|
|
||
|
Navigation User login Who's online There are currently 8 users and 57 guests online.
Online users
Support OlyBlog OlyBlog is run by volunteers who care about Olympia. If you like what we're doing, make a donation: Who's new
|
Submitted by rebecca on Sat, 02/02/2008 - 7:16pm.
The subject of rape (both response to false accusations of rape and actual rapes that don’t get followed up on) has surfaced in a couple of blogs lately. However, neither of those threads was the right place to engage in a deeper discussion of the topic. I was one of those interested in discussing the issues further, so I am creating a place to do so.
» I believe in the right of women to choose whether they are willing to have sex or not, who they are willing to have sex with, when, how, etc. I believe in the right of women never to be coerced into a sexual relationship. Every woman has the right to refuse to become or remain sexually intimate with any man. These rights of women are inalienable. They are not conditioned upon economic means, social standing, or race. In their strictest sense, they are not even conditioned upon the laws of the country in which she lives. If government has a responsibility to do anything, it is to protect firstly the persons and secondly the property of all those within its jurisdiction. One of the blogs really brought it to my attention that perhaps we have a big problem of injustice in how the government responds to rape. It was a post by Rob Richards regarding a homeless woman who was repeatedly raped. According to him, the local police refused to investigate the crime. There are aspects of this issue about which, at this time, I cannot claim to be an expert. I’m just a young college student. I’m fortunate in that I’ve never been the victim of a serious crime. I hope that I never will be. If I am, then I hope that my case will receive the attention it deserves by the police and the legal system. I am confident that the government has a responsibility to protect women from sexual abuse and equitably seek to bring rapists to justice. That doesn’t mean every case will be resolved. Perhaps, there may not be enough evidence. There is a time when it is preferable to punish no-one than to risk punishing an innocent person. But accusations of rape must not be ignored. Rape of any woman must be taken very seriously and a good-faith effort made to resolve every case. Another issue surrounding reports of rape surfaced following JT’s post of crime statistics for Olympia. This was that many reports of rape are declared “unfounded”. Several bloggers, including myself, have posted thoughts regarding this situation on his blog. At least one person advocated legal penalties for women who made false accusations. In light of the concerns raised above, I think it is fair to question who gets to call an accusation “unfounded” on what basis. I think great care should be taken in cases where there is any question as to whether an accusation was founded or not. If a precedent were to be set – or even appear to be set – that a woman who files a rape complaint will be penalized if there is insufficient evidence, it could have a chilling effect on real victims. Women who have suffered sexual abuse may decline to file a report out of fear that they will be punished if they can’t produce enough evidence to back up their assertions. That being said, I think it is reasonable to prosecute women who clearly make down-right false allegations. Punish them for wasting resources that our needed to help real victims and track down real criminals. Punish them for tarnishing the reputation of an innocent man. Punish them for the waste of physical and emotional energy by everyone who tried to help them when they cried wolf. Punish them because a world in which people only seek help they need, is a world in which people who need help are more likely to receive. So here’s a place to discuss responses to rape accusations. How should accusations be processed? How are they processed? Is there enough protection for victims? What about false accusations? How can problems in the system be fixed?
|
OlyBlog.net OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you. If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here. Latest Classified Ads Upcoming events
|
Links
Submitted by rebecca on Sat, 02/02/2008 - 7:20pm.Here is a link to the post by Rob Richards:
http://www.olyblog.net/my-friend-terrie
Here is a link to the post by JT:
http://www.olyblog.net/snapshot-crime-olympia-2007
I agree almost entirely.
Submitted by Mike on Sat, 02/02/2008 - 8:01pm.I might have made the issue of the rights for consensual sex to be less a female right, than a human right, but I think the problem of non-consensual sex is primarily a women's issue so that minor quibble is not significant.
I think that consensual sex between adults should not be criminalized or legalized. It simply is a choice that adults can make.
I think relationships are complicated, it's hard to keep our relationships harmless. Maybe even more so, with sexual relationships, but that's a reasonably ethical goal to keep sexual relationships harmless.
