My niece was raped, when I found out my first reaction was one of anger and wanting to go and find the guy and hurt him real bad.

My brother in law also had the same feelings, and still does, that this had happened to his daughter.

Sadly there were also some girls involved, who my niece thought were her friends who helped set her up.

'they simply need to stop participating in a chauvinistic culture that allows for rape to occur.'

I'd like details on that. I mean I've always felt I was being held responsible for other men that rape (or are violent), but it's the first time I've been given a cryptic clue on why I am responsible.

I would have thought a rapist would most likely have a hatred, or a fear of women, and be needing to assert control. This fear of women would more likely come from childhood powerlessness, manipulation or abuse from women I would have thought.

Alternatively a taught hatred of women from a father figure could cause hatred of women (maybe not powerlessness though), but I doubt that would be as powerful as a personal greivence from abuse at the hands of a mother.

I cant think of an example where I would have participated in a chauvenistic culture, but it's a pretty broad term and possibly subjective. But it seems by doing so, I would have allowed for rape to occur. This would never be my intention, and I wonder how I could ever make up for my actions that have allowed other men to rape.

I wonder if women ever participate in this culture, or if this culture didn't exist whether rape would still occur.

Dear Usual Suspect,

let me nip this in the bud. I DO NOT support blaming innocent men for the poor behavior of a very small group of human being who commit these crimes (both male and female).

In fact I think that the overwhelming majority of men are just as disgusted by these crimes as women are and this is precisely why I wrote this article- detailing the fact that although some men do rape- most men are actually deeply offended by rape and sometimes personally hurt by it.

What i will say is that chauvenistic attitudes (held by both men and women) enable rapists to commit their crimes with greater ease. For examples, attitudes like "well she was drunk, she was asking for it", or "well she was wearing a short skirt- she was asking for it" or "women are like uncovered meat- they are asking for it" shift the onus of responsibility off the perpetrators and onto women and it is these attitudes which (in providing a spurious defence for rapists) make it harder for victims to speak out, becasue they are fearful of being blamed.

It is the ONLY crime in Australia where we continue to shift the blame off the perpetrator and onto the victim. It is the only crime where victim's are blamed for the actions of the perpetrator. If men and women stop espousing these chauvenistic attitudes then we go some way to making it easier for victims to speak up, and this in turn is going to make it harder for men to rape and get away with it.

I've spoken up about being sexually assaulted becasue I dont buy into the crap that it was my fault. As far as I'm concerned I don't care if you're naked, drunk, and passed out in Kings Cross at 4am- nothing gives someone the right to violate them. I was walking down my own street after a day at uni when I was assaulted- there is NO excuse for any of this.

I hope that makes my position clear.

Nina Funnell

The ripple effect of trauma is well documented. It doesn't apply to victims of sexual assault alone. Take for example the suffering of children of Vietnam vets or the family and friends of murder or robbery victims. The ripple effect is well-recognised by a range of organisations that deal with victims and their families.

Pity the media don't generally account for the wide-ranging effects of trauma - no matter what the cause.

Well clear Nina. Thanks for the clarification. Maybe chauvenistic isn't the right word. Maybe sexist assumptions? I dunno.

'..(in providing a spurious defence for rapists) make it harder for victims to speak out, becasue they are fearful of being blamed.'
I accept that could be the case, but really I don't see these kind of attitudes from anyone under the age of 60 or so. Perhaps I need to get out more.

Much more damaging I think, is the few false accusations which add doubt to all legitimate cases in an environment when there often is very little evidence.

'It is the ONLY crime in Australia where we continue to shift the blame off the perpetrator and onto the victim'
I certainly don't, and I'm not sure the justice system does either. I think maybe as I said there is very little evidence in a lot of cases, and I cant imagine how terrible it must be for women to be poked and prodded immediately after just being violated to get evidence to assure a conviction.

A bit off topic, I also think if we re-separated rape and sexual assault people would give rape figures much more credence, and rape would be rightly separated from pinching someone on the bum (Which BTW I know isn't acceptable, but I don't see it in the same league as rape either). The word 'Rape' should be used more to describe rape, and the word should keep it's power in being the most terrible of crimes.

Nina's account is quite horrific. No doubt with the porn industry having its way as depicting men and women as meat the increase in these attacks will and are inevitable. The anger should be directed towards the social engineers who insist on their 'rights' to be indulgent rather than to be concerned for the safety of women and children. The more we depict humans acting like animals the more we will behave without any morality (except those outward earth worshiping morals).

<they simply need to stop participating in a chauvinistic culture that allows for rape to occur.>

I find this statement deeply offensive. As far as I know there is not nor has there ever been a chauvinistic culture that allows rape to occur.

There is a culture however that encourages men to try and get lucky.

I don't know what the answer is, apart from drastic measures like castrating all males before puberty, sadly I doubt no matter what measures are taken, some women will unfortunately experience what Nina experienced.

Malinger is right about the ripple effect of trauma, which applies in cases of assault, robbery, murder or even natural events like earthquakes, tidal waves etc.

Just recently there have been an unfortunate number of drownings of young children and the ripple effects of this is enormous. Some people will blame themselves, some will blame others.

Nina....if anyone ever grabs you from behind again.. REVERSE HEAD BUTT back into their face. (over and over) (depends on how/where he grabbed you)

Elbow to the ribs, clap your hands over their ears reaching back. Stomp the foot...(not easy) then elbow and run like hell.

Learn where the pressure points are in the hand. I think your hands would have been free no? (at least one)

I'd be interested to know exactly how this character grabbed you.. where his arms were and if you can now in retrospect see any physical opportunity to head butt him in the face?

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/753233/self_defense_grab_from_behind/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5Ud5sXjAos&feature=related

It's a good idea to get with a larger friend (male) and try out some of this... just watching a vid will not help much.

Changing the mentality in society ? that's a huge ask. you will always have the deviating mob.

Thankyou Nina, for sharing this terrifying and degrading experience with readers of On Line Opinion.

It is noble of you to think and write about the affects of what happened to you on those around you.

You must be very strong to write publicly about such personal experiences.

Dear Polycarp

Yes, if I had thought to I would have back-head-butted the guy (and I've since done a self-defence course that taught me just this). At the time though, I froze (for the first minute or so). This is a normal response and I know of one self defence instructor who, herself, froze (even though she was a black belt) when accosted. It's just shock. I was in it- and it paralysed me. It wasn't until I was lying on my back in the dirt and that the assault had progressed some-what that I regained presence of mind (and the adrenaline rush) to fight.

Perhaps more training would have helped. However, once again, I think that although self defence may make women feel more empowered in their every day experiences, it is not the sole solution to rape as it places the onus of responsibility onto women to learn how to defend themselves, instead of placing the onus of responsibility onto the small percentage of men who attack women, to STOP DOING IT. Until these men stop raping, self defence may help in situations like mine, but sadly, in most situations, the assaults are not by strangers, there is no violence (other than the rape) involved, and the victims usually submit due to psychological (not physical) forms of intimidation. In these situations physical self defence skills are unlikely to work as these skills are designed to equip victims responding to physical threats, not psychological forms of intimidation (like, "if you don't have sex with me, I'll tell everyone you're a prude/ lesbian" or "if you don't have sex with me, I'll hit the kids" and lets not even go into the most common form where the victim actually does like the guy, she may have even flirted or made the first move, she doesn't want sex, but she doesn;t want to offend him- she says no, he says (see more text below)

"oh come on" she says "no" again but not wanting to offend him by saying something like "I'll smash your face in" she protests, but he doesn't listen and then in a second, it's already happened...).

I'd also ad the fact that intimate partner (domestic) rape is the most common form of rape for adult women with 1 in 10 adult women being raped by her current or former partner.

These are complex issues- and worthy of debate.

As for the claim that porn is to blame- well, lets remember that there are many types of porn (some awful, some very ethical) and that we shouldn't make blanket statements about what ideologies they support. After-all, it's not what's in a text, but the way in which a text is read and interpreted by the reader which makes it problematic or not (in other words, meaning is in the audience, not just the text).

Finally to the individual who congratulated me on speaking out- THANK-YOU. It's not always easy. But you also labeled what happened to me as being "degrading". Yes. I think sexual assault is degrading. Yes. I think is is humiliating. Yes. I think it is embarrassing. For the coward who does it. I don't feel at all degraded, embarrassed or humiliated and why should I? He is the one who has done the degrading, pathetic, cowardly- and might I add, criminal thing. Not me. But thanks anyway.

That's all for now.

Nina

"if you don't have sex with me, I'll tell everyone you're a prude/ lesbian"

See this is what I am talking about when I want rape to remain rape. Coersion, while not morally right, is not rape. Rape should be kept, by definition, as physically forcing someone into penetrative sex.

Women need equality of responsiblity in this area. Men are responsible for their own decisions, and if a woman throws herself at him or convinces him, even blackmales him to have sex, it's not rape. Somehow, a man convincing a woman to have sex with him is considered rape?

If coersion by a male is rape, then why is seduction by a female not rape?

Hi Nina,

Sorry I probably ought to have thought a bit more about my expression when I used the word 'degrading'. Of course you have nothing to be ashamed of as the perpetrator does.

The conversation of psychological v physical force or intimidation is an interesting one. I wonder where the line is drawn? A person (male or female, adult or child) can be physically forced but then what about when there is just a threat of violence or the victim feels physically intimidated? I suppose these issues are defined in law but in reality it seems a very muddy area.

Calling coercion through threat of reputational (or other) harm 'convincing'a woman to have sex, seems part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

Seduction v rape is interesting. It is hard to see how being influenced by your own desire is the same as being influenced by fear of reputational (or other) harm. If a man is forced into sexual actions by fear then surely that is assault but if he is seduced? I guess the power-differential is important. A child could be seduced by an adult but it does not make it any less of a rape because there is no capacity for consent.

Presumably a man has the capacity to give or withhold consent no matter how stirred up he is as that is what differentiates him from a child- the capacity for consent. I guess a woman could threaten to falsely 'out' a man as gay to 'convince' him to have sex and I would be interested to know the legal status of such an occurrance.

Nice twisting there Rosie.

'Calling coercion through threat of reputational (or other) harm 'convincing'a woman to have sex'

I never said that.

With regards to rape and seduction, lets look at two examples.

A woman seduces a man who doesn't want to have sex with her. They get drunk, she strips off, strips his clothes off and turns him on, manipulates him with her hands, and pushes the issue until he gives in. The next morning he regrets this, but he never explicitly said no. I would say the man made the decision to have sex. No Rape. Man takes responsibility.

Reverse the roles, where the woman is drunk and doesn't explicitly say no, and we have a rape. She can 'feel intimidated' into this, and it's up to the man to take responsibility for ensuring she really really wants to go through with it. Man takes responsibility.

I think your multicultural views by proxy will make Aussie women less safe with the influx and high birth rate of Africans and Muslims there will be much more sexual assault in Australia in the future.

To avoid Middle Eastern Men is not racist against Arabs. If you see an arab walking down the street in Sydney chances are he is from a socially challenged background (eg. the poor farmers who immigrated from Lebanon after 1975) and is probably more likely to commit violent crime.

Ummm... Othercon? What "multicultural views by proxy" are you referring to exactly? I specifically did not get into the whole "muslims are rapists" debate (despite the fact that the guy who attacked me was 'of middle eastern appearance') for the following reasons.
1) In Australia intra-racial rape is far more common than inter-racial rape (i.e. anglo men rape anglo women more than men of other ethnic decent do) and this makes sense given that in 70% of cases the vic is raped by someone she knows (usually a family member or friend) and these tend to be of same ethnic origin
2)If we're going to go the whole Alan Jones these "thugs come to our country and rape our women" line of argument then lets not forget all those charming anglo men who have raped Aboriginal women
3)Me, Tegan Wagner and other women have had our experiences hijacked by those with a conservative, ideologically unsound, racist agenda. The problem is GENDER INEQUALITY- stop reframing rape as a racial problem.

Yes, I know certain groups have more misogynistic cultures and this is messed up- but deportment is not the answer as (as I mentioned) most rapes against white women in this country are done by white men...

just saying...

