Rape
Menstuff® has compiled the following information on
Rape.
Women stage flash mob protest
outside Harvey Weinstein trial
What Nobody Wants To Admit About Rape
Culture
The
Story Of Mankind: A Story of Sex, Violence &
Power? (Warning:
Intense & Breathtaking) 
When Is It Rape?
Woman Explains Difference
Between Rape And Consent In 5 Tweets To Men Who Still
Don’t Get It Forced
Oral Sex Isn’t Rape if the Victim is Intoxicated, Rules
Oklahoma Court
Worst States For Pregnant Rape
Victims
Rape Victims in Louisiana Are Being
Charged for Hospital Exams
How
the GOP sees Rape
Was
the World's Youngest Mother (rape victim) Only 5 Years
Old?
Think "no" means "no"?
Rape and the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce
"Corrective
Rape"
If a Woman Isn’t Bruised and
Bleeding, Will Her Rape Be Counted?
Tell the FBI: Rape is
Rape!
Myths and Facts about Male Victims
and Rape
Rape is... - A
documentary - Margaret Lazarus Documents Human Rights
Violations
Rape Culture
Through a Rapist's
Eyes
Teen Slang: Why The Word 'Rape'
Should Never Be Used Casually
Ohio
school rape victim didn't consent, prosecutor
says
Student says school
rules punished her for reporting rape
Margaret Lazarus Documents
Human Rights Violations
Date Rape Drugs
+ Resources
Sleep
Assault
Prison Rape
Slut Walk
GOP Rape
Advisory Chart
Books
10:01
Sen.
Franken Questions an Arbitration Lawyer about binding
Arbitration
12:03
A
message to my rapist
By Brie Lybrand. The rapist is Steven Bressler married to
Suz Bressler.
If you know either one of them, out him.
6:02
Disney
Princesses Used To Raise Rape Awareness In Controversial
Campaign
5:25
Lady Gaga - Til It Happens To You
1:07
It's amazing what happens when boys are actually taught to
respect women.
When Is It Rape?
On Jan. 6, the California Supreme Court ruled 6-1 that if a
woman rescinds consent during the sex act, the man is guilty
of rape if he does not stop immediately.
It also ruled that statements such as "I should go home"
constitute an unambiguous "no" on the woman's part. The
definition of rape has evolved again.
What are the facts of the case? Seventeen-year-old Laura
T. attended an otherwise all-male party at which she did not
drink. After allowing two teenaged boys to undress and
fondle her in a bedroom -- acts she admitted enjoying -- she
had sex with each. Laura did not say the word "no" nor did
she resist. Instead, she said, "I have to go home."
Because John Z. continued for approximately four minutes
after she first expressed what might have been reluctance,
he was convicted of rape.
Rape is an abomination no civilized society can tolerate.
But precisely because rape is such a serious crime, it is
important to establish explicit and reasonable standards by
which to judge the guilt or innocence of those accused.
If a woman (or man) clearly says "stop" during consensual
sex, then the partner should be morally and legally
constrained to do just that -- stop. But what if the partner
proceeds in good faith on the basis of a "yes" given moments
before? Common sense dictates that the rescinded "no" must
be explicit and that the partner should have a reasonable
amount of time to grasp the changed circumstances.
But the court ruled that sex becomes rape the instant the
woman rescinds consent and it provided no guidance on what
constitutes the withdrawal of consent.
The sole dissenting voice, Justice Janice Rogers Brown,
found that none of Laura's statements were "unequivocal."
Her requests to go home could have been interpreted as a
need for reassurance or a request for greater speed.
This is a nontrivial point. The law assumes that all
adults are responsible agents in sexual matters. (Laura T.'s
age was not introduced as a significant factor in the
court's conclusion.) The law assumes that women and men are
able to make their wants known and, so, have a
responsibility to do so.
As for the timing issue ... the court relied heavily upon
John Z.'s failure to desist immediately. But, as Brown
observed, the decision "does not tell us how soon would have
been soon enough. Ten seconds? Thirty? A minute? Is
persistence the same thing as force?"
John Z.'s attorney, Carol Foster, argued that her client
should have been given a "reasonable amount of time" in
which to withdraw. This is also nontrivial. If John Z. had a
reasonable belief of consent, then he should also have a
reasonable amount of time to realize circumstances had
changed.
Brown -- the dissenting judge -- continued, "and even if
we conclude persistence should be criminalized in this
situation, should the penalty be the same as for forcible
rape?" In essence, Brown is asking whether consensual sex
that becomes nonconsensual at some point should be treated
in the same manner as a back alley rape committed at the
point of a knife. Or should there be another category of
rape, such as negligence, which carries a lesser
penalty?
No one wants to return to the '70s when women who took
rape cases to trial were emotionally shredded in
cross-examinations. None of us long for the days when the
reports of a raped woman were summarily dismissed by a
cynical police department. But the recent California
decision is not a remedy for such problems surrounding the
issue of rape.
Sixties feminism deserves a lot of credit for bringing
sanity to bear on the crime of rape. They broke down a
mythology that claimed only "bad" girls who walked alone at
night in tight clothing were raped. Research showed exactly
the opposite to be true. Every woman was vulnerable to
attack, even in her own home and especially from men she
knew.
Sixties feminism attacked a court system that believed
rape complainants were less reliable than other victims.
Feminists attacked the "reasonable resistance" requirement
imposed by most states; that is, rape was not deemed to have
occurred unless the woman had manifested strenuous
resistance. Meanwhile, other crimes did not require a victim
to resist in order for a crime to have occurred.
The prosecution of rape used to be skewed against women.
Now it seems to be skewed against men. No longer is criminal
intent necessary for criminal
guilt
.
No longer is an explicit "no" necessary for the withdrawal
of consent. And men may be well advised to keep a stopwatch
as well as contraceptives by the bedside.
The Laura T. decision may well become a Pandora's Box for
false accusations of rape. No longer can the man point to a
woman's explicit consent because she can now argue that --
once penetration occurred -- she changed her mind. She need
not utter the word "no!" She can merely say, "I have to go
home."
As the former mainstream feminist professor Erin O'Connor
notes in her blog
,
"this ruling neatly dispenses with the idea that rape
necessarily involves force, and replaces it with a
definition of consent that is as uncertain and shifting as
the woman who wields it."
Source: Wendy McElroy, www.ifeminists.net/introduction/editorials/2003/0114.html
Woman
Explains Difference Between Rape And Consent In 5 Tweets To
Men Who Still Don’t Get It
Even though it’s easy enough for most of us to
comprehend, there are sadly still many people out there who
don’t understand the difference between rape and
consent. Because of this, Twitter user Nafisa Ahmed decided
to break it down in a way that everybody can understand.
“I don’t get how rape is so hard to understand
for some men,” she wrote in the first of a series of
tweets. “But, if you put it like this, they get
it.” Ahmed then goes on to explain the difference using
a super simple and effective analogy involving a purse and
some money. While it’s pretty sad that she even has to
do this, we’re certainly glad that she did. Let’s
just hope everybody takes note.
Twitter user Nafisa Ahmed used a simple analogy to
explain the difference between rape and consent
If you ask me for $5, and I'm too drunk to say
yes or no, it's not okay to then go ake $5 out of my
puse...just because I didn't say "No."
