1 in 6 female Australian students raped

[Pick]

If anyone in here has ever wondered why women seem so gosh-darned hard to talk to, the answer might be that you're a raging misogynist. Hope that helps!!

[Thanas]

The supposed "stigma" of being a rape victim is pretty insignificant to what's likely to happen if you are a male and atempt to report rape by a female.

What the fuck?

QFT. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, SVPD? "Supposed" stigma?

[Surlethe]

Maybe we should try to evaluate the RELATIVE IMPORTANCE of the various topics being discussed in this thread.

Rank the following items according to how important a factor they are to the incidence of rape. Give numbers to indicate relatively how important.

• Men not understanding what consent is / not caring about getting consent from women ("rape culture")
• Women getting so drunk they can't give consent or resist, and doing it over and over again
• Men raping men
• Women raping men
• Women regretful after having consensual sex / lying to get out of being labeled "slutty"

[Duckie]

Why should we? That's honestly a terrible idea. Why don't we rank blacks and gays and women and determine who's more oppressed? (Because it's a bad idea and just leads to arguments and dumbness)

[Surlethe]

To illustrate the point that the huge, overwhelming, dominant factor in the incidence of rape is men who won't take "no" for an answer or prey on women who can't give consent. To point out that, given the culture, some kinds of behavior might put women more at risk, but that's not the real problem, and it's not worth two thread pages beating a dead horse and ignoring both that the culture needs to change, and that there are real meaty questions that would lead to more productive discussion.

(For instance, questions that come to my mind*: when there's a "he-said, she-said" situation, with no physical evidence, who do we believe? What if two people are really drunk - can they be said to have consented? How do power dynamics influence choices -- if a huge man wants sex from a petite woman and she says "yes," but she said "yes" because she was afraid he might rape her otherwise, can she really be said to have consented? And so forth).

Unless I'm wrong, and most rape is not men preying on women, but is composed of (a) women lying, (b) men raping men, or (c) women raping men. In which case I'd like to see some statistics.

*but have probably been addressed by feminists the world over whom I haven't read -- still worth discussing, I think

[Big Phil]

As with blaming the victim, who the fuck is contesting that the "huge, overwhelming, dominant factor" with regard to rape is men who don't take no for an answer? You're not exactly scoring any points by pointing out the obvious here.

To address the description of Australia that Wee man gave, I'm honestly shocked that a modern, Western culture is so cavalier about its attitude toward rape. I know that athletes here in the US are often given the benefit of the doubt or are given passes in cases where facts aren't crystal clear, but the scenarios he described are frightening. If what you're describing is at all accurate, then Australia is seriously fucked up.

That being said, I'm not sure that professional athletes raping women are the best examples, or even typical examples. Far more relevant, as far as I'm concerned, are cases of molestation, incest, acquaintance/date rape, etc., as those scenarios are far more common. The better question is what is the average man in the street's attitude toward women and rape? What is the media's response when Joe Schmoe is accused of raping Jane Doe? Is she a slut, a whore, or a tramp, or is the guy a rapist (regardless of whether it's been proven in court)?

I can't really speak to a typical rape accusation, but what we read in the newspapers and see on TV is highly sensationalized, and the accused is usually viewed as being guilty regardless of whether it's been proven or not. That doesn't mean that there aren't assholes out there calling the woman a slut who wanted it, but the overwhelming share of voice is usually supportive of the woman and condemnatory of the man. Kobe Bryant, for example, was accused (but never convicted) of rape, but most everyone looks at him as a rapist (or at least a cheater). The Duke lacrosse team was accused of rape (an accusation which was later retracted when the "victim's" story fell apart and DNA evidence exonerated the accused), but all of those guys got tarred with the same brush - they're rapists, even though they're not. Mike Tyson was accused and convicted of rape - he's a rapist, and other than assholes here and there, no one seriously blamed the victim for her own rape.

When looking at the different cultural perspectives on rape, look at how the US is reacting to Dominique Strauss-Kahn's alleged rape of a hotel maid, versus how France (and Europe) has reacted. In the US, the accusation has been taken very seriously, and he's been treated as a criminal. In France and Europe people seem to be more concerned about his rights and reputation as a result of the rape accusation than they are about the victim of the alleged rape. There were people on this very board complaining that he's being treated unfairly, that his picture shouldn't be in the paper, although to be fair I don't believe anyone here has actually said "the maid wanted it" or "she's a tramp/whore/slut."

