Women fail to report rapes
Stuff Link: Women fail to report rapes
OK, so maybe, just maybe, the true rate of rape in this country really is ten times higher that reported. Any maybe, just maybe, 80% or rape complaints are false. Surely the only way to test this and establish the truth is to test each and every rape complaint in a court of law? Women do themselves a disservice by failing to report their rape. The only way this country will ever bring down this massive figure is by ensuring the aleeged perpetrators are brought to justice. And by disproving any allegation that 80% of complaints are false, again, surely these should be tested in a court of law.
That women blame the system for themselves not reporting their own rapes, is an excuse. I never reported my own sexual abuse. I chose not to. These women choose not to report their rape. One thing femi-nazi woman taught me is to take responsibility for myself – and to never blame others for my actions, or lack there-of.
But, on the other hand, if presumed rates of rape are based on surveys that include any kind definition along the lines of “I had sex with my partner even though I didn’t feel like it” then – my God! – I’ve been raped multiple times!
Women – stand up and be counted. If you believe you have been raped, report it. Do it now (“the obvious aim of which is to precipitate an immediate investigation of the relevant circumstances whilst the evidentiary trail is fresh” , to quote S. 246(5), Report of the Board of Inquiry, Anglican Diocese of Adelaide (24 May 2004))
You are far more likely to believed if you report it the same day – or the next, rather than 18 years down the track! 10,000 rape complaints as opposed to 1,000 will tell a story – even if you feel you are speaking to unsympathetic policewoman.
Am I supporting The Sisterhood, in wanting to see Rape complaints sky-rocket, further expanding the ever growing Sisterhood Economy? Maybe. If 9 times more rapes have been committed, than are reported, then yes. The perpetrators must be held to account. But I rather suspect that we won’t see any particulalry dramatic rise in complaints, charges and/or convictions, and that the number of cases deemed to be false complaints (generally meaning without substance) will sky-rocket.
Posts RSS 2.0
Jesus did you read the article properly at all?
No wonder people label you extremists.
Have you ever been to a rape trial at all?
Have you seen what the complainant has to go through compared to the defendant?
Do you not think that having Cops who don’t believe rape victims, going out there taking statements from complainants is a negative thing?
I’ve seen a rape trial of a close friend of mine and I thank god that I did not go through that after I was raped and fiddled with as child. The courts are stacked in favour of the defendant not the other way around.
You dickheads always seem to be making out that rape victims, apart from us male victims, all wanted it or it the victims fault.
You are defenders of the same system which you accuse of oppressing you.
Perhaps I should use your own view and logic of rape victims on your organisation. 80% of your complaints are false and your complaints should all be tested out in the fair court of law.
One day I hope you will ask yourself the question “Why does no one believe us or take us seriously?”
Hi George. Yes; I read the article. Did you read my post? “The perpetrators must be held to account.” Really; they must. I really do believe that. And nowhere do I make out that victims are in anyway responsible for wanting to be abused. But they are responsible for reporting it, regardless of the response they fear they’ll get. Only that way will things change.
Please do refer to The Woman Refuge’s own definition of sexual violence, which includes:”
- Making you feel guilty if you say no to sex
- When you give in to sex to put them in a better mood or to avoid a hiding
- When you have sex so they will stop pestering you ”
If it is these things that consitute the 90% of rapes that never get reported, then God help us all, because I’ve succombed to each one of these many a time in the interests of relational harmony. OK – maybe not the hiding bit.
Just last week I was reading in one feminist forum (which, coincidentally censures comments that don’t support femocracy, something we masculinists aren’t apt to do – hence why I’m leaving your post here), that stated:
I’m not sure if you are a woman, George, but to refer to any male in derogatory terms using sexual imagery is just as offensive as the above quote refers.
But I have been subject to false allegations of sexual abuse, of which the judge ruled had “no evidence”. Maybe I should just role over and say, oh well, someone has cried rape, therefore she must be right?.
George says:
Police should never ‘believe’ anything about a complainant. Their job is to look for evidence with an open mind and treat any statements with skeptisism. You are just promoting the old radical feminist line: ‘always believe the victim’.
