Woman jailed for sexual assault on man….

[SuperSleepyBaby]

Anyone else find this BBC article unclear?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-64919747.amp

The judge noted that “…neither he, nor the prosecution, could find any similar case anywhere in the UK.”

"Factually this case involved a woman having sex with a man without his consent and there should be parity between male victims of sexual crime and female victims," the prosecution solicitor said.”

Factually…….?

I think it's an understandable mistake to make given recent reporting and how rare this crime is.

The judges comments have really annoyed me.

The statistics mean that had this been a woman raped by a man the chances of a conviction are extremely low. That for me is the biggest point to be drawn from the case. No injuries, witnesses etc. No way would a woman have been believed.

Also in NI for sure the rape of a man would be considered worse by the male population than the rape of a woman. Especially a woman who went to bed with a man in her underwear.

Parity? Has he forgotten the horrendous treatment of a young woman not so long ago in Belfast? Were this young man's boxers passed around court?

I do feel sorry for the victim. (I don't think the post up thread about someones husband should be considered as anything other than his experience) But I am angry on behalf of all the woman who never get justice.

Yeah, you've been quite offensive, skirting around the issue too, she's a woman who sexually assaulted a man but plenty of women present in a more masculine way and there was no indication anywhere that she was trans. All you've done there is proven your level of prejudice.

Yes! This is what's outrageous about the case, making it about the perpetrator presenting less femininely just takes away front he real problematic elements!

I don't think the post up thread about someones husband should be considered as anything other than his experience

Oh yes absolutely, and I think my husband's more or less ambivalent reaction to what seems to be a clear cut case of rape, is odd. But I'm a woman so I see rape through a woman's eyes I suppose.

As far as I know he hasn't told anyone else though. So perhaps he does feel something more than he's letting on.

@Forgooodnesssakenow don't you find it also outrageous that we can't read news or comments made in court by a judge and know that when he refers to a woman it is actually a woman. It's more than outrageous it's dangerous.

I don't understand how they proved beyond reasonable doubt that this wasn't consensual.

The next bit isn't intended to victim blame or doubt the man's experience- it's a comparison with the experience of women in his situation. Look away if you will be offended...

Had it been the other way around, there would have been all sorts of reasons this wasn't rape, and no one's life should be ruined like this, he might have had a promising career etc. perhaps he was feeling experimental, but regretted it afterwards. Shit, maybe he was walking past and just fell into her.

I'd love someone who knows about this stuff to explain the difference.

Women can sexually assault men, OP. Males are not the only people capable of this crime. Women are not always the victim.

I do wish I had seen this case before completing my response to IPSO. This is exactly the problem with the media repeating according to gender identity and not sex, they have lost our trust.

Exactly. How many women would even go to the police to report this?

This

And i agree with other posters that due to the rarity and the fact that the media and courts lie all the time about the sex of the accused that its quite easy to be confused supersleepy

and men quite obviously can be dreadfully affected by sexual assault and rape

Given that the man who fell over and his penis accidentally penetrated a sleeping woman was entirely let off, I do find this disparity in punishment upsetting.

The argument that he couldn't have reasonably consented because he thought she was a lesbian is the one that galls me - men get to say they believed there was reasonable expectation of consent just because a woman is heterosexual, even if the woman herself says she would never have consented to it!

But the thing is, I can't get over a nagging feeling that they aren't quite equivalent anyway. Whilst yes, this is obviously sexual assault, I think there is a difference between being forced to put a part of you in someone else, and having someone force a part of themselves inside you.

Like someone walking up and sucking my finger would be weird and icky and I'd wash my hands and shudder when I thought of it, but someone walking and putting their finger in my mouth would be downright disgusting and invasive - definitely worse.

No idea whether this person (the rapist) is male or female. However there’s no mention of any vagina in the reporting. DNA can come from anywhere.
It’s wholly confusing.

Different times, different case, but I always felt the sniggering at the victim of Joyce McKinney (a seriously odd woman, see the link below) was cruel and unfair. Another recent thread mentioned the distress victims of sexual assault (particularly children) sometimes feel because their abusers knew how to induce arousal and orgasm, neither of which are the same thing as consent.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manacled_Mormon_case

It's also of note that if this or the case in Belfast a while back had happened south of the border, the identities of the assailant and the victim could only be made public with the victim's consent. The system here isn't perfect by a long way, but that is a good thing.

Er… she admitted it which probably helped!

I think we should take the rape of men seriously and there are some aspects of stereotypical masculinity which get in the way of that. We should also take rape of women seriously and we are a long way off that. This doesn't show the damage which as been done by the words man and woman becoming meaningless in the media. We have no idea who did what to whom when men are female, women and have vaginas. That's a dangerous precedent.

Yes totally. Newspeak.

@Oubliette86 I know you were specifically addressing the finding of guilt point.
But it was a last minute change of plea. There are still valid questions about how this got to court when so many cases against women do not.

It's worrying the amount of people here who seem upset at the fact that sexual assault by a woman against a man was taken seriously.

I'm glad the man who was sexually assaulted got justice.

I'm annoyed that the majority of women in the same situation would have not even seen their abuser arrested.

And the reporting on this case it's not helped by the fact that we can no longer believe the news without triple checking everything!

More surprise than upset I think. The other way round and this would never have got to trial.

Not upset. Envious, considering how the far more frequent cases of men assaulting women are treated and angry because I believe sexism and misogyny to be the reason for the different treatment. The seriousness with which this case was approached by the police and PSNI should be standard practice for female victims as well.

I am not upset that a man was believed and women are not believed. I'm angry. I'm less surprised.

I am glad the victim was believed and I hope he has the support he needs. Obviously.