely suggest this but without the same fear of slander.

Two possible ways I can see moving forward without blaming victims:

• We setup a charity that will offer legal aid to rape victims to pursue rapists who escape conviction at criminal trial through the civil courts. The bar there is on the balance of probability and not beyond reasonable doubt. Far fewer rapists would get away with it and whilst not ideal would at least change public perception and the discussion around rape.
• We say fuck it and call a spade a spade. For example I'll make the statement "Ched Evans is a rapist". Now he's welcome to sue me but again it's a civil case so balance of probabilities, and I'd say he's on thin ice trying to win that. (There is technically a criminal libel law on the books but it's not been used in a long ass time and there are moves afoot to remove it).

If some people want to help me set up said charity outlined above I'm game, not sure precisely how to go about it, and I am a man so I feel it would be better if it was led by women.

@DJBaggySmalls I've always had a small crush on Joe, mainly due to his bromance with Obama (says more about me really)

But it's nice to know he happy to stand up and challenge

I can see a third, reverse the burden of proof. Let a man demonstrate how he knew he had consent rather than force women to prove they didn't consent. It's more likely to get close to the truth - women aren't in a perpetual state of consent save for an extraordinary circumstance.

Innocent until proven guilty is an internationally recognised human right (article 11 Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Whilst it might be tempting to throw that out at times, the ramifications for everyone if we do not uphold it are dire indeed.

Guilty until proven innocent is the doctrine of the tyrant.

Yep. It's also the doctrine of the person who wonders just what gave you the impression that the sleeping woman wanted to have sex? Compel me with your logic, cos she says she wasn't into it and on the balance of probabilities...

There problem wit the burden of proof is that it is set up with the 'ten guilty men go free' doctrine but in the case of rape it's more like 1000 guilty men go free.