First read up on the proposals that have been abandoned by the government that would have meant jurors in rape trials would have been briefed on rape myths. Then come back and read David Cox's article.
Dear Mr Cox,
Where to start? Well, how about the beginning?:
Isn't it time to acknowledge that it's beyond the capacity of the judicial process to deal with date-rape?
First of all, I think it's pretty much acknowledged that the judicial process is flawed. Hence why all is ding-bat feminists (and other people who seem to think this is a problem) have been bitching and moaning for so many years. Second of all, don't call it date-rape. Call it rape. There is no legal distinction between date-rape and rape. Do you think in prison date-rapists and 'real' rapists are separated? It's when articles like this are printed with the term 'date-rape' being highlighted as the problem that people start believing there is a distinction between date-rape and 'real' rape. Mr Cox, are you implying by making that distinction that the judicial process knows how to deal with 'real' rape? Wow, all those 'real' rape victims and potential 'real' rape victims must be breathing a sigh of relief: "Well, as long as I'm REALLY raped, I'll be able to get my day in court. I must remember to scream and kick, be wearing granny pants, my tweed jacket and twin set and make sure to get raped by someone I've never met, in a dark alley, on the way home from choir practice. Because then it's REAL rape, not date-rape."
Pardon the sarcasm. But there is alot in this article to keep me going:
In date-rape cases, it's his word against hers.
As opposed to all the other rape cases?
But I've saved the best for last:
When our houses are burgled, we're hardly more likely than rape victims to see the intruder end up behind bars. So what do we do? We fit locks to our doors and windows. We keep our valuables out of sight....Feminists object that even to mention such things constitutes a shift of blame from perpetrator to victim. Yet, when we fit window locks, does this make burglary our fault?
I'm sorry, I wasn't listening to that last part, I was too busy buying my state-of-the-art chastity belt to ensure my 'valuables' are out of sight and not getting burgled.
Actually David, feminists don't object to women protecting themselves. Women should learn self-defence, especially since we know that defending yourself can actually help (and not just further arouse the attacker or endanger your life more). Feminists object to the proposition that somehow it is women's responsibility to stop rape, that somehow women have to learn to engage with men in such a way as to not get raped.
And no David, feminist don't "want a demonstration that the state backs women against men." We want a demonstration that the state backs women against rapists. Am I the only one that is screaming into a pillow over this? Is the distinction really that complicated?