I haven’t been following the cases of sexual harassment and assault at Skeptic conferences or organisations very carefully but don’t understand why those who have been accused of committing a crime are not reported to the police?
If a crime has been committed (and they are crimes unless it’s a sharia court) it’s important to take action – not just by demanding action from the employer or conference organiser but by calling on the police and legal system.
Attempts at addressing them “internally” reminds me of what the church does – deals with any “problems” without putting its dirty laundry out for all to see.
Skeptic or not, atheist or not, if a crime has been committed, it needs to be investigated properly, with both sides having a fair hearing and what not.
I know the police and justice system often fail miserably particularly when dealing with sex abuse cases, however, better that they are dealt with there than on blogs and via organisational board meetings.
If there’s crime, report it!
In the third section I wrote, I was trying to make the point, that the police needs to treat these claims with more respect and investigate, and maybe that was the real issue that needs to be addressed.
About the second section of my post I was reffering to PZ Myers post about Shermer. When you post a warning like that based on the testimony of a anonymous witness (anonymous to me as the reader) that is vague in details, then its hard for me as the reader to objectively look at that and not come to the conclusion, that i cant decide whether its true or not, and that position would be the same if the case, was about a person who ascused another of stealing. And when you post something like this arent you sorta calling on people to take the position that the person is guilty.
I realise by reffering to this, I might unfairly have assumed that you hold this position. Sorry.
If PG wasn’t enough answer to your question, Maryam, try reading this – http://freethoughtblogs.com/brutereason/2013/08/29/the-law-is-not-on-our-side/
PitchGuests obdurate nature amazes me, he has been independently told by a large number of people that he is a rape apologist. In his case he cannot even blame the #FTBullies and their obvious “crazy” feminazi doctrines. He totally burnt his bridges at sinfest.com doing the exact same things.
http://www.sinfest.net/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?p=439044&sid=f0dd151cfbeb235d6c5940a47d74e7bd#439044
Whenever there is a woman expressing emotion, especially about rape, PitchGuest is there minimising and even in the sinfest case laughing at them. Doesn’t look good. What are your issues PitchGuest? On second thoughts I really don’t care, just take them elsewhere.
Funny. Maryam is a woman expressing an opinion about rape, and Pitchguest is supporting her opinion, while you pretend she doesn’t exist on her own article. You erase any woman who holds a differing opinion to you, and have done so consistently over the last few years. So much for listening to what women have to say.
Liar.
There have been made several points in the comments about victims of rape who don’t report the crime because they feel they are not taken seriously by the police and therefore blogging about the accused perpetrator is justified (Thats how I understood anyway, correct me if I am wrong).
This does create a problem for me though, because to me it suggests that if the accusation against somebody are of a particularly horrible nature, that it possibly could cause stress to the victim, if they have to relive the incident in court, then it shouldn’t be handled by the proper legal authorities and we should just by default assume that the accused is guilty.
I understand that reliving the incident by reporting it to the police and going to court can be stressful for the victim, however unsubstantiated claims no matter how serious are still just unsubstantiated claims.
Its very true that the police should treat this seriously and follow up on it, so the victim have a chance of proving the crime committed against them, and not give their opinion about whether it happened or not and maybe that is the real issue that needs to be addressed, not whether vigilantism is justifiable because we are not satisfied with the way the justice system handles it.
Incidents of false rape-claims do also occur, should these people just be considered “acceptable casualties of war” in the fight against rape-culture?
Further I would like to comment on the point made by “Bjarte Foshaug” that the US have one of the highest standard of proof. I take it that you view it as unreasonably high even comparing it to Dubai. I’m not a citizen of the US but I am pretty sure that they don’t demand four male witness to support your claim that this was rape and they do accept technical evidence.
The last point I would like to address was made by “Magictighs” who said “If there was a predatory rapist living in my apartment building who was let go on a technicality, wouldn’t I like to know about” Well if the case was that there was a lot of evidence to support that he actually did it, but he was let go on some misconduct made by the police or the courts, then certainly I would like to know about it, however no evidence to support the claim is not a technicality. Shermer has not been to court and let go on a technicality, he has been accused of a crime, and as I said earlier “unsubstantiated claims no matter how serious are still just unsubstantiated claims”.
I hope the post this post has been readable, I know there’s properly some problems with grammar and punctuation, and for that I am sorry, English is not my first language, anyway that’s my two cents on this and I know Im kind of late, but I hope someone will read it and possibly comment on what I said. Oh yeah and great post by Maryam Namazie by the way.
I would like to correct my self. “Bjarte Foshaug” did not mention the hight standard of proof, but said that western society had much in common with Dubai, so apart from that, I still think my argument is valid.
—This does create a problem for me though, because to me it suggests that if the accusation against somebody are of a particularly horrible nature, that it possibly could cause stress to the victim, if they have to relive the incident in court, then it shouldn’t be handled by the proper legal authorities and we should just by default assume that the accused is guilty.—
Then you aren’t paying attention to what we are saying.
Do you really not understand the difference between ‘trust but verify’ / give benefit of the doubt and ‘convict on nothing but say-so?
Look at the difference between how a report of theft is handled versus a report of rape – the default assumption with theft is that the victim is telling the truth and they are treated like a victim. The default assumption with rape is that the victim is lying and they are treated as though they are the bad guy.
And yet, even if we take the most ass-ed up statistics the police put out to avoid doing their jobs, false reports of rape are no more numerous than false reports of theft.
Is it really so much to ask that we treat a victim of rape with at least the same respect we’d treat a victim of theft?
Maryam, take a look at the people agreeing with you in this thread.
If that alone doesn’t clue you in that you may need to rethink your stance, I really don’t know what will.
Ad-hominem attacks and guilt by association. Classic.
When only misogynistic rape apologists (case in point – pitchguest, a known troll whose contribution was a direct attempt at victim blaming) are agreeing with you, yeah, probably time to rethink which side you are on.
I am aware you simpletons think you can use ‘misogynist’ in every which way, redefining it as you please, but as with Vizzini, you keep using that word – I do not think it means what you think it means.
I certainly haven’t apologised for any rape been commited, but I get it. You’re just going by the book. But to be ahead of the curve, I think you should get some new material. It’s getting old.
I did report it.
Since I had the temerity to defend myself, reporting it nearly got me jailed for assault while the man who tried to rape me walked away to attack others.
My reporting it brought no consequences to him. It brought severe consequences to me.
Lesson learned.
I’ve since had other occurrences that were probably worth reporting. But I’ve learned my lesson. I kept my mouth shut and got on with my life. As a result, I didn’t have my personal life dragged through the mud, didn’t suffer professional consequences, didn’t have friends turn on me, didn’t have folks threatening me, didn’t have folks harassing my family, and hey, look, the rest of the outcome was the same – the perp walked away.
So tell me, why, exactly, should I report? Clearly, I was better off not doing so.
You reported an attempted rape to the police and as a result, your personal life was dragged through the mud, you suffered “professional consequences”, your friends turned on you, had folks threatening you and your family and you were almost jailed for it?
And the perpetrator walked free?
…
Why?
I mean, if we’re going to make a case against ever reporting to the police, I think it’s kind of important to establish why this happened.
It’s called rape culture, you JAQoff.
Trying to form a consensus on why it’s not a good idea to report things to the police, like rape (or attempted rape) = JAQing off.
That’s a great response. Remind me why I should take you seriously again?
FOR FUCK’S SAKE PITCHGUEST HOW MANY MORE FUCKING EXAMPLES DO YOU FUCKING WANT?!?!?
I have provided a holy shit-ton of links showing you why that shit happens.
Raoe victims. Are NEVER. Believed.
THAT is the FUCKING pattern that has been exposed through fucking YEARS of gathering rape statistics.
3%, Pitchguest.
Three fucking percent of convicted rapists will ever see the inside of a fucking jail cell.
THAT IS WHY.
She’s not calling you a JAQoff because you want to “form a consensus on why it’s not a good idea to report things to the police”. She’s calling you a JAQoff because this has been fucking established for fucking YEARS.
If you insist on denying the fucking NUMBERS, the problem isn’t with the numbers… it’s with you.
Rape culture.