[Lusankya]

I still remember the story of the Swedish girl who was raped and then rejected by her community, all because her rapist was from a more popular family than hers.

And I also still remember the board's reaction to the accusations of rape against Julian Assange, where every action taken by the women in question was mercilessly nitpicked, all because Assange was a more popular person on the board than some random Swedish women.

That's what it mostly comes down to: the more popular person, or the one who can play the media better gets the sympathy.

[Eleas]

As with blaming the victim, who the fuck is contesting that the "huge, overwhelming, dominant factor" with regard to rape is men who don't take no for an answer? You're not exactly scoring any points by pointing out the obvious here.

Correction: he's not scoring any points with you. I and presumably at least some other people in this thread are pretty much able to see his real point without hand-holding, and it boils down to this: the victim's habits is of subordinate importance to the crime itself and should therefore not merit discussion but somehow, mysteriously, it's still very important in this thread for it to be underlined and repeated. Not just in this instance, but in practically every one on the subject (as Lusankya rightly points out), we will sooner or later see the "idle" observation about how she could have avoided this if she hadn't been so very stupid.

That tendency is worth pointing out, as is the fact that it's a very convenient starting point toward attacking her for her obvious and self-defeating stupidity, without which she probably wouldn't have deserved rape.

That being said, I'm not sure that professional athletes raping women are the best examples, or even typical examples. Far more relevant, as far as I'm concerned, are cases of molestation, incest, acquaintance/date rape, etc., as those scenarios are far more common. The better question is what is the average man in the street's attitude toward women and rape? What is the media's response when Joe Schmoe is accused of raping Jane Doe? Is she a slut, a whore, or a tramp, or is the guy a rapist (regardless of whether it's been proven in court)?

In any situation where word stands against word, the winner will tend to be the person in power and/or supported by popular sentiment. I think that makes athletes and prestigious groupings a valid target of study, especially since their sentiments - as role models - would tend to color the perceptions of their fans.

When looking at the different cultural perspectives on rape, look at how the US is reacting to Dominique Strauss-Kahn's alleged rape of a hotel maid, versus how France (and Europe) has reacted.

Ludicrous. To conflate France and the rest of Europe in this instance - a French domestic matter, no less - deserves only ridicule. It also blithely ignores the fact that the victim was an American on American soil, meaning the US certainly would be expected to be a bit more vocal about the issue than non-involved countries.

[Surlethe]

As with blaming the victim, who the fuck is contesting that the "huge, overwhelming, dominant factor" with regard to rape is men who don't take no for an answer? You're not exactly scoring any points by pointing out the obvious here.

Nobody. My point is that going on and on and on and on and on and on and on about how irresponsible women shouldn't put themselves in harm's way gives disproportionate attention to a factor that is probably not significant and, whether or not it does, shouldn't matter.

That's what it mostly comes down to: the more popular person, or the one who can play the media better gets the sympathy.

To jump off your point ... women who accuse men of rape get dragged through the mud. When there's physical evidence of sex (but not of assault), the defense is invariably that the sex was consensual, and when there's not, it's either that there was no sex or that the sex was consensual. Either way, it comes down to her word versus his word. To help persuade the jury (or the court of public opinion) of one side or another, the defense has to besmirch the woman's reputation and shred her credibility.

[Surlethe]

That tendency is worth pointing out, as is the fact that it's a very convenient starting point toward attacking her for her obvious and self-defeating stupidity, without which she probably wouldn't have deserved rape.

As you say, it is fair in a dispassionate analysis to point out unwise behavior. But, to elaborate, in the context of an emotional trial, where the jury will be decided on how much of the woman's tattered credibility remains intact after she's been raked over the coals by the defense team, pointing out "unwise behavior" is essentially a dog whistle to misogyny, conscious or unconscious.

[Simon_Jester]

When looking at the different cultural perspectives on rape, look at how the US is reacting to Dominique Strauss-Kahn's alleged rape of a hotel maid, versus how France (and Europe) has reacted.

Ludicrous. To conflate France and the rest of Europe in this instance - a French domestic matter, no less - deserves only ridicule. It also blithely ignores the fact that the victim was an American on American soil, meaning the US certainly would be expected to be a bit more vocal about the issue than non-involved countries.