I have lots of questions about the 80% unfounded rate for rapes in Olympia. The rate seems too high, but I trust JT's stats, I believe he knows what these stats mean, so I am wondering what this rate means in terms of the investigation and prosecution of rape in Olympia.
My partner and I are on the board of the dv and sexual assault agency in Lewis County. We are familiar with Safe Place in Thurston County. These certified sexual assault agencies should be involved unless the victim abolutely refuses that assistance.
I will check in with the sexual assault counselor folks I know and see what they think about this 80% unfounded rate.
Nice to have your voice here, Rebecca.
human right
Submitted by rebecca on Sat, 02/02/2008 - 8:35pm.I realize that I used the term “women” or “woman” a lot. I actually thought about saying something at the end (where I listed several discussion questions) about non-female victims, but opted not to.
Certainly the right to refuse use of one’s own sexual organs is as much a right of men as of women.
I think there is a historical aspect of women not being considered equal to men in sexual relationships as reflected by historically unequal marriage laws. I think adult women are still more likely to be raped than adult men. I’m not sure how the statutory rape rates compare for young male vs. female children.
But thank-you for bringing up the issue of male victims. Perhaps I am also guilty of expressing a cultural bias by regarding rape as a women’s issue, thus unfairly side-lining the experience of male victims. I opened this thread by advocating that the “right . . . never to be coerced into a sexual relationship” was “not conditioned upon economic means, social standing, or race.” Perhaps we would add gender to that.
I think young boys are often exploited sexually
Submitted by Mike on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 8:12am.It's not rape in the sense that Rebecca and I would understand it, but it is sexual exploitation.
The thing that I am most interested in, the thing that puzzles me most about all this, is the question of what constitutes normal sexual development and experience in this culture?
We are quick in this culture today to label lots of people as sexual predators, to add folks to the registered offender lists when they may not truly pose any danger to the public.
I think the US is a pretty perverse culture with a high degree of sexualized advertising, sales, and a high degree of legalized prudery. It's a strange combination. I am very much aware of all this as I am engaged with my grandsons on a regular basis and I recognize how much more aware they are about sex than I think I was at their age. I don't want these boys to get in trouble, to be labeled in ways that can wreak havoc in their lives.
Once a child has been sexualized through molestation and exploitation, it may be pretty difficult to unring that bell. I fear the same with a groundless rape charge. I think it is hard to unring that bell also.
The 80% unfounded rape charge rate in Olympia suggests something is wrong here. JT's personal numbers from working rape cases indicated he worked cases that ended in convictions on 6 out of 10, that is not in the same ballpark as an 80% unfounded rate.
It may be that a police force with a predominantly male pov is poorly equipped to gather evidence in a crime area that is predominantly a "women's issue."
I believe that is clearly the case with domestic violence. The David Brame case in Tacoma makes it all too clear that the authoritarian personality type drawn to police work and the authoritarian culture of police agencies makes it difficult for police agencies to function as well as the community might want in the areas of law that are predominantly "women's issues." All the more reason for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault to seek support from the local dv and sexual assault agencies in my opinion.
But, for balance, and protection of the reputations and lives of other potential victims, I would still like to see law enforcement and prosecutor's office make it clear that filing a false report of rape is also a crime. This would only make sense in the most egregious cases where there is deliberate and wanton disregard for the "rapist's" well-being and the "rapist" had clearly not engaged in non-consensual sex. That's setting the bar pretty high for a charge of filing a false report.
I would tkae the 80% with a huge does of salt
Submitted by Guglielmo on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 10:11am.false reports
Submitted by rebecca on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 12:00pm.Personally, I wouldn't necessarily require the disregard for the alleged rapist criteria. If a women falsely says she was raped without citing a particular individual, and it eats up resources that should have been used to investigate crimes that actually occurred, that's a problem. Even if no individual man is attached to it, I think the option of charges for filing a false report should still be on the table (though maybe not used every time).
