"A woman is at just as great a risk of sexual assault from a man who stands up as she enters his company as she is from any other man"

That would appear to suggest that demographics are not at play here, (or that outward signs of respect for women mean nothing).

I've not found anything specifically about the factor mentioned above, perhaps the author will highlight the source of that claim. On a broader note there are demographic factors which might suggest something different to the authors claims.

http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221153.pdf
"In the general population, sexual assault perpetrators have been identified as having higher levels of hostility toward women; lower levels of empathy; and being more likely to hold traditional gender role stereotypes, endorse statements used to justify rape, and hold adversarial beliefs about relationships between men and women (Seto & Barbaree, 1997). In addition, they are more likely to have experienced abuse or violence as a child, have engaged in adolescent delinquency, have peers who view forced sex as acceptable, and have had early and frequent dating and sexual experiences (Seto & Barbaree, 1997)."

R0bert

Maybe some women like to think that they are under constant threat of sexual attack particularly from white males,because most of them have no interest in sexually harrassing them.

I think Ms Pringle is quite right to point out the false assumptions that can be made based only on knowledge of a person's superficial behaviours.

Maybe there is no place for these personal character assessments in the courts. Dangerous people often don't seem that dangerous, unless you happen to be their victim. This makes character assessments by others pretty irrelevant.

It is misleading to construct identikits of the characteristics of rapists. Like the misleading stranger danger campaigns, when facts show most sexual abuse of children is perpetrated by people known to the child and its family.

And it's something of a cliche that when the neighbour is arrested for some crime, everybody says how quiet and polite he/she always seemed.

'He is, however, a conformist to destructive norms of male sexual behaviour that discount the importance of mutuality'

Really? People who rape are conforming to the norm?

I wonder what the destructive norms of male sexual behaviour are?

It sounds like one of those umbrella statements, so that all forms of male sexual behaviour thus become suspect and seen as being destructive. Or more correctly heterosexual male behaviour.

I think Briar Rose is pretty on the ball with this one. That said though, if it comes down to 'he said, she said' then personal references for either side can do no harm. In fact it could be thought to be fair to someone who has already been put on trial in the media for alleged offences that the scales are balanced a little.

A defence or prosecution lawyer who engaged in outright character assination of the other side would be playing a risky game as a jury's sympathy could swing the other way.

Educating young women (and men) about consent would be better covered at school level about such things as date rape than this case.

Off topic a bit, but overall justice I think would be better served if the subjects of this sort of allegation were never named publicly in the media until found guilty. Even when found innocent, they carry a life long stigma and some shadow on their character must remain. Hopefully it would never happen, but it might also stop high profile people being the targets of this sort of allegation without foundation.

Out on a limb here but it could also be easier on the person making the allegations too. If their claims have foundation, but they are let down by the justice system maybe just through a lack of evidence, their perceived motivations are fodder for the press, which can only be more salt in the wound.