Thursday, July 16, 2009

[cry rape] sorting out the truth from the lies

Click the pic to see the vid of four drunk girls who got into a cab in Edmonton, started to smoke, which is illegal there, they got nasty and refused to pay, then, when they got out of the cab, told passers-by he'd raped them.

Let me report what happened. The cabbie was sensible enough to have caught it on film and when the police came to investigate his rape of them, he showed them the footage.

The police reaction? Oh, we can't charge you then. Er ... pardon? Case closed? Now just one minute! They falsely accused me, he told them. No, we're closing the case - no case to answer. Oh yes there is, he pressed. There's the little matter that if I hadn't had that tape, my reputation, marriage, job etc. would have been shot. I want those girls charged!

The police refused so he's brought a civil case against the four and wants $60 000 compensation. Naturally, I hope he gets at least a portion of it to teach them a lesson and that it has to come from them themselves, not from daddy or mummy. It would be nice to see them have to do some community work up to the adjudged amount.

Moving on ...

This BBC audio is long but you'll get the idea some minutes in. Do listen to as much as you can because it shows the other side of the story.

Between 3 and 9% of reported rapes turn out to be false after investigation, according to the BBC. I would hazard a guess that it would be far more than that. The majority of perpetrators are known to the victim and 97% of callers to Rape Crisis lines knew their assailant prior to the assault.

In the UK, an unfounded charge remains on someone's Criminal Record Bureau (CRB) file permanently, which can affect future job prospects. Complainants are granted total anonymity on first reporting a rape. According to the 1976 Sexual Offences Act, it is a criminal offence for the media to reveal a victim's identity or any other information that might lead to them being identified.

If they are charged with an offence such as perverting the course of justice or perjury in relation to their complaint they can then be named but there is no protection for those falsely accused of committing an assault.

There is no chance for the man or boy accused. Surely while he is still not proven guilty, he shouldn't get named, just as the girl doesn't. Then, if he's convicted or she's been found to be lying, the guilty party gets named publicly so people can be on their guard in future.

One commenter named Elsa wrote, about this story:

Why in a week in which three horrific men were finally jailed for murdering and raping women, does the BBC decide to run an article and air a radio discussion on the minuscule number of men wrongly accused of rape?

Therein lies the problem - in her level of concern for one gender only. She doesn't give a damn about the falsely accused boys. For her information, the number is hardly miniscule.

From America:

In a study that span nine years, sociologist Eugene J. Kanin’s findings were that in the United States, 41% of rape allegations are false. Kanin discovered that most of the false accusers were motivated by a need for an alibi or seeking revenge.

Kanin was once popular and highly praised by the feminist movement for his groundbreaking research on male sexual aggression. His studies on false rape accusations have received very little interest.

These findings are not exceptional. The U.S. Air Force studied over five hundred rape accusations in 1985. More than 130 of the accusers admitted, either just before they took a lie detector test or after they had failed it, that no rape occurred. A more in depth investigation by independent reviewers established that 60% of the original rape allegations were a sham.

Linda Fairstein is the head of the New York County District Attorney's Sex Crimes Unit. She states there are a concerning 4,000 reports of rape each year in Manhattan. Of these, about 2,000 did not happen.

Fortunately, not all women are like Elsa. Victoria Oxley, of Essex, wrote:

I think it is disgusting that girls falsely accuse men of rape. The increase of false accusations of rape make the women who have been raped not want to come forward. Therefore, there are many actual rapists that are still out there, free to attack again.

She really does have a point, you know, about the negative effect on women and girls themselves and how spurious accusations will rebound and make women and girls less safe overall. The stories above have been about young women and the stats on false accusations tend to drop off in the older age group who report rape. For a woman to be raped is something most men can't fully conceptualize and even harder to conceptualize is the difference between consent and rape. We're not talking here about line ball cases like Mike Tyson.

We're talking about where it's pretty clear and after some warning, especially outside marriage. I once spoke with a girl who'd been raped the night before and it was instructive, from the male point of view. My girlfriend tried to explain to me once what it would feel like to have been violated. I should think it would be pretty horrendous, accompanied by enormous anger and severe trauma to the sense of self-worth.

So if it is that horrendous, why then mix it up with lies?

A woman's perspective

Minette Marrin, columnist and mother with two children, wrote some time ago:

Not long ago my small son burst into tears when his older sister told him censoriously that it is men who do all the bad things in the world; men start all the wars and little boys love pretending to shoot and hurt people.