If you put a gun to my head to get me to give you $5,
you still stole $5. Even if I physically handed you
$5.
If I let YOU borrowe $5, that doesn't give
the right for your FRIEND to take $5 out of my purse.
"But you gave him some, whycan'tI?"
If you steal $5 and I can't prove it in court, that
does NOT mean you didn't steal $5.
Just because I gave you $5 in the past, doesn't mean
I have to give you $5 in the future.
If you can undersand alllllll of that, how do you not
undersstand the concept of rape?
Ok, rant over. Times like this are good because it
lets me know which men to avoid spending time with or in
the vicinity of.
And to think a man said "Well she sat on his lap &
went to his house." Okay, if I ask you to hold
my purse, does thast mean you can take $?
The internet was quick to respond to her
tweets
Walley - I'm not chastising anybody...But being
aware of how much alcohol u can consume before u don't
know between ys/no is being an adult.
macabretrash
Rape
If rape was about how revealing their clothes were,
rape rates would lquadrumple during the summer.
But they don't.
If rape was about how much sex someone's had in the
past, then virgins wouldn't get raped.
But they do.
Ifl rape was about how attractive a person was by
conventional standards, then onkly thin, white, abled
people would get raped.
But they don't.
If rape was about how much they drank, then sobert
people wouldn't gt raped.
But they do.
Michael Lmond @lemond2007
@thatxxv Your analogy is stupit, and you should feel
stupid for coming up with it.
nafisa ahmed
@lemond2007 @ me when you're not hiding behind a
cartoon avi, bro
nafisa ahmen
And thank YOU to the men who have interacted w/this
thread. It's sad, but sometimes they need to hear it from
another man.
What do you think?
Michel M. Prins
I am ashamed to hear that so many of my gender still
lack the knowledge of understanding the difference
between consent and rape. You might get away with it, but
there is a big chance that she will have to carry it with
her for the rest of her life. I can say with full honesty
that there are many men who can be trusted and we do know
what the difference is, but sadly have to agree that
there are tons of rotten apples in between them as well.
To whose who had to deal with such pain and terror: Do
not let the person win who has done you harm. Do not be
afraid to speak out, seek guidence, training and support,
because you know you deserve to be happy.
Daria B
Hey, people! Let's upvote this kind and supportive
comment up!
Marcia J. Downing
I am a rape victim and I wish men could see how this
changes who we are or were. I suffered from PTSD after. I
could not be left alone because of fear, my Mother or my
adult children would have to stay with me when my husband
had to go out of town on business or to serve in the Air
National Guard. I was a very independant woman and I
loved being alone, not anymore. I lost all of that for 30
minutes of fun for him!!! He was a serial rapist in our
neighbor hood, there were 7 of us, thankfully he's in
jail and has been since 1985 and we will keep him there
as long as I have breath in my body!!! One more thing,
his wife was pregnant at the time he did all of this. He
was the called the airport rapist in Nashville, Tn.
Nomadus Aureus
I too have been raped. And it was my first time.
And I used to have such (probably unrealistic)
romantic ideas about how that is going to be like.
Something tender, and fun, and warm... Even more than
a decade later, I still can't break away from it. To
this day I suffer from PTSD. I can't go to clubs. I
can only go to a live concert if I'm standing at the
back. I can't go into a closed place with people I
don't know. And worst of all, I can't make honest,
genuine love with the person I love. Did I have sex
while in a relationship? Yes. But mainly because I
felt it was an obligation. It feels like I've been
robbed of something that is supposed to be brilliant.
BUT! Last year, I finally made it to a point where I
got myself together and moved out and away to a new
country! All on my own! And started University. It
took weeks to learn to fall asleep, I still experience
difficulties in communicating with people I'm not
familiar with and sometimes I still get depressed.
(1/2)
Alusair Alustriel
If there is no allowance from the victim, it's a
crime, no matter if it's stealing 5$ or raping. Crime is
a crime. Forcing someone is forcing someone. Abuse is an
abuse. Stop explaining the perpetrator and pushing the
guild to the vicitim! Even if a woman agrees to have sex
and then changes her mind in the middle, the other party
HAS to respect it! And no "But"!!!
Source: www.boredpanda.com/sexual-assault-consent-analogy-tweets-nafisa-ahmed/
What Nobody
Wants To Admit About Rape Culture
Nobody’s in favor of rape, but it keeps on happening.
What’s not working?
The first reaction most people have, upon being told
about the concept of rape culture, is to dismiss it.
It’s intuitively obvious to them that our society
doesn’t condone rape or consider it a trivial matter.
Very much the opposite: rape is seen as the worst crime in
the world, rapists are considered inhuman monsters, rape is
often talked about as worse than murder.
(Editor's note: While
male-to-male prison rape is common, usually a convict who
ends up in prison for rape or child molestation is hated and
fears for his life daily. Many of his fellow convicts would
rather see him dead which happens quite often.)
What nobody wants to admit is that those assumptions and
attitudes are rape culture.
The key to understanding rape culture is that, in our
society, nobody (outside a few MRA bloggers, who are beneath
consideration) says “Hey, rape is just fine and
dandy!” They say “Rape is awful, it’s vile,
it’s the worst crime a human can commit, I am totally
opposed to rape.” Yet somehow, when any actual case of
rape is put before them, they work to find reasons why it
wasn’t really rape, it was something else instead.
Those last two sentences depend on and support each
other.
One of the most common occurrences when a woman has been
raped is that her entire sexual history is brought up and
used against her. The point of this attack is not that rape
is okay, it’s that she’s a slut so she must have
consented, right? Therefore it’s not rape.
When guys are told “When a woman says no, she means
try harder,” it doesn’t mean that rape is okay. It
means that a woman is still consenting even if she says no.
Therefore it’s not rape.
When a man is raped, he’s often outright laughed at.
Everyone knows guys are always horny, there’s no way a
man wouldn’t consent to sex. Therefore it’s not
rape.
Perhaps most often, we see the character or friends of an
accused rapist being held up as proof that they can’t
possibly be guilty. “I’ve known that guy for
years, and he’s no rapist!” “How could
someone think he’s a rapist? He volunteers at the food
bank!” and so on and so forth. Rapists are inhuman
monsters, everyone knows that, and this person’s not an
inhuman monster. Therefore he’s not a rapist. Therefore
it’s not rape.
It’s weird to have to say this to adults, but
let’s be clear: there’s no such thing as monsters.
Every person who’s ever been raped has been raped by a
human being. No exceptions. Dehumanizing rapists actually
helps perpetuate the very culture it tries to oppose.
* * *
There’s a certain platonic ideal of rape, a model of
what it’s supposed to look like. It was most clearly
described, in disturbingly specific detail, by a state
senator named Bill Napoli, who thought he was discussing
abortion policy:
A real-life description to me would be a rape
victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin.
She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity
until she was married. She was brutalized and raped,
sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is
impregnated.
That, our cultural subconscious is vaguely aware, is what
“legitimate rape” looks like. The further from
that image that any given rape gets, the more likely that
we’ll pull out our excuses for how it’s not really
rape.
What’s more, even anti-rape campaigns very often buy
into that image. All those lines about how women should
carry their keys sticking out between their fingers like
Wolverine, all those slogans about women being afraid to
walk down the street; they’re all based on defending
against Bill Napoli’s legitimate rape.