Sorry, Pitchguest. I was not aware that my comment to you with the links was in moderation. My explosion here was in that context of ignorance about the state of that particular post.
The post contains links to other stories, as well as statistics, proving (I think, anyways) why Steubenville and EEB and WithinThisMind are actually quite typical of how the system works (against rape victims).
I won’t be responding here again until that post is out of moderation.
“Three fucking percent of convicted rapists will ever see the inside of a fucking jail cell.”
3% of “CONVICTED” rapists will never see jail time? I’d be curious where that bullshit stat comes from. 100 bucks says a rape victim advocacy group… you know, one of those ones that gets government funding for each rape victim they council, and so benefits from victims believing the police won’t take them seriously and comes to them instead.
And LykeX insisted nobody is attempting to undermine police.
The fact that you handwave away groups developed to help rape victims, like RAINN (a group that I’ve donated both time and money too) tells me all I need to know about you you despicable little parasite.
The fact that you tried to present an info graphic containing both reported and unreported crimes as “convictions” demonstrates the dishonesty of rape advocates, and the reason it’s so easy to handwave you away (not that that is what I actually did, I simply acknowledged that some sites have an alternative agenda, and bet you would use one of those… and I was right… moreover, you didn’t even use the source correctly, you embellished even further)
Oh, I do apologize.
I meant to say victim-blaming JAQoff.
Because of course, it’s the woman’s fault both that she was raped and that she wasn’t believed in Pitchguest’s world.
Still wondering why victims don’t report, Maryam?
Pitchguest is your answer, right there.
You know, we really should thank you, PitchGuest
You have demonstrated perfectly to Maryam why many of us don’t report.
Look, Maryam, look at Pitchguest. You asked why we don’t report. Look at Pitchguest. Look at what happens when we do speak about our experiences. Look at the disbelief. Look at the victim blaming. Look at the attempt to make it seem like we are all liars and at fault for what happened to us. Look at Pitchguest. That’s why.
You asked why we don’t report. The answer is – because there is no safe place for us to do so. You are asking a question, but don’t provide an actual place for us to answer. I’d love to go into full detail about why I’ll never report again if you really want to know, but I won’t. Because you let the likes of Pitchguest onto your blog. But that’s okay, because to be blunt – he is the answer. I don’t report because of Pitchguest and those like him. It’s easier to keep my mouth shut and not have to put up with their shit.
So, there is your answer, Maryam. Both to why I won’t report, and to why my visits to your blog are rare and I won’t bother trying to answer your questions again.
WithinThisMind
So ‘blaming the victim’ has evolved (or is that devolved?) into asking for specific details on a crime you were very vague with?
And really the only reason I’m asking is not to disprove or deliberately cast doubt, but get a sense of what really happened, because you’re trying to use your anecdote as a device to discourage people from reporting to the police. If you were victim of the same incompetence and abuse of power as the woman who was arrested for 5 days, then that could explain why you were almost arrested. But it doesn’t explain why your friends turned on you (why would they turn on you?), why your personal life was dragged through the mud or why people threatened you and your family.
All for reporting an attempted rape? Sorry, but it just doesn’t add up. Not to me.
Nate Hevens
To say rape victims are NEVER believed is idiocy of the highest order. If you say in one breath they’re never believed, but then in the next say only 3% of rapists will ever see the inside of a jail cell (which if you take the incarceration rate of the US alone, over two million, would make [if you round it off] at least 60,000 rapists in jail), then maybe you should get your facts straight.
—you’re trying to use your anecdote as a device to discourage people from reporting to the police.—
Liar.
—And really the only reason I’m asking is not to disprove or deliberately cast doubt, —
Liar
I also apparently am 50/50 on spelling Stephanie’s last name, which is sad on my part. Sorry, Stephanie.
And I left the “m” off the end of your first name, Maryam. I’m doing good tonight.
Wonder what else I’ll misspell? Sorry…
Dear Marya Namazie,
Have you read Stephanie Zvan’s latest blog post? It’s a guest post. I’m not going to link it withuot both of their permission, but it’s Svan’s latest. Not sure or how long it’s be her latest, but it’s her latest right now.
The story is about what happened to a rape victim when she reported it. If after reading that you think reporting is the right thing to do, well… then there’s nothing else to say.
Because, Nate, it’s one case. It’s not typical, and it’s certainly not what happens to EVERY SINGLE PERSON that’s a victim of rape or sexual assault.
The same with Steubenville. It’s not a typical scenario.
Are you honestly going to use the Steubenville case to discourage rape victims from reporting to the police forever? If so, you’re an idiot and part of the problem. I symphatise with what happened to the Steubenville victim, I symphatise with what happened with EEB, but in all seriousness, if EEB’s intention for posting her story is to tell future rape victims, “The police? I don’t think so. That didn’t help me. /anecdotal evidence” – she’s irresponsible and her rape three years ago becomes irrelevant.
If that *wasn’t* her intention and you’re just using her incident for your own narrative purposes, then you’re an idiot and part of the problem. Either way, if I were you, I wouldn’t use either incident — Steubenville or EEB’s — to make a case AGAINST reporting to the police.
If these cases are not typical, then why do only 3 out of every 100 rapists ever see the inside of a jail cell? Why did Norfolk police only recently decide to start actually taking rape victims seriously? Why did the police tell Sarah Reedy that she made it up, and then fucking arrested her for it? Why did a 2007 report find that most rape victims are often judged and not believed? Why was this college woman told that she wasn’t officially raped because, among other things, she was drunk?
Steubenville, EEB… these are fucking typical. What’s rare is when a victim actually gets justice.
I could go all fucking day, Pitchguest. Simple Google and Bing searches yield distressing example after distressing example, including numerous studies and statistics, that prove me right and you wrong.
Stop being an asshole and start doing research.
Maryam… could you please let the above comment of mine out of moderation? The links in that are extremely important. It’s not meant to be spam, but information showing EEB’s story and Steubenville are, in fact, very very</i? typical of what happens.
You said CONVICTED rapists, then point to a post that not only takes reported rapes (a report is not a conviction), but then guesses on unreported cases as well. You are taking all reported cases of rape as gospel truth, and extrapolating more based on … what? clearly not reports.
But lets take this info graphic and really look at it…So, according to this graphic, only about 6% of rapes reported to police lead to jail time, only 10% lead to convictions. The disparity between conviction and incarceration is troubling, but given how many female teachers who get convictions and suspended sentencing, it is actually a very real possibility these numbers come from female assaults not being taken seriously, which is an issue most feminists don’t seem to have a problem with, not one worth speaking up about (unless called on it, like I am now).
Now, if we also consider the 2% false accusation rate most feminists will admit to, at best… we now have 1:5 ratio of all known reports being false… but we also need to keep in mind false accusations aren’t accounted for unless their stumbled onto, and even then, many times that gets ignored and the charges dropped. In Edmonton, 4 girls accused a cabby of sexually assaulting them to get out of a $13 fair… when the cabby showed the cops the video from his cab which showed he did no such thing, the cops did nothing. When he asked to press charges, the cops refused… the next day, one of the girls called the police station, apologized for wasting police time, and said SHE didn’t want to press charges… a rape report, which would then be added to your info graphic as a real rape, that was demonstrably false, was never followed up on, and thus, never counted as a false accusation… over $13 split between 4 girls (that’s $3.25 each)… but yeah, false accusations are rare because no woman would lie about rape…
Fact is, you are taking reports that are not provable as real, and rarely, if ever, investigated to determine if they are false, and presenting them, not only as real rapes, but AS CONVICTIONS… and you want us to accept your word that police can’t be trusted?
PS: If the reports are actually real rapes, those conviction rates would actually go up if people like you didn’t undermine the police, and encouraged victims to report as soon as it happened, and had the greatest chance of getting enough evidence to convict… But it seems more important to drive up the numbers (by discouraging real victims from coming forward, and by protecting false accusers from getting caught, resulting in lower conviction rates, and then padding the “never reported” numbers with the real victims) and justify rape center existence, of which you’ve admitted to be a part of.