If you want to know what the prevailing orthodoxy is, you have only to listen to school-children; out of the mouths of babes and sucklings comes all the one-sided propaganda about smoking, rain forests, ivory and fur coats. My daughter's attitude was just a watered-down classroom version of the hard-line feminist view that all men are rapists.

Of course it is not difficult to understand misandry. But it would be a tragic mistake to be as unjust to men as they have traditionally been to us.

Yet that is what women seem constantly tempted to do. In the debate on date-rape there seems, on the part of the most vociferous women, to be a wilful indifference towards men. They seem interested only in female sexuality and perspectives, and to discuss these things in a way that is clearly quite incomprehensible to most men.

One solution

There is a simplistic and yet cogent solution which is now maybe too late.

If a man takes his pleasures only with his wife, if we actually have wives instead of one night stands, if parents brought up girls and boys differently to today's free-for-all which saw those four girls in the top vid roaming the streets at night and large numbers of both sexes, drunk and too young to have much discretion on the town at all hours; if internet porn has the plug pulled on it, if the law would act fairly towards both accuser and accused ... then maybe some sort of solution might be forthcoming.

However, no one seems to want that state of affairs so we're stuck with what we have. Therefore, the only immediate relief is in the law adopting the principle of equal anonymity and naming, as mooted above.


For a start, I wasn't in Moscow, a westernized city at western prices but in the centre of the country, in a small city. In those 12 years, I think I heard three times of attempted rape or rape and one of those was a female friend of mine who'd been at my place and insisted on travelling home herself so she took a cab. The man was apparently half drunk and I asked her next day why she'd even got in that cab.

That was rare - and the reason actual rape was rare was perhaps an indictment of that society in other ways. From a man's point of view, there's absolutely no need to rape anyone. I don't know any man over there without a woman - even the hunchback of Notre Dame would have his 'friend'. In the younger set, it tends to be lots of boys and girls mixed up together. So let's say that any urges are quickly gratified and females are not backward in this.

If someone found himself without, then look across the road and there'd be any number you could have, I've heard, for some ridiculously low price. I always thought it ridiculous anyway to pay money for something so readily available but many men seem to avail themselves, maybe for less complications.

Anyway, we're getting off track. The bottom line is that there is no need for rape and if four girls [as in the Edmonton video] had said that, most people, especially the women who know their men back to front, would just laugh. They wouldn't laugh at all the problems they actually do have with their menfolk - the drunkenness, the lack of respect though and in that is a golden lesson if you want a Russian woman - stay in control of yourself and show respect.

And let me add once more that genuine rape is the absolute pits. To use one's power on a woman like that is gutless and unmanly, no matter how many Vikings did it in history. If we can't protect our womenfolk instead of raping them, then we've lost the plot.

Cut back to the west and I shake my head.

Any female I converse with here, she doesn't assume for one moment that it means anything dastardly [although anything's possible if both wanted] but there seem to be a lot of frustrated people round about who do assume it.

After Russia, quite frankly, this amazes me and shows such an unhealthy attitude in this respect, almost creating a paranoia not to go anywhere near a female. We seem, over here, to have lost any sort of normal ability to relate between the genders. I'm sorry but that's how it seems to me.

Since when does talking to a woman constitute "coming on" or "chatting up"? Since when? That's just sick. I'll talk to any woman who wants to talk to me and to hell with seeking anyone's permission and if she thinks this is "chatting up" [which no woman I know does], then perhaps she needs a few years in Russia to get her perspective back. Ditto the men.

What the hell has happened between male and female in the anglo-saxon west?


  1. "If a man takes his pleasures only with his wife, if we actually have wives instead of one night stands, if parents brought up girls and boys differently to today's free-for-all which saw those four girls in the top vid roaming the streets at night and large numbers of both sexes, drunk and too young to have much discretion on the town at all hours; if internet porn has the plug pulled on it, if the law would act fairly towards both accuser and accused ... then maybe some sort of solution might be forthcoming."

    Well now, that's the trick isn't it? I'd say we have an uphill battle on this on, James, but well worth the struggle.
    I've no idea even how to start, but it may be down to those wacky Christians with their absolute morality to lead the way.

    There are some promising clerics out there who seem to have noticed how biblical morality has real life applications today - ones not connected with wealth redistribution.

