"Most prolific" rapist reporting - male vs female victims

[QuentinWinters]

Was just reading that about the conviction of the "most prolific rapist" for raping over 100 men.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50987823

My impression was the reporting focused more on the impact on his victims and used much stronger language about him being a "monster" who preyed on men "just out to have fun with their friends" than reporting on rapists targeting women. There is a description of how being raped has ruined the male victims lives (previously I associated the terms "ruined life" with men who were found not guilty of rape).

So I looked up reporting on John Worboys as he came to mind as a similarly prolific rapist

In his initial reporting it is more focused on Worboys and describes him crying at the guilty verdict.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/mobile/england/london/7931975.stm

Later reporting as the scale of his offending has become clear is still much more focussed on Worboys and his reasons for raping, and more objective and factual about his MO with no discussion of the emotional impact on his victims.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-england-london-48702572

Seems like rapes of men are treated much more sympathetically than those of women. Quelle surprise.

@autumnrose01
Also noticing an outcry about GHB with a tone I’ve not heard before.

Also, noticed this.

If anything I think people are saying that this is more the way all rape cases should be reported. Factually and with an emphasis on the suffering of the victims.

Yes exactly. I don't know why these kinds of discussions are treated like some kind of race to the bottom. I want female victims accounts to be reported with the same kind of sensitivity as the mens have been in this case. I'd like more reporting of men using a ludicrous defence, and it being reported as such, instead of reporting the defences as credible.

It says in the most recent Worboys article that the cases are important as they prove his parole plea was a lie. His parole plea was that he raped because his relationship broke down. Why isnt that seen as a ludicrous statement? Why is it being reported as entirely believable until more victims came forward?

And Sky tv tone when they said “he lived ALONE”. Ugh.

I do agree with you about the reporting being more sympathetic but I think it's a bit distasteful to do a whatabout the womenz after what those poor men have gone through.

I do wonder if men in general will feel more unsafe after this reporting. Knowing that it can happen to anyone.

Agree completely, OP. Husband said the same thing before I'd even mentioned it.

I don’t think anyone is saying “what about the women”. It isn’t a race to the bottom. All rape cases should be reported as per the OPs post.

To those saying we shouldn't talk about this because of the male victims, I don't see that I'm sure any victim of rape is happy when a rapist is convicted no one is saying any different.

What is clear to me from this case is that there is a difference in reporting between this and cases where the victims are female.

How are we supposed to highlight that if you can't talk about it or compare the two.

“ whatabout the womenz after what those poor men have gone through“

Again, not what anyone is saying.

People are asking - can you hear a difference in tone of reporting? Apparently one radio station issued a warning for sensitive content before reporting it.

People are asking - do rape victims all get asked the same questions?

How did Warboys ever considered for parole? Though I dare say this guy will too. I’ve already seen that one QC commented on him being a churchgoer. She can’t possibly think that’s an indication that someone isn’t an evil git?

He’s not a citizen, I think, which makes me wonder if there’s any hope of deportation.

the specific wording is "most prolific rapist in British legal history"

This really isn't something that can be debated because it's simply a matter of numerical fact.

He has been convicted of raping 44 separate victims, and a further four victims of dexual assault by penetration

As such there is a very clear and simple point here - has any other rapist been convicted of raping more than 44/48 victims.

If not, then he is indeed very plainly the most prolific rapist in British legal history.

If you want to read something into that separate to what it actually means then thats up to you.

There are abusers such as William Goad who is reported to have abused 3500 boys - but was only found guilty on 14 counts. Worboys was convicted in respect of 12 victims.

The point here is clear - there were terabytes of evidence relating to the victims and the individual rapes, and this allowed the police and CPS to charge almost 200 counts of rape. This is something that I am sure they are quite proud of having done and got convictions, and it is indeed a moment of legal history.

And I very strongly doubt any previous rapist has had anywhere near this number of actually convictions. Other rapists may be more prolific, but this is purely 'in legal history', and that is something that is rightly being noted.