Well, I do think it's worth comparing national attitudes. Do we see differences in the way America treats rape charges, versus the way Australia or France or Sweden treats them?

Are these differences consistent? So, for example, when Julian Assange is accused of rape in Sweden, do Australians stick up for him while Swedes criticize him? When Strauss-Kahn is accused of rape in the US, do Frenchmen stick up for him while Americans criticize him? Or does it depend on which country is involved, and the popularity and credibility of the accused in the eyes of the people judging the accusation?

So I wouldn't be too hasty to condemn Sanchez for mentioning the idea that different societies may have different cultural perspectives on rape, different levels of readiness to employ victim-blaming tactics, different levels of men assuming that they can get away with "no means yes" thinking, and so on. Condemn him for other things if you like, but I think there's something to that.

Hell, even within a society that sort of thing can vary, depending on status and class and attitudes toward women and all sorts of other things.

[Thanas]

Most of the french shock seems to be a bit related more to the way he was dragged into court, which is not the way business is conducted in France.

[Eleas]

Well, I do think it's worth comparing national attitudes. Do we see differences in the way America treats rape charges, versus the way Australia or France or Sweden treats them?

As do I, and that wasn't my problem. My problem was a) the idiocy of treating Europe as a homogenous block in terms of gender attitudes (seeing as relative equality in terms of wages, etc demonstrably fluctuate hugely across Europe, and b) the disingenuous insinuation that his example hinged on gender attitudes in the US being more enlightened as opposed to, say, the victim being a US citizen.

Are these differences consistent? So, for example, when Julian Assange is accused of rape in Sweden, do Australians stick up for him while Swedes criticize him? When Strauss-Kahn is accused of rape in the US, do Frenchmen stick up for him while Americans criticize him? Or does it depend on which country is involved, and the popularity and credibility of the accused in the eyes of the people judging the accusation?

All of those are worthy questions. I cannot see where I dispute that. I'm pointing out that by examining what the role models like to say, we can gain a sense of what the common people like to hear.

So I wouldn't be too hasty to condemn Sanchez for mentioning the idea that different societies may have different cultural perspectives on rape, different levels of readiness to employ victim-blaming tactics, different levels of men assuming that they can get away with "no means yes" thinking, and so on. Condemn him for other things if you like, but I think there's something to that.

I don't condemn Sanchez for that. That line of reasoning is sound. What I do have a problem with is his frankly disingenuous attempt to put down the reactions to the Strauss-Kahn case to cultural differences, as if relative nationality of the accuser or accused doesn't matter.

Hell, even within a society that sort of thing can vary, depending on status and class and attitudes toward women and all sorts of other things.

Yes, Simon. This is also what I have said and the basis of my own reasoning, in this and several other threads.

[SVPD]

The supposed "stigma" of being a rape victim is pretty insignificant to what's likely to happen if you are a male and atempt to report rape by a female.

What the fuck?

QFT. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, SVPD? "Supposed" stigma?

Yes, supposed.

This stigma is something that's been asserted to exist for the last 25 years since I started getting educated on sexual assault around age 10. I ahve yet to see any evidence of it. Rape victims are handled with kid gloves by.. practically everyone. That isn't necessarily a bad thing; they ahve been through a traumatic experience.

However, I have never seen any actual evidence of any real "stigma". As far as I can tell, it's simply a refusal to accept, on the part of people who make a living on rape, that times have changed and we no longer allow the "short skirt defense" in court; in fact we've changed the law significantly to prtoect against that specifically, and that change in law reflects a serious change in social attitudes.

At one time, sure, there was a real stigma for rape victims as there was a cloud of suspicion that they invited it somehow - and in that era, "inviting it" was seen as an excuse for the rapist. That is no longer the case.

In fact, the entire argument that there is a stigma is based on the alledged reluctance of rape victims to report it. But why are they supposedly reluctant to report it? Well, because of the stigma, seems to be the answer; the stigma including the "I won't be believed" excuse. I have yet to see any evidence of its existence that isn't a circular argument.