  2. North Northwester, you got in a little quickly, old son, while I was adding a section to the post. I tend to edit for ten minutes after I post 'to see how it looks'.

    Still, your point stands and as I say in the now added-on section, it's time to get some sort of normality back into relations, as you say, 'not connected with wealth distribution'.

  3. Sorry that was me *typo*

    This man should have been allowed to have charged the women criminally and they should have been convicted first in a criminal court. He's right. What if he'd not had the proof.

    Decent women HATE women like this for they create fear in men in offering any assistance when in need[thinking of a time when my car broke down and no man would help] and mistrust and higher burden of proof for reaal victims to overcome.

    I agree that unless the man has prior convictions for such and it's a public safety warning, his name should not be published until he has been convicted.

    Women need to realize that some crimes/allegations are so heinous one never ,under any circumstances, uses them as WMD for other motives.
    Not only is it a grave injustice to men but real victims of such crimes.
    And although, we also understand any woman, at any time, should be allowed to walk down the street with full safety is not the reality of our world and they need to dress and behave in a way that does not court their own victimization.

    One has to also take responssibility for not recklessly putting themselves in harm's way.

    The sluttish,drunken and loutish way women behave in Britain was a shock to me when I first came here.

    Men can't be vulnerable just because they have a penis and the law should come down HARD on women who do this.

  4. I also want to say further....

    in every other aspect there are implied contracts and so should be the case with sex.

    I do not believe that up until the point of penetration a woman has the right to say 'no' and then it be classified as 'rape' beyond that.

    Sure, kissing is not consent for more, b ut there reaches a point when the behavior is.
    Even for women there is a point of no return and we're acting on instincts that, aside from survival, are the strongest human instincts that cannot be turned on and off like a tap.

    * The feminists are going to kill me for that. :)

  5. ...any woman, at any time, should be allowed to walk down the street with full safety...

    Right on! I completely agree. I want any woman who sees me coming not to think, 'Ahhhh, fear,' or 'Groan, not him again,' but to think, 'This might be a bit of fun,' and know she calls the tune. I want her to feel, inside, she'd be protected too.

    I don't see anything saintly in this at all - it's just a biological need to do what needs doing.

  6. Our comments crossed over then, Uber. This is about the 12.04 one.

    Interesting about the kissing because so much is said in a kiss and that's why women in particular can read a lot from it.

    I agree the kiss in itself is not consent but it does self-actualize. If he starts it and she shows, through coolness in her response, that she's not sure, then a man should back off and wait for her to move forward or until her acquiescence and body language say for him to try again.

    Vice versa too.

    If she doesn't want and switches off, then it is over. If she tentatively moves forward in the kiss, then that's his signal to go carefully forward little by little and seeing if she'll go with him. Often she wants him to lead.

    A kiss is a thousand times better than words for getting the contract you speak of right and if there's no kissing and it goes straight to N1, then I fail to see how there can be any complaints from either side.

    If there is a kiss, then it directs everything else.

    She can then turn around and invite him, via body language, to try again. He has a lot to sort out in his mind - is she a teaser, is she just unsure, does she need a bit of a push?

    The word rape at this stage is a bit silly. He should be sensitive enough even at a point where the animal is beginning to take over inside him [and if it doesn't, then that's not a great compliment to her] and she, in turn, has to understand his control lessens in response to her allure.

    Even then the kiss rules and determines where it goes to.

    There does come a point though where both have, let's say, got down and descended into some pretty heavy stuff and I do think that's the point where it's pretty difficult to call rape.

    If she stops and pulls away at the point, as angry as he might feel, all is well and he'll probably get a second go later, after the next champas.

    If he plunges on now and uses force to hold her down, then that's rape, on the grounds that he wasn't reading her at all.

    It's so difficult to define though.

  7. Yes, I do think the taxi driver should have been allowed to have these silly girls charged. To be accused of rape is a terrible thing for an honourable man. These girls obviously do not know what "rape" really means and if they had had a little feminist education, they would know that it is something not to be joked about.
    The worrying factor remains, though, the number of women who do not report rape. Things are better than they were but women are still scared of having their sexual history used against them and really it has nothing to do with a present charge of rape.
    Make no mistake: men who rape are men who HATE women. They are not men who like women so I don't think your scenario of the tender kiss comes into play, James.
    There has never been a time when the majority of men have slept only with their wives so I don't know why you would think they would start now. Why don't you poll your male readers on how many of them would refuse a no-strings, no-telling, affair?

