The voices of rape victims are silenced. Mostly by the social stigma of "shame" - which comes from society's prevailing attitude of blaming the victims for their own attacks. So women who have been raped may tell one or two close friends, perhaps a member of their family, or a trusted partner. They may tell the police. Or they may tell no one at all.
Because rape is so often regarded as a "dirty" secret and kept behind this convenient veil of shame, it is all too easy for people who have never been raped or sexually assaulted to assume it is not a widespread problem. And many of the many, many women who have been the victims of sexual violence think they are one of the very few. They are not. The recently published Stern Review (which can be found on the UK Government's Equalities website) is testament to that.
Now a new blog exists where people can anonymously post the stories of their rapes and experiences of sexual violence and coercion.
The accounts are heartbreaking because so many of them are so very ordinary. A party. A night out with a friend. A boyfriend. The simple, social things that so many women enjoy every day.
Another feature the accounts have in common is the effect of these assaults on the women who describe them. Life shattering.
Here are a few short extracts:
"None of my family have any idea of any of it and that’s the way I want it to stay. I’m telling my story here because I want people to read the story and know that rape victims never ask for it or deserve it. I didn’t ask for him to spike my drink. I didn’t ask him to violate me in my sleep. I didn’t ask to become pregnant only to lose the baby later. No one ever does."
"I couldn’t understand why (the police) didn’t believe me, I couldn’t understand why they didn’t help me, I couldn’t understand why they wouldn’t let me go home. I was still drunk and I could feel the throbbing pain from the choking and the rape.
I couldn’t go home. I spent the next 4 days in jail, waiting to see a judge about bail. I had to have a public defender because what they’d charged me with meant prison time - and it took time to find an attorney who would represent me.
The day I was released, I attempted to commit suicide."
"I’d been successful, and happy, and remarkable. Now I had nothing. I hated him but I blamed myself. I thought I’d “asked” for it, I thought I’d not made it clear - I let him link my arm, I let him get into my flat, I could have fought harder, I could have said something, I could have called him and told him he was a rapist scumbag, I could have gone to the Police. Everything I did was wrong. I blamed myself for everything."
"We had been together for about two months. We were in bed kissing, and he decided to have sex with me. He was on top of me, and I kept telling him to stop. He didn’t. He forced himself into me, and I felt myself starting to bleed. I pushed him off of me and ran out of the room, crying. I cleaned up in the bathroom, then went outside to have a cigarette. He followed me. Still crying, I said to him, “Are you happy now, you fucking asshole?” He looked at me tenderly, enveloped me in a hug, and said, “I love you, baby.”"
"I remember lying there with his hands all over me. He kept touching me, he wouldn’t stop touching me. I just closed my eyes shut and tried to fade out. I can’t be here right now. He kept apologizing. “I’m sorry. I’m sorry. I’m sorry.”
He had to have known what he was doing to me. He had to have known that he was ruining me. With each touch he was breaking me apart. Each breath on me tore apart my old identity."
More common features of the accounts quoted above: in each case the victim knew her assailant. And none of the perpetrators was brought to justice for his crime.
The entirely understandable reluctance of rape victims to tell people about their ordeal means it is chillingly easy for our society to sweep the extent of the abuse under the cultural carpet.
In fact, despite the authorities publicly urging rape victims to seek justice, the social pressure not to be branded as a woman who was - that vile phrase - "asking for it" is often far stronger. Society plays straight into the rapists' hands, so much so, that society could be said to be conniving with the rapists, allowing them to continue raping with impunity.
Because time and time again, that is what is happening. And time and time again, the victims' voices are unheard or ignored or disbelieved.
Society is made up of people. It is you and me. Every time we pass casual judgement on a victim of rape ("What did she expect, dressed like that?"; "She threw herself at him because he was famous"; "She shouldn't have got so drunk"; "She led him on" ) we become an accessory to rape.
Showing posts with label acquaintance rape. Show all posts
Showing posts with label acquaintance rape. Show all posts
Thursday, May 5, 2011
Monday, March 28, 2011
When rape becomes a habit
So another serial rapist - who attacked elderly people essentially unchallenged for 17 years - is finally caught and sent to prison in the UK. Delroy Grant may have assaulted more than five hundred victims in their own homes, many of them ill with diseases like Alzheimer's or Parkinson's, before his appalling activities were brought to an end.