I'm also not likely to be convinced otherwise but outraged "WTF!!??!!" posts. Sorry, but quite frankly a large part of the reason we're having this discussion is that a large part of the rape victim advocacy industry has put a lot of effort into making it socially impolite to question certain assertions about rape, so outraged one-liners aren't likely to carry a lot of weight with me. I'll also point out that my wife was a rape victim which is the reason I ahve an 18-year-old daughter when I'm only 35, so I'm going to put it out there right now that I'm going to take any assertion that I don't care about rape victims as a personal insult.

[SVPD]

As many people have mentioned, one of the big problems in Australia is that rape is not seen as rape in many cases.

Because those who are doing the raping are often in higher social positions (not necessarily class, but things like sportsmen) it's automatically assumed that the girl was just some groupie who's regretful.

I understand that SVPD and Sanchez will hop on me here for thinking that this is some continuation of "blaming the victim", but expose yourself to the Australian media for a while - and especially go back a few years to when the biggest sports organisation in the country had to release an educational DVD for their players addressing such issues as: "Is it OK to have sex with a passed out woman?" and "Should you have sex with your mate's wife?" and you can begin to see that there are massive cultural problems on the male side of the coin here.

Destigmatisation isn't the real issue. Stigmatisation of the assault/assaulter is.[/quote]

I'm not going to get on you because I can't speak to the Australian attitudes towards such things. All I will say is that these attitudes do not really exist in the U.S. in anywhere I've lived, and I've lived in some pretty dissimilar parts of it.

[Simon_Jester]

In fact, the entire argument that there is a stigma is based on the alledged reluctance of rape victims to report it. But why are they supposedly reluctant to report it? Well, because of the stigma, seems to be the answer; the stigma including the "I won't be believed" excuse. I have yet to see any evidence of its existence that isn't a circular argument.

Then can you please explain to me why it is that women report a much higher rate of rape in anonymous surveys than they do to the police?

Are they just joking to screw with the survey results or something? Because if they're not lying in a situation where there is no incentive to do so (an anonymous survey), then the rate of actual rapes winds up being a lot higher than the rate of reported rapes.

Or am I missing something here?

[Block]

In fact, the entire argument that there is a stigma is based on the alledged reluctance of rape victims to report it. But why are they supposedly reluctant to report it? Well, because of the stigma, seems to be the answer; the stigma including the "I won't be believed" excuse. I have yet to see any evidence of its existence that isn't a circular argument.

Then can you please explain to me why it is that women report a much higher rate of rape in anonymous surveys than they do to the police?

Are they just joking to screw with the survey results or something? Because if they're not lying in a situation where there is no incentive to do so (an anonymous survey), then the rate of actual rapes winds up being a lot higher than the rate of reported rapes.

Or am I missing something here?

Because there's a mythical stigma in the US that in many cases is perpetuated by the same people who are supposed to be advocates for the victim, that same stigma which doesn't really exist in most US males minds, makes it harder to report because women are taught that it does. Women who accuse people of rape in the US are treated as victims from the outset except in very rare cases where there's a lot of money to be made and even then it's usually met with the gentlest questioning possible. Women still don't report because they're afraid they will be looked down on when it's simply not the case.

[Todeswind]

Then can you please explain to me why it is that women report a much higher rate of rape in anonymous surveys than they do to the police?

Are they just joking to screw with the survey results or something? Because if they're not lying in a situation where there is no incentive to do so (an anonymous survey), then the rate of actual rapes winds up being a lot higher than the rate of reported rapes.

Or am I missing something here?

Because the standard of what constitutes "not guilty" in most western nations is "reasonable doubt" it makes rape a supremely difficult thing for them to really do much of anything about.

Realistically speaking most times rape occurs there isn't actually much the police can do, many legitimate rape cases aren't viable for the police to pursue. If you get drunk and end up sleeping with someone at a party you would not willingly have sex with while sober, or get forced into sex by someone then it is very hard to prove that rape occurred. With very few exceptions evidence of rape and evidence of sex at a party are virtually indistinguishable. Even the sort of defensive wounds one would incur fighting off ones rapist (cuts, bruises, and so on) often can realistically be seen as the product of rough consensual sex rather than sexual abuse.