As to Norfolk… You pointed to a link where a rape was investigated and actually got a conviction… but where rape victim advocates (the ones I’m claiming are out to justify their existence) claim not enough was done, and that got changes that gave them, yet more power, and more jobs… and further promotes the “come see us first” mentality. This isn’t about not taking rape seriously before these changes, it’s about nothing ever being enough. Seems to me, the changes are more about protecting the false accusers than helping actual victims.
As to Sarah’s arrest… I would say, the cause is possibly the same one as why Brian banks got convicted… mistakes happen. Seems you’d rather skew them in one direction over the other.
As to the 2007 report…Looking over the report, it seems the report is entirely based on the perceptions of those who reported rape… I can understand that, after a traumatic experience, you would rather not be questioned about it, that this may seem like hostility, but really… how are the police supposed to get enough evidence to prove the case, without asking the only witness they have?
There are ample examples of men who were falsely accused and went to jail. Hell, there is an entire program designed around this very issue, the innocence project… men convicted of crimes they didn’t commit… and you deem that’s not good enough, you need MORE women to be believed without evidence? That none of those innocent men’s cases were taken seriously? Did Nefong in the Duke Lacrosse case not take rape seriously before he got his ass fired for misconduct? Perhaps Marry Kellett didn’t take rape seriously enough before she was reprimanded for misconduct as well? Yes, there are examples, on both sides of the isle, that show undesirable outcomes. Presenting those as representative is dishonest, and dangerous.
markneil, once again busy blaming the victim.
And precisely where is blame being applied? And for what am I blaming them for? Are you seriously going to tell us asking ANY questions is deemed blame? Are you seriously going to tell me that the claim isn’t supported, even by the provided anecdotes, that that is blaming? Are you suggesting Scott is too weak and pathetic to handle a handful of questions, or have their discrepancies noted? Do you think that poorly of Scoot? Do you have anything to contribute beyond attempts to shame people into silence?
Not to you. I think you’re scum and I’m not really here to discuss things with you. I simply didn’t want your bullshit to stand unopposed.
Not surprised. Any time shaming language such as yours is presented, your type tends to fling insults, present emotional arguments and run. You expect people to accept your positions without question, and daring to ask questions makes them scum undeserving of answers (because really, you have none to give, only “FEELINGS”). You have absolutely no substance, and can’t actually justify your positions, so there is little wonder why that’s your default reaction.
I like that sentiment!
markneil, I’m pretty sure you know you’re making a hostile environment here.
I’m also pretty sure you know
are a pretty good reason not to launch into cross-examining someone who just disclosed being sexually assaulted. And I must say that`s a clever game you’ve got there, framing hostile questioning of me as being my real defender, because you alone believe I can handle your hostile nonsense. Sorry to say I’ve seen that trick before, but a gold star for effort!
I think I was clear that my witnesses blamed me, told me flat out they would not cooperate with police, and told me to chase after and kill a man who had just sexually assaulted and tried to murder me, a demand that’s absurd on the face of it, but leaves them free of any responsibility even to give a damn.
I think I was clear the hospital would not see me. In a country (Canada) with universal health care. I was turned away.
So I think you know I did
namely my witnesses blamed me, insist nothing between two men can really count as sexual so men “can’t” be raped by men, and it’s my fault anyway, and if I don’t chase down and kill this man (a thing I can’t do and wouldn’t do anyway) like some kind of Hollywood action hero, any rapes he commits in the future will also be my fault, and when I went to the hospital they
Would not. Even. See me. Even for my physical injuries.
Then why would I expect the local police, who I have heard from my classmates are terrible for mishandling sexual assaults, would be any better than the doctors, who should’ve maybe done an STI test or investigated if my horribly swollen face had anything broken or maybe even, I don’t know, collected a rape kit?
(Notice this all pertains to the attack when I was an adult and doesn’t involve me being in high school with the teachers who love to trivialize every act of bullying against me and make me help kids with their homework when they beat the shit out of me and decide their course of action based on whose parents have more money.)
I think you know that I answered your questions before you asked them. So pardon me if I
because as LykeX has said above, I’m not really here to discuss things with you. I simply don’t want your bullshit to stand unopposed.
“I’m also pretty sure you know “FEELINGS” are a pretty good reason not to launch into cross-examining someone who just disclosed being sexually assaulted.”
Not when that person who just disclosed being assaulted is attempting to use that assault to prove a position. If you’re going to claim police won’t take people seriously, because they didn’t in your case, it is not unreasonable for someone to point out the lack of actual police interaction in your anecdote. It’s not unreasonable to point out you can’t actually make any claim to the polices response because you didn’t actually give them the chance.
“And I must say that`s a clever game you’ve got there, framing hostile questioning of me as being my real defender,”
Never claimed to be your defender. I just claimed I didn’t take you for the wilting flower others appear to think you are. Your attempts to admonish me, rather than cowering away, would suggest I’m correct.
“I think I was clear that my witnesses blamed me, told me flat out they would not cooperate with police, and told me to chase after and kill a man who had just sexually assaulted and tried to murder me,”
And how exactly does a witnesses claims prove anything about how police will react? Were the witnesses, themselves, the police? My point was, what your witnesses claimed is not representative of the polices reaction.
I also find the claims “they blamed me” and “you should kill him” to be rather contradictory. If they saw it was your fault, why would they advocate for you to take such drastic action?
“So I think you know I did present reasons that actually involve police namely my witnesses blamed me”
Witnesses aren’t police. You never gave the police a chance, so you can’t make assertions on the polices reactions. You simply assumed the police wouldn’t be able to do anything because your “witnesses” claimed they wouldn’t be co-operative. That’s like claiming lifeguards would let me drown because my uncle said he wouldn’t teach me to swim. It’s astronomically stupid.
” insist nothing between two men can really count as sexual so men “can’t” be raped by men”
So you are attempting to present the difficulty men have being believed about sexual assault as equivalent to the support women get with such claims. apples and oranges dude, though that still doesn’t mean you shouldn’t go to the police.
“and when I went to the hospital they Would not. Even. See me. Even for my physical injuries.”
What did you think, you could walk into a hospital, and have them gather evidence yourself? That they would say “hey, we’ll provide you whatever tests you need”. And are you seriously suggesting a woman would experience this kind of treatment too?
As an aside, I find it incredibly odd that you would be supportive of a movement that claims your own victimization is rare, marginalizes it and claims that focus should be on women’s victimization, while presenting you, not as a potential victim, but as the perpetrator.
“Then why would I expect the local police, who I have heard from my classmates are terrible for mishandling sexual assaults”
YOU DIDN”T GIVE THEM A CHANCE. So you have absolutely no right to make claims on how they would react. You are also a male, and feminist advocacy has marginalized male victims by claiming the focus should be on women, and presenting rape as something women are victimized by, so your own dismissal is not representative of how women would be treated, who HAVE had so much advocacy for them. It is incredibly dishonest to try and conflate the two as the same experience.
I do have to ask… what classmates? women’s studies students?
” I’m not really here to discuss things with you. I simply don’t want your bullshit to stand unopposed.”
Of course you don’t want to discuss it. Seems you folk never really want to discuss the topic, only dictate how people should “feel”, behave, and respond to claims. Since when has one group being able to point a finger at member of another group and condemn them in the courts of public opinion, to swing them from the trees like strange fruit on a mere word, as feminists seem to want to do to men (of which you’re the pointed at, not the pointer, FYI), been deemed social justice?
I also note, I was responding to your own bullshit. After all, you’re making claims about police reactions to a crime they were never even informed about. You let other people bully you into not reporting, the witnesses, your classmates, and the society that deems adult men can’t be victims of rape, that’s a woman thing. Dumbass.
“Do you have any idea how hard it is to report sexual assault?
That is not easy.
I have been raped twice. I have not reported to the police.”
By your own admission, you haven’t reported it to the police, so you don’t know how hard it is ether. You may know how easy it is to be bullied out of doing so, but that’s not the same thing You then proceed to claim you were denied things the police could have easily attained… what were you doing, trying to prosecute on your own? The one who was raped is not required to gather evidence to prove their case, but they do need to report it to the PROPER authorities (not some conference organizer that isn’t trained, and most certainly not competent enough to resolve the issue), and go through the process.
“Even if it was, I certainly wasn’t in the psychological state to have been able to recognize what to do.”
