| Jamie89 |
12-04-2018 06:31 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ammi
(Post 9943074)
..I understand the awareness of ‘personal vulnerabilities’ in situations...but sadly in society that’s often placed placed and totally focused on the female..and rape trials especially are extremely difficult for ‘victims’ as we know...which is why many are not reported...or reluctant to report...but as a non guilty verdict was reached in this case...we as a society would assume the ‘victims’ to also be the rugby players...yet society still doesn’t say...’why did they put themselves in that position’...why is no focus seemingly placed on that aspect...the disrespect they appear to have for females aside...they became ‘vulnerable’, surely in their intentions for that evening ..to leave themselves so open in the whole vein of events...to being accused of rape and non-consensual sexual acts...?...no focus of ‘blame or vulnerability’..ever appears to be there though in how society views these things...?...
|
Exactly. Even if a woman wins a rape case there's still always talk of what she could have done to better protect herself from being raped. But there's never any talk of what men can do to protect themselves from being accused of being rape, men just aren't given that kind of responsibility. If you're going to have rough group sex with someone you hardly know that results in them being injured/bleeding, and then show no interest in her welfare afterwards and act the way they acted/spoke about her the way they spoke, then you could say that in terms of having a rape accusation thrown at them, they were "asking for it" - but of course that never gets said when it's the other way around. Peoples attitudes are completely imbalanced on the whole. Hopefully 'Ibelieveher' will make other men think about that and start taking more responsibility for their own actions.
Also, I actually think that rape trials should be handled differently and without the need for 'beyond reasonable doubt'. For example having a certain percentage of certainty perhaps, and leniancy in sentencing if someone is convicted with doubt.
I know that would probably never happen (and maybe it's a terrible idea idk) but if the conviction rate and number of people who don't even report is ever going to change then there needs to be some kind of overhaul on how cases are dealt with to reflect that it's practically impossible in most cases to know for certain if consent was given. It's completely different from things such as murder/robbery etc as it's not the act itself (sex) that's being questioned so the cases being handled differently would just be reflective of that too. And it'd mean bringing into question mens behaviours and actions much more than is currently the case, and the accused actually being on trial, rather than just the accuser. |