Perhaps I could mention how little news coverage the individual attacks merited while Grant was still at large. Or I could shake my head in disgust at another messed up investigation of a sex attacker by the Metropolitan Police. Or I could seethe at one psychologist describing Grant's actions as "stealing sex", as if theft could be in any way analogous with the despicable nature of his violent crimes.
OK, so I did mention those factors. But I don't want to focus on them. I want to mention again that the nature of Grant's rapes - against people unknown to him - are extremely rare. But there are two aspects of Grant's behaviour that are not so unusual.
One is that Grant's violence was not confined to the victims of his sex crimes. This charming man was also responsible for perpetrating domestic violence against at least one of his former partners - his ex-wife, Janet Watson. She testified against him in court.
The other is Grant's repeat rapes - he did it over and over again. As a rapist of strangers, Grant is a relatively rare creature. But as a serial rapist, he is not.
Two studies are quoted in this blog post by Yes Means Yes. One was a sample of almost two thousand male US college students, the other a survey of more than eleven hundred newly enlisted men in the US Navy.
In each case, the men were essentially asked if they had ever forced another person into having some form of sexual intercourse with them. The word "rape" was not used in either questionnaire.
In the sample of college students, 120 admitted they had raped or attempted to rape someone. The blog analysed the figures thus:
Of the 120 rapists in the sample, 44 reported only one assault. The remaining 76 were repeat offenders. These 76 men, 63% of the rapists, committed 439 rapes or attempted rapes, an average of 5.8 each (median of 3, so there were some super-repeat offenders in this group). Just 4% of the men surveyed committed over 400 attempted or completed rapes.
The students were also asked about violent acts they committed. Once again, the rapists, especially the repeat rapists stood out:
These 76 men, just 4% of the sample, were responsible for 28% of the reported violence. The whole sample of almost 1900 men reported just under 4000 violent acts, but this 4% of recidivist rapists results in over 1000 of those violent acts.
The study of new naval recruits asked similar questions about forced sexual activity and the results were very similar. A large proportion of the rapists were recidivists and between them they had carried out the majority of the sexual assaults mentioned in the survey.
In the vast majority of cases in both samples, the rapist already knew their victim. It was also clear that as well as the violence reported, by far the favourite modus operandi of the rapists was to ply their victim with alcohol.
Rapists, these studies would suggest, often get a taste for rape. Violence is frequently a part of their personality. And in general, they prefer to target someone by befriending them first - and by offering them a drink.
So why are so many of these rapists' victims made to feel they somehow brought the attack on themselves? These men know exactly what they're doing.
Perhaps I could mention how little news coverage the individual attacks merited while Grant was still at large. Or I could shake my head in disgust at another messed up investigation of a sex attacker by the Metropolitan Police. Or I could seethe at one psychologist describing Grant's actions as "stealing sex", as if theft could be in any way analogous with the despicable nature of his violent crimes.
OK, so I did mention those factors. But I don't want to focus on them. I want to mention again that the nature of Grant's rapes - against people unknown to him - are extremely rare. But there are two aspects of Grant's behaviour that are not so unusual.
One is that Grant's violence was not confined to the victims of his sex crimes. This charming man was also responsible for perpetrating domestic violence against at least one of his former partners - his ex-wife, Janet Watson. She testified against him in court.
The other is Grant's repeat rapes - he did it over and over again. As a rapist of strangers, Grant is a relatively rare creature. But as a serial rapist, he is not.
Two studies are quoted in this blog post by Yes Means Yes. One was a sample of almost two thousand male US college students, the other a survey of more than eleven hundred newly enlisted men in the US Navy.
In each case, the men were essentially asked if they had ever forced another person into having some form of sexual intercourse with them. The word "rape" was not used in either questionnaire.
In the sample of college students, 120 admitted they had raped or attempted to rape someone. The blog analysed the figures thus:
Of the 120 rapists in the sample, 44 reported only one assault. The remaining 76 were repeat offenders. These 76 men, 63% of the rapists, committed 439 rapes or attempted rapes, an average of 5.8 each (median of 3, so there were some super-repeat offenders in this group). Just 4% of the men surveyed committed over 400 attempted or completed rapes.
The students were also asked about violent acts they committed. Once again, the rapists, especially the repeat rapists stood out:
These 76 men, just 4% of the sample, were responsible for 28% of the reported violence. The whole sample of almost 1900 men reported just under 4000 violent acts, but this 4% of recidivist rapists results in over 1000 of those violent acts.
The study of new naval recruits asked similar questions about forced sexual activity and the results were very similar. A large proportion of the rapists were recidivists and between them they had carried out the majority of the sexual assaults mentioned in the survey.
