Anonymity and rape

[la_marquise]

Am I the only person who is deeply concerned by the proposal our new masters have put forward to reintroduce the policy of anonymity for people accused of rape? This used to be the case and it was changed because it can be damaging to conviction rates -- when a name is given, other victims do on occasion come forward, having previously not done so out of fear, uncertainty and conviction that the system is against them. It's estimated that rape is greatly under-reported in this country already, and this move will not help that. It won't help the conviction rate, either, and that is shockingly low. People accused of other crimes are named unless they're under-age. This move is all about protecting men and that's all. It doesn't help deal with the crime, and it panders to one of the most pernicious of the rape myths, the false accusation. The level of false rape claims is no higher than false accusations of all other crimes. But whereas the latter are barely notice din the press -- as are the bulk of rape accusations -- false rape claims are almost guaranteed to be splashed all over the news. What this move tells us is that male reputation is considered to be far more important by our new regime than female safety.
Details of the new proposal are here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8695367.stm
I suggest anyone who wants to question my remarks on rape conviction rates and false accusation rates takes a quick look through the online archives of a respectable newspaper or reads one of the several excellent recent books on women and our modern raunch culture. (You could start here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/mar/20/rape-convictions-lady-stern-cps)

Comments

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

That was my reaction, too. And it's a Liberal Democrat proposal.

[lamentables.livejournal.com]

No, you are not the only person.

[zanda-myrande.livejournal.com]

Doesn't surprise me in the least, sadly. But yes, of course I'm concerned.

[ms-cataclysm.livejournal.com]

My own view is that the conviction rates are so low that that there is no effective legal deterrent to rape anyway.
I still think it worthwhile campaigning against the proposal because the attitude behind the proposal is a problem in itself.

[a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com]

no, not at all are you the only one.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Yes, precisely. There have already been protests in the newspapers and on the radio.

[woolymonkey.livejournal.com]

That's outrageous.

*is outraged*

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Isn't it? I shall be writing to our new M.P.

[mevennen.livejournal.com]

I'd prefer to see a one-size-fits-all approach to crime reporting - as you say, false accusation convictions are made much more of, as far as I can see, than rape convictions. And I agree with Ms C that the legal deterrent appears virtually non-existent.

False claims that make it to court are relatively rare, again as far as I can see, although there are women who use it as private weapon of choice. We have one in town - four false allegations so far, including Trevor - most people don't believe her, since she cries rape or sexual assault, then retracts, and is known to be a pathological liar (one of our many), but it's caused a hell of a lot of trouble even without going to court.

But there are men who make consistent false claims of assault and God knows what, and relatively little mention is made of this.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

The more people who write about it, the better. This needs wide discussion.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Thank you for commenting. SO far, you're the lone male.

[ramblin-phyl.livejournal.com]

Does this anonymity extend to female teachers who take advantage of underage male students?

Makes me wonder which highly placed gov't official is about to be accused.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Under European Equal Rights legislation, it would have to, I think.
One of our two current ruling parties (the smaller, more left wing one) have had this as a policy since 2006, apparently, though it wasn't in their manifesto. I am not impressed by that, either.

[miintikwa.livejournal.com]

This is appalling! And if you do it, we'll likely follow. Augh.

[mojave-wolf.livejournal.com]

I'm of two minds about this; my first is the intent, which I agree is rage inducing; plays into the whole bs "false accusation" myth, a whole bunch of tropes I just deleted yelling about because, well, yelling. (more yelling deleted)

On the other hand, Melissa at Shakes brings up that this inadvertantly could be good for some victims, as well: http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2010/05/britain-proposes-granting-rape.html

there is some inherent value to survivors of rape in their alleged attackers not being publicly identified. It will help protect victims' identities, for a start, which is no small thing, especially to accusers who desperately want to remain anonymous. Women who are assaulted by men who are famous, for example, will not have the crushing weight of an international media bearing down on them as they try to protect their privacy. They will be insulated from the usual disgusting charges of fame- and fortune-seeking.

That has the capacity to actually encourage victims to come forward.

She also covers some of the reasons why this might not be such a good idea, and comes down leaning that way.

I'm honestly not sure as to practice, but as to intent? Yeah, "appalling" covers it.

[elmyra.livejournal.com]

Um, yeah, what you said. http://tinyurl.com/32mvbnc

[elmyra.livejournal.com]

A judge can already place restrictions on identifying the defendant if that could lead to identifying the victim.

[elmyra.livejournal.com]

That's exactly what I was wondering. I think the practicalities of getting legislation through Parliament mean that that can't be it, but still...

[aberwyn.livejournal.com]

OOH, good point about the official!

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Though you would do it by state, I guess, which gives more opportunities for it to be rejected as an idea. I hope, anyway!

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

We already have victim anonymity, and I think in cases where revealing the defendant's identity compromises the victim's anonymity, the defendant remains anonymous also. In an ideal world, we'd have a press that didn't leap on celebrity accusations and a populace that truly accepted that an innocent verdict meant that and moved on (though with rape, that is always an issue for other reasons. Sigh).
It's a big intractable issue and I would never want a genuinely innocent person to have their life destroyed by a false accusation. But I want women to be safe, too, and being female I guess I tend to lean that way. Best of all would be a system of anonymity for all, but I can see the protests now if that was proposed (because those accused of paedophilia might be protected, and that would set off a huge swathe of teh stupid in our tabloids).

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

Great post. Thank you for the link. And hi, I'm Kari, lovely to meet you!

[wishus.livejournal.com]

Can't quite comprehend the logic here. I am not in favour.

[dorispossum.livejournal.com]

You've already said most of what I feel about this subject.

The appalling level of convictions - and what it reveals about the deep rooted level of misogynist attitudes among BOTH sexes in this country - is my main concern. With no meaningful sanctions against rape, there is little deterrant to those men who like to do it, which means an escalating risk to (mostly, by by no means exclusively) women and girls.

For example, in some US studies (see link) one in four men reported having forced women to have sex despite their visible distress, and a third of male college students reported that they would rape a woman IF THEY KNEW THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE CAUGHT OR PUNISHED AS A RESULT. [my emphasis - and note this statistic is based on the attitudes of 'nice' middle class boys, not the stereotypcal ghetto kids]
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a741405961~db=all~jumptype=rss

Women's safety is dependent both on social attitudes and on effective legal sanctions - which we don't have.

The proposal to restrict DNA sampling worries me for similar reasons: yes, keeping records on the basis of arrest IS an infringement of civil liberties. But so is being assaulted. And as you observed, I find it troubling that the legal civil liberties of men appear to matter more than the practical freedoms of women.

[http://users.livejournal.com/la_marquise_de_/]

That is scary. And yet, when I think about it, more or less every woman I know has a tale of being pressurised into sex on at least one occasion. We have such a long way to go in educating our culture to treat women as people still.

[miintikwa.livejournal.com]

I hope so too!