This can’t be repeated enough: most real-life rapes
don’t look anything like that. If you’re raped, it
will probably be by someone you know, in a place that you
usually feel safe. It will definitely not be by a monster,
so stop keeping an eye out for monsters. Most likely it will
be someone fairly likable in most respects, as most people
are. You might have been laughing at their jokes right up
until they assaulted you.
It is very, very common for people who’ve just been
raped to have a hard time admitting that that’s what
happened. They’ve heard all the reasons why something
doesn’t really count as rape. They’ve probably
said or thought some of those rationalizations themselves.
So if all those other cases weren’t really rape, theirs
must not be either, right?
Then, too, rape is the worst crime in the world, the most
horrible, traumatic, life-destroying thing that can happen,
right? So if they don’t feel completely traumatized and
destroyed, it couldn’t really have been rape,
right?
And the person that raped them isn’t a monster.
Maybe they still like their rapist, even love them. Maybe
they don’t want to permanently label that person as an
inhuman monster. Maybe they just don’t want to accuse
someone who’s well-liked and will have an army of
defenders arguing that they’re not a monster. Maybe
they don’t want to be accused of lying because after
all, it obviously wasn’t really rape.
So another man or woman just keeps their mouth shut about
what happened, tries to file it away and forget about it.
And another rape ends up being condoned by a society that
vociferously does not condone rape. And nobody wants to talk
about how this happens, because saying that rapists are
human beings, and human beings commit rape, sounds like
being insufficiently anti-rape. We would rather condone
actual rape than appear to not oppose imaginary rape
strongly enough.
Source: goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/brand-what-nobody-wants-to-admit-about-rape-culture
Women stage flash mob protest
outside Harvey Weinstein trial
If you were looking at the courthouse in New York City
where disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein is
currently on trial for multiple counts of sexual assault on
Friday morning, it would have seemed pretty quiet.
But just across the street, something was brewing.
Dozens of women had gathered in the park facing the
courthouse. They were a diverse group, wearing black with
accents of red, many of them tying black mesh around their
eyes and carrying totes emblazoned with “TIME’S
UP” and Dolores Huerta quotes. Just before 11 a.m.,
they marched out of the park and lined up, faced the court
and began to chant.
“Patriarchy is our judge that imprisons us at birth!
And our punishment is the violence you don’t see,”
the women sang in unison as they swayed back and forth in a
choreographed dance.
“The rapist is you. It’s the cops. The judges.
The state. The president.”
The song they were singing, “Un Violador en Tu
Camino” (which translates to “A Rapist in Your
Path” in English), was written by LasTesis, a feminist
performance group based in Chile. It was first performed
publicly in Chile in November 2019 in the midst of the
country’s nationwide uprising against inequality. The
video footage of the flash mob spread quickly, and “Un
Violador en Tu Camino” has since been performed around
the world in London, Mexico City, Paris, Berlin, Bogota and
Barcelona.
Zakiyah Ansari and Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas gather to
perform the Chilean anti-rape anthem "A Rapist In Our Midst"
outside of the courthouse where Harvey Weinstein's trial is
ongoing.
Activists Paola Mendoza, Yara Travieso and Sarah Sophie
Flicker first saw video footage of “Un Violador en Tu
Camino” last month. As the performance grew in
popularity within Chile and then moved to other countries,
Mendoza, an artist based in New York City, emailed
choreographer and director Travieso and Flicker, a creative
director and artist.
“It was very moving to see a group of women come
together in their own terms and talk so openly, blatantly,
and boldly, and fiercely about rape culture,” Mendoza
said. “I was like, ‘Let’s do it in New York.
Let’s translate it into English and let’s do it in
New York.’”
And so they got to organizing, along with actor and
activist Amber Tamblyn and the national organizing director
of the Working Families Party, Nelini Stamp. They all
reached out to their own networks and encouraged those
attending to bring other women-identifying people.
Organizers Paola Mendoza and Sarah Sophie Flicker.
The lyrics of “Un Violador en Tu Camino”
express the philosophy of Argentinian theorist Rita Segato,
which identifies fundamentally broken institutions rather
than just poorly behaving individuals as the root of rape
culture and sexual violence.
“We can say ... that this is not on us. This is on
the system that doesn’t protect us, and doesn’t
protect our basic human rights,” said Travieso, who
sees the words of “Un Violador en Tu Camino” as
almost a mantra.
The focus on systems that perpetuate violence against
women over singular monsters is why Mendoza, Flicker and
Travieso found the song so powerful in this current
moment.
“It is much larger than one man committing a
horrific crime, this is a systematic problem,” Mendoza
said. “And so it’s not just about the Harvey
Weinstein trial, though he represents something specific in
the United States. It’s about something that’s
bigger than that.”
Yasmeen Hassan, the global executive editor of Equality
Now, was one of the women in attendance. She told HuffPost
that she sees the Weinstein case as symbolic, “the
epitome of what led to the Me Too movement.”
“Justice systems nowhere work for survivors,”
Hassan said. “We want to show solidarity with survivors
all over the world and we want to push for reform of the
justice system to better serve survivors in their quest for
justice.”
A group of women activists perform the Chilean anti-rape
anthem "A Rapist In Our Midst" outside of the courthouse
where Harvey Weinstein's trial is ongoing.
This is also why Mendoza, Flicker and Travieso decided to
stage the flash mob protest in multiple locations across the
city. After performing “Un Violador en Tu Camino”
outside of the courthouse, the group planned to reprise the
performance on the subway, then move to their final
destination: the Trump Hotel by Columbus Circle. (President
Donald Trump has been accused of sexual misconduct or
assault by more than 40 women to date.)
“Since 2016, women have been the punching bag of the
administration,” Mendoza said, “and so [this
protest] is a way for us to gather our strength, and to
gather our solidarity, and be bold and fierce for the year
that lies ahead, which we know will be difficult.”
?[This is us] saying to the administration and to
the system that we are not going to be silent, and
we’re not going to just take it,” she continued.
“We’re going to fight back, and we’re going
to fight back with dignity and love and sisterhood and lots
of strength.”
Source: www.aol.com/article/news/2020/01/10/women-stage-flash-mob-protest-outside-harvey-weinstein-trial/23898559/
Think "No" means
"No"?
Well, 173 members of Congress don't.
A far-reaching anti-choice bill, introduced by Republican
Chris Smith and supported by 173 members of the House,
includes a provision that could redefine rape and set
women's rights back by decades.1
Right now, federal dollars can't be used for abortion
except in cases of rape, incest, or when the woman's life is
in danger.
But according to the New York Times, the Smith
bill would narrow that use to "cases of 'forcible' rape but
not statutory or coerced rape."2 This could mean cases where
women are "drugged or given excessive amounts of alcohol,
rapes of women with limited mental capacity, and many date
rapes" would no longer count as rape.3
As far too many women know, bruises and broken bones do
not define rape—a lack of consent does. The Smith bill
is scary. And with 173 supporters it already has a
frightening chance of passage—unless the public speaks
up right away with an outcry that can't be ignored.
Can you sign the petition to Congress today, demanding
they oppose the sexist, anti-choice Smith bill?