The vast majority of rape is not forced sodomy or violent rape, in fact the vast majority of rape isn't even the sort of chemical rape (roofies etc.) that can be practically or measurably determined as being a forcible sex act. Especially when people partake in the more esoteric of recreational drugs it makes it especially hard to prove. You are far more likely to be unwillingly forced into a sexual situation with an acquaintance when both of you are drunk and he (or she) is misreading the signals than you are to be forcibly raped by a stranger.

Its this issue of acquaintance rape that is the real reason I believe so many rapes go unreported. The effort required in reporting the rape is monumental, it's damn near impossible to prove, the defense attorney is going to drag you through the mud when you go on the stand and perhaps most importantly it will break friendships and ruin relationships. Once a woman or man accuses their attacker of having committed a rape he or she is not only alienating that person but alienating all the people who are "allied with" that person. So really unless someone was raped in a violent way by someone they don't know there isn't a realistic structure by which they might choose to report it without destroying their lives.

[SVPD]

In fact, the entire argument that there is a stigma is based on the alledged reluctance of rape victims to report it. But why are they supposedly reluctant to report it? Well, because of the stigma, seems to be the answer; the stigma including the "I won't be believed" excuse. I have yet to see any evidence of its existence that isn't a circular argument.

Then can you please explain to me why it is that women report a much higher rate of rape in anonymous surveys than they do to the police?

I cannot, because there is not data that I know of to explain it. I suspect, however, that a lot of women do not report "rape" to the police because it is not rape, or not clearly rape; it's a situation of "we were both drunk and I feel taken advantage of but.. on the other hand I DID let him do it and never said 'no'", or something substantially similar.

I'd also question the methodology of selection for these surveys. Women who ahve been raped are obviously a lot more likely to care about a study on rape than those that haven't. Selection bias is a very common problems in surveys on many, many topics.

Are they just joking to screw with the survey results or something? Because if they're not lying in a situation where there is no incentive to do so (an anonymous survey), then the rate of actual rapes winds up being a lot higher than the rate of reported rapes.

Or am I missing something here?

Other than the obvious potential for selection bias and the other common problems associated with statistical research is that there is a large area where two people end up having sex and one of them regrets it later. That can be for any number of reasons, but I would imagine a lot of them are cases where the girl got drunk or high and had sex willingly. They essentially said "I'm drunk, I'm horney, what the hell" and later felt taken advantage of.

There are a lot of variables here that could drag us off on a tangent, like whether the guy is drunk too, how drunk, what level of expressed consent is acceptable, etc. Regardless of those the problem is that there can be a lot of cases where the girl considers herself raped because she's pissed off - but where the male did not actually commit any crime, and did not, in any way, intentionally take advantage of her.

Furthermore, there's the problem that women are constantly being told "there's a stigma attached to rape, you won't be believed, you'll go through hell blah blah blah" and so forth from the very people that are advocating for rape victims. This makes for a strong potential for self-fulfilling prophecy where women aren't reporting it because of what they're being told it will be like if they report it.

Part of what I'm getting at here is that a lot of the questions you are asking are quite valid - and we simply don't know the answers. It's quite possible I'm incorrect as a general rule, although what I'm saying is certainly true at least some of the time. The problem, however, is that real examination of these issues has been systematically discouraged with claims like "you might blame the victim!" For at least 25 years now we have heard the same mantra of "rape myths" and "stigma" and so forth and despite numerous initiatives that have been made to protect rape victims, such as prohibiting introduction of sexual history in most circumstances, we are being told no progress has been made - and worse, we are being told it is unacceptable to question either victims or the people feeding us this information.

[Serafina]

Furthermore, there's the problem that women are constantly being told "there's a stigma attached to rape, you won't be believed, you'll go through hell blah blah blah" and so forth from the very people that are advocating for rape victims. This makes for a strong potential for self-fulfilling prophecy where women aren't reporting it because of what they're being told it will be like if they report it.

Maybe because that's still the experience many women have?

Sure, the police will generally believe you insomuch as they'll start an investigation. But plenty of other people will NOT believe you, and there's still plenty of accusations against rape victims going around. I'd like to direct your attention to the case of Julian Asange as an example, where the two victims were accused of anything between "they just want attention" to "they are american spies out to ruin him", including on this very board. The same is happening to plenty of other rape victims. This is especially problematic if the rapist and the victim are from the same community - she'll face such accusations from former friends or neighbors.
Also, due to the way how traumatic rape can be, just plenty of people saying "i don't think he did it" can be very injuring to the victim - because that carries the indirect accusation that she is a liar and that this never happened to her.