Odd, you seemed to be in the state of mind to investigate, asking for video footage a civilian isn’t entitled to, but police are.
Why, precisely, didn’t you go to the police. Not a stitch of the reasons noted had anything to do with the police, and no witness is required to co-operate with vigilante justice, but the police are a different matter. If you’re going to present going to police as an ineffective, or inefficient option, you really should present reasons that actually involve police.
PS, based on your name, one would infer you are male… are you trying to conflate the experience of a male being raped and trying to report it, with a female in the same scenario, as if the obsticles and support are the same?
Okay. I’m sure it’s been said before, but
Do you have any idea how hard it is to report sexual assault?
That is not easy.
I have been raped twice. I have not reported to the police.
My witnesses blamed me and refused to cooperate.
They withheld store security video footage.
They said it was my fault if the man ever raped anyone else, my responsibility to hunt down and kill a man who just spent minutes trying to break my neck, like I’m supposed to be the hero of some goddam Rambo movie, or else his crimes will be my fault. Why? To absolve themselves of responsibility for standing by and watching the attack. To absolve themselves of having to care.
Doctors wouldn’t even see me.
No. Reporting sexual assault is not like reporting a tooth ache to the dentist. It’s not a simple logical procession of 1 and 1 is 2 and x is wrong so I should do y. Even if it was, I certainly wasn’t in the psychological state to have been able to recognize what to do.
Survivors don’t need to be lectured.
Being confident enough is the key. And so is being tough enough to endure every step in the process of reporting, through getting the cops to take you seriously, to getting through the medical/scientific processes and then, one or two years later, going through the court processes. Not everyone can do it. They didn’t choose to be in the position in the first place and it’s a bit much to ask for people who’ve probably never thought about the topic much before.
And what rape counsellors do is, first and foremost, respect a woman’s choices about what she wants to do and what her tolerance is for these stresses. The best approach from a social point of view is for more people to sign up for training as rape counsellors so that each individual woman doesn’t have to negotiate these intimidating processes alone. Having someone with you who knows the hospital and the police officers and the processes and the expectations can ensure that women who do decide up front that they want to pursue the matter aren’t disheartened and discouraged as things get too stressful for them to handle by themselves. Just reducing the drop out rate for those who do initially report would be a good starting point.
I find some of the comments here really bizarre and don’t want to spend too much time getting bogged down with this tone of debate – which I find unhelpful – but I do want to make some general comments.
Telling someone who has already gone public with a case of sex assault or abuse or rape to report the perpetrator is not dismissing her claim. It is in fact taking it seriously. However poor the law is, it is a real option for people to get some sort of redress and hearing that is unavailable elsewhere. Even if the issue is addressed at one’s workplace or on a million blogs, the woman in question has the right to be heard. Perpetrators – however we dislike them – also have a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
That the system is unfair or that violence against women is ignored are not excuses for disregarding available options and pressing for justice. If everyone decided to take things in their own hands, we wouldn’t have had positive changes in the law because people fought for and finally got justice that was initially denied. Trying the case on blogs and via boards of various organisations is not the way to get real redress and justice.
As someone who has spent most of my life fighting unfair laws, and opposing various police and government efforts to turn a blind eye I think it’s important for women to go to the police and demand action, particularly women who are confident enough to fight their employers and to do so publicly on these issues. They are the ones who also need to be at the forefront of bringing improvements in the law and demand redress when none is provided.
Finally I find it slightly absurd how some of the Americans here are trying to prove how awful America is compared to everywhere else. You do really think the world revolves around you don’t you? Capitalism is found everywhere and violence against women, racism, inequality are part and parcel of the system.
In fact, I know that system well. I was pulled over a barricade, kicked in the face, had police jump on my stomach which resulted in internal bleeding, had my trousers torn and my glasses broken, was arrested with 17 others and charged with 13 years in prison for opposing the first Gulf war in 1991 at the homecoming parade by the infamous NYPD. Of course the police charged myself and 17 others (we were called the War Parade 18) with assaulting them, obstructing justice and so on.
In prison we were woken up and photographed and told that if “you had been fucked more, you wouldn’t be protesting” and so on… The police attacked us at one of our hearings, our car was broken into and on and on.
I spent 3 years going to court. Thankfully we had excellent Leftwing pro bono lawyers representing us. The charges were eventually dropped when we found footage of the police dragging us over the barricades and beating us, showing clearly that they had been lying all along – as they do.
Britain’s police may be more subtle but can be just as brutal when push comes to shove and they continue to ignore everything from death threats I have received and so on.
Life’s unfair and very often the cards are stacked against us. So we have to fight and one of the ways is to fight to change the law or make it more responsive.
Changes in the law are important steps in bringing about positive changes in society – from institutional racism to violence against women.
It’s time Maryam. You must know it. We surely know it. This day was going to come sooner or later. You’ve too much class for this place. I’ll follow your writing from wherever you next choose to publish it and I’m sure many others will.
I’m not sure why I have to leave freethoughtblogs if I disagree with some of the other bloggers. I have a blog here – no one tells me what to say and no one expects me to conform. We agree and disagree on various issues. Everyone speaks only for themselves not for the network as a whole.
This is not the pattern observed elsewhere on this … platform. I posted in haste, perhaps. You’re the only reason I come here, mainly because you deal with real issues, head on, with total pragmatism and good sense, to the total exclusion of drama, gossip and “attention whoring”. I’ll continue to read you wherever I need to click to do so. All the best – a sincere and attentive reader.
Pitchguest
1) I think the advice is naive, at best.
2) What does this even mean? How can my thumb be up a blog network? Are you trying to say to my thumb is metaphorically up the networks ass? If so, you’re using the saying wrong.
3) What discrepancy?
4) Didn’t say she was.
5) I said this already.
6) Point to one for me? I haven’t seen it. I’ve seen people explaining that going to the police can be a bad experience, but I’ve seen no one take any hard stance against it.
I was gonna break this down before I realized this is just several different ways of saying the same thing.
So let me be clear: no one is saying to not go to the police. In fact, most are explaining why others in the past haven’t gone to the police, and why it’s unreasonable to expect everyone to be comfortable in doing so in the future.
I really don’t. Given the reactions I’ve seen and assuming that rape has occurred, nothing close to justice has come to be.
From your link: “Trial by ordeal was an ancient judicial practice by which the guilt or innocence of the accused was determined by subjecting them to an unpleasant, usually dangerous experience. Classically, the test was one of life or death and the proof of innocence was survival..”
No seriously, what the fuck are you talking about?
Tell me, if we all believe Shermer to definitely be guilty, where’s the calls for his arrest? I haven’t even seen people ask for him to be fired, though there’s probably a few somewhere.
Like I said: y’all definitely don’t know what you’re talking about.
markneil
The point is that ‘criticism’ in and of itself is not ‘undermining’. To go from ‘criticism’ to ‘undermining’, you need to do more than assert ‘criticism’ (which you haven’t).
I.. what.. the fuck? No, arguing for a perspective does not require you to twist your descriptions to fit your narrative. No, doing so is not the point of arguing for a given perspective.
If you want to argue that Nate’s writing was hyperbolic, than sure. I agree. The police care, at times. The rapist suffers consequences at times. These aren’t remotely reliable, though.
Seriously, what the fuck are y’all talking about? What laws? What new problems? Rape already has a low conviction rate and report rate, there’s no new problem here. Pointing out that the police are often themselves the ones discouraging reporting highlights this problem and allows us to work to fix it.
1) Who actually won’t acknowledge that the system doesn’t, at times, work? I don’t see anyone.
2) Everything here is superfluous. You’re trying to hard.
Hey dumbass, I was referencing the yes means yes blog post. You know, Meet the Predators? The one that shows that rapists won’t admit to rape if you actually call it rape, but will admit to it if you call it something else?
I love your tangent on my misandry based on nothing but your own delusions as to what I was thinking, though. Fucking classic.
That’s actually far more than I thought.
See, here’s the thing: just because you have a separate source doesn’t mean that source is credible. For instance, a conservative news site that can’t format it’s links properly and talks about fucking FEMA coffins isn’t credible.