Usual Suspect: << A woman seduces a man who doesn't want to have sex with her. They get drunk, she strips off, strips his clothes off and turns him on, manipulates him with her hands, and pushes the issue until he gives in. >>

This reads more like an individual sexual fantasy than a real life scenario. I don't suppose you'd like to provide some examples where this situation actually occurred?

othercon: << ... with the influx and high birth rate of Africans and Muslims there will be much more sexual assault in Australia in the future >>

What ninaf said. This is just an unsubstantiated racist slur intended to deflect attention from her argument about gender inequality. Pathetic.

Im just saying there will be more rape for sure a disproportionate amount by chosen groups. This is not to say all are rapists.

It would be very interesting to conduct interveiws using a lie detector of alleged victims and alleged perpetrators.

I wonder what the results would be?

One group of rad feminist defined any form of penetrative sex as rape, I think it was MacKinnon who defined rape as occuring any time that a woman did not initiate the sexual encounter.

Now the goal posts are getting moved even furhter, in that there must be a clear concise verbal consent.

James H.

Yes, I think you are right. McKinnon did say something like that, which, as a woman, I find TOTALLY offensive. It suggests that women have no agency in their sexuality and that only male-on-male sex can be egalitarian.

As for your comments about lie detectors though, I'd mention the fact that under-reporting, not falsified reporting is the biggest issue facing rape survivors. It's estimated that only 15% of rapes go reported. (though of course this is an impossible thing to estimate- by definition). In my situation (although I was not technically raped) i was able to report for the following reasons
1)I was bashed (this meant there were clear signs and no one was going to disbeleive me... but this is highly atypical)
2) I did not know my attacker (once again- atypical- most victims have a sense of loyalty to the attacker or his family/ friend network)
3) I was not technically raped (so I knew I wouldn't have to do a rape kit).
4) I did not blame myslef in the slightest- I felt no guilt or shame and in the subsequent therapy which I did for almost a yr, my main issue was "anger management" (dealing with revenge fantasies)
Once again- atypical...

An interesting article, Nina. I sympathise with your experience.

As you have already said, though, your was an assault first and foremost rather than a rape, whatever the perpetrator may have intended. That experience of assault is vastly more common among men than among women and many more women have the vicarious trauma of watching a son or husband lying bloodied and bruised than ever experience any form of violence themselves, yet there is an emormous expenditure on advertising, police resources, legal support and so on directed solely and specifically at assaults on women, while assaults on men go virtually without recognition. Often, the advertising includes significant distortions of the facts, minimising the male experience and talking up the far-less-common female one.

Furthermore, as has been said by others, the focus on male violence against women has lead to a situation in which a man can be punished quite severely merely because a woman makes an allegation - no actual evidence is required for the full force of AVO laws to swing into action, with all of the attendant consequences for the accused. In my case, I spent many thousands of dollars fighting a case that had no basis in fact and in which no allegation of actual violence or threats were made, merely a statement that I had raised my voice.

I'd have liked to see your article, personal as it was, making a more general comment on violence, rather than the gendered statement it is. I acknowkledge your attempts to be specific about the small class of perpetrators, but those sorts of comments are likely to be lost in the quoting if your work is picked up by some of the vested interests who prefer propaganda to facts.

Dear Nina
your comments about 'freezing' are well taken and noted. There was a girl at my gym who demonstrated considerable kickboxing skills on the bag...(and with whom I got along well as a friend) and one day I did a bit of a naughty thing..I kind of feigned rushing grabbing her (in the gym) and she did exactly what you did.. 'froze/cringed'. I never touched her.. just made out like I was going to... She didn't mind, and it underlined in her own mind that the better strategy is to keep out of danger rather than fight it off.

I think more training can do the trick...but it's not a simple process and must be ramped up from basic to more realistic to testing moves out in real life environments..like on a street.

This is much too big a task for most and there is always a danger of overconfidence leading to risk taking.

I hope that the female members of our human family will always consider the risks before venturing into unsafe territory. No amount of education or public shaming is likely to stop a bloke high on speed and maybe porn from doing what he wants. Or.. even just a person with a desire to conquer women.

In my own search for answers and understanding, one of a number of books I have read is Katie Rophie, The Morning After.

Lipstick Feminism also makes for some intriguing reading, even though it is old. Although I found it a hard slog.

< I'd mention the fact that under-reporting, not falsified reporting is the biggest issue facing rape survivors. It's estimated that only 15% of rapes go reported. (though of course this is an impossible thing to estimate- by definition). >

If that is the case then how do we reduce the incidence of sexual assault in our society, the only things I can come up with, are either separating men and women, or castrating the male population.

From my understanding is that the definition of rape has been expanded from " the use of force against her will/consent" to include perhaps any type of heterosexual behaviour.

For example some people will use alcohol or drugs as a social lubricant and disinhibitor, now new laws are being passed that if a woman is under the influence then her consent is not valid.

Even in a stable relationships, sexual approaches are at times unwelcome, so is it not possible then, an attempt at seduction can become sexual assault.

In terms of gang rape Id say Middle Eastern for sure are over represented in gang rape. Surprise surprise Middle Eastern boys were responsible for a gang rape at a Water Park.

If you are walking through a park at night and attacked by a stranger Id say for sure a Middle Eastern man would be disproportionately likely to be the offender.

Compare this to the number of street rapist Asians there are. There are far more Asian men in Sydney and Australia but Arabs are heavily over represented in rape. I chose Asians because in terms of population they are both minorities in Australia.

Just the other day an Infamous Muslim rapist of northern Melbourne had his sentence increased.

A carload of arabs driving past is far more likely to try to abduct you than a carload of non-arab men.

ninaf,

Re your comment "...under-reporting, not falsified reporting is the biggest issue facing rape survivors." This maybe correct as far as issues facing rape survivors go, but falsified reporting is the biggest issue facing alleged rapists and it should also be for the justice system but it is not.

The Waikato Times in NZ, reported some years back that 30% of the alleged sexual assaults reported to the Hamilton police were revealed to be without substance which leaves the question of how many of the remaining 70% were without substance but which could not be established. Further here in Australia we have the highly publicised incident in Coffs Harbour where members of the Sydney Bulldogs football team were slandered by women in the north coast town whose stories were later uncovered as porkies. People discussing these issues in public forums should not forget these things.

What needs to happen, is that where it is clearly shown that a person misreported a crime such as rape, that person should be given the same sentence as the alleged rapist would have received if convicted.

I suspect then we will have more "alleged" victims in gaol than rapists.

Roscop,

Were the two separate allegations against the footy team "porkies", or was there insufficient evidence to proceed? Do you have any information that you can provide that the allegations were false?

As to false allegations in general, many women and more children and young men than you'd care to imagine present to emergency departments following sexual assault. Of those a very small number agree to police involvement. Some just want the experience behind them (and many show signs of PTSD and such later); others are well aware of the usual futility in obtaining justice.

Of the small percentage that go to court, actual conviction rates are disturbingly low.

"In 1996-1997, the number of findings of guilty for “sexual assaults” in New South Wales was 10 per cent of the number of offences reported (Cook et al. 2001: 44). In Victoria, the number of convictions of rape in 1997-1999 was only 4.2 per cent of the number of reports (VLRC 2003: 81). ... [estimates] convictions have not risen above 3.1 per cent of reports in any year in the last decade (Stop Rape Now 2004). These figures are all the more disturbing when we remember that at least 85 per cent of sexual offences are never reported to the police... "

http://www.aifs.gov.au/acssa/pubs/issue/i4pdf/acssa_i4_reportingandconvict.pdf

"Usually the victim is a young woman, and the accused is an older man, more often than not a relative. While the complainant can have her past scrutinised, the accused - unless he (or very occasionally she) takes the stand - won't be cross-examined, and so will not be questioned about past behaviour, including prior offences. The onus is on the complainant to prove sexual assault took place, and that is not easy, particularly when children are involved. The Gatehouse Centre child abuse support service at the Royal Children's Hospital had some 150 new referrals about sexual abuse each month of last year, and only 2 per cent resulted in convictions."

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/The-rape-of-justice/2005/05/21/1116533577568.html

Addendum:

Reading my last post I want to clarify that the conviction rates reported (there and here) are of reports to police. There are many reasons why charges are withdrawn or why cases don't proceed. As explained further in the following:

http://sa.democrats.org.au/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=1426&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

"The committee reported that, of women who have been sexually assaulted, the reporting rate was somewhere between a worst case scenario of only 8.7 per cent and, at best, 33 per cent. Put another way, somewhere between seven and nine out of 10 rape and sexual assault victims do not report the crime. If we take the 2002 figures, where 628 cases were reported to the police, it represents the tip of an iceberg with the real numbers of those crimes being somewhere between 2,000 and 7,000 people.

To consider then that only 11 offenders were found guilty as charged, with four of the 11 pleading guilty (which means that only seven of the cases were actually won), we have an appalling reflection on how we in this state deal with the issue of rape and sexual abuse, and it clearly shows why legislation such as this is needed."

Includes additional figures on male victimization:

http://www.yarrowplace.sa.gov.au/booklet_statistics.html

pynchme,

With respect to the bulldogs case, I remember a fair time after the whole media circus had died down, one of the chief investigators actually complained that there was quite a lot of pressure to get charges laid (probably because of the media circus), but he really couldn't find any evidence and basically implied the woman's story had a million holes in it.

I find it interesting that you have absolutely no sympathy for men falsely accused of rape, or else just think where there's smoke there's fire. Those players had their names dragged through the mud, and the whole team was under suspicion. I remember admiring Hasem El Masri for refusing to do a DNA test as he was nowhere near the 'action' and is an upstanding citizen and deeply religious man. Yet he, and many other members of the team endured shouts of rapist while on the field and walking down the street. I can imagine you joining in the chorus.

Sure, it suits your purposes to inflate rape figures, just like adding in all the 'sexual assault' like pinching on the bum, and 'regretted sex' to mix in with the rape to make those numbers much larger. 1% of women raped is horrible enough, I don't see why you have to haul in anybody ever accused and assume them guilty when you have no idea of the actual facts just to make the figures more 'impressive'.

People are innocent until proven guilty in case you didn't know. I'm sure you'd like mandatory charges and sentences to any man accused of rape but the rest of society likes actual evidence before locking people up.

It's an effective tactic by feminist to play the 'under-reported' card, where every tiny whiff of smoke helps to create an image of a raging bonfire. Then you can lobby to protect all women at any cost to some men who are totally innocent.

Pynchme, thanks for that survey. A small extract from it is below.

Let me ask you something, and I'd appreciate a straight answer, please. Do you think that the 25% of men who responded to that survey saying they'd been assaulted would be likely to feel welcomed by the NSW Rape Crisis Centre's website? Do you think that their loved ones may have experienced vicarious trauma in the same way that those close to women victims do? The writer is a member of the Management Committee of the NSW RCC and yet her piece that started this thread is bare of mention of males as victime at all.

"# 83.8% of females and 47.4% of males reported at least one unwanted sexual harassment style experience;
# 59.3% of females and 25% of males reported at least one unwanted sexual assault style experience;
# 35.5% of females and 15.4% of males reported at least one unwanted penetrative sex experience;
# between 12.6% and 35.5% of women; and between 5.3% and 15.4% of men reported experiences when aged 16 or older which meet the legal definition of rape;"

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the NSW RCC does great work in its way, but it's still exclusivist and exclusionary on purely gender grounds and it still demonises men to achieve its ideological ends. It's the last bit I personally, never having been a victim of such an assault, am most offended by, since normal men are sympathetic to women who've been assaulted anyway. Do the counselling, by all means, but leave the feminist proselytising out of it is all I ask. Serve victims of both genders.

The more one looks into so many of the organisations that have been set up under the aegis of feminist ideology the more often one finds a deeply discriminatory and female chauvinistic culture at the core.

The Sex Discrimination Commissioner, to her credit, has raised these issues as something she would like to address but is powerless to do so under current legislative and international arrangements.

Anticeptic...

Let me be really clear and say that for all posts I make on OLO I only speak for myself, and not the RCC.