I agree it should only be done when the report was very clearly false. If it's not clear whether a offense occurred, then party can be punished because both are innocent until proven guilty.
I would add that a women who initially reports a sexual assault as a rape shouldn't be punished if the crime is later re-classifieds, as long as she isn't maliciously providing false info. So if I women come crying to police that she was raped and they ask some questions and it doesn't meet the full legal criteria of rape - "just" sexual assault" - it's not her job to know the different classifications, as long as she's not out crying wolf.
As far as the bell is concerned, I think you have a point. I'd definitely think twice about dating somebody who had been accused of rape - in face, I might not have to think twice.
false accusations
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 7:17pm.Thanks
Submitted by rebecca on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 9:09pm.That makes sense as far as when penalties can be imposed. But I find it hard to imagine a women thinking she was raped when she wasn't at least sexually assaulted. Maybe you could explain "unfounded" better? I can imagine some situations - where a crime would be reclassified - that a reported rape might be "unfounded" but not a deliberate falsehood. But otherwise, I'm confused by the distinction.
unfounded
Submitted by Robert Whitlock on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 10:09pm.It's not a perfect world; assault can occur without any evidence of the fact. So I understand why people would be concerned about imposing penalties on a woman who might be accused of making a false accusation about rape.
I can also see how penalties might be abused in order to smear a woman who makes a claim that cannot be substantiated.
People deserve protection against false accusations, be they false accusations of rape by an alleged victim, or false accusations of criminal activity by a police officer.
thanks
Submitted by rebecca on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 12:38am.I think I was understanding "unfounded" as a conclusion that the rape did not occur. I'd like to see them distinguish between "we don't know" and "we know (or are pretty sure) it's false". Thanks for the explanation.
rape isn't (only) about what's in the victim's head
Submitted by pseudonym on Sun, 02/03/2008 - 11:10pm.Don't take this personal
Submitted by rebecca on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 12:33am.To say that non-consent must be expressed is to imply a right to touch another person sexually until they tell you not. Now, if someone comes up to me and starts groping me, that's NOT ok. It's not OK for someone to touch me sexually even if they stop after I ask them. They have no business touching me in the first place.
That's like saying it's OK for someone to steal from me as long as I haven't specifically asked them to leave my stuff alone! Only the implications are more serious.
YOU DON'T HAVE ANY RIGHTS TO MY BODY. CONSENT IS NOT TO BE PRESUMED.
(Please don't take this personally, psuedonym. I realize you didn't write the laws and you may have a point as far as how they are written/enforced. I appreciate you're contributing to this thread. I really don't mean to take it out on you, but what you said just makes me mad. Hope you understand. I'm not mad at you.)Heartily second that.
Submitted by Meta Hogan on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 9:16am.Third!
Submitted by jlw on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 10:50am.Then again, if you're accustomed to sleeping in the same bed with someone, I don't think they really need to hear an explicit "yes" every time.
This world's crazy, give me the gun. -- P.J. Harvey
Yes, and
Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 11:40am.Call me old fashioned, but I personally probably wouldn't end up in bed with someone unless there was some mutual trust there to begin with.
RCW
Submitted by rebecca on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 6:23pm.I took a look at how the Revised Code of Washington defines rape. If any of you are interested in looking at the details, it's RCW 9A.44. You can access it online: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/
Here's a very simplified summary.
If the victim is seriously injured or threatened with serious injury (in the course of being subjected to sexual intercourse), then the perpetrator is guilty of rape in the first degree.
If the victim attempts to resist and is forcibly compelled to have sexual intercourse (but not injured), OR if the victim is incapable of giving consent, then the perpetrator is guilty of rape in the second degree.
If "the victim did not consent . . . and such lack of consent was clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct" and the perpetrator has intercourse with the victim, then the perpetrator is guilty of rape in the third degree.
The actual laws are a bit more complicated. I didn't include all the caveats, just the gist of it. If you really want to know what the law is, read the RCW or talk to your attorney. (-:
Bringing up the issue of
Submitted by pseudonym on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 9:56pm.Bringing up the issue of consent the way I did was only intended to address when it could be the case that a rape was unfounded and there was not a deliberate false accusation. I did not mean to imply that there are not laws protecting those who are unable to consent and underage, etc.
