Great Britain: Be sure of women's consent or face rape trial, men told

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | March 8, 2006 | Joshua Rozenberg

[Larry Lucido]

Be sure of women's consent or face rape trial, men told

Houston, we have a problem. Who signs the consent form?

Now I gotta go wash my eyes out with soap.

[MonroeDNA]

The surest way to not have sex with a woman is to ask her if it is OK to have sex with her.

[Canard]

"Wouldn't "low conviction rates" suggest that a large number of men are being brought to trial improperly, when they are in fact not guilty?"

Not really. Rape is the most difficult crime to get a conviction in, for fairly obvious reasons.

[gogeo]

Video is always good.

[gogeo]

She can change her mind, you know...

[Stoat]

Rape is the most difficult crime to get a conviction in, for fairly obvious reasons.

Then it sounds like what's called for is a reduction in the threshold and standards of proof required for a rape conviction.

[Canard]

What do you want to reduce it to? Often it's one person's word against another. What basis are you willing to lock people away on?

[King Prout]

geesh...

can anyone imagine a woman still being interested in nookie after having to sign a consent form in front of two legal witnesses?

[Stoat]

What do you want to reduce it to? Often it's one person's word against another. What basis are you willing to lock people away on?

That was going to be my next question to you, since you brought up the point about the level of proof and I thought that this might be what you were suggesting as a solution.

According to the graph so very kindly and graciously provided by Polecat Pete,

There is a HUGE discrepancy in the number of convictions in the USA versus the UK.  I am not a lawyer, attorney, solicitor or barrister, and not even a resident or subject in Great Britain, and as such I don't know what the standards of proof are in the courts of the UK.

Perhaps this is one of the things that can be considered?  Here in the USA, however, I believe that it's extremely difficult to get a conviction unless there is an injury to the woman or physical evidence suggesting that she actively tried to prevent the crime, and so I believe that the standards of proof for a conviction here are rather high.

I actually didn't have a solution to the matter, I was just intrigued by the Home Office's solution, of embarking upon an 'awareness campaign' directed exclusively at men and their behaviors.

 

[Canard]

That's interesting, I hadn't seen that before, thanks. I wasn't suggesting that I have a solution either, but that is certainly food for thought.

[Stoat]

That's interesting, I hadn't seen that before, thanks. I wasn't suggesting that I have a solution either, but that is certainly food for thought.

You're quite welcome and I apologize for misinterpreting your intent.

I would wish to suggest, however, that the Home Office may be missing the mark in this 'awareness campaign' in that they are not targeting this campaign effectively.  Although I am sure that all Conservatives would want to encourage all men to be Gentlemen and as such to treat Ladies with respect and courtesy at all times, which includes ensuring that any interpersonal relations are embarked upon in a spirit of mutual happiness and agreement, many will question the appropriateness and efficacy of a Government program designed to change behaviors that are shaped and molded many years before they will ever see that 'awareness' poster in a pub's loo.

Given the mammoth rape conviction disparity between the US and the UK, and particularly the number of cases brought to trial versus the number of convictions in the UK, as documented in the article, my perception is that there are at least a couple of points that are not being addressed:

Either

• The UK has a GROSSLY disproportionate number of utterly vicious, craven women who are seething with hatred for men and who think nothing of bringing a false rape charge against a man whom they once shared an intimate and (hopefully) loving interlude  ( I find this difficult to believe)

Or

• The understanding and expectations of women in the UK are completely out of synch with the legal realities (which may or may not be proper realities) and we have a situation where honest, upstanding women honestly feel that they have been raped yet their crimes are not being avenged and the perpetrators are not being appropriately called to account.(I'm more inclined to lean in this direction)

 

If the truth of the matter is indeed more in the direction of the latter option than the former, would it not be more appropriate to either

• Reform the criminal justice system in Great Britian with a goal of ensuring more rape convictions.

• Embark upon some sort of effort to change the behaviors and/or expectations of women so that they will be more in line with the legal realities. 

 

or perhaps both.

 

           

[Fido969]

If a sufficiently hawt woman jumps on top of a guy, she can pretty much always be assured of consent

What if she's fat and ugly and you're drunk?

[Gordongekko909]

If I'm sufficiently drunk, then she will be sufficiently hawt.

[Fido969]

If I'm sufficiently drunk, then she will be sufficiently hawt.

An' you KNOW what Ah'm talkin' about!

[Gordongekko909]

An' you KNOW what Ah'm talkin' about!

Gee, that sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before?

Oh no.

What if she's fat and ugly and you're drunk?

Oh God no.

If I'm sufficiently drunk, then she will be sufficiently hawt.

Oh HELL no.

That does it. I am never drinking again.