It may interest you to know that I actually do a lot of work with male survivors. I have also written a number of articles elsewhere about them and have done academic research into the specific impacts on men. This article was not about that. it was about vicarious trauma (though note I decided to focus on males experience as I agree, this is often forgotten about or overshadowed by womens experience of VC). In fact when I wrote this piece I was trying to address that imbalance and give voice to the experience of my dad, brother etc. (you may want to look at this too http://www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/sexual-assault-still-too-taboo-for-public-airing/2008/03/26/1206207204988.html)

It pains me that no matter what I do I get attacked. There has even been websites where guys have put up photos of me and my story and a poll to "vote how rapeable you think this chick is". All I can say is that I beleive the overwhelming majority of guys are just as disgusted as I am by these attitudes and behaviours. I have also had tremendous support from men, and I have also offered my own support to a tremendous number of male victims. I'm sorry if you feel that because I volunteer for an institution that provides free counselling to both males and females that I am some sort of devil-incarnate. But please- honestly- think about what I've been through and the fact that no organisation is perfect- I'm doing the best I can. What the F--K are you doing to help fix this problem?

ninaf:"an institution that provides free counselling to both males and females"

Do you think that males might be put off by the many references to feminism and feminists that adorn the website? I'll bet the office is similarly adorned with lots of references to "girls can do anything" and similar empowering affirmations, with no doubt the obilgatory Duluth-model chart of violent behaviours, with "him" as the perpetrator...

Out of interest, how many males did you provide free counselling to last year?

Ninaf, grateful if you could enlighten me on a couple of things.

You start your article by telling us your father was a juror at a rape trial. He would therefore be fully aware of the horrific nature of a real rape incident. Did he ever have a discussion with you on the subject of Anti Rape and Anti Assault Personal Alarms or other avoidance measures?

Here is a link to a website I googled: http://www.personalalarms.com.au/personalalarms.htm

Interestingly the website says the British Police are selling PAs to the public and lists a number of constabularies. It doesn't list any service providers for women.

PAs might not prevent all attacks on women in possession of them, but they could assist in the capture or the chances of others corroborating the description of the offender if activated quickly whilst the offender is making his escape from the scene.

I have a male friend who owns a PA and I am quite impressed with its features.

I have had a look at the NSW Rape Crisis Service website (http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/index.htm). I have not at first blush, been able to find any reference to such devices there. I thought at least one PA manufacturer’s name might appear amongst the list of sponsors. But no PA manufacturers appeared among 3 sponsors listed. Only sponsors into air conditioning.

As a member of the management committee of the NSWRCS can you tell us:

1. Does the service have a policy of promoting the usage of such devices?

2. Is it in the charter of the service to do whatever it can in giving advice to women to minimise their chances of becoming a rape or sexual assault victim or is it only concerned with after the event counselling and support?

3. I notice the NSWRCS does request service users to provide non-identifying statistical data to the organisation for accountability purposes. Does that include data on PA usage?

As I have a young daughter, I am genuinely interested in your response to my questions.

Others might also like to comment on what I have to say here.

ROSCOP. As I have clearly stated before I do not speak for the NSWRCC here. You can ask questions regarding my article or my personal opinion but I will not be baited into speaking on their behalf. Also you have no right to ever expect a response from me given the disgusting manner in which you have related to me, though for the benefit of others I will respond in this particular instance.

Your understanding of rape is pathetic. I do support PA devices but the circumstances in which they are likely to be effective are minimal. IN stranger rape circumstances PA devices might work but as discussed earlier in this thread, most victims just freeze (they would not have the presence of mind to fumble through a bag and activate a PA device). Also stranger rape is the rarest form of rape. Also the most common form of rape for adult women is intimate partner rape with one in ten adult women being raped by her current or ex partner. With relationship violence the dynamics are so complex and a PA device would be a crude, unrealistic solution. In 70% of cases the perpetrator is a family member or "friend"- once again the rape does not occur due to physical restraints being used to force the victim into submission, but rather intangible social pressure restraints (like an uncle abusing his niece- in this example the victim does not need a weapon to fight back but rather the belief that she has a strong family network who will support her and side with her if she speaks out)

I'm not saying I don't support PA's- in fact I'm actually assisting a man (that's right! I actually do have male friends) develop a prototype for the Aussie market. I'm just saying that there are limits to their uses (but like self defence classes- if they make women or men feel more confident in their day to day activities then I support them).

Roscop: << Others might also like to comment on what I have to say here >>

I feel really sorry for your daughter.

Nina - thank you for your article and your responses here. You're doing a great job.

Roscop - A few years ago I obtained an inexpensive mobile phone for my children to carry. I really dislike telephones but for safety purposes it was a great help and comfort. Once or twice over the years one or other of my children (daughters and son) have been in situations where the use of the phone has been beaut.

However about 7 or 8 years ago one of my daughters was stalked by a fellow (now in gaol for raping someone else I believe). He followed her in his car; blocked her path with it and chased her into a sparsely populated housing block. The day was high winds and storms -her screams for help didn't carry over the wind, nor would any alarm have done. She couldn't stop running to get the phone out. Luckily she got home (and within minutes he parked outside of our house) and the police were called. Although by then he'd left; she was able to give a good description. On it's own, the police were only able to take a report. When there turned out to be more cases (same fellow; a few school girls) he was eventually charged and went to court. He got a warning and suspended sentence.

Btw that is only one of a number of incidents that I could relate.

Anyway two points:
1. A mobile phone has on the whole been of more use than an alarm.
2. There are times when nothing is helpful.

What I don't like about the whole thing is the idea that if a woman (for whatever reason) can't use or doesn't have an alarm or a phone that she might in some way be blamed for the outcome of an attack, most of which don't happen in public places anyway.

Antiseptic: Could you give an example of the references that you find troublesome.
Do you have any examples of men seeking help who have been turned away by any service providers ?

Ninaf said to antiseptic – “What the F--K are you doing to help fix this problem?”

One thing antiseptic is doing to fix the problem is to enter into the debate and present his opinions in a calm, rational and respectful way. If ninaf was confident about her opinions she would not need to resort to aggression –aggression is never the answer to any problem.

Exactly how do you prove vicarious trauma and how far should the ripple affect be allowed to travel? Just because someone feels stress or pain when someone close to them has been raped does not necessarily mean it is vicarious trauma. It would be unwise to always presume that a person’s self analysis of their own feelings was accurate. In my opinion such events when they come a little too close for comfort can trigger feelings associated with trauma that the relative or friend has experienced in the past but has not adequately resolved for their own peace of mind. A friend of a rape victim may be feeling pain because it triggers off feelings associated with child sexual abuse that they have kept suppressed for many years. It may trigger feelings in other people of who are victims of ongoing domestic violence which they are reluctant to declare. A father may feel unbearable guilt when his daughter is raped because he has unrealistic expectations about his ability to protect his children.

It would be irresponsible of governments to pour money or resources into dealing with every case that comes forward saying that they are victims of vicarious trauma. They may well be victims and in a great deal of pain but it has little or nothing to do with someone else’s experience

Antiseptic: "Don't get me wrong, I'm sure the NSW RCC does great work in its way, but it's still exclusivist and exclusionary on purely gender grounds and it still demonises men to achieve its ideological ends."

Can you give an example of what you mean?

Especially, can you point out how the site "demonises men" ?

If the vast majority of perpetrators of rape are men, then it can't be helped if you experience that statement as being demonized. Is that what is happening for you ?

Phanto: "One thing antiseptic is doing to fix the problem is to enter into the debate and present his opinions in a calm, rational and respectful way..."

Antiseptic's strategy to 'help' men is to stamp out any help available to women. One of the many things that he doesn't seem to understand is that stopping services to female victims also reduces services to male victims. He is clearly much less concerned with the plight of any victim of any sex than he is with maintaining male entitlement to resort to physical means, if necessary, to enforce their will on others.

He does them all a great disservice and sadly can't even see it.

Also, it's known that peer approval/disapproval of violence towards others is crucial in either stopping it or encouraging it to continue. People who really want to stop (any) violence could help by disapproving of violence, instead of putting so much effort into minimizing the violence experienced by others.

Pynchme

Thanks for you comment. Really. :-) I'm really sorry to hear what happened to your child. I have no kids so I can only imagine what that must have been like but seeing what my own ordeal did to my parents I can guess that it must have been a really scary experience. Thanks for sharing it here. Unfortunately, others here clearly lack compassion, not to mention empathy. There seems to be a number of border line- if not outright- sociopaths on this site. It's frustrating to bother voicing my experience (plus expertise) when there are so many idiots and I'm unsure whether these people really are as uneducated and callous as they present themselves as, or whether they are just trying to get a rise out of me/ us. Either way, it doesn't bother all that much, as it just lends weight (not to mention material for my new book) on why we need to keep pushing for equal rights now, more than ever :-)

Hope you have a great holiday season with you family- and thanks again for the support :-)

Nina

Pynchme:"Antiseptic's strategy to 'help' men is to stamp out any help available to women"

LOL. "help help, I'm being repressed". You and Monty Python: a match made in heaven.

Pynchme:"He is clearly much less concerned with the plight of any victim of any sex than he is with maintaining male entitlement to resort to physical means, if necessary, to enforce their will on others."

Oh, that's a nice one. Do show us all your examples of me using threats or physical force or me trying to "enforce my will" on you or anyone else. On the other hand, I've frequently gone on record here and elsewhere expressing concern for fairness and for the proper treatment of victims of both sexes, as well as children.

Your trouble is that my arguments are correct and they cut straight to the basis of your own sense of entitlement to ride on the "feminist" bandwagon, which is discrimination. If it's not OK to discriminate against women, why is it OK to discriminate against men? Conversely, if it's OK to discriminate against men, why is it not OK to discriminate against women

Phanto – Ya sa “They may well be victims and in a great deal of pain but it has little or nothing to do with someone else’s experience”. Ya shood bewear yar talken abowt sufwas of vic R’US torma.
Mate ya shood sho moor empaffy.

Medi evil signtists sa vic R’US torma isha mutashion off re-petty’ve stain and jury. Dis okurrd inan airwa wen womyn wid fad arsis gots loads of loot fur bean sufwas. Day dinner av to werk den. Anudder way of gedding loot is sticken da hand up de air n kryen grape. Taxpa’a sauced lukr wll cum fludden yur way unda viktum compo skeem witch dun re choir convic shun, juss priddy face.

Ef ya wanna sea uder sufwas of vic R’US torma take Kaptian Kook ad dis Anal Rapport re bellow.

B hine De smilen faeces ya c dare ar sufwas of vic R’US torma. Wylst ya ad it, getta lodda da grrrl inda middle wid da big wyde kut ad der frunt. Is dat Brazzillion me see? Hehehe!

http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/Resources/Annual_Report_2007-08.pdf

Am I correctly reading this annual report? For one million bucks, half the calls are returned within 6 months.

Sounds like they could do with a lot more money (no doubt such shoestring budgets also constrain the number of pixels afforded to those proud displays of victorious trauma Brazilians).

Hi Usual S: Sorry that it's taken so long to get back to this one.

Re: The Bulldogs. I've included some links below that show a few things:

1. The matter was concluded because of a lack of evidence not because the players were vindicated. Also, there had been a similar accusation about a year before.

2. A sample of "chauvenistic culture".

There is a listing of about 50 news articles in a Wiki page that refers to many incidents where players touched women, indecently exposed themselves to women, punched one or two in the face, urinated on others (one player explained that they have a bit of fun where they target a woman somewhere and urinate on her legs.)
Players also talked about their bonding by sharing a woman for sex.

3. Go through the list and see how many incidents resulted in charges of assault or indecent sexual assault or anything else.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/03/01/1078117371473.html

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/02/28/1077677017509.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rugby_league_incidents#cite_note-1

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1097323.htm

Lastly, the figures I posted were from another State but are consistent with others collected elsewhere around the world.

Of 600 plus reports made to police - fewer than a dozen convictions were made. That's something like 60 reports being made to result in one conviction. Now bear in mind that a proportion of those figures refer to SA of children and of other men. Do you honestly think that they are all lying?

Also, again:

"The Gatehouse Centre child abuse support service at the Royal Children's Hospital had some 150 new referrals about sexual abuse each month of last year, and only 2 per cent resulted in convictions."