  8. It would depend on the woman of course. There'd be many who'd try it with a secretary or whatever.

    You mention men who hate women. Do you think that there are any women in existence who hate men?

    How do we, as a society, get back from that mutual hate?

  9. That's a valid and interesting theory WC on why women don't report rape.

    I think there is a lot of truth to what you say but also, many people are ignornat about rape laws.

    For instance:

    Many women[and men, no doubt] do not realize a woman can also be charged and convicted of rape against a man, which carries the same penalties.


    Many people are not aware that a woman under the influence of alcohol or drugs to the point that she cannot legally give consent has the same protections as a minor even if she DOES give consent, it being nullified by her temporary inability to give legal consent.

    There is MORE protection for BOTH parties under the laws governing rape than people are usually aware.

    One thing that should be abolished as both you and James point out- in my NOT SO HUMBLE opinion- is
    1/ Her sexual history as it's completely irrelevant to the specific incident.
    2/ No man's name should be published and the law should be required to go to great pains to protect his reputation/privacy until conviction.

    In both instances only if either party has past history of alleging rape or being accused of rape should their past even be a consideration even at trial.

    James you have inspired me to write a post on this,although from a different angle, which I hope you will read. I just so happen to have done extensive research about rape laws many years ago.
    I have no doubt you will agree with it,but feel free not to.

  10. Interesting point James about the man's control lessening.....
    so does a woman's , which is why women should not put themselves in situations where their desire or lack thereof could be misinterpreted. And if a woman doesn't have any real desire for a man,she should not be kissing him at all[simply because she feels like kissing]

    I think regardless of how steamy a kissing session is both parties should be able to control themselves. I meant 'beyond kissing' a person loses control and if gone beyond that point,then a woman can't really in all fairness cry she was not consenting and implying sex was a desired outcome.

    But certainly not at the kissing stage.

    I never kiss a man I have no desire to have sex with.Even the ones I do, I do not kiss until I have been dating someone for about 3 wks[barring an end of date peck on the cheek] because beyond that steamy kiss one isn't going to be able to control themselves- and in this instance- I mean ME LOL

    So people have to keep themselves in check and they are either in the game or out...there'd be no misjudgements or blurred lines then.

  11. It's a bit like a point in my book when the guy says to her, 'You want a massage?' [meaning her usual].

    She says no immediately and he asks, knowing the answer, 'Don't you like my massages?'

    She answers, 'I haven't time to make love now. I have to go to work.'

  12. W.C Not all rapists are men, not all victims of rape are women.

    And whilst the standard is that rape is a crime of violence, sometimes not.

    The sex and violence centers in the frontal lobe of the brain are side by side. They have found that in rapists they overlap so when ones sexual or violent responses are triggered in these people, it automatically triggers the other and rape occurs.
    Some of these 'people' get sexually aroused by violence, some get violent when sexually aroused.

    But from a biological standpoint, and due to very high levels of testosterone in men, and the procreation instinct very high,rape is a normal response to sexual arousal and men have to fight that urge[and are almost victims to their own hormones/biology] and must go against what is natural due to societal constraints.

    In every species of animal a 'rapist' will be ostracized, even a fruit fly, because biologically, it has to be the woman who decides the matter of procreation for the survival of the species[by way of gene selection]because the male of all species procreate too indiscriminately, which is counter productive to the evolutionary process.

    Rape is a natural biological reaction[as is paedophilia- to a point] that men are expected to fight nature and his own biological urges -which must be extremely hard.

  13. Sorry for hogging your comments section...

  14. That's what the comments section is for.

    Yeah, there's always this fight inside, especially when it gets to the business end of the matter.

    When I was campaigning hard with my soon to be first wife, she let me in by degrees [she was pretty experienced] and just before the point, asked me if I'd wait till tomorrow [no laughing permitted].

    It was line ball [excuse the expression here] but I did stop. That earned me the best five nights in a row the next night.

    Now here's the thing - she'd already said yes [on the top of a mountain] to marrying me. So she was taking a risk but I think she had my measure, just quietly.

    We can stop if there's an advantage in it, that's all I'm saying. :)

  15. LOL James! I have no doubt you only like the yes if it follows weeks of deliciously tormenting no's.

  16. You may be sure that the next thousand true rapes will not be committed by one thousand rapists, but a relative handful. That is the problem with raising a discussion on society as it may relate to rape. The rapist, like the pedophile, is immune to change, resistant to control, and is always prolific.
    Albert de Salvo, before he graduated to murder, committed one thousand rapes a year, and as many as six in one day.
    Even date rapists are always of the serial type.

