RAPE ANONYMITY DEBATE HEATS UP AND A FEW MORE VOICES EMERGE

At the weekend, the site highlighted how a few male MP's had publicly supported the Coalition Government's proposals to support anonymity for rape defendants, even though the way the Parliament debate had been covered by the media you would have thought that no MP had supported it (Sky, Daily Mail, Independent, Guardian and Telegraph). Talking about dancing to one tune.

However, a few more have emerged, Jason Duncan who was a victim of a false accusation was interviewed and Mark Brooks from the ManKind Initiative was on Radio 5 on Saturday night (1 hour 42 in).

Posted by Skimmington

Comments

[Bob]

There is a definite media-mafia who suppress accurate coverage of this. Why on earth would there be no anonymity other than a desire for some sort of vindictive misandry.

[lacoste shirts]

To most men , experience is like the stern light of a ship which il-luminates only the track it has passed. Do you think so?

[Jon]

Did anyone see this article from Women against Rape in the Independent? http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/lisa-longstaff-women-will-be-the-losers-if-the-government-allows-anonymity-2023137.html

Complete sexism from Lisa Longstaff. Despite agreeing that rape is a more serious crime than a false rape accusation, she confidently asserts that men are more likely to commit rape than to report a false rape accusation.

I wrote a letter to the ed; let's see if it gets published.

[Jon]

Here is the letter, for what it is worth:

"Editor,

Lisa Longstaff seems quite biased, perhaps unconsciously so, on the issue of rape, and the false reporting of rape (Lisa Longstaff: Women will be the losers if the Government allows anonymity, Comment:10 July 2010).

She claims "The proposal to reintroduce (anonymity for the accused) relies on the sexist myth that women are quick to lie about rape."
The fact of the matter is Lisa has absolutely no evidence to support this claim, besides the special pleading and hysteria that frequently blights discussion of this sensitive issue.

Rape is a dispicable crime. Arguably considered worse than murder, and certainly containing more of a stigma. The false reporting of rape is also a dispicable crime. There, however, useful comparisons cease. Most people would agree that the false reporting of rape is not as hideous a crime as rape is. Why then, are so many people so willing to accept that one gender will 'commonly' (Lisa's words) commit rape, rather than that the other gender will lie about rape? This assumption that men are inherently less moral than women is key to understanding Lisa's emotive and flawed argument.

Further, Lisa asks "Given the injustices rape victims face, why are men accused of rape being made a special case?". The answer is simple. They aren't being made a special case. Suspected rape victims rightly receive anonymity - an extremely unusual exception in our justice system which boasts the right to 'face one's accuser'. So why not anonymity for those accused?

The casual attitude with which many feminists, including Lisa Longstaff, dismiss the right of those accused of rape to anonymity is symbolic of the general contempt with which men are held in popular culture and media.

Regards

Jon"

[Groan]

Well done Jon I think your point about the unusual nature of granting anonymity to accusers is well put. There have been a number of cases of serial false accusers. Anonymity alowed them to go undetected.

[Bob]

I have always wondered why there are no male rape laws. I don't mean sodomy or anything to do with the sexual act committed by male rapists.

I am talking about the deliberate sexual assaults on men's sexual organs. Does a rapist HAVE to be male, does rape HAVE to involve penetration? If my genitals are on the outside of my body does that not mean that raping me does not involve penetration?

Rape is about power not sex, countless feminist studies have stated this, so why does using the sex organs of my body as a means to harm and gain power and control over me NOT rape? Because I am a man I can be have my sexual organs kicked and assaulted such that it may even stop me having children...but is that's not male rape? Why not? Is it IMPOSSIBLE to be a rapist of any kind if you're not male?

The current rape laws only deal with female rape, there is not even consideration of male rape. Mention male rape and people immediately think of homosexual acts. They are conditioned to think of rape as a purely male crime that has to involve penetration, that is to say they apply female rape as though there can be no other type.

But there are TWO genders, does that not mean that they both have their own individual forms of rape? Or is it just the case that one gender gets treated worse than a murderer if even accused of rape and the other has a free-for-all where deliberate genital attacks are regarded as 'emancipation' and even celebrated in the media, with not a rape law to bring against them in sight.

Just a thought!

[paul parmenter]

Bob, congratulations on the very telling point you make in your above post (Mon 12 July 9.28).

I try to think originally and logically about sexual and relationship matters, but I have not encountered this concept before. Kudos to you. And I think you are dead right. Why should the physical location of a person's genitalia make such a huge difference to the way society and the law treats them?

Why are female genitalia sacrosanct and legally untouchable, while it remains permanent open season on male genitalia, and where the most common reaction to a violent assault on a man's penis or testicles is a gale of laughter and applause? A man can go to jail for even just touching a woman's sexual organs, but a woman who kicks a man's balls always walks free and is even regarded as a heroine.

Yet we regard ourselves as civilised people, and lay claim to believe in fairness and equality. We still have an eternity of a journey to make before we have any right to such claims.