No doubt once the ranks of senior male policemen have been thinned sufficiently, and certain favoured female officers get promoted into top positions, all police will be required to demonstrate the correct beliefs before they join.
You won’t find anything like that on this site – I challenge you! I’ve personally never heard any man express that attitude. Making completely fabricated allegations as a tactic for capturing the moral high-ground is not generally considered a particularly ‘manly’ trait by the way. I can see why Al wonders about your gender!
Yes, that’s what the feminists keep on telling us. A whole bunch of very senior lawyers, legal accademics, and at least one Australian Judge would disagree with you. The reality is in NZ, men do not currently get a fair trial with regard to historic claims of sexual abuse.
If no one takes us seriously, why are so many Family Court / Domestic Violence/ Sexual Abuse Industry workers going to the trouble of contacting media, writing letters (perhaps even posting on blogs like this), desperately trying to push the same tired old feminist propaganda lines?
First thing I would like to say is I’m sorry for jumping the gun abit.
I get a bit defensive and irrational in talks about rape. I witnessed a close family member being violently raped when I was a child, and have had close friends who have been raped.
I will point out that I don’t support the feminazis that are around and acknowledge that they do nothing but make matters worse in terms of male and female interactions. I can see both points and sides and how some things may have caused them to form their opinions etc.
I think society and the courts in general are sexist towards both females and males in certain areas. Especially when it comes to abuse and male victims and the family courts (my father had to fight like hell to get custody of my older sister from her junkie mother).
I’m sorry to hear that you have been accused of a false claim and I can see why this would make you skeptical about others. Personally I think when it established with concrete evidence or a confession that a claim was false, the accuser should be sent to jail for a minimum of 5 years.
False claims as you will know from personel experience damage lives not only yours but your families etc. They also make it hard for real victims of rape.
But I do believe false claims make up a minority of the claims, not 80% as some cops believe. The reason why it is dangerous is the real victims will see that the cops don’t believe them and wont even bother going through the system to punish these men.
The police usually believe complainants and will investigate the circurmstances and evidence to see if this corroborates with the claim. They walk in their with open minds that anything could’ve happened and that the complainant could be lying. But given that the process in which victims have to go through can be unsettling and emotional, if these real victims don’t think people believe them, they wont take action.
One of the many reasons why real victims don’t come forward is fear of not being believed. A former cop I know told me of a sad case in which a brother inlaw of a young girl had hoped into bed and raped her. The Police were the only ones who believed her, not even her own family and when it went to court the man said that he went into the bed and that he touched her and penetrated her with his fingers, but didn’t rape her, yet still the family wouldn’t support her. He also told me of another story of a woman who said she’d been raped at an atm machine one night. The Police believed her, but the evidence they found said she wasn’t raped. It turned out that at the time she claimed she was raped at the machine people had gone by and used it and not seen anything, nor had any of the cameras.
But the dangerous point that article raises is the those Police surveyed have already made up their minds that these woman are probably lying before they go in there.
I don’t think we will be seeing many female officers in the top brass for a while and I woudln’t be worried. From what I have heard from current and former cops I would rather the guys who are in there now werent, whether they were replaced by females or males or mixed wouldn’t worry me, so long as they weren’t dodgy and didn’t have that “boys club” mentality.
I would be quite happy to meet Al D Rado or you JohnP to ascertain my gender, the conversation would probably be less confrontational and more rational, well I would be more rational than I am on here.
What I would really like you guys to look at though is that these trials are no ordinary rape trials. If your ordinary Joe Bloggs gets accused of rape he is not in a position to get his mates to investigate it and cover it up.
If the Louise Nicholas case and all the trials that are related were standard rape trials then I probably wouldn’t be thinking they were “unjust” even if they are fair in the eyes of the courts.
It is this same court system that is partly responsible for much of your anguish.
The stigma that goes with being accused of rape is very. But it is equally hard, if not more, for real victims of rape to labelled sluts. The burden of proof sets the standard high inrelation to conviction, all the defense needs to do is make one witness look stupid, or decietful, or put some doubt in the jurys head and that person can walk free. Lets face it most defence lawyers out there are pretty onto it too.