In the vast majority of cases in both samples, the rapist already knew their victim. It was also clear that as well as the violence reported, by far the favourite modus operandi of the rapists was to ply their victim with alcohol.
Rapists, these studies would suggest, often get a taste for rape. Violence is frequently a part of their personality. And in general, they prefer to target someone by befriending them first - and by offering them a drink.
So why are so many of these rapists' victims made to feel they somehow brought the attack on themselves? These men know exactly what they're doing.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Too boozed up to say no...or yes.
A few years ago there was a minor panic in the UK over drink-spiking and its role in "date rape". Numerous reports recounted how rapists were slipping Rohypnol ("Roofies") or Gammahydroxybutyrate (GHB) into women's drinks then taking advantage of them when they became disorientated from the effects of the drugs.
Undoubtedly, this did and still does happen. But a study commissioned by the Association of Chief Police Officers reported in 2006 that only one in 12 of suspected "drug-assisted rapes" actually involved so-called "date rape drugs". In fact, the main culprit rendering women incapable and vulnerable to attack was alcohol.
Many press reports responded to this study by choosing the angle that date rapes were therefore mainly down to the victim's regrettable binge-drinking. Take this quote from The Daily Mail: "rather than furtively spiking drinks in bars, predatory sex attackers often committed 'opportunistic' assaults after victims had willingly drunk themselves into a state of helplessness" (my italics).
Are we seeing a pattern here? Once again, responsibility for the rape is shifted to the victim. And sadly, juries have often been shown to be unwilling to convict those accused of rape if the victim was drunk at the time of the attack.
And not just juries. Take the notorious 2005 court case of Ryairi Dougal, a security guard at Aberystwyth University who had sex with a student while she lay in a drunken stupor outside the door to her room. Judge Roderick Evans ruled the jury should acquit Dougal when, under cross examination, the student admitted she was too inebriated to recall whether she gave her consent to sex or not. "Drunken consent to sex is still consent," said Judge Evans.
Actually nowadays, it isn't. Under UK law, someone who is rendered helpless by alcohol or any other intoxicant is judged to be legally incapable of giving consent to sex. Unfortunately, the problem is measuring how drunk is too drunk to give consent and here is a classic loophole through which would-be rapists can secure an acquittal in court.
There are many decent men out there. And decent men will not deliberately ply a woman with drink to render her acquiescent so he can jump on her while she is in a state of severe drunkenness. Even if a woman has been flirting with him. A decent man, I believe, will STOP if it becomes clear the woman is too inebriated to be aware of what's going on.
And if you are a woman, beware the man who buys you a drink. Then another. And another. And another...
Undoubtedly, this did and still does happen. But a study commissioned by the Association of Chief Police Officers reported in 2006 that only one in 12 of suspected "drug-assisted rapes" actually involved so-called "date rape drugs". In fact, the main culprit rendering women incapable and vulnerable to attack was alcohol.
Many press reports responded to this study by choosing the angle that date rapes were therefore mainly down to the victim's regrettable binge-drinking. Take this quote from The Daily Mail: "rather than furtively spiking drinks in bars, predatory sex attackers often committed 'opportunistic' assaults after victims had willingly drunk themselves into a state of helplessness" (my italics).
Are we seeing a pattern here? Once again, responsibility for the rape is shifted to the victim. And sadly, juries have often been shown to be unwilling to convict those accused of rape if the victim was drunk at the time of the attack.
And not just juries. Take the notorious 2005 court case of Ryairi Dougal, a security guard at Aberystwyth University who had sex with a student while she lay in a drunken stupor outside the door to her room. Judge Roderick Evans ruled the jury should acquit Dougal when, under cross examination, the student admitted she was too inebriated to recall whether she gave her consent to sex or not. "Drunken consent to sex is still consent," said Judge Evans.
Actually nowadays, it isn't. Under UK law, someone who is rendered helpless by alcohol or any other intoxicant is judged to be legally incapable of giving consent to sex. Unfortunately, the problem is measuring how drunk is too drunk to give consent and here is a classic loophole through which would-be rapists can secure an acquittal in court.
There are many decent men out there. And decent men will not deliberately ply a woman with drink to render her acquiescent so he can jump on her while she is in a state of severe drunkenness. Even if a woman has been flirting with him. A decent man, I believe, will STOP if it becomes clear the woman is too inebriated to be aware of what's going on.
And if you are a woman, beware the man who buys you a drink. Then another. And another. And another...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)