“That prostitutes, sex workers, women in any neighbourhood, women who drink in bars or out of them, women who talk to strange men or familiar ones have a right not to be raped or sexually abused is of relatively recent vintage in our legal system”, asserts this human rights lawyer.

OK. But any woman who puts herself in “iffy” situations – just because she has the right not to be raped or sexually abused – is and idiot. Rapists are not interested in rights. Rights do not prevent rape. The only thing rights do is ensure that the rapist will be dealt with if found guilty.

We all have rights. But we are also responsible for our own well being and safety. Rights are only of practical use to the author and her colleagues after the event, when they charge victims huge fees for their services.

Lady, get real. It is a jungle out there and when these naive young women go into it they should realise that after both they and the virile young lions that they meet have had a few drinks and/or drugs, that sheet will happen, so beware. If they don't, it isn't forgetfulness, it is simply stupidity.

Thank you Jocelyn Scutt for this useful article. It's an evidence-based counterpoint to Father Dave's anecdotal piece in the same issue of OLO. I feel sorry for Leigh - he just doesn't get it.

The long struggle by women’s groups in Australia to bring what you rightly describe as "fairness, ethics and principled morality into rape law" has been inspiring. But it's clear that the struggle to convince many Australians - and not just Islamists - that the rationale for these changes is wholly justifiable is far from over.

I don't think that Sheik Hilali is an isolated case of powerful men in Australia being 20 years out of date.

Jocelynne,

Good article and point well made.

I have to disagree Jocelynne. While I think you are right Australia is changing it's views, the dear old sheik is much much more than merely 20 years behind.

The author said: “No one should condone the statements made by Sheik Hilali. .....Just as it is doubly serious if people in positions of authority in any part of the Australian community express such views.”

True, but interestingly, some Australian feminists still seek to excuse the Sheik, which I guess is all about the Left being sweet on Islam. This makes for strange bedfellows because the values and goals of feminism and Islam are diametrically opposed. However the Left is feeling a bit devoid of champions these days and probably only sides with Islam through a (wrong) belief that it somehow represents the ‘outsiders’ and ‘downtrodden’ in the world (which it doesn’t). Still, that is the crazy feminist Left for you, so busy castigating white Anglo-Saxon men that they would cut off their own noses to spite their faces. Their actions impede change, as the author suggests.

All of the evidence before us is that an overwhelming majority of Australian men and women disagree with the Sheik. This why the Sheik has been caused to offer explanations.

Men and women are victims of rape and of sexual offences generally. Only recently we have seen a succession of female molestors of adolescent male students get lighter sentences and the victims received little or no support from male and female journalists. Unfortunately there will always be some men and some women who presume that the victim (regardless of gender) must have contributed somehow. Female and male perpetratiors use the same excuses.

In an ideal world, men and women would be able to go anywhere and do anything and not be at fear of some perpetrators taking advantage of them. However in the real world we all have to risk manage to some extent and that is not because men are men or women are women, it is because some people are criminals.

But that being said, Australia is not a “rape supportive” society and there are strong disincentives in place to deter perpetrators.