The petition says: "Bruises and broken bones do not
define rape—a lack of consent does. Stand up and oppose
the dangerous GOP legislation to redefine rape."
Federal funds are already severely restricted when it
comes to reproductive rights and women's health care, a
situation that ends up hurting lower-income women in
particular, who tend to use federally-funded services more
often than wealthy women. The last thing we ought to be
doing is legislating to make these laws more stringent.
In addition, the Smith bill is full of dangerous
anti-choice provisions as well as the rape redefinition.
Called "Stupak on Steroids" by NARAL Pro-Choice America in
reference to Rep. Bart Stupak's failed attempt to push
stringent restrictions on insurance coverage for abortion
during the health care debate, it would "force millions of
American families to pay more taxes if their health plan
covers abortion care, jeopardizing abortion coverage in the
private market."4
The Smith bill is just the first of many attacks on
women's rights to come in the new GOP-controlled House.5 If
it moves forward, it would set an incredibly dangerous
precedent for GOP action in the House for the next two
years.
Can you sign the petition asking Congress to denounce the
Smith bill to redefine rape? Click here: pol.moveon.org/smithbill/?id=25965-299027-G0utnUx&t=4
Sources:
1. "The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape," Mother
Jones, January 28, 2011 www.moveon.org/r?r=205936&id=25965-299027-G0utnUx&t=5
"Stupak on Steroids," The Hill, January 25, 2011
www.moveon.org/r?r=205938&id=25965-299027-G0utnUx&t=6
2. "The Two Abortion Wars: A Highly Intrusive Federal
Bill," New York Times, January 29, 2011 www.nytimes.com/2011/01/30/opinion/30sun1.html
http://nyti.ms/eEUJgY
3. "The House GOP's Plan to Redefine Rape," Mother
Jones, January 28, 2011 www.moveon.org/r?r=205936&id=25965-299027-G0utnUx&t=7
"Stupak on Steroids," The Hill, January 25, 2011
www.moveon.org/r?r=205938&id=25965-299027-G0utnUx&t=8
5. Ibid.
Worst States For Pregnant Rape
Victims
A Republican state representative in New Mexico introduced a
bill Wednesday that classified abortions for rape victims as
"tampering with evidence," effectively requiring women to
carry their pregnancies to term in order to prove their case
in a sexual assault trial.
This bill will not pass, as Democrats control both
chambers of New Mexico's state legislature, but there are
plenty of other state laws that extend the nightmare for
women who are impregnated through rape.
Of the 26 states that require
a waiting period (usually 24 hours) for women
seeking abortions, only Utah makes an exception for cases of
rape or incest. Pregnant rape victims in some states must
also undergo counseling
about the negative effects of abortion before having the
procedure.
If a woman who conceives through rape does go on to have
the child, she can open herself up to being victimized by
her rapist again and again. In 31 states, paternal rapists
are allowed to sue for custody and visitation rights like
any other father, as a Chicago woman who was served with
custody papers from her rapist brought to the public's
attention last summer after former Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.)
made his "legitimate rape" comments.
Even in the states that don't protect the parental rights
of rapists, many rapes never lead to a conviction and
certain provisions can make it difficult for a woman
impregnated through sexual assault to keep her attacker out
of her and her child's life. Mother Jones reports:
But of the 19 states that have laws addressing
the custody of rape-conceived children, 13 require proof
of conviction in order to waive the rapist's parental
rights. Two more states have provisions on the issue that
only apply if the victim is a minor or, in one of those
cases, a stepchild or adopted child of the rapist.
Another three states don't have laws that deal with
custody of a rapist's child specifically, but do restrict
the parental rights of a father or mother who sexually
abused the other parent.
Source: www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/26/pregnant-rape-abortion_n_2552183.html?icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-sb-bb%7Cdl2%7Csec3_lnk1%26pLid%3D262092
Rape Victims in Louisiana Are Being
Charged for Hospital Exams
Many victims of sexual assault are burdened with paying out
of their own pockets for forensic medical exams and related
care
1 in 5 U.S. Women Are Raped at Some Point, Report
Says
Some rape victims in Louisiana are being forced to
literally pay the price of their own assault.
An investigation by the Times-Picayune found that
many victims of sexual assault were being billed by
hospitals after they sought treatment and, in some cases,
were charged thousands of dollars.
Though the Violence Against Women Act was amended in 2005
to stipulate that sexual assault victims should not be
billed for medical forensic exams in the wake of their
attack, the requirements only include the basics for a rape
kit or SANE exam, such as “an examination of physical
trauma, a determination of penetration or force, a patient
interview and collection of evidence.”
“By that definition,” reports Rebecca
Catalanello in the Times-Picayune, “costs for
procedures that are a regular part of the SANE screening
— pregnancy tests and HIV tests, among them —
could be considered extra. And, in many cases throughout
Louisiana and the United States, they are.” Some of the
women who spoke to the Times-Picayune reported they
had been billed for simply being admitted to the emergency
room, despite being required to do so in order to have their
exam completed.
One woman, who was violently sexually assaulted, received
two medical bills following her visit to the hospital, which
came to $4,200. Her mother told the Times-Picayune,
“You know what really gets me? Prisoners in Angola
[the Louisiana State Penitentiary] get medical
treatment for free.”
Some of the costs can be recouped by victims, as long as
they apply for reimbursement from the Louisiana Crime
Victims Reparations Board. Yet there are conditions: Victims
must file charges against their rapists, and must also be
clear of felonies on their own records (at least within the
past five years). Victims also can’t have been involved
in illegal activity at the time of the rape, which could
include underage drinking. What’s more, the victim must
not “have behaved in a way that, in the opinion of the
board, ‘contributed to the crime.'”
Yet Louisiana doesn’t appear to be an outlier.
According to the Times-Picayune, only 15 states pay
for tests for STIs and medication prescribed in the course
of a forensic exam and only 13 states pay for pregnancy
tests. There are only 10 states that cover the cost of
emergency room fees for sexual assault victims and the
number of states that cover the cost of treating injuries
sustained during a sexual assault is a mere five.
This practice could have serious consequences. While law
enforcement workers and victim advocates often lament that
only around a third of rape victims actually report their
attack to the police, the possibility of being saddled with
exorbitant bills for medical treatment could deter victims
from seeking medical treatment. And without the forensic
exams, valuable evidence against the rapist is unlikely to
be collected, which would likely hinder prosecution of the
victim did file a report at any time.
But while Catalanello’s investigation is an
upsetting read, the report has already made waves. In a
statement released after the Times-Picayune piece was
published, the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals
said, “We take a strong stand against sexual violence.
Our heart goes out to victims of these crimes. This is a
result of disjointed local parish health policies, as well
as a poor legacy charity system that was run inefficiently
for many years. We will work with the Legislature and the
partners to address this and ensure sexual assault victims
are provided the services they need, and also make sure we
are doing everything we can to fight sexual
violence.”
Source: time.com/3444686/louisiana-rape-victims-exams/
FBI Rape definition expanded to
include male victims
The Obama administration on Friday expanded the FBI's more
than eight-decade-old definition of rape to count men as
victims for the first time and to drop the requirement that
victims must have physically resisted their attackers.
