Antiwomen: << I think I understand how you feel. It must be a bit like the way I felt when I was falsely accused of being "violent", by a woman who understood the sytem.
>>

Nina Funnell published an article at OLO [ http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8258 ] in which she detailed a sexual assault against her, including the police station where she reported the assault and some of the personal effects of the attack on her.

On the other hand, the clearly misogynist Antiseptic claims to have been falsely accused of violence by a woman, without providing any details of the alleged assault. Indeed, he's informed us previously that he's a solidly-built bloke of gruff demeanour, so much so that he thinks none of those he abuses here would stand up to him IRL.

Given that Ms Funnell has gone on record here and officially reported the assault against her, I'm inclined to believe her. On the other hand, Antiseptic is on record here (ad nauseam) as a misogynist bully, so I'm disinclined to believe his claim of innocence.

Just as he claims that his offensive bullying behaviour at OLO is humorous, I suspect that the behaviour that prompted accusations of violence was interpreted somewhat differently by its object than by its perpetrator.

Antiseptic doth protest too much, methinks.

ninaf:"by the time a boy turns 18, one in seven will have expereinced some form of inapropriate sexual contact)"

What do you mean by "inappropriate"? Some examples would be helpful.

ninaf:"We know that less than 1 per cent of rape cases are successfully prosecuted anyway"

Not according to the courts. it is this constant attempt to inflate figures that worries me with that organisation. Even in the annual reports there are serious discrepancies between data in the body and data in the tabulated section.

ninaf:"We know that less than 1 per cent of rape cases are successfully prosecuted anyway"

How do you "know"? Don't cite the NSWRCC, their claims are already suspect.

ninaf:"there is still a lot of prejudice against victims (even if she was raped she must have been asking for it- type logic)"

That's not prejudice, it's sketicism and it is a healthy thing for anybody to possess. I take your point about the organisation not having a role in determining the truth of a claim, but surely it must do so internally if only so that it doesn't misallocate resources.

Let me ask you what would happen if I was to ring up and claim that I'd been raped six months ago? What would be the process?

CJMorgan: "Antiseptic claims to have been falsely accused of violence by a woman, without providing any details of the alleged assault."

I've not gone into details of my encounter with the flying spaghetti monster, or my time as leader of the world or all sorts of other things that didn't happen. I have gone into details of what my ex claimed.

Now, little fella, leave my leg alone - sniffing my crotch won't bring you any pleasure at all.

Anti

The concern you raise is valid. Just as gambling hotlines, quit smoking hotlines or childrens help hotlines can be hijacked by people who may not have a gambling addiction, smoking addiction or childhood trauma, there is always a chance that a rape crisis hotline can be hijacked by people who are unaffected by sexual assault. The question though is do we therefore suspend the hotline on the assumption that random individuals may abuse it? Personally I believe that to deny the thousands of individuals who use the line for legitimate purposes on the basis that one off twisted individuals may be abusing it is ludicrous. I would also suggest that such individuals would tire of the prank quickly and if they didn't well then maybe speaking to a counsellor is not a bad idea for them anyway...

and pynchme..I agree with your comments especially about not descemding into a moral panic about youth and sexuality. Young people have always been sexually active and I dont read the sexting trend as any more disturbing than any other historical expression of teenage hormone based behaviour... I didnt mean for my article to imply otherwise

"We know that less than 1 per cent of rape cases are successfully prosecuted anyway so with hold a counselling service on the basis that a conviction has not been achieved is ludicrous. We know that only about 15 per cent of cases even get reported to the police"
Nina

I am puzzled as, too why 1 per cent of rape cases are successfully prosecuted.

Perhaps Nina, meant only 1 per cent of ALLEGED rape cases are successfully prosecuted and that only 15 per cent of ALLEGED cases are reported to police.

That is unless the law has been changed and all those who are accused of rape are guilty the moment an allegation is made.

I thought the basis of our laws was innocent until proven guilty. But by Nina's definition once men are accused they are guilty. No court of law needed, so why bother with trials.

Using Nina's figures roughly 7% of cases reported to police, lead to a prosecution.

James H

This seems to be a fairly moot point. If you came home tonight and your place had been ransacked and all your valuable goods stolen you would say that you had been robbed. You wouldn't say that you had been "allegedly" robbed simply because the person who robbed you had not been caught, stood trial, and been found guilty.

As it is with rape cases. If a person forces another to have sex against their will they have been raped regardless of whether the matter is legally agreed upon.

There is a distinction between actual innocence and legal innocence just as there is a distinction between reality and legal fact

ninaf:"The question though is do we therefore suspend the hotline on the assumption that random individuals may abuse it?"

No it's not, it's whether you operate any safeguards to prevent waste and stop those who might be acting maliciously from usurping the resources that should be reserved for victims. No one suggested closing the organisation down. Nor did anyone suggest "prank" calls are the issue.

As James points out, one of the problems with organisations such as the NSWRCC is that they may pander to those who are simply interested in "getting back" at someone. If the organisation is really first point of contact for those claiming to have been raped, it should be offering counselling about the seriousness of making unsubstantiated claims, as well as the rest. Uncritical acceptance simply gives a malicious claimant validation. I have referenced 2 easily-found news stories about women who have done just as I described, so this is not a "one-off".

What is the process if I ring up and make a claim of having been assaulted? Is there any kind of effort to determine the veracity of claims?