Consent is a huge issue and obstacle when charging rape. For example, sexual intercourse without consent in Pennsylvania is sexual assault, not rape. In PA, rape is reserved for force, coercion, underage, mental impairment, etc. Wisconsin is the only state that I am aware of that requires words or overt actions for there to be consent, although there may be others. In other words, sex is deemed not consensual unless words or overt actions demonstrate consent.
I find myself feeling rather guilty
Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Tue, 02/05/2008 - 3:05am.at some of the "descriptions" - if nothing else, guilty of the sexual fumblings of adolescent male behavior of the past. I sincerely hope that "unfounded" has more basis than a good intention not accepted - for the case of both parties.
Sexual contact is a tricky area at times. One person's "well intended" fondle, could be another's unwelcomed grope and by no means, am I trying to make light of this. Additionally "permission requests" could somewhat "ruin the moment".
Another thought entered my mind concerning JT's crime numbers, Based on the total population, the aggregate number of rapes wasn't incredibly high, per se, therefore some of the "unfounded" cases could be the result of one or two individuals either executing vindictiveness or poor judgement.
None of this is anything to laugh at in any case. I think it would be important for men and women to continue to learn communication skills to avoid misunderstandings.
Thanks for the input, ladies. Although I'm happily married, I'm a "touchy" person and would never want the slightest misunderstanding to take place (pictures of Bush with the German Chancellor come to mind, but I'm not THAT touchy)
asking permission
Submitted by rebecca on Tue, 02/05/2008 - 10:23am.Some of us like our space and prefer not to be presumed on. Maybe I'm a little out of my expertise writing about romantic relationships . . . but I would prefer that a guy ask me than touch me when I don't want it. There are ways of asking permission for physical contact that don't involve words, but allow the other party to choose whether to accept the offered contact or not. Typical handshake etiquette would me a classic example. You extend your hand to me, I reach out to grasp your extended hand. You don't grab my hand from my side and start shaking it. Hugs can be given similarly.
Prior communication may provide limited guidance. This is especially true within the social circle I was raised where religious standards help dictate what contact can or cannot be had outside of marriage. Obviously, the limitation of prior communication is that neither party knows what "mood" they will be in at the time. Beforehand is probably not the time to get permission for actual intercourse. But before going out on a date might be a good time to ask whether your boyfriend/girlfriend feels comfortable with you putting your arm around them, kissing, etc. (Maybe that sounds silly to some of you, but depending on what sub-culture you're from those could be of-course OR no-way.) When it comes to sex, err on the safe side.
Better to postpone it a little (because you 'ruined the mood')than subject a woman to contact with which she is uncomfortable. I wonder how frequently there actually is unclarity over the woman's desires.
I feel that I have a right not to be touched by another person against my wishes. I feel uncomfortable when new acquaintances get "touchy" with me. Even something as relatively small as an uninvited arm around the shoulder or pat on the back can be unpleasant to me. Get your hands off me! It is awkward knowing how to communicate with people sometimes. How do you let someone know you don't want their hands on you without offending them? When do you give a casual notice and when do you pull the alarm? With close friends, I sometimes allow a light hug.
I don't think I should have to wear a t-shirt that says, "Don't touch me" to avoid unwelcome contact. Not that most people would take a t-shirt seriously anyway.
Good to know
Submitted by Norm on Tue, 02/05/2008 - 7:23pm.Are their other women on the blog that have similar feelings? I'm completely in the dark here, I've tried the "asking" thing and been laughed at (not joking) and have since decided to go with body language. I've been told "no", I've even said "no" (not always a good idea guys) but I've only once been told "yes" and have never said "yes" before in my life....I'd start laughing.
A lot of unwelcome touching
Submitted by rainy gray on Tue, 02/05/2008 - 9:10pm.Maybe this cuts both ways, and men have experienced the same thing, but I have no experience of being male, and cannot fairly speak to their experiences.