The new definition will increase the number of people
counted as rape victims in FBI statistics, but it will not
change federal or state laws or alter charges or
prosecutions.
The issue received top-level White House attention
starting in July, when Vice President Joe Biden raised it at
a Cabinet meeting.
Biden, author of the Violence Against Women Act when he
was in the Senate, said the new definition is a victory for
women and men. "We can't solve it unless we know the full
extent of it," the vice president said.
Since 1929, the FBI has defined rape as the carnal
knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will. The
revised definition covers any gender of victim or attacker
and includes instances in which the victim is incapable of
giving consent because of the influence of drugs or alcohol
or because of age. Physical resistance is not required. The
Justice Department said the new definition mirrors the
majority of state rape statutes now on the books.
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.,
said all rape victims "should have access to the
comprehensive services that will help them rebuild their
lives."
In November, Leahy introduced legislation to reauthorize
the Violence Against Women Act and provide an increased
emphasis on efforts to stop sexual assault.
"We've always had a broad definition of who is eligible
for services, and the change could result in additional
resources being made available for survivors of rape," said
Linda McFarlane, deputy executive director of Just Detention
International. The nonprofit human rights organization works
to eliminate sexual abuse in prisons and other detention
settings.
Congress approved $592 million this year to address
violence against women, including sexual assault, domestic
violence, dating violence and stalking, under the Violence
Against Women Act and Family Violence Prevention and
Services Act. The Obama administration had sought $777
million to combat violence against women.
Using the old definition, a total of 84,767 rapes were
reported nationwide in 2010, according to the FBI's uniform
crime report based on data from 18,000 law enforcement
agencies.
Nearly 1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men in the United States
have been raped at some time in their lives, according to a
2010 survey by the National Center for Injury Prevention and
Control.
Source: This article appeared on page A - 5
of the San Francisco Chronicle, www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/01/06/MNDJ1MLTPQ.DTL
(Editor's note: An important
piece the above article left out is the following:
"The revised FBI definition says that rape is “the
penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus
with any body part or object,” without the consent of
the victim. Also constituting rape under the new definition
is “oral penetration by a sex organ of another
person” without consent.") 
Myths and Facts about Male Victims
and Rape
Myth: Rape happens because of an uncontrollable desire
for sex with an irresistible victim.
Rape is an act of violence in which sex becomes the
weapon used to control and or harm a victim the rapist
perceives as vulnerable.
Myth: Men and boys cannot be raped.
One in six men report having been sexually abused by the
time they were 18 (Finkelhor et al., 1990).
Anyone from infants to the elderly, regardless of gender,
race, religion, socio-economic status, education, physical
appearance, marital status, or culture can be raped. Rapists
choose their victims carefully, looking for anything that
will make the victim vulnerable and give them the advantage.
They isolate their victims from bystanders who could help
them, and rely upon shock, surprise, weapons, threats,
strength, or positions of authority to counter the
victim’s ability to resist.
Myth: Homosexual males perpetrate most sexual
abuse of boys.
Men who sexually abuse males are usually pedophiles or
persons who prefer a child as their sexual partner, not
homosexual males. Most perpetrators know their victims
(Groth et al., 1989) (Roesler et al., 1994).
Myth: A man or boy who experiences sexual arousal
or orgasm during the abusive act enjoyed it.
Males may respond to stimulation even when it is abusive
or violent. A man or boy who experiences sexual arousal may
feel shame and guilt, but the arousal does not mean that he
was willing or enjoyed it (Gartner, 1999).
Myth: Boys abused by males are or will become
homosexual.
A boy may question or be confused about his sexual
identity and orientation after having been abused by a male,
especially if he experienced sexual arousal. But there is no
reason to believe that sexual abuse causes homosexuality
(Gartner, 1999).
Myth: Boys who are sexually abused will grow up
to be sexual abusers.
While the majority of sexual abusers were abused
themselves, the majority of sexually abused boys never
become perpetrators (Lisak et al., 1996).
Myth: If the perpetrator is a female, the boy
should consider himself lucky, not abused.
Our societal norms encourage a boy to deny any negative
or traumatic responses to having been “so lucky,”
to having earned a “badge of honor.” But, having
been coerced or manipulated into sex by an older girl or
woman is always abusive and often damaging (Lisak et al.,
1996).
Comments:
Monika said...
Great myth busting, and great link. (It seems to be
linked incorrectly, however, on your post; I think blogger
sometimes does that).
There are also some great books out there for male
survivors. An autobiography I read that I found particularly
moving was Sheldon Kennedy's "Why I didn't say anything"
www.amazon.ca/Why-Didnt-Say-Anything-Sheldon/dp/1897178077
Kennedy did a great job of showing the complexities male
survivors (and survivors in general) experience.
In my experience (I am a sexual assault/abuse therapist),
men and boys are really hit with the "you are going to be an
offender" myth, as well as homophobia / "you are going to
turn out gay" - both of which are often well
internalized.
Just as there needs to be greater awareness about sexual
violence in general, so does there need to be greater
awareness about male survivors, specifically.
Thanks for the education!
Source: straightguise.blogspot.com/2008/01/men-against-sexual-violence-sexually.html
Men Against
Sexual Violence: Sexually Abused Males by Joe Kort
I found an excellent site about raped and sexually abused
males that every therapist and male who has raped or been
raped should have as a resource. The site at which I found
the following is Men Against Sexual Violence www.menagainstsexualviolence.org/myths.html
Tell the FBI:
Rape is Rape!
Each year, the FBI fails to count hundreds of thousands of
rapes in its Uniform Crime Report (UCR)—even missing
many rapes that are reported to police. That’s because
for over 80 years, the FBI has been using the same
fundamentally flawed definition of “forcible”
rape: “The carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and
against her will” to track rape statistics in the
UCR.
This excludes rapes involving forced anal sex and/or
oral sex, vaginal or anal fisting, rape with an object (even
if serious injuries result), rapes of men and transgender
people and other injurious and degrading sexual assaults.
Also, because the definition includes the word
“forcibly,” police departments often interpret the
rule (against UCR guidelines) as leaving out rapes of women
with physical or mental disabilities and those who were
unconscious or under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
A recent
Ms. investigation revealed that the archaic definition
plays a key role in the vast underreporting of rape in the
U.S.:
- The FBI’s 2007 Uniform Crime Report listed
91,874 “forcible rapes”, but some estimates
suggest the actual number may be 24 times
higher.
- Police departments go to great lengths to look good
on the UCR, the FBI’s comprehensive national crime
report by which all U.S. police departments are judged,
and federal funding is determined. Often this means
interpreting “forcible rape” even more narrowly
than the FBI does when classifying sexual crimes.
- Police departments across the country, notably
Baltimore and Philadelphia, have been found to be juking
the stats—coding legitimate rape cases as
“unfounded” in order to make it appear that
rape numbers have declined.
Without an accurate definition, we won't have accurate
statistics about rape, and without accurate statistics, we
will never have adequate funding for law enforcement to
solve these crimes. A change in the definition of rape would
lead to better law enforcement response and could thus
reduce dramatically the incidence of rape.
It’s high time for a change. For rape survivors,
a modern definition of rape at the federal level would
acknowledge, once and for all, that rape is rape—and
that the stories and experiences of all rape survivors
(women and men, gay or
straight) count.