[JABBERBONK]

Once again the femminized double standard, often times the situation involves alcohol, like on many college campus'. The man however is held to a higher standard, since he has not the ability to revoke consent the next morning, when sobriety takes hold.

[Stoat]

Once again the femminized double standard, often times the situation involves alcohol, like on many college campus'. The man however is held to a higher standard, since he has not the ability to revoke consent the next morning, when sobriety takes hold.

If this is indeed a major reason for the huge disparity in the number of rape trials versus convictions in the U.K., then this not only paints an utterly ludicrous face upon this "awareness campaign" which is aimed exclusively at men, but it could be argued that this is so completely wrongheaded that it constitutes a nearly criminal act in and of itself, in that it does absolutely nothing toward protecting any victims involved. 

If 'morning regrets' are indeed the primary reason for this huge disparity, then the people who need an "awareness campaign" (or, preferably something FAR more effective than this silly plan) are the women, not the men.  They need to be made 'aware' that SLUTTY BEHAVIOR is not held up by the courts and they can expect no convictions for trials brought entirely due to such a foundation.  They need to be taught, apparently, that staying up drinking until 4AM and willingly falling into bed with whatever bloke is nearby is NOT RAPE and is best addressed by Ladylike Behavior.  When women conduct themselves as Ladies and learn to say "No", then men will conduct themselves as Gents....it's a two-way street out there, not the "Only Men Are To Blame!" shrill mantra spewed by the FemiNazis.

 

[RHINO369]

I think the reasons for the low ratio from accusation to conviction rate has several reasons
1) Rape can be hard to prove
2) Many women decide afterward that they didn't' want to do it
3) Women who were victimized as a child (which is a good size of all women unfortunately) have a freeze reaction when they are they think they are being victimized. They might think they are being raped, yet won't say anything, just freeze. The guy may or may not know shes doesn't want it, but even if he does what Jury will convict if she doesn't yell or even say no.
4)Other times women who were victimized as a child see all interaction with men as abuse.

I listen to a radio show where a people call in with health and relationship problems, and one girl called in and said she was raped. After further questioning it turns out she was naked in bed with the man giving him oral, and he went to have sex, and when she said stop he did. She had no idea were he got the idea that he could do that, proving women must have some kind of cruel impediment from understanding the very very simple workings of a mans brain.

[Stoat]

1) Rape can be hard to prove

Agreed, but for some reason it seems that it's far easier to prove in the USA than in the UK., as evidenced by the link and chart that Polecat Pete so graciously provided to this thread.  This would suggest that a significant difference exists either in the burden of proof required by the respective courts or the behaviors or expectations of women in the UK.

2) Many women decide afterward that they didn't' want to do it

"Morning Regrets" are not rape. They are an after-the-fact recognition that you used poor judgment and you should immediately enroll in a Ladies' Finishing School.

3) Women who were victimized as a child (which is a good size of all women unfortunately) have a freeze reaction when they are they think they are being victimized. They might think they are being raped, yet won't say anything, just freeze. The guy may or may not know shes doesn't want it, but even if he does what Jury will convict if she doesn't yell or even say no.

Such women need the greatest possible level of compassion and possibly counseling and therapy, and their history needs to be available to a man's defense team and needs to be fully admissible in court in the event she decides to bring criminal charges against a man. A man who sexually victimizes a child should be burned alive in public and the immolation should be  televised live and unedited on free TV.

 
4)Other times women who were victimized as a child see all interaction with men as abuse.

Same response as given to #3.

I listen to a radio show where a people call in with health and relationship problems, and one girl called in and said she was raped. After further questioning it turns out she was naked in bed with the man giving him oral, and he went to have sex, and when she said stop he did. She had no idea were he got the idea that he could do that, proving women must have some kind of cruel impediment from understanding the very very simple workings of a mans brain.

Your description of her is as a 'girl' and so in my view she is excused from complicity by virtue of natural youthful innocence....innocence being a virtue, particularly among the young.

As to any gender-related 'mental impediment', I would suggest that men and women have very different ways of thinking and acting and this is one of the magical Gifts that God gave to Mankind to add immeasurable dimensions to the joys of life.  Yes, they can cause troubles at times, but this is the reason for proper parenting and insuring that children are imbued with the very best values that Society can muster.

[moatilliatta]

I find it had to believe that the burden of proof in rape cases is that different between the US and the UK, which leads me to suspect that the difference in conviction rates might be down to US prosecutors being less likely than UK prosecuters to proceed with cases that are diffcult to prove (e.g. when it's one person's word against another). Given the statistics, it looks like the British prosecutors must be bringing a lot of cases that they know they have little realistic chance of securing a conviction on.