As for police investigations - while they are usually carried out in a professional, neutral manner, there is the very real danger that the evidence will NOT suffice for a conviction. If that is the case, the victim went trough a very dramatic repetition of her trauma and risks the above-mentioned social stigma for nothing.
This isn't really a matter that can be resolved. Especially in the case of attempted rape, there is often no physical evidence except possibly some bruises - certainly nothing that is clear evidence for rape. In th case of rape by anonymous assault, the rapist might just be impossible to find. If you are raped while drunk (or similar situations), it boils down to your word against his - while sex clearly occurred there is no evidence that it was rape.
That's a VERY hard situation to deal with, much more so if you're already suffering from a trauma - like rape victims do.


The social stigma these days is just as real as it was 30 years ago. It no longer consists of "you're a slut for being raped" or "you brought this upon yourself" - it consists of the difficulty of conviction in most cases and the fact that many people will simply doubt it a la "this guy is not a rapist".
All of this is a reason why rape is often not reported - many women hesitate because they're afraid of being called liars, that their very real trauma never happened. And even those who don't might not bother because catching the rapist is often impossible.

[Crown]

I'd like to direct your attention to the case of Julian Asange as an example, where the two victims were accused of anything between "they just want attention" to "they are american spies out to ruin him", including on this very board.

I'm sorry but do you deny that Julian Asange releasing sensitive US information that was embarrassing US foreign and national interest on such a level didn't make him a prime candidate for pretty much every dirty trick that the NSA/CIA could think up? You would have to possess a Bambi-esque kind of naivety to not even consider that as being a possibility precisely because of who Julian Asange is and what he is doing.

The idea that someone calling out 'rape' means we drop all other possible reasons/suspicions aside and automatically condemn the accused is a very dangerous and shallow one.

Now, if he was found guilty in an impartial court of law, then he was guilty. End of discussion. But to actually infer that people were stigmatising the rape victim because the crime was rape - and not because of who Julian Asange was and what he was doing demonstrates such a stupefying simplicity in critical thinking that flabbergasts me. Put it another way; people would have been suspicious if he was charged with an un-paid parking fine, or speeding, etc, etc.

[Tiriol]

Furthermore, there's the problem that women are constantly being told "there's a stigma attached to rape, you won't be believed, you'll go through hell blah blah blah" and so forth from the very people that are advocating for rape victims. This makes for a strong potential for self-fulfilling prophecy where women aren't reporting it because of what they're being told it will be like if they report it.

Maybe because that's still the experience many women have?

Sure, the police will generally believe you insomuch as they'll start an investigation. But plenty of other people will NOT believe you, and there's still plenty of accusations against rape victims going around. I'd like to direct your attention to the case of Julian Asange as an example, where the two victims were accused of anything between "they just want attention" to "they are american spies out to ruin him", including on this very board. The same is happening to plenty of other rape victims. This is especially problematic if the rapist and the victim are from the same community - she'll face such accusations from former friends or neighbors.
Also, due to the way how traumatic rape can be, just plenty of people saying "i don't think he did it" can be very injuring to the victim - because that carries the indirect accusation that she is a liar and that this never happened to her.

As for police investigations - while they are usually carried out in a professional, neutral manner, there is the very real danger that the evidence will NOT suffice for a conviction. If that is the case, the victim went trough a very dramatic repetition of her trauma and risks the above-mentioned social stigma for nothing.
This isn't really a matter that can be resolved. Especially in the case of attempted rape, there is often no physical evidence except possibly some bruises - certainly nothing that is clear evidence for rape. In th case of rape by anonymous assault, the rapist might just be impossible to find. If you are raped while drunk (or similar situations), it boils down to your word against his - while sex clearly occurred there is no evidence that it was rape.
That's a VERY hard situation to deal with, much more so if you're already suffering from a trauma - like rape victims do.


The social stigma these days is just as real as it was 30 years ago. It no longer consists of "you're a slut for being raped" or "you brought this upon yourself" - it consists of the difficulty of conviction in most cases and the fact that many people will simply doubt it a la "this guy is not a rapist".
All of this is a reason why rape is often not reported - many women hesitate because they're afraid of being called liars, that their very real trauma never happened. And even those who don't might not bother because catching the rapist is often impossible.