The defendants in rape cases are not smeared or character assasinated like the complainants in rape cases, their sexual history is never brought into question.
If you reply I would like to know what you, under the current justice system and way things are, would do if you were raped. If it’s too hard to imagine yourself as being a female, imagine yourself as a young male like that guy who took that woman to court a few years ago for forcing him when he was 13 to have unconsentual sex.
Remember that only 30 years ago rape victims addresses were read out in rape trials. Just recently an accused and subsequently convicted rapist, was allowed to cross examine his victim, this has now been changed.
You guys have been fighting your battle for who knows how long and still face an uphill struggle. The system may seem fair to us now, but I have no doubt in my mind that 30 years down the track we will look back and think “crikey dick that was pretty bloody stupid how we used to do that”.
My offer to meet for a coffee or somethin similar is real ( aslong as I don’t get beaten up
) and again I apologise for my irrational first post
Thank you for your very detailed reply, George. One thing I do believe is very wrong with the legal profession is the ‘beyone reasonable doubt’. I think the benchmark is too high. A ‘highly certain you did it’ bench mark might be more appropriate. To alleviate cases where the judge knows he did it; the jury knows he did it; we all know he did it, but he gets off on a technicality or because it’s not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
Beyone Reasonable Doubt usually translates into absolute proof. We all know that’s sometimes not there.
However, when it is well established that false allegations are rampant particulalry in Family Court procedings, then those people lying in court are damaging it for other innocent victims. That Police may have (and I don’t know if they have) a culture of non-belief, one has to ask why. It is simply mysogenism, or is there experience such that they’ve experienced one falsie too many?
Almost every criminal protests his (her) innocence, even after conviction. Should they be believed? I once knew a (gay) guy decrying he had been raped. He was adament! Turned out he had been subject to an internal drugs search after being found loitering near a visiting boat.
Or a girl likewise adament, which turned out to be reluctant sex for drugs.
We could ll go on, knowing real victims, and falsies. I stand by my earlier words. Perpetrators must be held to account. But victims must act to report the crime, else they simple ensure the offenders are free to re-offend. I also stand by my previous definitions (quoted from The Woman’s Refuge). Remember also that feminist Ellen Bass, in her oft quoted manual “The courage to Heal” exhorts women “if you think you were abused, you almost certainly have been, even if you don’t remember it” Like it or not, but women are being taught to be victims on the flimsiest of fact.
I appreciate you thoughtful reply George, sorry I’m so slow to respond.
You say:
This is why there is a problem George, average NZ people like yourself have come to ‘believe’ things which are completely contrary to all available evidence. It is also contrary to the experience of professionals who don’t benefit from inflating rape statistics.
Why is this? Because continual feminist propaganda is effective! Try repeating this little mantra to yourself 108 times every day, and you may be able to break free:
“Man-hating Radical Feminists ALWAYS lie about abuse”
You ask:
If I (or someone I knew) was raped, I would head straight for a properly trained forensic police doctor and get an examination. DNA technology has advanced to the point where even a few hairs, a bit of skin under a fingernail, or traces of bodily fluids can provide positive identification of an offender.
If you browse one of the older sections of this web site, you will find that MENZ has had considerable experience (ie: several thousand NZ cases) with false allegations of sexual abuse.
Al D Rado then says:
Noooooooooo! Al, how could you? E Tu Brute?
This exactly what the Radfems are working towards – undermining time-tested principles of Justice so that public trust in authority is diminished. Moving away from ‘Beyond Reasonable Doubt’ to the ‘Balance of Probabilities’ is where the Family Court is fundimentally flawed.
In my opinion, a ‘highly certain you did it’ benchmark is not too far distant from shouting: “she’s a witch”, and starting to gather firewood!
recently my sister awoke during the night to find her husband having sex with her she told him to stop but he ignored her.previously in the evening she had told him very firmly that she was not interested in having sex with him that evening. this is the second time this has happened once again without her consent and after saying no and while she was a asleep.she has since left him.is this rape or was he simply exercising his rigts as her husband to have sex.????
Yes it is certainly rape, and he is likely to be imprisoned if charged and convicted.
No husband has a ‘right to sex’, at least not in civilised countries!