What happened in Staubenville has happened many places. It’s used as an example because it’s recent, undeniable, and held responses from all over the god damn country. You think everyone who opined on the Staubenville case lived there? No, of course you don’t. That would be stupid. Then you have to recognize that the outpouring of victim blaming and slut shaming occurred from people all over the USA. You cannot brush that off as an isolated incident.
And that’s another thing. The flaw isn’t merely with the police. Even if the police were the best fucking people on the planet, it still wouldn’t have changed the outpouring of hate from all over the goddamn country the Staubenville case got, nor would it change the hate women have received in lower profile cases
But fine, let’s look at thousands of untested rape kits from all over the country. Does that meet your requirement for “uniform”? Hey, it looks like some action has been taken about those rape kits. I wonder if that had anything to do with highlighting the problem? No, surely not. That would just undermine confidence, eh?
Really? We’ve seen the reactions high profile rape cases can garner (Staubenville, Rehtaeh Parsons, etc), we know the police have a history of not prosecuting and investigating to their capabilities. These aren’t negotiable.
1) Look, I know. You don’t like me, you don’t like my opinions, and I’m rather contemptuous of what you’e said so far. You’d like to talk down to me and insult me. But trying to explain to me that limitations and flaw aren’t synonymous when you’re responding to me making the distinction and explaining why I think the limitations are flaws in this case just makes you look silly.
2) Ah, I see. You think by “reduced convictions” I mean any sort of convictions, legitimate or no. Rest assured, I only mean limitations that result in decreased convictions of actual rapists, not those who have been wrongfully accused. But I’m willing to bet you could have figured that out on your own.
Is anyone advocating internal reporting to the exclusion of reporting abuse to police? Anyone trying to cover up abuse by saying it should be dealt with internally is reprehensible, but I don’t see anyone advocating that. To the contrary, I see people trying to prevent exposure by saying that no one should say anything or be held credible unless they go to police. That’s not advocating for justice, that’s an attempt at silencing.
I don’t understand, Pitchguest. Are you living in an alternate universe? Under a rock?
Because in the world I live in, rape victims are treated like shit, by the justice system and by the average person.
Is it any wonder that rape victims are afraid to speak out when, out of 46 of every 100 rapes that are reported, 12 lead to an arrest, 9 get prosecuted, 5 lead to a felony conviction, and only 3 convicted rapists will spend even a single day in prison?
Is it any wonder rape victims are afraid to speak out when the average person will just blame them for it? “What was she wearing?!?” “Why was she so late?!?” “Oh, she’s just a slut.” “She shouldn’t have gotten drunk!” “Why did she go to that party?!?”
All of those are questions leveled at the Steubenville victim, by the way.
Oh… men get raped, too, and they face rather similar crap: “He’s in prison for being a criminal; maybe he shouldn’t have dropped the soap.” “They didn’t rape him; he just doesn’t want to admit he cheated on his [significant other].” “Girls don’t rape guys; he’s a wuss.” Our society loves soap-dropping jokes.
I want rape victims to report. I would gladly encourage rape victims and sexual harassment/assault victims to report what happened to them. In an ideal world, they would. But we don’t live in an ideal world, Pitchguest. In the Delhi case, exactly like Steubenville, there was no justice served until there was a public outcry.
Have you read the case of the 13-year-old who was called by a judge a “sexual predator” because a 41-year-old man admitted to having sex with her? Yup. In the United Kingdom. This year. This fucking month. A 13-year-old (a minor, by the way) was called a “sexual predator”. Things are moving now, yes. The judge let the guy walk free, but the guy’s back in court and so is the judge, because of public outcry.
In these instances it takes average individuals (members of Anonymous, sympathetic people, feminists) raising a public scene before any justice actually gets done.
My reasons for saying what I do about the system is because I want victims to report. But I want them to have a system they can trust, and I simply don’t see any evidence that we have such a system right now.
Rumraket
What the fuck are you talking about? The OP isn’t about any specific incident. Sure, it starts off referencing the recent controversy, but goes on into general advice
1) For fuck sakes, there’s more than just a few rape victims. The recent ones you just heard about aren’t the only ones. For instance, the person you responded to is talking about rape victims in general, and why they avoid going to the police. You need to actually know and address the reasons victims don’t go to the police before you have any credibility on the matter.
2) What “public justice”? What’s going to happen? Can you even describe the goals of those involved, or are you simply making shit up?
3) I’m starting to think you don’t know what you’re talking about.
4) Wait, no, I’m certain you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Jacob, Jacob, Jacob.
Indeed, general advice which you are discouraging. You genius, you. If you didn’t have half your thumb up FtB, you might have noticed this discrepancy. Sadly. But you know Maryam wasn’t just giving general advice. She’s obviously been reading the recent threads and noticed the lack of reports to the proper authorities, and probably noticed the plethora of posts telling them not to. After all, she’s not *stupid.*
1) Jacob, the reason people here says there’s no point in reporting these things to the police are twofold: they don’t care, and Steubenville. See your boy Natehevens up there? Seems he’s actively discouraging people and he’s going for the double whammy. Have you read the threads on Pharyngula, Almost Diamonds and B&W? They all seem to have drunk the same Koolaid, seeing as they almost all believe the same thing. The recent thread on Pharyngula is a strawman to the common reaction a rape victim supposedly receives, and if it’s so damned common why is there even a point to report it? Derp derp derp!
2) You know exactly what he’s talking about. Don’t play dumb.
3) If it’s the Middle Ages, a better analogy would be the cases against Shermer and Krauss is more like trial by ordeal.
4) Seeing as people have been accused of rape and the moral principle here at FtB (most of FtB) seems to be to “believe the accusers”, I think he knows full well what he’s talking about.
It’s right there, from the get-go: “I haven’t been following….very carefully but don’t understand…”.
Well there’s the problem, right there.
Perhaps, and I’m just spitballin’ here, you could look into it a smidgen before telling people who have already been a victim of sexual assault what you think they ought to do.
This shit didn’t just jump out of the bushes. There’s a history. A back story. Real people have been affected by this in very real ways. A discussion has been going on. For fucking years. If it’s new to you, perhaps holding back your advice until you have “been following” for a bit is worth looking into.
Because, honestly? You’re not helping.
Maryam:
There are a host of reasons that victims of sexual assault do not report:
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/oct/25/penal.crime
—
—
—
In the case of Jane Doe, she fears retaliation if she reveals identifying personal information. She wanted PZ to reveal her claim so as to protect women in the future from Shermer. There are back channels that many women use to help protect one another from sexual predators since the authorities are extremely poor at doing so:
—
Why police do not believe rape victims.
markneil
Oh come the fuck on. If you’re gonna mischaracterize, you need to make it believable.
Does criticism inherently undermine? I’m not remotely convinced it does.
I see a very biased slant in your description.
1) It may very well do so. Those that may be discouraged are those that feel that being blamed and dismissed isn’t worth the effort. It’s those that are hurt by blame and dismissal. Do their feelings not matter? Should they not be warned of that possibility? What do you propose we do otherwise? Is ignoring the flaws of the system preferable in this case?
Why should I encourage anyone to take a risk without first explaining that risk to them? I’ve been to the police about sexual assault. I’ve been to different organizations about harassment in general, and have gotten a range of responses (most of the good ones were those acting without any official capacity). Sometimes the system works; that doesn’t mean it isn’t often profoundly fucked up.
2) Your under the mistaken assumption that most rapists believe what they do is rape. Look it up; they don’t consider it rape. Legality is a non issue for many since they don’t see what they do as illegal.
3) If the claim won’t be taken seriously, what incentive does a false accuser have? It won’t go anywhere and won’t hurt anyone, by your words.
4) Characterizing victim advocates as “bilking money from the government”. Classy.
Ahahaha, what the bloody fuck? You realize that there isn’t much funding there, right? Can you actually justify this assertion, or are you just talking out of your ass?
Your assertion of undermining not withstanding, a flaw need not be uniform for us to criticize it. If such was required, very little would actually be criticized.
1) It was never argued that the problem was merely with individuals.
2) Limitations of the system do not indicate limitations of the system? Jesus fuck.
And before you whine about strawmanning, a limitation that leads to reduce rape convictions is a serious fucking flaw.