Make sure that all rapes are counted. Sign this petition
to tell FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney General
Eric Holder to update the overly narrow, outdated
“forcible rape” definition.
Read Petition Letter
Change the "forcible" rape definition
Greetings,
I was shocked to learn that the FBI uses an archaic
definition of rape (“The carnal knowledge of a female
forcibly and against her will”) to gather statistics
for the Uniform Crime Report. This definition, drafted more
than 80 years ago, is problematic for many reasons, chief
among them that it excludes victims of forced anal or oral
sex, rape with an object, statutory rape, and male rape.
Moreover, this definition is often used by law enforcement
to exclude rapes of women whose ability to give consent has
been diminished by drugs or alcohol.
This poses several problems:
1. This archaic definition of what constitutes "real
rape" affects perception of the crime by law enforcement,
and likely impacts the treatment of rape victims
2. With such an incomplete description, the FBI has
undercounted rapes by hundreds of thousands of cases,
resulting in an inaccurate understanding of the scope of the
problem.
3. Without accurate rape statistics, allocation of
funding to (and within) local law enforcement to combat and
investigate crime will be misdirected away from this
terrible crime.
It’s high time for the FBI to recognize this error
and modernize the definition to reflect the reality of rape
in the United States. Please update the Uniform Crime Report
so that the definition of rape includes all victims. Every
rape should be counted.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
[Your name]
Source: www.change.org/petitions/tell-the-fbi-rape-is-rape?utm_medium=email&alert_id=WqIorhKQzm_XhWolTRbyr&utm_source=action_alert
If a Woman Isn’t Bruised and
Bleeding, Will Her Rape Be Counted?
In late January, U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.) sparked
outrage when he introduced the No Taxpayer Funding for
Abortion Act (H.R. 3), which sought to further restrict
abortion funding for all women. But what also angered
feminists was that, in drafting an exception to allow
abortion funding for survivors of rape, the bill defined
“real” rape exclusively as “forcible”
rape. For sexual assaults that didn’t fit that narrow
definition, funding for an abortion would be denied.
After a week of intense pressure, Rep. Smith dropped the
term “forcible” from the controversial bill.
Problem solved? Hardly.
In fact, the concept of “forcible rape” has
long been used and is still being used to limit the
reporting of rape at the federal level. Since 1929, the
FBI’s Uniform Crime Report (UCR), which tallies all
crimes reported to local law enforcement each year, has used
this archaic definition of rape: “The carnal knowledge
of a female forcibly and against her will.”
That counts some rapes, certainly. But what gets left
out?
Plenty. The UCR’s definition excludes victims of
nonconsensual sodomy and oral sex, and those raped with
fingers, fists or objects. And all male victims, of course.
Also, because the definition includes the word
“forcibly,” police departments often interpret the
rule (against UCR guidelines) as leaving out rapes of women
with physical or mental disabilities and those who were
unconscious or under the influence of drugs and alcohol
(despite the fact that at least 22 percent of all rapes
involve those substances or incapacitated victims—and
some studies put the number as high as 77 percent). The
assumption, strangely, is that those women weren’t
“forced.”
The UCR definition, both in its wording and its effect on
police practices, thus omits a large number of
rapes—which then impacts the investigation and
prosecution of rapists. Some studies have shown that 90 to
95 percent of rapes are committed by serial rapists. If
those serial predators are not prosecuted, they’re free
to rape again and again.
And that’s why a change in the definition of rape
would lead to better law enforcement response and could thus
reduce dramatically the incidence of rape. A modern
definition would include sex of all kinds without consent.
It would embrace victims regardless of sex, gender, age,
disability, consciousness or level of intoxication. And it
would encompass incest; rape with an object, finger or fist;
and sodomy or oral copulation without consent.
Joanne Archambault, a sexual-assault-investigation expert
and founder of the nonprofit End Violence Against Women
International, insists that the UCR’s definition of
rape sends a frightening message to society about what types
of sexual assaults matter.
“The fact that it only tracks forced penile-vaginal
rape says a lot,” she points out. “Are we saying
all those other ones aren’t important? Of course they
are.”
She adds that the UCR definition feeds into social
stereotypes about who is a “real” rape victim,
which have a huge impact on rape reporting. “When
they’re first assaulted,” she says,
“[rape survivors] aren’t thinking of law
enforcement; they’re thinking of safety. They go to
their friends, loved ones, family first.” If a rape
survivor isn’t validated by her community, she’s
less likely to report the crime.
It’s high time for a change. For rape survivors, a
modern definition of rape at the federal level would
acknowledge, once and for all, that rape is rape—and
that the stories and experiences of all rape survivors
count.
This is an excerpt from the cover story in the Spring
issue of Ms. magazine. For the entire story, look for
Ms. on your newsstands or join the Ms. community and have a
copy of the magazine delivered to your door.
Comments on this piece? We want to hear them! Send to
letterstotheeditor@msmagazine.com.
To have your letter considered for publication, please
include your city and state.
Want to help fight rape in your own community? Join the
No More Excuses! campaign of the Feminist Majority
Foundation and Ms. magazine and demand that the FBI change
its outmoded definition of rape, that city police
departments test every rape kit in their backlog and that
cities make sure untested kits don’t accumulate again.
Go to our online campaign headquarters where you’ll be
directed to letters you can send to FBI director Robert
Mueller and U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. You can also
order a local take-action package that includes a dramatic
video about the rape-kit backlog by Lorraine Sheinberg and
Susan Rubin and ideas for making a difference on this vital
issue.
Source: msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2011/05/23/if-a-woman-isnt-bruised-and-bleeding-will-her-rape-be-counted/
Teen Slang: Why The Word 'Rape' Should Never Be Used
Casually
This is a teen-written article from The Communicator,
the student-run print and online newspaper of Community High
School in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Words, like most other teenage cultural expressions, go
in and out of fashion. And though certain phrases we use on
a daily basis can leave older generations perplexed, they
are often harmless and insignificant. However, the
increasing use of the weighted word “rape” as a
casual slang term threatens to do much more than raise a few
parental eyebrows.
The word “rape” is generally used by high
school students either negatively, to represent mental or
physical injury or damage, (“Wow, that math test
totally raped me.”) or positively, to represent
beating, winning, or acing something. (“Oh yeah, I just
raped that math test.”).
The use of “rape” in such a casual way
misrepresents the gravity of sexual assault. Rape is no
laughing matter. In the United States, approximately 16
percent of women and three percent of men have been victims
of attempted or completed rape. Fifteen percent of sexual
assault victims are under 12. Sexual assault victims are
three times more likely to suffer from depression and four
times more likely to contemplate suicide than
non-victims.
Therefore, the use of rape as a positive term is
confusing and worrying. How can committing an act of rape be
equated to winning or doing something well? There is nothing
glamorous about rape, and nothing “cool” about
committing sexual assault. The negative use of the word
”rape” is not much better. Losing a sports game or
doing badly on a test is nowhere near comparable to being a
victim of rape. Imagine how a victim of sexual assault would
feel hearing the word thrown around so casually.
Sure, rape is not the only word used in this context.
“Kill” has often been used in exactly the same
way, and complaints about it are few and far between. The
use of murder in this context, however, is not as
problematic as that of rape. The two words, while perhaps
interchangeable in a sentence, are different entities with
different histories.