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/The-rape-of-justice/2005/05/21/1116533577568.html

Is it rational to conclude that 148 children per month lie about being sexually abused ?

I think it's more reasonable to conclude that there often just isn't enough evidence to meet legal requirements for a conviction. Understandable really - it's one of those crimes that's so often hard to prove. However, I would say that the system is definitely working in favour of the accused.

Usual Suspect, cont'd:

<"Sure, it suits your purposes to inflate rape figures, just like adding in all the 'sexual assault' like pinching on the bum, and 'regretted sex' to mix in with the rape to make those numbers much larger.">

I agree with you that the terms 'sexual assault' and 'indecent assault' are not clear; well not clear to me and you anyway. 'Rape' is a bit clearer though. I was one of the people who lobbied nearly two decades ago for definitions in Queensland to be changed and they have been changed sometime since then. The definition of rape back then was ONLY penis in vagina. No other act of penetration; defecating or urinating on victims, or forcing them to perform oral sex, was counted as rape.

However, as to including "pinching on the bum" in rape figures - if that happens I've never seen it. Whether it's termed sexual assault or indecent assault or just assault - in my experience it is usually dealt with through something like a human resources department; EAP; a general counsellor or just directly with the police. All of that said, it pays to consider the subjective experience of the person being pinched. Someone who has already experienced sexual abuse is likely to be more upset than someone experiencing it as a one off event in a crowded lift (I guess). In any case, as trivial as it may seem to some people, it is still being groped isn't it. How the law regards it I don't know.

Seeker: You're reading the report incorrectly. Please see the heading above the 6 months.

Roscop: Your post was one of the most puerile and vulgar pieces of idiocy I've ever seen here

Pynchme

Thank-you very much for those links. Very interesting. I thought I would ad that the NSW RCC in conjunction with the media and journalism research centre at UNSW (where my PhD is based) is running a program with the NRL to re-educate (or as I suspect educate for the first time) footballers on how not to rape women. Catharine Lumby and Kath Albury are the academics in charge and I've worked closely alongside both these women in the past. Unfortunately the NRL owns the research as they have commissioned it so these academics can not publicly publish their findings. HOWEVER they can be interviewed about their personal opinions and in the past I have spoken to Lumby at some length about her findings. I also interviewed Dr. Megan LeMasurier about her involvement with the project. She was responsible for transcribing the tapes and she said listening to the men talk about their attitudes towards women and sex made her physically ill and it was many months before she could actually have sex again. She also added that was not the players, but rather management that was the most horrendous. There were quotes such as "everyone knows that 'no' really means 'yes'". Basically most of the players have only ever seen women as mothers, or sex objects, or as a servant. Few of them have seem women in management positions or positions of power. It's a fairly disgusting culture.

n

Ninaf, this article most certainly lifts the veil on rape allegations. I anticipate NOT a similar thank-you to the one you extended to Princess Pynchme for her press article research skills.

Review of Bulldogs rape case

By Neil Mercer

February 18, 2007 12:00
Article from: The Sunday Telegraph

THREE years after rape allegations shattered the Bulldogs, a detective has written a book
….
The 100,000 word manuscript, by former detective senior sergeant Gary McEvoy, gives for the first time a detailed behind-the-scenes view of the investigation
…
It mounts a convincing case that Bulldogs players were falsely accused of sexual assault.
…
But some detectives soon questioned her story after it was contradicted by independent eyewitnesses. At the end of the inquiry, some even wanted her charged with making false allegations.
…
According to McEvoy, … 23 years in the NSW Police, "troubling signs'' about the veracity of the woman's story emerged within three days.
…
“We were getting good evidence of an incident of consensual sex but not of a pack rape.”
…
“In fact, we were getting nothing to suggest any crime had occurred at all.''
…
“In addition, the alleged victim changed her story several times in the course of making several official statements.”
…
McEvoy says the woman's girlfriend had not backed her claims. The friend had been with one of the players in the resort that night. He says she was "far from supportive of the alleged victim.”
…
McEvoy says Detective … Glen … was second in charge of the investigation.
"Glen felt the victim had made a false report,'' he says
…
"He also believed there was sufficient evidence to at least investigate her for 'make false allegation' or public mischief.''

Roscop- On the contrary- thanks for posting that, I think it IS important to have a balanced debate about this stuff and as I have said before, I think that if a person ever fabricates a rape allegation for whatever reason then they are the absolute scum of the earth as not only does it ruin a man, but it calls all other legit rape victims stories in to question. With specific regard to the Bulldogs case I am actually privileged to certain information (not through the RCC, through a different channel) which on the surface of things at least, suggests that in the woman's mind she really was raped. The fact that her story was inconsistent doesn't look good, but then again, I'd be far more suspicious of a victim who's story had no holes whatsoever. One of the things I have been taught in counselling training is that one of the outcomes of PTSD is a confusion of memory and often memory loss. In my own instance, I did not recall being strangled (as my mind had deleted that memory deeming it too stressful) until the following day. That night at the police station they could clearly see bruising and a swollen injury around my neck so they photographed and swabbed it, but it wasn't until the next day when I put my own hand around my neck that the memory came back. This is normal. Also I beleive the woman was highly intoxicated at the time, so I wouldn't be suprised if there are holes in her story for that reason. Just saying.

Sweet Ninaf,

<<<<<<< I did not recall being strangled (as my mind had deleted that memory deeming it too stressful) until the following day.>>>>>>>>

Yes, this fits very well with your story which I remember from the video you were in. At the time I watched the video, I had what I now realise, thanks to the NSWRCC and your most honest self, was a very bad dose of vicarious trauma. My suffering was compounded by reading the piece in HONI SOIT which told us about your terrible ordeal. Better sense would have told me not to do that, because in such a uni rag of great sexual libertarian tradition, I should have known you would be more explicit about what happened…”F-U-C-K O-F-F” you told the attacker on top of you armed with a box cutter. And with this latest statement of yours, I now feel a relapse of vicarious trauma coming on.

Excuse me dearest whilst I go lay down.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=xsfWhCYgC30

As a man, let me just say that I think this "Roscop" troll is a very good example of why we still need feminists, rape counselling services and other initiatives that seek to ensure that women's status and safety in our society is unable to be assailed by Neanderthals like him. Some very bitter and twisted men at OLO tend to try and dominate discussions like this at OLO, but this one takes the cake.

Like I said earlier, I feel very sorry for the daughter he claims to have fathered - not to mention her mother and any other woman who is unfortunate enough to know a low-life creep like him.

Years ago I was trying to impress a young lady and unfortunately drank too much, I escorted her home and realising that I was making a fool of my self decided to go home by myself. At no time did I touch her, attempt to touch her or even kiss her.

Anyway later I found out that she was telling people that I wouldn't take no for an answer.

To say that I found this accusation upsetting is putting it mildly, I was so angry because nothing happened, and I did not attempt anything with her.

Regardless of what others think of me here, I have never tried to force any woman to have sex and if I felt she wasn't interest, and that my approaches would be rejected, I never persued the matter.

CJ - I am so glad and relieved to see your post. Thanks for having the courage to state your thoughts up front.

Btw: Just for general interest. My son (he's a soldier; one daughter is part-time ADF too). Anyway he found the girlfriend ad really annoying. When you think about it, it's also saying that men need or can only manage alongside girlfriends who are a bit umm 'un-bright'.

http://viv.id.au/blog/?p=2236#comment-81228

I sometimes get disheartened but there are men who are a real ray of sunshine. Thanks for being another one.

Roscop - I'm including a link to the article you cited so that people can read it in full. Thanks for that. At the outset she told police that she'd had consensual sex with some of the players in the days leading up to the complaint. Did you see where it states how she was spoken to after that?

http://72.52.152.33/~leagueun/forums/showthread.php?p=3148907

Nina - it's great to hear about the research being done and that the footy mob has commissioned that. Their motives may not be particularly noble but at least they are trying to impart something to players that they need to grasp in order to relate better to the community. I'll be very interested to follow that. Ty!

Also delighted that you're writing a book. You've sold one already!! I'll keep an eye on your name at Amazon and through the University Bookshop.

To underline the importance of the work that you're doing, here is an example of troublesome attitudes. It's heartening to check back and see that some men expressed their disapproval.

http://bobstruth.blogspot.com/2006/09/jonbenet-never-did-get-laid.html

Still laughing at the railroad tracks (SJF I think :) ) - the Perils of Pauline imagery is great :D

James I hear you (well, read you really:)) and I sympathize. I know that there are troubled people out there - some really unbalanced and problematic, drama centred people. You know though why it was so easy for people to believe her/ - it's the stereotype that men value themselves for their sexual prowess and the embedded notion that real men don't take no for an answer.

I think we are probably fighting the same sort stereotyping. Unfortunately too many men are happy to conform to that stereotype.

As a feminist I believe that men are and can be better than that.

One of the problems for women, especially re: sexual assault; is the pressure on them to explain their behaviour as if they invited assault. You know the sort of thing I mean - did she flirt; what was she wearing; did she accept a lift from a stranger and so on.

What are some ways that you can think of that men can protect themselves from women who might make claims later of improper behaviour?

I ask this because I recently read where someone was advising men to drop a drunken woman off but not to enter her premises and certainly not have sex with her no matter what she seems to be inviting, which is what you did isn't it.

The poster suggested the fellow, if he was interested in sex, phone her the next day when she'd regained her faculties and try to make some sort of arrangement. What do you think? As a general rule of thumb would that work as a recommendation for men in dating situations ?

To CJMorgan
Whilst we are into using epithets (oaf, low-life creep, troll, Neanderthals etc), and you are, like one or two other participants, demeaning the relationships that I have with my daughter and other females in my life, with your offerings of crass sympathy, may I just say that you come across as a chivalrous imbecile.

MAN(sic), as a review of this debate would show, all that you have contributed is puny and reflex support to the affirmative side. Where women are involved it would more than seem that is your natural bent. From my standpoint, that’s okay because I love and admire some of them to ….but I don’t allow that or my despise for what others are up to, to overly colour my thinking on issues. Having said that and in full appreciation of the fact that I don’t own this forum, the kindest thing I could say to you by way of suggestion is if you can’t lift your game, rather than lurk here, you should go get a life.

BTW. Why I haven’t been labelled as “misogynist” has really got me puzzled…because that is the normal trite epithet used for the purpose of nullifying a man’s underlying arguments.

To Pynchme,
thankyou…I will respond.

James H. I am truly sorry you had that awful awful experience. It is completely unfair and disgusting. I guess it's somewhat similar to a man boasting that a woman "put out" when she didn't (this happened to me when I was in highschool and still very much a virgin) though the main difference is that being called a rapist is a actually also being called a criminal. Disgusting. As a woman I'm really offended that that happened to you and please know that not all women are like that!

Which brings me to the next male here. CJ Morgan- bless your cotton socks :-) Thanks for being so supportive. As I have always believed (and has been demonstrated on this thread)- people are people- some are fabulous, some are horrible- gender doesn't have much to do with it- if anything. There are so many great men here- and great ladies too- and there are also some purile, offensive individuals- (both men and women). It really touched me to read you comment. Sometimes, I think people forget that just because I've had my 15 milliseconds of fame, that I am somehow not a person with feelings- other times I think they just dont care (Roscop Im talking to you, you low life scum. personally 'misogynistic' is too good a label for you. I have no idea where your hatred comes from, but you may want to work on it, instead of spraying everyone here with distasteful offshots of your bigotted onanism.- You're a really horrible horrible human being and I have no idea how you live with yourself or how anyone else tolerates your company- you must pay/ bribe/ or intimidate them well. SCUM).

On to happier notes Spikey I've been really interested in your contributions... keep 'em coming!
all the best to all for 2009, n.

Oh, isn't that a lovely little note from nina. CJ must be feeling all warm and fuzzy having received his little pat on the head. You're a GOOD boy, CJ, here, have a nice bone.

What a lot of self-affirming nonsense from Pynchme and nina. I'm feeling vicariously traumatised simply from having had to see it. Can I make an appointment to see one of the "experts" at the NSWRCC about it, nina?