Insult aren’t ad homs. Fuck you’re clueless.
“Does criticism inherently undermine? I’m not remotely convinced it does.”
Oh, nether am I… but I never said as much. But it needs be noted the two aren’t mutually exclusive ether. When you’re getting people saying shit like the following, you are undermining the very authorities that are there to address these issues, and making things harder for everyone involved, except those who bank of such unfortunate events:
“It’s simple. The police don’t care, the courts will put the victim in the same room as their attacker, and the attacker will never suffer the social consequences the victim will suffer.
Never.”
“Hold on. That’s the whole problem. The police don’t necessarily deal with it at all. It’s not unheard of for the police to “deal” with a rape report by calling the victim a lying slut.”
“…and police are too willing to think the victim might be lying – despite evidence to the contrary.”
“I see a very biased slant in your description.”
Yes, but only mine right? None of those who share the same view as you are biased in any way, nope nope nope.. It’s funny that someone trying to argue a particular perspective would be accused of arguing a biased perspective, isn’t that the whole point of arguing for that perspective?
“Should they not be warned of that possibility? ”
You mean warnings like ” The police don’t care, the courts will put the victim in the same room as their attacker, and the attacker will never suffer the social consequences the victim will suffer. … Never.”. No, I don’t believe they should get such warnings. Telling them “it will be difficult, you’ll need to be strong to get through the process”, that kind of warning I can agree with, but telling them they will come out worst off, and for absolutely no gain… that’s not a warning, that’s sabotage.
“Is ignoring the flaws of the system preferable in this case?”
Preferable to creating more problems, enacting half baked laws based purely on emotional arguments with no regard for the potential consequences of those choices.
“Sometimes the system works; that doesn’t mean it isn’t often profoundly fucked up.”
But many of the commentors don’t acknowledge sometimes it works. And “often” is a nebulous term. after all, there is the assertion even once is once too often, so when you say it “often” happens, you could be suggesting it in such a context. Now, I don’t think that’s what you mean, but that doesn’t mean saying “often” isn’t potentially exceptionally misleading.
“Your under the mistaken assumption that most rapists believe what they do is rape. Look it up;”
Found this Article on a feminist blog (by Jaclyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti) which actually seems to hold a view more akin to my own “misunderstanding” than your misandric view that men are completely ignorant and prone to rape “by accident, a view rapists can very easily use to beg forgiveness “please, I didn’t realize, I’ll never do it again, I’m so sorry. I’m just an ordinary guy who didn’t understand consent properly”. Seems perpetuating that view paints all men as monsters that need to constantly be reminded not to be assholes, and convinces women that rape ca, and usually is, just an accident. That’s got to help victims resolve in going forward /sarcasm
http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/
” If the claim won’t be taken seriously, what incentive does a false accuser have? It won’t go anywhere and won’t hurt anyone, by your words.”
The accusation alone can be incredibly damaging, and there will always be those who say “just because he wasn’t convicted, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. No conviction doesn’t mean no harm done, so no, those aren’t my words. I was also talking perception, not the reality. Or are you going to argue that my saying someone believes something makes it true?
“Characterizing victim advocates as “bilking money from the government”. Classy.”
For some, it’s a fair criticism (or are you only allowed to do criticism now?). It their focus is more on manufacturing more victim statistics to justify funding, then I am well within my rights to accuse them of monetizing other peoples suffering. Or are you going to tell me nobody has ever manipulated people into giving money for a cause the collectors didn’t really care about? Do you believe rape is such an emotionally uncharged things as to be unable to manipulate emotions into a bankable asset?
“You realize that there isn’t much funding there, right? ”
US 1.25 billion dollar industry with very little oversight
http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL30871_20100226.pdf
“Can you actually justify this assertion, or are you just talking out of your ass?”
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/aliciapowe/2013/03/04/independent-womens-forum-reports-on-the-corruption-of-vawa-n1525516
“The US Government Accountability Office (GAO) indicates that a significant amount of funds allocated by the VAWA programs has not being spent on servicing victims. Nearly all of the grants audited by the Inspector General between 1998 and 2010 had violated grant requirements. Some grantees were found to have questionable expenditures for a large majority of the funding they received. The Department of Justice also uncovered several cases of outright fraud and embezzlement in 2012.”
“Your assertion of undermining not withstanding, a flaw need not be uniform for us to criticize it. If such was required, very little would actually be criticized.”
The problem is that non-uniform issues are being presented as if they were. Steubenville is a prime example of a department that needs criticizing. But the moment you point to Steubenville as an example of why someone in New York shouldn’t go to the police, that is a problem. And that is precisely what I see here.
“1) It was never argued that the problem was merely with individuals.”
That’s my point. Problems with individual’s are being portrayed, not as problems with individuals, but with a widespread problem with the system. That’s bullshit.
“2) Limitations of the system do not indicate limitations of the system? Jesus fuck.”
A limitation doesn’t not equate to a problem. The two words are not synonymous. I know that must be hard to accept, but it’s true. That whole presumption of innocent until proven guilty ting the accused has is one hell of a limitation on convicting those accused, but it’s being there is not a problem, no matter how much you folks would have us believe otherwise.
“…a limitation that leads to reduce rape convictions is a serious fucking flaw.”
no matter how much you folks would have us believe otherwise.
How exactly is giving true, verifiable information about the problems of a system the same as undermining confidence in it? And if it is, doesn’t that imply a rather large problem with the system? Furthermore, why are you such a disgusting excuse for a human being?
You’re not getting the names. We’re not letting you do this. You can howl and scream, but we’re not letting you drag another victim through the mud. Your objective is obvious. You’re not fooling anyone.
“How exactly is giving true, verifiable information about the problems of a system the same as undermining confidence in it?”
Because it is not true and verifiable uniformly through the whole system. You may have true and verifiable anecdotes, but there are likewise many examples of the system working as desired. Examples you choose to hide and/or marginalize in your efforts to undermine the system as a whole.
“And if it is, doesn’t that imply a rather large problem with the system?”
No, because a problem with specific individuals within the system,or limitations of the system designed to ensure protections for the innocent are not evidence that the system itself has a larger problem.
“Furthermore, why are you such a disgusting excuse for a human being?”
Ad hom attack. Standard. though I am surprised it wasn’t your opening line.
As for the rest, I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about. Persecution complex, paranoia. whatever.
Don’t any of you people know what an ad hominem is?
I suspect more than any of you know how to argue without neurotically insulting people.
Take a vicodin for once. Maybe people might feel like actually having a discussion.
One simply needs to read the comments, from those who claim to advocate for victims, to see why so many victims don’t report. To listen to those who seek to help victims, you would think the police response would be to rape them again, then laugh as they kicked the victim out on their ass. How exactly is undermining confidence in the very process used to enact justice helping anyone but the rapists? All it does is discourage those who are actually raped from going forward, encourage those who would rape to continue doing so, under the belief they won’t get charged, and encourage those who wish to falsely accuse to go forward (in the belief their reports won’t be taken seriously, and so they won’t get investigated enough to get caught), and build a “need” for support agencies to bilk money from the government as victim advocates. “Rape Culture” seems to me to be a theory built on creating more victims to justify the industries existence and funding.
I realize you and Pitchguest love the standard MRA script, but have ever tried to learn what Rape Culture is?
It matters. It just doesn’t apply to freakin’ blog posts.
Which is precisely why blog posts shouldn’t matter to anyone when deciding guilt anything at all.
“deciding guilt IN anything at all.” Herp. Derp. I need to proofread better.
Nobody is trying to put Shermer in jail on this basis. Nobody is dogmatically asserting his guilt or saying that this settles it beyond all doubt.
You’re not honestly engaging with what people are saying. You should change that or get ready for people to draw the relevant conclusions about your personal integrity.
In the case of Shermer there is nothing to engage except a single anonymous email from a source that one person with a clear agenda says they happen to trust. What people are trying to do is do harm to the career of someone they disagree with, whether this is justified or not depends on the truth of the claim.
If it’s true he should go to jail, if it’s not then people have no business spreading this.
I will engage the exact same way I would with any other political attack add; skepticism and asking for evidence.