For the last several centuries, murder has been
universally accepted as the horrible crime that it is. When
a murder is reported, it is always investigated and taken
seriously. Even young children know and understand that
killing is wrong.
Rape, however, still has a long way to go in terms of
awareness, understanding, and prosecution. Almost all
rapists (94 percent) do not spend even a day in jail. On
average for the past five years, 60 percent of sexual
assaults are not reported to the police. Even when a rape is
reported, there is only a 50.8 percent chance of an arrest
being made, and 31 percent of those convicted of a felony
for rape will not spend time in jail.
In addition, rape prevention efforts and the recognition
of marital rape as a crime did not come about until fairly
recently, contrary to what one might assume. The first
legally incorporated rape crisis center was not established
until 1972. Every U.S. state had a marital rape exemption
law, which stated that a husband raping his wife was not a
crime, until 1975, when South Dakota became the first to
remove it. The last state to remove this exemption, North
Carolina, did not do so until 1992. Many countries today
still do not view rape within marriage as a crime.
In just four decades, the United States has come a long
way in terms of assistance for rape victims, education about
rape, and prosecution of rapists. But there is still a long
way to go in both our own country and others. We need to
start by treating rape as the serious issue that it is. How
can students in our generation understand the damage and
severity of rape when it is thrown around in every other
sentence? How can the 60 percent of sexual assault victims
who do not report the crime to the police find the courage
to do so when “rape” is used jokingly and treated
as “nothing”?
I know that the students who use the word
“rape” in a casual way usually do not mean
anything by it. They do not condone rape or think that it is
a good thing. I know that there have been times I’ve
used the word more lightly that I should have. But in this
case, intention doesn’t count. Even if you don’t
think rape is insignificant or funny, using it as a slang
term sends the message that you do.
There is nothing funny, glamorous, or casual about rape.
Committing an act of rape does not make you cool, powerful,
or superior. As high schoolers, we should know this. So why
can’t our vocabulary reflect that knowledge?
Source: www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/09/teen-slang-why-the-word-r_n_1194059.html?ref=high-school&icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl17%7Csec3_lnk1%26pLid%3D12605
Ohio
school rape victim didn't consent, prosecutor says
A 16-year-old girl was "substantially impaired" after an
alcohol-fueled party, was unable to consent to sex and
suffered humiliation and degradation when she was raped by
two high school football players, a prosecutor said in her
opening statement at the boys' trial.
But a lawyer for the defendant said his 17-year-old
client "did not rape the young lady in question."
Special Prosecutor Marianne Hemmeter and the defendant's
attorney, Brian Duncan, spoke at the opening of the juvenile
court trial, which has drawn international attention to a
small town in a football-loving region of eastern Ohio.
Hemmeter told Judge Thomas Lipps, who is hearing the case
without a jury, that she would show that the girl was
"somebody who was too impaired to say no, somebody who was
too impaired to say stop."
The attorney for the other defendant, 16, gave no opening
statement.
The case has divided the community amid allegations that
more students should have been charged. It also has led to
questions about the influence of the local football team, a
source of a pride in a community that suffered massive job
losses with the collapse of the steel industry.
The defendants are charged with digitally penetrating the
West Virginia girl, first in the back seat of a moving car
after a party and then in the basement of a house. The
17-year-old defendant also is charged with illegal use of a
minor in nudity-oriented material.
Witnesses said the girl was so drunk she threw up at
least twice and had trouble walking and speaking. She also
was photographed being carried by the two boys.
In an excerpt of a videotaped interview with ABC's
"20/20," Richmond said the photo was a joke. He contends the
girl was awake and was a willing participant, the show
said.
Following opening statements, prosecutors presented two
witnesses, 17-year-old girls who saw the girl the night of
the party. Questions by prosecutors and defense lawyers
focused on how much the girl had been drinking that
night.
One of the 17-year-old girls, a Steubenville High School
student, said the 16-year-old girl was having trouble
walking but never appeared to pass out. The other
17-year-old girl said she had never seen her friend so
intoxicated.
If convicted, the defendants, who deny any wrongdoing,
could be held in a juvenile jail until they turn 21.
They were charged 10 days after the party, after a flurry
of social media postings about the alleged attack led the
girl and her family to go to police.
Steubenville officials have protested that outsiders have
unfairly criticized police handling of the case and have
given Steubenville a black eye. Officials created a website
to counter misinformation about the case, disputing, for
example, the allegation that the police department is full
of ex-football players from the local powerhouse team,
nicknamed Big Red.
Hacker activists have publicized tweets and other social
media postings made the night of the alleged rape, including
a 12-minute video in which one student joked about it while
others in the background chimed in.
The National Organization of Women has demanded that the
student be charged under the state's failure to report law.
Attorney General Mike DeWine has called the video disgusting
but said the student didn't have firsthand knowledge of the
alleged assaults.
Bob Fitzsimmons, a lawyer for the girl's family, said,
"The family wants this matter over so they can move on with
their lives and their daughter's healing."
Dozens of witnesses for both sides were expected to
testify at the trial. Their testimony is considered crucial
because the girl was severely intoxicated that night and
appeared to be passed out at times, according to several
witnesses.
Editors’ Note: The Associated Press named the
suspects in the case but FoxNews.com did not because the
trial is being held in juvenile court.
Source: www.foxnews.com/us/2013/03/13/trial-to-get-under-way-in-case-ohio-high-school-football-players-accused-raping/?test=latestnews?cmpid=prn_aol&icid=maing-grid10%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl16%7Csec3_lnk2%26pLid%3D283131
Student
says school rules punished her for reporting rape
A 2011 letter from the Department of Education to
schools reads: "Schools should be aware that victims or
third parties may be deterred from reporting incidents if
alcohol, drugs, or other violations of school or campus
rules were involved. ... Schools should consider whether
their disciplinary policies have a chilling effect on
victims' or other students' reporting of sexual violence
offenses." Learn more
Source: www.aol.com/article/2016/04/23/student-says-school-rules-punished-her-for-reporting-rape/21349719/
Actual
leter: (3
pages) www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-202304.html
Fact
sheet:
(6 pages) www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/dcl-factsheet-202304.html
Know
your rights
(5 pages) http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/title-ix-rights-202304.html
How
to file a
complaint:
(6 pa(5 pages) www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/howto.html
Hot Link -
Rape Culture?
I ran across a video,
recently laying out the statistics, or lack of them, behind
rape on college campuses. Supposedly one in five women will
be raped or sexually assaulted before graduation: the video
ties the statistic to a phenomenon called "Rape Culture" and
includes a somber quote about rape culture by Joe Biden.
The
video, presented by Caroline Kitchens from the American
Enterprise Institute (a conservative think tank), offers a
counterargument, backed up by a few statistics. The original
one-in-five statistic was based, according to Kitchens, on a
fairly superficial study: self-reporting from 5000-plus
women in two colleges, one in the Midwest and one in the
South. Kitchens claims that the study was flawed in numerous
other ways, including using the Internet to send a
questionnaire to the respondents and not verifying their
claims.
Rape and other sexual crimes are serious issues, and
should be punished accordingly. And if true, the one-in-five
statistic should have young women and their parents very
nervous.