They don't seem to have much else to do to earn the $750k or so in wages they were paid last year, since there was an average of less than 5 calls a day from new callers to the NSWRCC last year (that would be in a 24 hour day, I presume) or approximately 1 call every 5 hours. It's just as well the Centre had $50,000 for IT to cope with such a workload and 4 admin staff to keep everything humming. I don't know how I manage to struggle through with a single phone line and a 3 year old computer with just myself to run it all. I only get through 30-50 calls in a day (that would be an 8-10 hour day) or approximately 3-5 calls per hour. Somehow I still manage to find the time to fill the orders and do the invoicing, as well as collecting from slow payers, attending meetings with clients and suppliers and all the other things that a business requires.

On the evidence of the NSWRCC, grrrls can indeed do anything, especially spend other people's money on themselves. It's a shame that such worthy causes always seem to be ripe for milking by the unscrupulous and that being unscrupulous is yet another of the things that grrrls are able to do.

Pynchme:"At the outset she told police that she'd had consensual sex with some of the players in the days leading up to the complaint."

No, she didn't. the police officer quoted in the story said ""We were getting good evidence of an incident of consensual sex but not of a pack rape.
"In fact, we were getting nothing to suggest any crime had occurred at all.'' "

Her allegation that she was raped was not withdrawn by her. The evidence the officer refers to is that of witnesses The officer goes on to say:"As to the woman's motive for possibly making up the story, he says she had been insulted by one player some hours earlier. "

Do you regard accusing someone of rape for insulting you as a reasonable thing to do?

Seriously, Pynchme, your cause is not served by deliberately misquoting stories or trying to ignore data that don't fit your preconceptions. The evidence in this matter and in the Broncos case is that the allegations of rape were false and that the women involved made the accusations for reasons other than any sense of having had their chastity or personal safety violated. Sometimes women do bad things and sometimes football players don't do the bad things they're accused of. Personally, I'd expect a top level athlete, well-used to self-discipline, to be far better able to control himself than a woman with a skinful of West Coast Cooler or whatever the current leg-opener happens to be.

The same would apply if the athlete were female and the alleged "victim" male, with a gut full of Jim Beam and Coke.

The trouble is that you grrls, always keen to see women only as helpless, hapless victims don't give them the credit for being responsible for their own situations. It speaks volumes about your sense of your own capacity to do so.

<What are some ways that you can think of that men can protect themselves from women who might make claims later of improper behaviour?

I ask this because I recently read where someone was advising men to drop a drunken woman off but not to enter her premises and certainly not have sex with her no matter what she seems to be inviting, which is what you did isn't it (I was one who was intoxicated, not her).>

Firstly, apart from having 5 High court judges as witnesses, there is not much a man can do to protect himself from allegations of improper conduct. The only other way to avoid such allegations would be not to have anything to do with women.

Yeah I know not all women will do such a thing, but it is impossible to differentiate between ones who will and ones who wont.

The problem with alcohol is that it is used as a social lubricant, and a disinhibitor. So people may do things whilst under the influence that they may not do when sober or would like to do when sober but feel too inhibited.

As a male I find that unless I am prepared to take the risk and try to initate, nothing happens. Due to some privileged conversations I understand some women feel offended when a bloke doesn't at least make an attempt.

pynchme,

'What are some ways that you can think of that men can protect themselves from women who might make claims later of improper behaviour?

I ask this because I recently read where someone was advising men to drop a drunken woman off but not to enter her premises and certainly not have sex with her no matter what she seems to be inviting, which is what you did isn't it.

The poster suggested the fellow, if he was interested in sex, phone her the next day when she'd regained her faculties and try to make some sort of arrangement. What do you think? As a general rule of thumb would that work as a recommendation for men in dating situations ?'

So, when woman are taught how to protect themselves from rape, that's putting the onus of responsibility on the victim. But when a man is a victim of false accusations...

Double standard anyone?

Antiseptic: You are again pressing Nine to discuss NSWRCC matters when she has explained more than once that it is inappropriate for her to do that. You seem to have difficulty accepting “No” for an answer.

New Callers - 1,399
Repeat - 5,630
Total - 7,029
Telephone - 6,201
Online - 787
Email - 41

The RCC stats are enumerated in the link below. I can tell by the figures that you’ve selected to quote that you have seen the page.
http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/LatestNews/Statistics/StatisticsJuly07-June08.htm

Over 365 days that’s more than 17 calls per day, plus provision of training, education and consultancy to many service providers throughout NSW. All human services have stringent and very time consuming recording requirements.

You compare that to your own efforts in responding to up to 50 calls in an 8 hour work day, while coping with additional duties. That’s about 10 minutes per call. Busy bloke.

- but not all phone biz is the same is it. Like, the RCC isn’t taking pizza orders is it. I take it that you have no idea what’s involved in responding to someone who has been assaulted or to an enquiry about how to help someone navigate the emotional and legal complexities of sexual assault.

Re: Bulldogs – links were provided in an earlier post, but here is one. You could Google further information if you need more clarification.

“REPORTER: How long after was it that the police were aware that the girl was with the -- some of the Bulldogs players three nights before -- when did you learn of that?

DET CHIEF INSP JASON BRETON: The first time she gave a statement.”

http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2004/s1097323.htm

Lastly, one of the interesting things that I am noting in posts since expressing regard to CJ Morgan, is the way that other some other males here are seeking to push him back into line – into conforming with some sort of male code of behaviour towards women.. Heaven forbid that one man might have an independent opinion and the courage and self assurance to express it.

pynchme:"You are again pressing Nine to discuss NSWRCC matters when she has explained more than once that it is inappropriate for her to do that."

No, she's stated it, not provided any explanation of her reasoning at all, probably wisely if the rest of her output is a guide.

She states on her CV here that she is member of the management committee of the NSWRCC, presumably in an attempt to increase her perceived authority. That means that I am free to examine the derivation of that authority and it also means she has the means to obtain the answers to the simple questions I have asked. If the answers are not forthcoming, I can only assume she or her fellow committee members are not confident they will be adequate.

I should make it clear that I don't regard the NSWRCC as an especially badly run or wasteful organisation of its type. These sorts of groups that have political backing are rarely as efficient as they could be. However, this group uses its funding for a purpose unrelated to its raison d'etre and discriminates as a result. The purpose of their funding is to assist rape victims in their time of crisis; it is NOT to promote feminism.

the following statement appears at the head of their annual report for last year:"“Anything I do is my attempt to emulate the commitment of all of you at Rape Crisis and the
work you do to change women’s lives. I have a career as a feminist that is well rewarded.
The real issues are always on the ground and anything I can do to recognise and support that is a
fraction of what women in my position should be doing.”
A leading feminist who has been assisting the Centre’s fund-raising efforts"
[cont]

[cont]

At least she acknowledges her career is as a feminist, not as whatever it is she's being paid to do. The NSWRCC regards this as such an important statement of their worthiness that they place it above the title of their report, yet there is not a single endorsement of their work from a victim included anywhere in that report and there are

Religious groups that run NGOs, such as Mission Australia, Salvation Army, Anglicare, Hillsong (famously) are prohibited from using their funding to proselytise. why should the situation be any different for groups that espouse feminism as their ideology? The parallels are quite striking.

In terms of the call volumes, each call, including repeat callers, handled by the centre cost $138.49, or more than $695 for each new caller. Nearly half of all calls were for incidents that allegedly occurred more than 6 months previously, which hardly seems like a "crisis" situation justifying such massive outlays, let alone justify the evem more massive outlay they're asking for next year. As no figures were provided, I can only assume that none of those callers were men.

If Nina would like me to stop asking the questions she obviously finds uncomfortable, all she need do is respond with some accurate and truthful answers. If the NSWRCC doesn't want her speaking for them, then perhaps they might respond on her behalf - after all, it's not as though they've much else to do.

Ninf, The word “SCUM”…the word to the immediate left of the closing bracket…is that the normal way you sign-off?

I am glad I have brought you along with me to this point where you are using words such as “onanism”. What you are now saying is a mark of your immaturity and desperation.

Don’t forget luv, you are the one on stage here…I am just a heckler.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/onanism

Too many posts starting with 'As a man' and 'As a woman'. Does this add weight to the opinions expressed? I think not. So what is the reasoning for such a disclaimer? Are we speaking on behalf of all men or women? Are we apologising for something while simultaneously setting ourselves up as a shining example of our gender in some way?

Nina,

'James H. I am truly sorry you had that awful awful experience. It is completely unfair and disgusting. I guess it's somewhat similar to a man boasting that a woman "put out" when she didn't (this happened to me when I was in highschool and still very much a virgin)...'

That makes me laugh. It's probably just me, but that smells of 'enough about you, lets talk about me.' Or 'yes some women can be nasty, but lets get back to talking about the bad men, but I'll disguise that intention with all the patronising 'validation' empathy I can muster'.

Ha, I just found another example...

'James I hear you (well, read you really:)) and I sympathize. I know that there are troubled people out there - some really unbalanced and problematic, drama centred people. You know though why it was so easy for people to believe her/ - it's the stereotype that men value themselves for their sexual prowess and the embedded notion that real men don't take no for an answer.

I think we are probably fighting the same sort stereotyping. Unfortunately too many men are happy to conform to that stereotype.'
'

This one smells of, 'yeah there a few troubled women, but really when you look at it, it's all mens fault really, in fact too many men are so flawed.'

Houellebecq,

I don't know where you come from, but you bring a smile to my face. It seems you are able to pick up on what is not being said.

Apropos the new laws for intending NSW rooters, see prominent mention of Draft and Final versions in the last two NSWRCC Annual Reports.

I guess rooters in other states and territories in our one nation can do as they please. Or should we expect the Virgin hotties to hand out travel warnings well before descent?

Hello!... it is 2009 not 1901…if you get what I mean. Was it Kevin Rudd on coming to power said this country was not being governed as intelligently as it could? Well here is a prime example for you folks.

When not up close checking for traces of cellulite on the revealed parts of those perky tennis sheelas arrses, on the 72 inch hi def TV my kids jointly bought me for Christmas, I sit in front of it speculating.

Whilst ignoring the faked grunts (no doubt practiced in their beds) I speculate how John Alexander would “negotiate intimacy” with Johanna Griggs on their Australia wide circuit. I still believe it is legal to have it off with you’re colleague but to be on the safe side, I would first check in the manual for inter-gender protocols written by Catharine Lumby (which you will very shortly find with Gideon’s Bible beside each bed) before I went anywhere near a front bottom, bald or hairy.

I picture John keeping his reading glasses on going naked to bed.

I also wonder if they could embed their negotiations in their commentary in a way that was not obvious to the viewers. Would a few thumbing gestures and a couple of wink winks or thumbs up, whilst the camerawomen discretely centre the focus of the lenses on Serena’s cleavage lifting poor ratings of women’s tennis, do as a YES? Oh well I guess it is back to Lumby’s manual again….

Me thinks the complexities of modern living in Anglo countries are getting to too great.

Would it be better to go overseas to where the girls have a better appreciation of spontaneity if a bloke is thinking of getting it on?

Pynchme:“REPORTER: How long after was it that the police were aware that the girl was with the -- some of the Bulldogs players three nights before -- when did you learn of that?

DET CHIEF INSP JASON BRETON: The first time she gave a statement.”

The full quote should have ended with “Some of the Bulldogs players made that comment to us while they were being interviewed at Coffs Harbour Police Station prior to leaving.”

But let’s assume no malice on your part in preference of a more favourable explanation such as trying to keep within a restrictive word count limit. So what’s your point on all this really? The cops don’t make good pimps? I agree.

I for one believe that some sort of assault did occur. Some of the Bulldogs didn’t want to have sex with her. Some of them didn’t even want her hanging around. Some of them tried to tell her so. Some of them may not have been absolute gentlemen about it. All very sad, really. Totally preventable, but this time no one to blame officially. The only clue, re-education camps for boys, presumably to explain to them that football groupies are people too. Mothers, sisters, girlfriends … Can’t wait for the Aussie version of Ladettes to provide equivalent training for girls.

Reading the last few comments, the article title "Angry, frustrated and powerless" takes on a whole new meaning. Do any of you losers have a sex life - other than with yourselves, I mean?