As for the situation in general, it’s as simple as this; the conference staff are responsible for running the conference, not investigating criminal matters, that is the job of the police, end of story. The guy who signed up to watch the door and check tickets for minimum wage has neither the training, responsibility nor likely the inclination to perform a rape investigation.
Oh please. There’s no reason for anyone to do that. You’re being ridiculous.
This isn’t politics and there’s no attack ad.
Point to me someone who said the police shouldn’t be informed. Informing the conference and informing the police are not mutually exclusive.
In any case, regardless of whether or not the police are informed (it can actually be really difficult to go to the police; they have a terrible track record of victim blaming and dismissal), many conferences still like to be informed of incidents such as this since, you know, they want a smooth conference and attendees being sexually assaulted disrupts that.
Point for me someone who said that the door man is the one doing the investigating. For fuck sakes.
Believing a victim == finding Shermer guilty.
Too many rape victims are disbelieved. Thats part of rape culture. People like you are so concerned with Shermer, but not the women who have been harmed by his predatory ways. Dont worry about Shermer. If he is guilty, it isnt like he will spend time in jail. Most rapists do not. If he isnt guilty, he is not likely to be harmed by false rape accusations. For all that his defenders whine and cry about how much false rape accusations hurt someone, none have come up with ONE case, let alone statistically significant numbers of them.
The concept of due process doesn’t seem to matter to most people here, but it’s what protects us from thuggery from the state. I applaud Maryam for pointing out a simple basic fact – that there are appropriate measures in place. They don’t always work, and it’s terrible when they don’t, however to expect a conference organizer or security guard to take on more responsibility than the legal system is absurd, if someone reported it to me the first thing I would do is call the police, and that’s the only reasonable course of action to take, conference security does not have the resources for a serious investigation on such charges as rape or sexual assault.
Also for the record, people, when you throw out anonymous accusations over the internet, they can damage a legitimate case later on by generating false leads and confusing witnesses, and possibly ruin a legitimate criminal investigation afterwards, which is something you all should really keep in mind.
Due process applies to a court of law. Defenders of Shermer seem completely unable to grasp that fact and continue to apply legal concepts outside the courtroom.
oops – abuser not believer
Maryam, the victim did report the crime – to the conference organisers who …
… did nothing.
The instant defense of the alcohol /drug using rapist is to claim either that the victim did consent but was too drunk to remember or that both parties were drunk and the believer had a reasonable belief that consent had been given.
Then there is the victim blaming of which Steubenville is the most obvious US example but the same thing happens over the pond. It happened in the case of Jimmy Savile and, most recently, when the prosecution blamed the victim http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/crime-courts/fury-as-paedophile-walks-from-court-after-prosecutor-says-13-year-old-girl-was-sex.1375854228
Victims are scared to report rapes and police are too willing to think the victim might be lying – despite evidence to the contrary.
@NateHevens
Exactly. Even in a case where the perpetrators were actually convicted; even when there was photographic evidence of the crime; even then, the victim still suffered more than the criminals. People were falling all over themselves, trying to come up with reasons why the boys were innocent and she was a slut.
Any discussion of this issue must include recognition of the tendency for rapists to be excused and rape victims to be demonized. And not just lip service.
Hold on. That’s the whole problem. The police don’t necessarily deal with it at all. It’s not unheard of for the police to “deal” with a rape report by calling the victim a lying slut.
So, it’s better? Better for who?
Better for people who then don’t have to face the uncomfortable truth that they have to actually participate in preventing rape and making society safer, or being faced with the incredibly terrible truth that society is pretty damn awful and that they can’t just magically hope that it can be fixed by someone else.
It’s simple. The police don’t care, the courts will put the victim in the same room as their attacker, and the attacker will never suffer the social consequences the victim will suffer.
Never.
Steubenville.
I’d say Maryam has either not considered this or thinks it’s “no big deal”. I hope it’s the former, but I’m not really in the mood to give the benefit of the doubt lightly.
Unless you’ve been living under a rock with your fingers in your ears I don’t see how Steubenville, Rehtaeh Parsons, or any other high profile case could have escaped notice. Those women reported to the police and the reaction of the cops, their communities and society at large is well documented… Not to mention knowing they’ll have to suffer the indignity of the physical examination to get a “rape-kit” done after they’ve already been violated… or the fact that they can’t wash or use the bathroom until that exam is complete… or the fact that they’d need to be thinking clearly enough to do EVERYTHING right in order to follow those steps.
Again: That’s only a very small part of the horror of being a victim of rape.
This is going to sound very rude — and positively Pharyngulite and I truly apologize for that — but shut the fuck up.
The two options is Maryam didn’t consider it or didn’t think it’s a big deal? How condescending can you get? The only reason she’s urging people to go to the police after being sexually harassed/assaulted or raped is because she’s ignorant. Brilliant. Not in the mood to give the benefit of the doubt *lightly*? Fuck you.
The Steubenville is one case. One case that was handled very badly, by the police, by the teachers at the school, by the media who covered it. It was a clusterfuck of bad, and yes the victim of the rape suffered for it. But if you want to discourage people from reporting rape to the police because of what happened at Steubenville, you’re doing a disservice to the victim and to yourself.
What of the other examples of rape cases where the perpetrator was duly punished? What of the case against Julian Assange which is still on-going, who is in hiding at the Ecquadorian embassy because of it? What of the gangrape in Delhi, where the victim unfortunately died shortly after, but where the perpetrators were all imprisoned — were not exonerated, were not given the presumption of innocence, but went straight to jail — where all of them (except for one, who commited suicide) await punishment?
But I suppose if no one had made a report in either of these cases, of Steubenville, of Assange, of the gangrape, and the other cases of sexual assault and rape, then nobody would get their just desserts. And why? Because “the police doesn’t care.” *slow clap*
The reason victims of rape and sexual assault go through the motions is the exact reason why those accused of murder go through the motions: due process. Are you suggesting that rape victims should be exempt from this process? Those accused also receive the same gruelling experience and you know what? It’s just. It’s fair. It might be horrible, yes, and the questions might be cutting it too close for comfort, but there’s a reason for that too: presumption of innocence. If someone accuses you of murder or rape, should that be taken at face value? Should it be accepted without due process? No? Well, then, there’s your answer. I hope.
Your dishonesty is showing. Nobody is discouraging victims from going to the police. We simply recognize that they might have valid reasons not to want to do that and leave the choice up to the victim. We recognize that the victim know their own situation best.
This is the kind of thing that makes me think that you’re not simply misguided, but actively evil. You can’t possibly have missed the hundreds of times where people have already pointed out that this is not what we’re saying.
Nobody is arguing that Shermer should be convicted based on the accounts PZ have posted. Nobody is calling for him to be jailed or hung on this evidence. Nobody is trying to eliminate due process or undermine the justice system.
You’re arguing against a position that nobody holds. Remind me, what’s that called again?
Has it not occurred to you that victims can be harassed for going to the police, and the attempt to deal internally might be an attempt on the victim’s part to avoid this?
You can’t have been paying very close attention, then. It’s not like this hasn’t been discussed before or is being kept a secret.
In a perfect world, where victims could trust that they’d be protected and taken seriously, where their concerns were not minimized, where the victim wasn’t put under more suspicion than the perpetrator, where the police could be bothered to take a report and investigate properly, where rapists didn’t go unpunished as a matter of course… in that world, what you’re saying would make sense.
When we have such a world, let me know. We sure as hell don’t now. Until we do, I’m quite content with letting the victims make that call for themselves. It’s not my place to tell a them what to do, neither is it yours.
That’s literally what’s being asked for: for the victim to continue to attend the conference without the presence of their assailant.
Maryam, you obviously aren’t too interested in listening to the experiences of victims.
It’s also obvious you’re far more interested in having an intellectual wank at the expense of women who have been through something terribly traumatizing than actually caring about the people who’ve been through it, because if you cared even a little bit you’d take the time to listen to even a small percentage the thousands of women who have recounted their personal experiences. You wouldn’t be so flippant and dismissive of the realities of what a rape victim goes through during and after an assault or offer your trite little bit of advice, which is just more victim blaming and shaming.
I’d ask you to feel shame for your actions, but until you actually look into this and attempt some empathy for these women you’re not going to get it.