I find this thread really distasteful.
The thing that really struck me, was the mention of the fact that most victims didn’t want to know any details from the police around what happened and didn’t want their families knowing.
It might be the same has it been women but it just makes me think about the huge stigma around male rape.
I feel so very sorry for all his victims. How horrific

I don’t mean the whole thread is distasteful. It’s a very shocking piece of news and I do think it’s right people discuss it. But some of the comments seem to miss the point to me. The male victims have it no easier.

“ The male victims have it no easier.”

And nobody said they did.

I agree that the way that rape (of women) is dealt with by our judiciary, media and society more generally is a fucking travesty.

But as far as this story is concerned, I think the emphasis and out thoughts should focus on those poor, poor men who were this bastard's victims.

I'm just a little bothered by the fact that most posters here appear to give absolute zero fucks about them.

I have nothing but sympathy for the victims of this man, exactly as I would if they were female. It’s not their fault the media and judiciary find their rapes more serious and abhorrent because of their sex.

But suddenly GHB is a problem? After all the years of women being targeted by predators using it?

I think it's difficult to compare subtle difference of tone in reporting in cases where the facts are so unusual. I suspect that had this case involved women its one where there would have been a lot of sympathy from the media for the victims.

This is not a competition between men and women about who is the worst victim. I imagine it must be even more difficult for male victims to come forward than women. The scale of the victims suggests that they weren't taken seriously. Let's just be glad that a heinous criminal has been put behind bars.

“ I imagine it must be even more difficult for male victims to come forward than women”

Why?

Is it safe to presume this guy is in solitary?

Our legal system is so crazy though, I still think, give it 20 years and he’ll be asking for parole with a sob story.

People are asking - do rape victims all get asked the same questions?

Probably not, but this case isn't a good example of that - the victims didn't know they were victims until the police informed them. It wasn't the victims making an accusation and being believed because they were male.

Why?

Men are often not believed about assault, or think they won't be, the idea goes that they are strong men, and if they couldn't get away/fight back, they must really have been into it. With the attendant worry that people will believe they are gay.

In some ways this conviction is a positive step - as when someone says "she must have consented" or "she must have agreed to take GHB" or whatever, this case can be pointed to. Evidence - these men did not report therapes. Some may not have really "known" what happened. They didn't fight back. Etc. etc.
This can be a step to counter the arguments.

And the police obviously thought they'd come across someone like the East London killer - which is partly why they were looking for bodies.

Goose, yes, but women are often not believed about assault.

So in that respect, no difference.i think it’s horrifically difficult to report full stop.

Re difference being the police found out from the phone - yes, I’ll have to read up. If there’s not even one person who reported this themselves, it’s not going to apply re what questions are asked.

The reporting struck me too. Completely different tone to the reporting, less sensationalist, no discussion of what the victims were wearing, more respectful of the victims, more straightforward condemnation of the rapist

.......or of the fact most of them were drunk and went back, willingly, to the rapists apartment.......

Jesus H Christ. Why does this still have to be a competition between men and women? Read about the case before posting such drivel

It's not a competition......I think many of us would have considered the difference in approach and reporting of these rapes to other rapes of women we have heard about...certainly I did upon watching this on the news this evening.

I do agree with you about the reporting being more sympathetic but I think it's a bit distasteful to do a whatabout the womenz after what those poor men have gone through.

We should ignore the injustice? Most of these young men were targeted for the exact reason women who are raped are told that they are complicit - being so drunk they were "easy game" for a predator. Nobody is saying that these young men should be told they were architects in their own rapes: they are saying that their female equivalents should not be told this.

Oh, and FWIW - most of the victims didn't know they'd been raped until the police identified them from the videos and came knocking at their door.

I think the only difference is that the video evidence made any possible defence completely unbelievable. I do think, that had the victims been female, the reporting would be similar. It’s extremely rare for the evidence to be so clear-cut; apparently the decision the jury had to make was were the victims asleep or not (some were snoring on the video), as people can’t consent if they are asleep.