Seeker: It was word length. That's why I placed a link (twice of that one) so that people could read the whole article. The point of that sentence was in response to one of Antiseptic's usual lies where he portrays her as not telling about having consensual sex.

Roscop says, "Would it be better to go overseas to where the girls have a better appreciation of spontaneity if a bloke is thinking of getting it on?"

I am surprised to see such a suggestion put so boldly, even by you - urging more Aussie men to participate in sex tourism to Asia so that they can contribute to another country's problem in the abuse of women, young men and children. - but hey, let's not hold them to the standards of decent men. Do you think that they can't cut it? They can't get a bonk unless it's in the context of exploitation of others with less power in the situation ?

James: It's a pity that when people like Houellebecq demean women and belittle what was a sincere sentiment from me; that you gladly fall into line. What happened in the case of your niece's rape? Were the perpetrators (female and male) ever convicted ? You said you knew what injustice felt like first hand and that someone close to you had also experienced a traumatic betrayal of trust, and I've believed you. If you have experienced those things, how can you be "smiling" when Houellebecq and Co. make these horrid assertions about women ?

Antiseptic: If you're genuinely interested in answers to your questions why not email the centre and ask them. A lot of organizations and public bodies have policies that prevent employees and volunteers from discussing organizational matters in public.

I agree that some women do bad things and some footballers don't do the things of which they are accused. However, it seems that the football culture protects the bad eggs.

"TICKY FULLERTON: .... Yet the fact remains that in the past 20 years not one of the cases of alleged rape in AFL and rugby league has led to successful prosecution." (2004)

http://fulltext.ausport.gov.au/fulltext/2004/abc/s1100551.asp
and again FYI:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rugby_league_incidents

One then has to ask whether the football culture reflects community values; or whether it's an abberation to the norm. What do you think?

Usual Suspect - YES! I wanted to discuss the "double standard" and was sure that one of you would raise it. (Btw James I did assume that you'd both been drinking).

Anyway - the point is that rape victims are rarely believed. Consent is assumed as the default position. The onus has always been on the victim to prove a negative - that consent was not given.

Proposals that have been pending but not yet realized include that defendants will need to prove that they obtained consent.

I am interested in understanding how people think that negotiating consent for sex will change their dating behaviour and situation. What steps will they take to show that sex was consensual ?

http://www.hreoc.gov.au/legal/submissions/2007/20070720_sexual_assault.html

http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22603668-5006009,00.html

Now, one could argue that, if sex has always been consensual, that nothing need change. On the other hand, if men really believe that most rape victims put themselves through the onerous process of rape kits and police interviewing, just out of spite, then maybe they need to think about how they will account for any sexual activity in which they engage - just in case.

Btw: The idea of using alcohol as a "social lubricant" has always been alarming to me. If someone won't come at sex with the other person when they are sober... ??

pynchme,

That's a good idea putting the accused up as guilty and then have them prove their innocence. We should have that for all crimes. It'd be great! If someone wrongs me, I'll just turn up to the police and claim they raped me. They'll have to prove I didn't consent.

With regards to alcohol, it's the only tool some women can use to allow themselves to be 'naughty'. As good girls don't enjoy sex or seek sex out in their twisted mindspace. Then they can console themselves for all that naughty debauchery that they enjoyed so much the night before with the fact they were drunk so they aren't like all those other girls who are just sluts. Now with your new laws coming in about guilty until proven innocent, women with these problems will have the added tool of accusing the guy of rape if her friends catch her out being a 'slapper' or if her (now future husband in her eyes) kicked her out in the morning before cuddles or didn't make her breakfast.

And before you twist all this around and decide for me that I am one of the people (as I'm one of the all 'men' you generalised about) that believe 'that MOST rape victims put themselves through the onerous process of rape kits and police interviewing, just out of spite' just know that I'm on to your tricks.

I like your technique. 'Houellebecq demean women'. Where has he demeaned women. He's had a joke about reading between the lines as far as I can see. Something you're very apt at I see...

'go overseas to where the girls have a better appreciation of spontaneity if a bloke is thinking of getting it on?'

somehow equals...

'urging more Aussie men to participate in sex tourism to Asia '

I was thinking of those naughty French myself. You know, people free of the English culture who are left with getting pissed to allow themselves to be 'naughty'.

In fact I read a lot of the Footballers problems as a lot to do with alcohol really. That's the common denominator. Anyone see that SBS documentary on the Groupies? Disgusting! Women treating those players as a conquest to brag about to their friends! Oh, sorry I forgot, it's only when men behave like that it's offensive to women.

Anyway, the Group Sex football cases I see as an extension of my post above. Girl is so, so naughty (and drunk) she decides it's a good idea for group sex. That's even more 'bad' or 'slutty' than shagging in general. She's the more adventurous cousin of the 'good girls don't'. She's the 'good girls one at a time'.

In the act of sex with 2 or three guys, an extra guy is stupid enough to think he is welcome. She doesn't fancy him or his attitude (fair enough) and the next morning, dealing with the shame of being used (used when sober, when she was drunk last night she was sexually liberated), the rape accusation comes out. May be true, may not be, maybe she said no explicitly, maybe she was too drunk to bother, maybe he just watched, maybe he forced her. Everyone's a bit fuzzy on it all. So to protect her reputation, and to justify the nagging feeling she has been abused, or just disgraced herself, down to the station she goes.

Now I'm not callous enough to think the 4th footballer, if explicitly told 'no', and proceeds, is not guilty. But cant you see how messy this all is. Even the first 3 guys who were having consensual sex, now they're all rapists, and so is the rest of the team. In fact all footballers have terrible attitudes towards women, but the women who also likes group sex is just a confused young girl in need of attention. She was drunk, no excuse for those 4 guys though.

Why exactly do we have a Rape Crisis Centre? Why is rape more worthy of a taxpayer funded support service than any other type of crime or attack which can cause equal or even worse trauma? If someone burns down my house I would be severely traumatized. If someone bashes me in a dark alleyway I would be traumatized for sure. If someone embezzles my life savings and I was put out on the street because I had to sell my home to meet my debts I would be shattered. There are many victims of crime who do not have access to support services. It would seem to me to be beyond the resources of government to provide support for all victims of crime in this way. So why exactly is the crime of rape given this special treatment?

Why a ‘crisis’ centre? All assault victims are in a state of crisis. Anyone who is traumatized has a crisis to deal with. Why does the word crisis need to be used when it is obvious to most people that rape equals crisis anyway? Is it an attempt to ‘dramatise’ something that is already very serious in order to manipulate public thinking?

pynchme:"one of Antiseptic's usual lies where he portrays her as not telling about having consensual sex. "

Please show where I did that. I quoted from the story that was posted about the case and it made no mention of her telling anyone about consensual sex. You then went to a different source to find some evidence to back your own claim up. Fair enough, but hardly indicative of me telling "usual lies". You do have trouble with simple causal relationships, don't you?

pynchme:"why not email the centre and ask them"

I intend to. What do you think the chances are that I'll receive a response, with them being so busy on their 5 calls a day?

Pynchme:"A lot of organizations and public bodies have policies that prevent employees and volunteers from discussing organizational matters in public."

Yet Nina had no trouble "discussing organisational matters" until the questions got a little too hard, poor dear. Hypocrisy is never a good look.

pynchme:"not one of the cases of alleged rape in AFL and rugby league has led to successful prosecution."

Well, let's be thankful that vindictive women who've been dumped by footballers aren't as good at manufacturing evidence as they are at manufacturing claims.

Once again, you'll do all you can to avoid having women responsible for any part of their own bad situations.

pynchme:"If someone won't come at sex with the other person when they are sober... ??"

Some people won't "come at sex" with anyone if they're sober. Alcohol has a long history of providing those people with a socially-acceptable means of overcoming their inhibitions, while allowing them the possibility of saying "oh, it wasn't my doing, I was drunk".

Interestingly, being drunk doesn't prevent one from being held responsible if one commits an offence in that state. It may even be held as an aggravating circumstance and is itself an offence if police choose to prosecute. Why should it prevent one from being responsible for assenting to sex? Please do have a go at that one, I'm genuinely interested.

Pynchme’s news link quotes Karen Wills as follows:
"We are really happy that the law includes those three clear words, that consent can only be given freely, voluntarily and by someone who has the capacity to do so," said NSW Rape Crisis Centre manager Karen Willis.
"It makes it clear that if a person achieves consent by trickery, lies, manipulation, drugs and alcohol, then it is not consent."

And in HREOC’s submission to NSW Attorney-General's Depratment:

<<The definition of ‘lack of consent’ proposed by s 61R(2) of the Consultation Draft is ‘a person does not consent to sexual intercourse if the person: (a) does not have the capacity to agree to the sexual intercourse, or (b) has the capacity but does not have the freedom to choose whether to have sexual intercourse, or (c) has the capacity and freedom but does not agree to the sexual intercourse’.

HREOC believes the reforms should be accompanied by targeted education programs. These programs should promote understanding that sexual intercourse must be freely agreed to by both parties and that a person seeking sex should take steps to ensure the other person is consenting.

If the accused is taken to have the capacity to understand the concept of consent, then the accused should be taken to have the capacity to ascertain whether consent is present.>>

So would married women have the capacity for consensual sex outside of marriage, unless they initiate it? And if a person “achieves consent by trickery, lies, manipulation …” can her consent be withdrawn due to retrospective incapacity.

What happens when both “seek” sex and therefore neither requires consent, but for some reason, it later turns out one of them did need it? Would a convenient workaround to this dilemma assume men need consent and only women can give it? Provided of course, she can sustain her capacity well into the future.

Guess a good feminist will be one that not only supplies the condoms, but prefills her consent contracts.

'(a) does not have the capacity to agree to the sexual intercourse'

Does this mean too drunk to consent?

'then the accused should be taken to have the capacity to ascertain whether consent is present.'

Does this mean you cannot be too drunk to seek explicit consent.

All this seems to revolve around a seeker (presumably male) and an acceptor/non-acceptor, presumably female of sex. It all seems rather outdated and doesn't fit in with the reality of relationships in my view. It's also inconsistant in regards to peoples responsibility while intoxicated.

Usual Suspect: I agree with much of what you say. Alcohol does seem to be a common denominator. That is why in many ways new laws like this where the defendant/s need to show that steps were taken to obtain consent could be really beneficial.

Btw: I understand the radical change in thinking that needs to occur re: casual sex and alcohol, but it doesn't mean that an accusation of rape automatically positions the accused as guilty. A court has to decide that.

In any other crime, however, the defendant is required to prove innocence. Like if someone breaks into a house and steals some goods; we don't start from the assumption that they were invited in and given permission to make use of the householder's wallet and belongings. We don't demand that the householder prove that they didn't issue an invitation to enter and so forth.

Same with car theft. The starting point isn't - '... well innocent until proven guilty means that the car owner needs to prove that they didn't purposely make the car available'.

In fact a case could be argued that householders and car owners have some real motives (like collecting insurance; replacing goods and vehicles) for making such invitations. No doubt some do too. That isn't where community thinking about culpability begins though nor where the majority of court cases are focused.

Antisepic I'm not going over that link again; the football incidents and the crisis centre. You waste my word space demanding repeated responses to your lies. People will have to read back (sorry to whoever bothers).

As to alcohol use and responsibility. If a fellow believes that a potential sex partner who has been drinking is still capable of giving consent then having evidence of consent will help to show that. The issue is less about drinking per se, and more about retaining the capacity to give consent. Let's examine it - maybe this is a requirement that can add clarity to cases and that would help everyone.

'In any other crime, however, the defendant is required to prove innocence.'

What a strange justice system. I've never heard of this kind of system in a first world country.

'Like if someone breaks into a house and steals some goods; we don't start from the assumption that they were invited in and given permission to make use of the householder's wallet and belongings. We don't demand that the householder prove that they didn't issue an invitation to enter and so forth.'

I don't think any assumptions are made in any court. Someone is accused, and those accusations must be proven. In regards to rape it isn't even assumed sex has taken place. It isn't even assumed the accused and the defendent have even been in contact.

'... well innocent until proven guilty means that the car owner needs to prove that they didn't purposely make the car available'.'

I think you'll find they would if the defendent testified this is what had happened.