In case you don't bother with Kitchens's video, here's
the gist, according to studies cited by Kitchens: Rape is on
a long-term decline generally; the rate is more like one in
over 50 (still horrible); college-educated women are less
likely to be raped on a college campus than off a college
campus. Kitchens also makes a logical point: if the
one-in-five statistic were true, many or most parents
wouldn't be sending their daughters to college.
Initially, given the studies Kitchens cites, I tended to
go along with her analysis, even though her references
whizzed by as I watched. My wife encouraged me to dig
deeper, and I found myself in a labyrinth of data, claims,
and conclusions.
Kitchens's video is just over five minutes long - not a
sure indication of superficial reporting, but the statistics
she cites did go by pretty quickly. On my second viewing, I
had to go back over small sections of the video, hitting
"pause," just to be clear about what she was saying and to
get some references I could look up. And then I hit
Google.
It seems that both the proponents and debunkers of "rape
culture" have some valid points. I started with a story by
Alia Wong in the online edition of The Atlantic: "Why the
Prevalence of Campus Sexual Assault Is So Hard to Quantify:
Every statistic seems to be contradicted by another one"
(January 26, 2016). There are many links to external sources
in the article, and though I highly recommend this article,
I admit that it could become difficult to navigate the
labyrinth of popular-press articles and government
studies.
One link was to the 2007
US Department of Justice
study, which Kitchens uses as her main reference and
criticizes for being the basis for the one-in-five claim.
And some of the other articles I found in the Atlantic post
link back to it. The 2007 study seems to me to have been
carried out very carefully, and the authors define their
terms and the structure of the study (in 111 pages) and warn
against overinterpretation of the results. The one-in-five
statistic in one of the charts conflated actual forced rapes
and rapes accompanied by alcohol or drugs with attempted
rapes and completed and attempted assaults that weren't
rapes - for instance, forced kissing or even attempted
forced kissing. The authors did not make claims about one in
five women being raped, nor did they use the term "rape
culture" (first coined in the 1970s, according to Wikipedia
).
I followed many other links in the Atlantic article and
in the articles it sent me to - which I doubt you'll bother
with. One article concluded that rather than a pervasive
rape culture on college campuses, there was a small
percentage of men committing the vast majority of rapes.
If you've stayed with me this far (thank you), let me
just stick my own nose into the situation:
Is there a true rape culture on college campuses?
Probably not. Does Kitchens's video, by itself, make a
definitive case against the term "rape culture"? Probably
not. Bottom line from the mixed salad of articles on the
Internet? Sexual assault of all kinds is real (and
horrible); reporting of incidents and prosecuting of
perpetrators needs to be made easier and less traumatizing
to the victims; accused perpetrators deserve due process
(not only to mitigate false accusations but because due
process is guaranteed by the Constitution); convicted
perpetrators need to be punished severely. Finally: There is
a lot of room for intensified efforts at education, in
academic institutions and in the wider society, of all
aspects of sexual assault - from prevention to victim
empowerment.
And here's my educational message for readers of
Menletter: If you think rape or assault is okay; if you
think women "have it coming to them" or that they are merely
objects for your pleasure: over ninety percent of the men
around you consider you to be the worst kind of scum. You're
not only making the rest of us look bad, you're making our
sincere attempts at romantic connection a lot harder. And,
of course, you're needlessly traumatizing women. Clean up
your act.
Aftermath: A Broader Issue
There's a broader issue, beyond the discussion above,
about research and the way popular culture and the Internet
mess things up. When a set of claims about a problem becomes
a meme (as I think happened with the term "rape culture" and
the Super Bowl claim in the next paragraph), the meme takes
over and stops or distorts further inquiry, into both the
underlying facts and the best ways to address the
problem.
Some supposed phenomena, ostensibly backed up by
purported statistics, but with dubious factual support, take
on lives of their own. As memes, they are hard to refute,
and factual evidence is ignored or discounted as politically
motivated.
An example from 1993 was that domestic abuse skyrocketed
on Super Bowl Sunday - apparently perpetrated by
testosterone-poisoned
and beer-soaked men. The media was filled with warnings and
advice about prevention. This meme was debunked years ago
(see the Snopes.com article here).
(add more here) Yet in the
third quarter of Super Bowl 50 (2016) a commercial from the
organization "No More" aired a warning about domestic abuse.
This commercial was reported widely, with links to a video
of it, including the online edition of Sports
Illustrated .
Even ostensibly scientific medical investigation is not
immune to playing around with facts and coming to
preordained conclusions. An example is a meta study of
research, leading to the questionable claim that men should
not be screened for prostate cancer. See my articles
here
and here
.
(PCAW.org
resources)
Due diligence
Any claim, especially one that gains wide distribution,
can be solid, or it can be the result of a combination of
careless research, a political agenda, a compliant media
machine, lazy journalism, and sometimes downright
dishonesty. This applies not only to social issues but to
"hard" science research, medicine, and anything else for
which results are supposed to be backed by numbers.
It's always a good idea to check out Snopes, but also to
seek out further information by following links in online
articles and by Googling the study, the authors, and other
research on the topic. Specifically, what question was being
asked? Was it asked in such a way as to bias the numbers?
How much data were collected? How much of the data was
cherry-picked, ignored, or set aside? Does the
interpretation match the data or lapse into speculaton? Who
is making claims, and what is their affiliation? What other,
independent studies are cited? Is the article we're reading
a rehash in the popular press or websites? This kind of due
diligence can be difficult, time-consuming, confusing, and
annoying. I certainly discovered that in trying to untangle
the skein of information and misinformation about rape
culture. But that's what due diligence is all about. It can
keep us from going crazy or from spouting counterarguments
with no backup.
Should We Answer?
As men, we have a vested interest in claims having to do
with violence, crime, assault, the wage gap, and any other
claim purporting that all men or most men or even lots of
men do harmful things. When we hear something that sounds
fishy (like the one-in-five meme being equated to rape
culture), it probably doesn't do us a lot of good launching
into a verbal dueling match - mansplaining, you know. I
suggest listening carefully and then saying: "Hmmm. I'm not
sure I agree. But I don't have enough information to form a
clear response. I'll get back to you." And I suppose it's a
bad idea to say anything that can be quoted to others with
intentional or unintentional misinterpretation.
This gives us breathing space to do a little research and
to decide whether the "get back to you" part is worth
doing.
A lot of times, it's not worth it. The readers of
Menletter are mostly of like mind and agreeable. And I get
to write and edit my thoughts. But in the heat of a verbal
exchange, with someone who is angry and unmovable, I try (my
ego doesn't always cooperate) to disengage.
[Many many thanks to my wife, Ann, for encouraging me
to do my own due diligence for this article.]
Source: mail.aol.com/webmail-std/en-us/suite
* * *
Perhaps rape itself is a gesture, a violent
repudiation of the female, in the assertion of maleness that
would seem to require nothing beyond physical gratification
of the crudest kind. The supreme macho gesture - like
knocking out an opponent and standing over his fallen body,
gloves raised in triumph. - Joyce Carol Oates
Contact
Us |
Disclaimer
| Privacy
Statement
Menstuff®
Directory
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of Gordon Clay
©1996-2023, Gordon Clay
|