Accusing Maryam Namzie of being flippant and dismissive – interesting. Let us know how that works out.
Well, it’ either that or she’s speaking on a subject without doing her homework. The reasons why victims don’t go to the police are common knowledge and have been discussed repeatedly, both in this case and many times before. For a practical example, look at the Steubenville case. It’s not exactly a secret.
You, on the other hand, seem to just be here to stir the pot. Not at all interesting. Feel free not to let us know anything you think ever again.
Say there was a predatory rapist living in your apartment building who got off on a technicality, wouldn’t you want to know about it?
…or what if the victim felt they couldn’t report it. What if they were worried about being slutshamed or blamed for their assault and therefore being revictimised all over again? What if they feared that their partner would leave them? That their family would turn against them? That society at large would whisper behind hands or treat them as damaged goods? What if they were worried about getting threats of rape or assault from all the “brave heroes” that pile on victims as if it were a sport?
…but then… even with all that on their minds they also felt they couldn’t live with knowing that this rapist would also go after more people?
That’s just a small part of the reality of what a rape victim has to face.
“…or what if the victim felt they couldn’t report it” – one of the reasons might be that the victim himself is not clean, eg. has been commiting some illegal activity (is a thief, didn’t pay the taxes etc.), so he can’t go to police.
…and the victim could also be a 16-foot-tall purple alligator, as well.
*rolls eyes*
I think you’ll find that the examples I’ve made above are far more likely. Of course, I’m not just trying to find ways to blame rape victims for trying to protect themselves from the realities of rape culture. I’m also not so stupid as to think that a victim going to the police has a sinister reason behind it when that is not usually what happens in cases of rape.
Say a relatively famous person, one that you’ve had disagreements with in the past, went around publicly stating that you’d done horrible things. Would you want people to just accept it?
Well, since I don’t rape people or harass people or do those kinds of things I don’t have much to worry about, do I?
As for the disagreement? How do you know the victim is a relatively famous person?
Oh, I see, you’re referring to PZ. When he disagreed with Shermer saying something stupidly sexist, which was called out, only to have Shermer double down and act like an ass? Which PZ noted, and moved on from?
Is that what you’re referring to?
If it is, you might want to note that it’s not PZ making the accusation. You might want to go to Pharyngula and actually read the post that you’re so up in arms over. The victim is not PZ, but someone known to him who wanted her story told, not to harm Shermer, but to warn other women to avoid being alone with him.
Is there a problem with not wanting more women to be victimised?
Maryam, you are far too rational and reasonable to keep your blog on FtB. You have a great record of standing up against injustice of all types. It is happening on FtB right now. Michael Shermer is having his name dragged through the mud on the basis of an unproven accusation, gleefully repeated with nauseatingly Pilate-like hand washing by PZ Myers. Please consider withdrawing from FtB.
While I realize the victim is in a difficult situation, I also don’t understand why people are expecting conference organizers or the offices of organizations to be able to effectively investigate and resolve criminal activity. I would go to them if I don’t like the kinds of jokes somebody is telling, but not if I was assaulted.
I would certainly inform them of what happened, but wouldn’t expect any kind of justice beyond the person being ejected from the conference or fired from their job. And that’s the best-case scenario.
I also think some people are going down a dangerous path with this naming of names without anybody being charged with a crime, without a legal trial, etc. Seems like a good way to get yourself served with a libel or defamation of character lawsuit.
As far as I can tell from 2,000 miles away, most women in the USA believe that the police won’t treat them fairly if they report rape. Especially if there’s alcohol involved – which is exactly why it’s a rapist’s favourite weapon. (see Meet the Predators)
Most victims don’t go to the police
Here’s an example of what happens in the comment in the thread at Pharyngula
Here’s another example
and another
Oh, and there’s this one.
And here’s an article on why cops don’t believe the victims – it’s the result of extreme stress.
And none of that is excusable. Nevertheless, it does not justify, and certainly does not substantiate this kind of public accusation.
We might not live in an ideal society, but potential rapists ARE nonetheless convicted routinely. If someone thinks they’ve been subject to sexual assault they should report it instead of relying on “public justice”.
What the fuck is this, the middle ages? Should we just assume guilt and throw the “perpetrator” in the pillory without a trial and without a fair hearing in court?
No. Not-guilty until proven otherwise in a court of law, that’s how rational people who respect the rule of law should react to public and internet hearsay. End of discussion.
—potential rapists ARE nonetheless convicted routinely.—
Citation needed.
Telling a victim how to deal with their assault is irresponsible, particularly in situations where the perpetrator still has power to do the victim additional harm. Not to mention that in a culture like ours, sexual assault victims are held to a much higher standard of proof than anyone else.
Got robbed? What a shame. Got raped? How did you let that happen? Didn’t report it? Then I guess it wasn’t real, huh?
Should a sexual assault victim be ABLE to report it and get action? Yup. But it doesn’t work that way.
Isn’t that /why/ it should go to the police rather than the conference peoples?
“Should a sexual assault victim be ABLE to report it and get action? Yup. But it doesn’t work that way.”
So you’re telling people not to even bother reporting it to the police despite the fact that some people do get into trouble for assault, but telling conference peoples is doing something. Right. And telling them also doesn’t erase your “still able to do harm to the victim” part.
Anyway, restraining orders sound nice – maybe that would help with the “still able to do harm” part of it.
The whole “higher standard of evidence” claim. Higher than what, exactly? Have people been charged with other serious crimes with less evidence than is required for rape or sexual assault?
Anyway, telling people not to even bother reporting it is what’s irresponsible here… they should be encouraged to, not told things saying that even if they report it, nothing will happen. I hope no one is actually going to listen to your comment, especially the last part. I hope they remember that there are actually lots of sex offenders (who needed to be reported to get on the list!), so one can’t actually say that reporting it won’t do anything!
So let’s say I’ve been raped and I know that the charges will be ignored and I could be committing professional suicide reporting it. I’ve been through one unspeakable trauma and you are telling me that the only way my account of my rape should MATTER is if I report it to the police and lose my job and reputation.
No. Not even remotely reasonable and for you to suggest it is to perpetuate rape culture.
Additionally—what planet do you live on that you don’t KNOW that rape is held to a higher standard in court than other crimes? Go google it.
Yeah, you “know” the charges will be ignored. Of course you do.
Is your argument anything else than proving Sister Eu right?
Excuse me, but don’t we need it to be established that there IS an actual victim and an actual perpetrator first, before we assume this?
I thought this is what the courts and rule of law was for. I cannot agree to this kind of public lynching and a priori assumptions of guilt. I’m a skeptic and a rationalist, I’m not an anarchist and I despise mob-mentality. I don’t believe in hearsay and I most certainly can’t respect these kinds of public accusations.
In situations such as these, a skeptic and rational person who respect thing such as criminal forensics, science and evidence, there needs to be AN INVESTIGATION.
Before an investigation has been conducted by professionals, I simply cannot join in on this, sorry.
It’s a good thing nobody’s asking you to, then. If you had bothered to pay the least bit of attention, you’d know that.
Part of being a skeptic means knowing what the hell you’re talking about before you open your big mouth.
“Telling a victim how to deal with their assault is irresponsible…”
Educating people on how to alert authorities is actually empowering them to take action. We teach kids as young as three to “dial 911.” This idea that an accused rapist should be punished even if the victim has no evidence and didn’t alert authorities is what is irresponsible. Irresponsible is writing blog posts slandering public figures. Irresponsible is telling women that they are special so that their claims of rape should be held to a lower standard of evidence of other crimes.
First, there’s a big difference between telling someone how to do something and telling that they should do something.
Second, nobody is advocating that Shermer be punished. Nobody is advocating a lower standard of evidence in the court room. Nobody is saying that the evidence currently presented is enough, or should be enough, for a conviction.
So, basically, you’re responding to something that people aren’t actually saying. As a good skeptic, I’m sure you know what that’s called. I suggest you read what people have written on this. This has all been gone over a dozen times already. It’s hardly being kept secret.
Common sense from FtB! Who’d have thunk it.
I’m afraid western society still has too much in common with Dubai for that to be a workable solution much of the time.