Houellebecq

Yes! - and if a defendant claimed that they'd been given use or ownership of a vehicle or access to a home and property; they would be required to show some proof of that, like a sales slip or agreement or witness or something.

It therefore seems fair enough that a defendant in a rape trial should be requested to do the same. Here's an interesting interview re: rape trials:

http://www.abc.net.au/stateline/nsw/content/2004/s1253430.htm

As to the starting point; I was referring to community thinking - the first assumption and how that differs from crime to crime.

Pynchme,

'they would be required to show some proof of that, like a sales slip or agreement or witness or something.
'

Not really. It's up to the prosecution to prove they are lying. If proof is readily availble the defense might save everyone the time and bother, but the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt, not the other way around.

I don't know how you put yourself up as an expert on what the community thinks. That's a pretty weak argument, and is a moot point anyway as it cannot be changed by law. Men accused of rape like the footballers were are assumed guilty. Why do you think the whole team suffered calls of rapists for so long, even after they had been cleared by the authorities.

Even in the Broncos case, the girl was assumed an innocent little flower who got drunk and was taken advantage of by those abusive footballers. Notice the assumption wasn't those innocent poor drunk little boys treated as pieces of meat by the girl for a sexual conquest.

Pynchme indeed,

Re:”...sex tourism to Asia...They can't get a bonk unless it's in the context of exploitation of others with less power in the situation ?”

A gender power difference would be a difficult thing to assess. That is, if I hadn’t first thought about it and done something like exploited the ThaiLoveLinks website and yielded to the pleadings of one of the multitalented lasses to come visit. For the purpose of putting your propostions to the test, I would need to take Ms Lumby’s manual with me. However a great fear of flying precludes me from doing so.

This fear has been with me since a top-actor-chasing moonlighting whore armed with a plastic fork, shoved me back into a cramped rest room right up the arrse end of a 747 as I was exiting it, still doing up my zip with my johnson half hanging out. This horrific event occurred on the last of my many flights (a “red-eye”) to and from Bangkok some time back. I remember my mind just wasn’t processing things very well at the time of the assault and much of this has only come back to me since I have had my feet on the ground and my therapist assisted me with “recovered memory”. I suffer easily from jetlag and DVT (now a rewardless and therefore less publicised complaint) and I get up and stroll the aisles of the plane when trolleys are stowed and cabin lights turned down low.

On disembarkation my attacker had the effrontery to stand at the door and wave good-bye to me and whilst doing so she said “hope you enjoyed the flight SIRRRRRR” with a cheeky smile on her face. I stood there staring at her not noticing whether she had scratches on her face, her uniform was torn or passengers were banking way up the aisles behind me and not even noticing if my little pubic hairs were smeared in her lipstick. Now you know where my hatred of some women comes from (yes Ninaf, I am talking to you here).
(to be continued)

Quote from elsewhere:” "The damage to the Bulldogs Club has been incalculable. Our players, their wives and children were abused and still are. The Club lost millions of dollars in sponsorship and was fined $350,000 by the NRL. At games, our supporters, even now, still have to put up with "rape" taunts.

Since Gary McEvoy made his views public last Monday we have received numerous emails and letters from members of the public stating they have changed their minds about what they were led to believe happened at Coffs Harbour and have apologised to the players and the Club for believing they were guilty.”

Given the above, now read this:

Ninaf: “I thought I would ad that the NSW RCC in conjunction with the media and journalism research centre at UNSW (where my PhD is based) is running a program with the NRL to re-educate (or as I suspect educate for the first time) footballers on how not to rape women. Catharine Lumby and Kath Albury are the academics in charge…”

Talk about piling gall on gall! I am surprised this has not been picked up by anyone examining this pathetic woman's statements so far, in the debate.

pynchme:"If a fellow believes that a potential sex partner who has been drinking is still capable of giving consent then having evidence of consent will help to show that. The issue is less about drinking per se, and more about retaining the capacity to give consent."

So if a woman is under the influence of any kind of mind-altering substance or in any other kind of disinhibitory situation, she may not have sex? What a wowserish position.

What then of a man? Is he also prohibited from having sex under those conditions? When I was a young bloke, I'd never have got laid without a bit of Dutch courage of some kind.

What happens if they're both under the weather? Is he still responsible, while she can have her fling in the knowledge she can claim she was raped if it goes wrong or she gets some post-coital second-thoughts?

Antiseptic: This is an interesting article written by a man on issues of consent:

http://www.blognosh.com/2008/07/the-opposite-of/

I understand what you're saying about how muddled things can get; but they won't be any more grey than they are now.

Sex between people who've been drinking isn't "prohibited". I don;t think the law does or could do such a thing.

Apart from all the legal biz; one thing I've never understood is how anyone can engage in sexual intimacy with anyone who was apparently repelled by the idea when sober. You or somebody posted about women regretting sex in the morning; but we have all heard jokes about men who had buyer's remorse haven't we. It would be just awful (I think, anyway) to be the object of someone else's regret.

Roscop it's interesting that you identify some woman-hatred in yourself and that you relate a traumatic event. Sounds awful - how though does that translate to a hatred of feminism? Wouldn't you be opposed to rape and predation ? How does stopping laws and action that aims to prevent predation and protect victims of violence help you or people who share similar experiences ?

Houellebecq: <"I don't know how you put yourself up as an expert on what the community thinks...">

I don't.

<"...juror judgements in rape trials are influenced more by the attitudes, beliefs and biases about rape which jurors bring with them into the courtroom than by the objective facts presented, and that stereotypical beliefs about rape and victims of it still exist within the community...

...jurors may query a claim of non-consent if a complainant did not verbalise it or physically resist. Jurors may also question how a defendant could reasonably be expected to know that the complainant was not consenting if she gave no overt sign that she was not consenting...">

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi344t.html

Pynchme:"Apart from all the legal biz; one thing I've never understood is how anyone can engage in sexual intimacy with anyone who was apparently repelled by the idea when sober."

I'd suggest that is an extremely rare situation. If two people have got drunk together, they are at least friends surely? If they met after having become drunk, how would either of them know how the other one felt when sober? Often, as I said about myself as a young bloke, it's got nothing to do with attraction or otherwise, merely overcoming shyness and insecurity and perhaps some social conditioning to do something you'd like to do but don't feel able to while sober.

By making consumption of alcohol or drugs an automatic bar to proving consent, all you are saying is that if a woman has regrets about the choices she made she can repudiate them with no onus of proof other than proving she had been drinking. Then the onus of proof falls on the man to demonstrate that consent was obtained. If he has "buyer's remorse" what recourse is open to him?

It's yet another example of the ways in which you demonstrate contempt for the capacity of women to take responsibility for their own decisions, but must look to responsible men to do it for them.

To digress a little, it strikes me that when we have a set of laws (Child Support) which automatically target fathers' income (yes, sometimes mothers' income too, but not as often) it is good to establish right at the outset that he is the responsible party. After all, it could get quite complicated if he claims he was not in a state to give informed consent and that he is therefore not responsible.

'<"...juror judgements in rape trials are influenced more by the attitudes, beliefs and biases about rape which jurors bring with them into the courtroom than by the objective facts presented, and that stereotypical beliefs about rape and victims of it still exist within the community...
'

As I've said, you cant legislate against this. The jury is supposed to represent the community.

'...jurors may query a claim of non-consent if a complainant did not verbalise it or physically resist. Jurors may also question how a defendant could reasonably be expected to know that the complainant was not consenting if she gave no overt sign that she was not consenting..."'

And well they might. So first you complain about jurors not using 'objective facts presented', now you think it's a problem when they do use the 'objective facts presented'.

I’ve had another look at the patently inadequate statistics at the end of the NSWRCC 2007-08 annual report. I still wonder why there is no proper cohort analysis of caller nos. All we are given are the number of new callers and repeat callers and a few percentages, with no comparison with the previous year. So I am wondering how many callers are police working on sexual assault/rape cases or therapists dealing with alleged victims etc etc. Do I have to assume that these are included in the 27% shown as “Supporters”? And then we are given a breakdown according to Disability and Cultural background…do we apply the numbers and percentages for those categories to “Supporters”?
There are no stats on face to face case work or court attendance etc. etc. and there is no information on key performance indicators.

With the space allocated to photos far exceeding the space allocated to token stats, I guess the NSWRCC just doesn’t think it is accountable to the public for spending taxpayer money. What do others think?

Do you think that the NSWRCC Annual Report should be independently audited?

http://www.nswrapecrisis.com.au/Resources/Annual_Report_2007-08.pdf

Houellebecq: I'm now wondering if you're trying to sound like an idiot or if it's unavoidable. The crux of our discussion was the community's assumption of 'consent', whereby the complainant is then required to prove a negative - that is, that she (or he) did *not* consent, such as by evidence of struggle etc.

The alternative idea is that consent should not be assumed - by anyone (especially, first of all - the offender) unless it is expressly given. That then would put the onus on the accused to prove, or at least state, what steps he (or occasionally, she) took to establish consent.

The quotes provided and the link were in response to your apparent need to be spoonfed some evidence that studies are done of community beliefs and attitudes to such matters.

Roscop: How about you email the site and ask them directly. Maybe you can check next year to see where your contact was recorded in the stats.

- and btw, how would shutting down a service like the RCC be of any help to men? I realize that you don't give a toss about female SA victims; although one would think that you'd share some common empathy with them... but I would also think you'd care about male victims of sexual assault (since you say you've been one, and how traumatized you were). I don't know any woman who doesn't care about SA victims, whether male or female. Can you explain why it's different for you ?

Now there's an idea. Maybe you could phone the centre and find someone with whom to discuss these issues - sort of work through it. Seriously - the service is there to help.

Antispectic: For once I actually agree with most of what you posted. You made some good points.

I think that it would be, and is, quite correct for men to make a statement to police and undergo a rape kit exam if they believe that they did not or could not consent to sex. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't.

Maybe the biz about paternity claims would even be dependent on that - not sure; I'd have to think about it a lot more.
In any case, a lot of men who have impregnated women just skip anyway. Unless the woman has the financial means to compell them to a paternity tests and whatnot, what's to stop them?

Short story: I once had contact from a young man from a small town who went to stay with an old school friend living in a large city. The friend engaged him in some celebratory drinking and he suspects that he might have been slipped something more. He woke the next morning with a sore bottom and semen evidence. He was too ashamed and didn't know where or how to seek help. He was traumatized. He had no money so felt he had to stay put while he worked something out. He was scared to go to sleep. That's an example of two people getting on the turps. Would you say he had a case ?

Pynchme,

Nice sidestep. And more arrogance. I had another look at your links...

* 9 in 10 respondents rejected that women are more likely to be raped by strangers

* about three quarters agreed that false claims of rape are rare and nine in 10 could say (if a juror starts with the assumption that women often lie about rape, this will influence the way s/he interprets testimony)

* 85 percent disagreed that women often say 'no' when they mean 'yes' and nine in 10 could say (testimony that the complainant said 'no' is unlikely to convince jurors with this belief that she did not consent)

* 93 percent of males and 96 percent of females disagreed that women who are raped often ask for it

I rest my case.

Houellebecq,

Just put this link again so that others may read it in full.

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi2/tandi344t.html

The changing attitudes are no doubt reflected in proposed changes towards the need to gain explicit consent.

The community attitude to the Bulldogs and other footy clubs and players is understandable given the long list of offences attributed to them. I posted the link before.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rugby_league_incidents

http://fulltext.ausport.gov.au/fulltext/2004/abc/s1100551.asp

If any of the clubs are doing something to get footballers back to being community icons for all the best reasons than good on them (at last), whatever the motive (possibly sponsorship concerns).

Here is another story that got published in the Sydney Morning Herald: “A lost jacket and a stolen heart”. Who believes the garbage that gets printed in the Fairfax press these days? Once upon a time Fairfax used to produce very respectable broadsheet newspapers. Now it will publish any trash including that written by Adele Horin. Needless to say I stopped buying it long ago.

Out of the alleged sexual assault on Nina Funnell and lost jacket stories which do you think is the more credible? I go for the lost jacket story myself and not just because the teller is much more appealing.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/lifeandstyle/a-lost-jacket-mystery-man-and-a-stolen-heart/2009/01/17/1231609053191.html

To view the video, go to http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=zQybOsM-7Qw

Is the OLO alleged sexual assault article authored by Nina Funnell, a “viral ad” for the NSWRCC?