It does, particularly when alcohol is involved.
Submitted by Norm on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 1:06am.Different dynamic though. I've had women who were a little too "comfy" with me when they were drinking, and as a male I can say something...and probably get a ration of #$*&, or I can sit there and take it and get some great giggles the next week when I walk into the bar.
I understand your point, and unfortunately some men either don't get it, are too drunk to get it, or just don't care. At least when I'm approached and touched in a way that I'm not really cool with, I don't actually fear for my safety, mostly just my pride.
So what about when alcohol isn't involved?
A light dose of pepper spray cologne
Submitted by Mike on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 9:30am.or a quick tap with taser (set on stun) will help the slightly inebriated male regain his bearings and will reset his "body language" receptors.
I am reserved, don't engage in much touching with my gal friends. I hug my guy friends more often than my gal friends because I think unringing the bell of unwanted touching is difficult and pepper spray cologne clashes with my patchouli.
Don't hug me!
Submitted by Norm on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:11pm.I hate the smell of that stuff!
Mostly women hugging me, the guys I tend to hang with aren't huggy.....and I'm ok with that.
I am so gonna hug you
Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:20pm.If you smell like patchouli you may end up with a knee to the...
Submitted by Norm on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:21pm.Remember Gug, Norm is likely packing,
Submitted by JT on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:22pm.you might get gun germs on you!!! Ewwwwwww!
“America passes the critical gate test. Open the gate and see where people go – in or out. This is still the country people flock to.” George Will
Awww...
Submitted by Guglielmo on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:24pm.LOL,
Submitted by JT on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:28pm.Nice!
“America passes the critical gate test. Open the gate and see where people go – in or out. This is still the country people flock to.” George Will
Negative
Submitted by Norm on Wed, 02/06/2008 - 6:34pm.Unfounded includes recants
Submitted by Mike on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 8:17am.and loss of contact. Talked with my dtr who worked a couple in DV agency and she recalls that a lot of cases recanted, took back their testimony, maybe under pressure from an abusive partner, maybe over concern that the rape occurred in conjunction with illegal drug use, and that pursuing the rape charge would open the victim to charges for uncontrolled substance violation (meth? mj? not sure)
Unfounded would also include the cases where the PD lost contact with the victim, that might be more likely with homeless victims.
I suspect a lot of crimes of this sort end up in the unfounded category even though something criminal may well have happened.
That is very different from an unfounded case where no assault occurred and a "victim" uses the charge to ring the rape bell on a party who did not assault them, that to cover their tracks with a partner, or to get the other party. That activity is the one where I think filing a false report should be prosecuted. I suspect this does not happen a lot, but it would be very crummy to have it happen to you. That rare occurrence produces a victim who is labelled as a rapist and has not raped anyone. That should be a crime imho.
False Reporting is
Submitted by Merwyn Haskett on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 9:10am.The other thing is the Low Life Expectancy of those kinds of criminals, especially when it involves children. Many people might have no sympathy for an actual rapist or child molester who gets killed or assaulted in prison; many won't persue why the guards didn't see anything. But what about when the guy was innocent?
But equally bad, and possibly even more reprehensible, is that just one incident like that makes it a hundred-times more difficult for the next victim to get the help and justice she deserves.
Olympia Unfounded Rate
Submitted by rebecca on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 10:21am.JT has posted a correction regarding Olympia's rape case statistics, including percentages of "unfounded" rape accusations from past years.
The rate (updated) is "about 25% unfounded rate" for last year. He also lists the rates for 2003-2006.
Here's the link to that thread:
http://www.olyblog.net/snapshot-crime-olympia-2007
It caught my eye that there was a 0% unfounded rate for 2003. I wonder what the number of reported rapes was that year.
The 0% most likely
Submitted by Guglielmo on Mon, 02/04/2008 - 10:49am.Those numbers make more sense to me.
Submitted by Mike on Tue, 02/05/2008 - 7:49am.