  17. You're referring, xlbrl, to the sociopathic type.

  18. Uber, I totally agree with all that you say, especially about not publishing a man's name until conviction. True, not all rape is carried out by men and it is, perhaps, even harder for a man to report because of the taunts he will get from other men who will wonder why he didn't use his physical strength against the woman.
    To answer your question, James, I have never met a woman who hates men, probably because it's a concept alien to me. Thjere are some women who hate men but not as many as you imagine, methinks. There was a mistaken movement calling itself "feminist" in the late 70s/early 80s which preached that women should not love men, in any sense of the word. It upset many of us who were fighting merely for women's rights, as in equal pay and opportunity. I would agree with you that a woman, or anyone else, for that matter, should be able to walk down a street free of fear. Men do have a responsibility here and they should not frighten women. They may not even realise they are doing it . The sound of footsteps behind you in the dark, quickening and slowing as you do, can be terrifying, for instance.

  19. Not sure what you mean. What rape is not sociopathic rape?
    Be that as it may, I suspect the great majority of rape that occurs is not done by the one-time rapist, if he exists.

  20. Rape on a technicality, e.g. a husband with whom the wife decided next day it was rape - that's a non-sociopathic instance.

  21. OK. Except that leaves us nowhere. A civilized, mature woman of my aquiantance told me that any woman that tells you she does not have the desire to be "thrown down" is lying. It is when we remove that instinct of aggression from the male that women--among themselves--complain about yet another quality lacking in men.
    And I hear they are complaining a lot about that one lately.

  22. XLBRL- You're friend is right.

    Thanks, W.C. I think our views are very similar.It's a shame though that any independant woman who believes in equalty is seen as a manhater.This is why I do not like to be considered a feminist ,and am not one,but do believe very strongly in women being treated as equals.

  23. I wasn’t going to post, because it seemed everything I would have said to some degree, was already mentioned by other posters.

    some great research/facts there. I agree with equality, but some take it too far and as you said, really come across as anti-men.

    I do wonder at your statement "How do we, as a society, get back from that mutual hate?"
    I wonder if the issue is the break down of societal norms, gender roles even, that has left people fearful or lacking in guidelines at conduct? Just a thought, no data to back it up. I do know that we only have our circle of influence as to promoting change with things.
    (and, I do not believe in strict gender roles, as I would dread such confinement)

    there's a fine line between 'ravish' fantasies and 'rape' fantasies. I couldn't imagine any woman fantasizing about the reality of rape (being in the medical field, I've had to council some rape victims). On the other side, yes, most women want their men, to be men.

  24. 'Between 3 and 9% of reported rapes turn out to be false after investigation, according to the BBC. I would hazard a guess that it would be far more than that.'

    Thirty years ago, and perhaps more, it was reported that forty per cent of all reported rapes were bogus (ie a figment of the woman's imagination). Given the appalling decline in educational standards and social mores, and the influence of certain ill educated, unintelligent and all too obviously misandrist 'wimmin', I doubt that things have changed other than for the worse as far as men are concerned.

  25. LMFAO @ Ubermouth. You're quite right dear: one of the consequences of giving women too much freedom to shoot from the lip is that men can no longer be arsed to pretend to take women seriously.

    The sisters are doing it for themselves, until the battery runs out, and then they need a man to tell them how to change it.

  26. Thanks all contributors here and I appreciated that the sentiments were tipping to the hoeful side of the ledger in the sense of finding a solution.

    Take someone who hasn't contributed here as an example, say Cherie. Take me [not literally, of course]. She doesn't hate men but she has some reason. I don't hate women but have some reason.

    The reason for the misandry and misogyny must lie elsewhere and William touched on it. I personally think it suits the political book of certain people through the past decades that something which has always simmered below the surface - the misunderstanding and annoyance at times - should be blown out of proportion.

    Both Uber and Welshcakes mention equality. Now that it's way over equality [you know there is a positive discrimination policy in place], it seems it's going to swing back a little.

    My friend has a model of a ship going down a wide canal, swinging wildly and crashing into the bank one side, then swinging wildly over to the otehr side and crashing into the opposite bank, all the while going down the canal and damaging itself as it goes.

    I think that sums it up.


Your thoughts on this?