You've been had: Sydney Cinderella's 'jacket man' exposed as viral ad
http://www.smh.com.au/news/home/technology/sydney-cinderellas-jacket-man-exposed/2009/01/20/1232213599896.html

pynchme,

Man you're funny. Even in the face of your whole argument imploding by the use of evidence you provided, you still attempt to sidestep. Hoist with your own petard!

First you say in a court of law a *defendent* has to prove their innocence. When that old saying 'innocent until proven guilty' is brought up, you sidestep by saying the '*community*'s assumption of 'consent' is the deciding factor.

You state 'attitudes, beliefs and biases' are the problem, but only if those biases favour the defendent.

If the the jury are silly enough *not* to assume rape (guilt), even so much as '*query*[ing] a claim of non-consent if a complainant did not verbalise it or physically resist. ', then that's a problem? I'd say it's a healthy judicial system.

Then when asked how you can measure this community's assumption factor (leaving out the issue of how you quantify what bearing it has on actual trials) you come up with a report with figures that actually show that the majority (even the vast majority in some cases) of people show attitudes that would align their 'attitudes, beliefs and biases' with the prosecution anyway.

When this is pointed out, you retort with 'The *changing* attitudes are no doubt reflected in proposed changes towards the need to gain explicit consent.'

Thank you. That's the best laugh I've had all day.

Triple j:Hack :Saturday, 15 November 2008, 12:00:00 AM

“It's estimated only around 15% of sexual assault victims report the crime to police, and by far most victims are women. This week Hack takes a look at why so many women don't report the crime. Ronan Sharkey talks to a young woman who was sexually assaulted and did report.”

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/triplej/tv/hack_sexualAssault.mp4

It should come as no surprise that the “young woman” in this video clip is Nina Funnell. Note what is not disclosed in the video clip and that is the material fact that Ms Funnell is on the management committee of the NSWRCC. Whilst you’re at it take a look at the manageress of the NSWRCC, Karen Willis. You couldn’t find a more feminine woman than that, could you? From my observations these types of women’s services seem to attract this type of woman.

Houellebecq:

The law is contradictory and community attitudes are changing.

However, it's still the fact that few crimes are reported; and many fewer ever reach convicted.

Now, if you can dispense with the diversionary hysterics, please try to address the point. How are men (and some women) going to do to negotiate consent? How will people who want sex going to be able to show afterwards, should a charge of SA be made, what they did to assure themselves that the person they were with really wanted to have sex ?

Roscop:

<"Whilst you’re at it take a look at the manageress of the NSWRCC, Karen Willis. You couldn’t find a more feminine woman than that, could you? From my observations these types of women’s services seem to attract this type of woman.".

What are you saying there? What sort of woman do you mean?

Pynchme:"it's still the fact that few crimes are reported"

No, it's yet another unsubstantiated claim. Do try to distinguish between facts and fantasies: your output would be so much more worthwhile.

Pynchme:"How are men (and some women) going to do to negotiate consent? How will people who want sex going to be able to show afterwards, should a charge of SA be made, what they did to assure themselves that the person they were with really wanted to have sex ?"

The time-honoured way among honourable people is to ask. What do you suggest should replace that? What standard of proof is enough in the world of the grrls who want to be victims?

Pynchme:"The law is contradictory and community attitudes are changing."

What aspects are contradictory? The law is perfectly in accordance with Westminster principles of justice, which demand proof beyond reasonable doubt in criminal matters. That applies to any crime, from shoplifting to murder.

As for "community attitudes", it would be surprising if the years of "woman as perpetual victim" propaganda jadn't had some impact. Nonetheless, sensible people recognise that it takes two to tango and most men are not interested in sex with an unwilling partner. The fact that women sometimes change their mind about their willingness post-facto is a matter for themselves, not for the Courts.

Pynchme:"it's still the fact that few crimes are reported"

No, it's yet another unsubstantiated claim. Do try to distinguish between facts and fantasies: your output would be so much more worthwhile.

Pynchme:"How are men (and some women) going to do to negotiate consent? How will people who want sex going to be able to show afterwards, should a charge of SA be made, what they did to assure themselves that the person they were with really wanted to have sex ?"

The time-honoured way among honourable people is to ask. What do you suggest should replace that? What standard of proof is enough in the world of the grrls who want to be victims?

Pynchme:"The law is contradictory and community attitudes are changing."

What aspects are contradictory? The law is perfectly in accordance with Westminster principles of justice, which demand proof beyond reasonable doubt in criminal matters. That applies to any crime, from shoplifting to murder.

As for "community attitudes", it would be surprising if the years of "woman as perpetual victim" propaganda hadn't had some impact. Nonetheless, sensible people recognise that it takes two to tango and most men are not interested in sex with an unwilling partner. The fact that women sometimes change their mind about their willingness post-facto is a matter for themselves, not for the Courts.

As always, your view is based on your contempt for the capacity of women to be in charge of their own outcomes.

An example of keeping the bastards (like the NSWRCC with its bodgey Annual Report statistics) honest:

<email begins>
Subject: Homicide in Australia: 2006-07 National Homicide Monitoring Program annual report [Sec: Unclassified]

Dear Mr xxxx,

Thank you for your enquiry and apologies for the lateness in reply.

Your request alerted us to an error within the NHMP 2006-07 Annual Report. Homicide statistics differ if they are reported on the victims’ relationship with their offender or offenders’ relation with the victim. In this case, there was a transcription error as we moved between the two. Instead of 7 homicides involving a mother and 15 involving male family members killing a child as originally stated, 11 homicides involved a mother and 11 homicides involved a male family member killing a child in 2006-07.

This has now been corrected in the online version of the document.

Regarding your request, of the 11 homicides that involved a male family member, 6 involved biological fathers of the child and 5 were de-facto partners of the mother, who lived with the child. One biological father murdered two children.

We acknowledge the usage of male family member and mother is not a useful way of classifying relationship between a child homicide victim and their offender. In future reports we will employ classifications that provide a more detailed classification of the relationship between child victims and offenders.

Partly as a consequence of your email, we have started to look at child homicide in more detail and plan to publish more on this later in the calendar year.

Regards,
xxxxx

Xxxx xxxx
Crime Monitoring Program
Australian Institute of Criminology
<email ends>

Nice work, roscop. Let's hope the AIC comes up with some suggestions on how to stop these tragedies

There seem to be a lot of "transcription errors" painting women in a more-favourable and men in a less-favourable light lately...

Can you clarify in what way are women painted in a more favourable light?

Pynchme:"Can you clarify in what way are women painted in a more favourable light?"

Read above. You might like to also recall the recent White Ribbon debacle, in which the statement was made that "1/3 of boys think it acceptable to hit a girl". Some 2 or 3 weeks later (after the campaign had run its course) a letter appeared in the national press, correcting the claim to "1/3 of girls think it acceptable to hit boys" and blaming a "transcription error".

Did you really need that pointed out?

Ahh and here this is why so many people advise me not to bother; that providing you with information is a waste of time. You just circle straight back to your original lie. I looked through all of that material and didn't see that transposition error. What I saw was a statement that a proportion of interviewees (both boys and girls) thought it was acceptable to hit boys; and another portion that thought that under certain circumstances it was ok to hit girls.
Also there was the statement that boys thought girls hitting them was funny.

Women don't have to be painted in a favourable light. There are certainly some problematic and vicious women amongst us; but in general females do exist in a more favourable light. We don't murder as much as white men; bash others; sexually molest or rape as much by a long way. That said, I believe there are many more decent men than thugs, though by the way so many of you here condone, excuse and incite violent behaviour, I sometimes wonder.

Also your claims that feminists/ women/ child support responsibilities cause men to suicide. That's simply untrue. Suicide rates for both sexes have been fluctuating downwards for a century.

That there are men still killing themselves is unacceptable. Marriage is a protective factor for both sexes; which should point us towards mutual respect and care, not an adversarial stance.
Men who suicide include those who have been incarcerated; many on drugs, some who have committed homicide and suicide together; and people - often men - who have mental illness. A very large proportion of men with mental illness or chronic substance abuse issues have been the victim of some trauma; very often sexual assault. Overwhelmingly by another, trusted male.

So don't give me your hate woman/ blame woman rubbish. Start doing something constructive like working to stop violence and sexual assault of ALL people and children.

I'll ask again in case you somehow overlooked the following questions:

How are men (and some women) going to do to negotiate consent? How will people who want sex going to be able to show afterwards, should a charge of SA be made, what they did to assure themselves that the person they were with really wanted to have sex ?

Roscop:

<"Whilst you’re at it take a look at the manageress of the NSWRCC, Karen Willis. You couldn’t find a more feminine woman than that, could you? From my observations these types of women’s services seem to attract this type of woman.".

What are you saying there? What sort of woman do you mean?

Pynchme, I am referring to the manageress’s femininity. Go to the NSWRCC annual report and have a look. Can you see anything feminine about this “know-all” woman? I can’t even see a hint of femininity. What do you see?

I guess next you’ll ask me what’s that got to do with her role as manageress of the NSWRCC, to which I’d say go figure for yourself.

Well Roscop even if she were not feminine (how can you
tell that? Do you know her? What do you mean by
"feminine" ?)

What has it got to do with anything?

pynchme:"Also your claims that feminists/ women/ child support responsibilities cause men to suicide. That's simply untrue."

A lot of men seem to disagree with you, but what would they know, eh?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/compose-message-article.asp?article=8258

A quote from the article:"Wendy Sturgess, chief executive for Crisis Support Services, said Mensline Australia, a phone line for fathers suffering after family break-ups, had seen a spike in calls from anguished fathers.

Ms Sturgess said: "We've had many, many calls … in the past two days from right around the country from men saying to us, 'I know what it's like to be driven to that point. I know what it's like to be so much in pain that that's the only way I can think, to end my life or to end my children's lives.' Some men are ringing, saying … 'I realise how close I've been to doing that myself."'"

I'll have that apology now, thanks...

Pynchme, you asked me how can I tell that Karen Willis is not feminine. Judge for yourself. Just take a look at her appearance and mannerisms in this video clip: http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/triplej/tv/hack_sexualAssault.mp4

Ronan Sharkey(4:28): “Sometimes women aren’t even sure if an incident was sexual assault”

Karen Willis:”Quite a lot of young women will ring us and say something along the lines…oh I’ve been going out with my boyfriend for a month…I know you always have to provide oral sex at the end of a date but last night he made me go all the way…is that sexual assault?”

What we can also tell from this video clip is that the NSWRCC gets a lot of dumbass young women callers who have been swallowing their boyfriends’ cum for a month without developing any sexual urges of their own. Their boyfriends made them let them put it in where nature intended it to go. They then have to ring up Aunt Karen Willis’s mob to find out if that is sexual assault.

Anti - despite your fervent wish that men suicide at a high rate because of CSA; separation from their children and the like - they do not suicide at anything like the rate you claim. In fact, I don't think I have ever seen any proven link between CSA clientele and suicide. I know that loss of a family is traumatic for anyone; but the rates you claim are not all about family loss. As I pointed out; very young men and very aged men suicide; men who have mental illness, drug and alcohol problems; who have been victims of sexual and other types of assault and so on...

As to referring to a spike in calls and so forth; I don't think the solution to helping men who are seriously depressed and suicidal is to put children in their care without supervision (which could also be considered an added stress). Many of the homicides and homicide/suicides that we hear about take place while visitation is taking place - that is, while the men have the children in their care and while the mother is complying with court directives.
I think what we're seeing is men; many of whom might be depressed; acting out the threats they made that caused the break up of the union in the first place.

Roscop: You said you were a victim of a sexual assault. How is it then that you hate victims of sexual assault ?

Also - rape victims include very elderly women; tots; females and males of all ages; disability; class and levels of attractivness. Why does a person's "femininity" give them greater credibility when acting on behalf of people who have been raped ?

After all this, btw, not one of you has been able to say how a person might demonstrate that consent had been gained. Have any of you got any ideas on that yet?