With all due respect, some of the things you've just said isn't about stigma, it's about lack of evidence. I'm pretty sure that every police officer worth his paycheck would dearly love to arrest every son of a bitch who has committed rape. But if there's not enough evidence they can't do so. And at the same time there are people who use rape as a weapon against others, ruining their reputation by lying and saying "he raped me" (or "she raped me" in some circumanstances). That really can ruin someone's life, but just in other ways than rape. And as has been said, what about those situations where it's one person's word against other's? Is there some reason why everyone should automatically believe a claim about rape against a person who has so far done nothing wrong?

Rape is a loathsome crime, yes, but it still needs to be investigated properly. Assange, in your example, may be a douchebag extraordinaire with delusions of grandeur and be a really, really dickish person in general, but he is still innocent until proven otherwise. Personally I find the man pretty obnoxious from what I've read of him, but is that enough to automatically condemn him as a certified rapist without a proper trial? The rights and the well-being of the victim must be protected, especially in a traumatic crime like rape, but the rights of the accused are also important.

[Serafina]

@Crown
The point is that rape victims regularly encounter such indirect accusations.
And YES, i AM saying that we should disregard such possibilities altogether - in the public forum. Doesn't mean that law enforcement can't consider them, but there is nothing to be gained except harm to the victim when it's made public like that.
In an ideal world, rape cases would not be a matter of public discussion at all. I realize that this is unrealistic, but that doesn't mean we can't strive for it. Investigations should be as non-public as possible - that would protect BOTH the (potential) victim and the (potential) rapist.

With all due respect, some of the things you've just said isn't about stigma, it's about lack of evidence. I'm pretty sure that every police officer worth his paycheck would dearly love to arrest every son of a bitch who has committed rape. But if there's not enough evidence they can't do so. And at the same time there are people who use rape as a weapon against others, ruining their reputation by lying and saying "he raped me" (or "she raped me" in some circumanstances). That really can ruin someone's life, but just in other ways than rape. And as has been said, what about those situations where it's one person's word against other's? Is there some reason why everyone should automatically believe a claim about rape against a person who has so far done nothing wrong?

I'm fully aware that there's a good reason why many rapists can not be convicted. That doesn't change the fact that this is an enormous problem for the victim.

What i have been describing DOES result in stigma. The "no one will believe you"-part of rape is partially caused by the fact that rape is often not provable, for reasons i described. Not only does that mean that the victim will not get some justice or closure (the rapist being free is a major problem for rape victims), it also often leads to the "you just claim he raped you because you wanted to ruin his life"-accusations. I fail to see how those are not a stigma.

Rape is a loathsome crime, yes, but it still needs to be investigated properly.

Did i ever claim anything different?

The problems i have been describing in regards to law enforcements are intrinsic and can not really be changed as long as we want to maintain due process (and i for one do). Again, that doesn't mean that they are not a problem for the victim.

[Tiriol]

The problems i have been describing in regards to law enforcements are intrinsic and can not really be changed as long as we want to maintain due process (and i for one do). Again, that doesn't mean that they are not a problem for the victim.

Okay, sorry for misunderstanding. I simply failed to catch your meaning.

[Crown]

@Crown
The point is that rape victims regularly encounter such indirect accusations.
And YES, i AM saying that we should disregard such possibilities altogether - in the public forum. Doesn't mean that law enforcement can't consider them, but there is nothing to be gained except harm to the victim when it's made public like that.
In an ideal world, rape cases would not be a matter of public discussion at all. I realize that this is unrealistic, but that doesn't mean we can't strive for it. Investigations should be as non-public as possible - that would protect BOTH the (potential) victim and the (potential) rapist.

You are spectacularly missing the point. The response 'This is happening because it is an American plot' was NOT generated because the crime Asange was being accused of was rape, it was generated because of who he was and what he was doing to embarrass the US. It would still have been generated if the crime he was accused of was; blood diamond trading/smuggling from Sierra Leone, or unpaid parking tickets, or a hit and run, or, or, or, etc, etc.

The idea people should refrain on commentating this rather obvious thought just because the crime being accused of is rape is so utterly emotive it doesn't warrant a response. Let alone a second one that I'm doing now.