Written in response to discourse on CBC radio, May 28, 2015.
There is a call from people affected by rape to strengthen
laws. There has been an evolution in law away from the victimization of the
victim; a reduction if you will, in drawing inappropriately on orthodoxy and a
contorted view of female sexuality. For
a person to be charged with rape, there needs to be a clear determination of
the absence of consent on the part of the victim – oft times the means by which
to determine the presence or absence of consent is in the un-witnessed dialogue
between two people leading up to the event. There is no basis in this
circumstance to answer to an accusation of rape and there can never be, or people
would be convicted on accusation alone.
The goal is to have a society where people are safe and can
choose how they want to interface with others – the challenge is it is hard to
effect through law enforcement – it needs to be culturally driven and that will
take some time. Women are understandably frustrated that they are required to
be constrained in their daily lives to a greater degree than men to protect
themselves, but there is really no other way, people simply have to protect
themselves. As a man I am mindful of where I am, who I am exposed to and how I
might manage any given situation should it arise and women need to as well. So
prevention is a critical element in response to the threat of rape.
Consent and only consent – is the determinant of rape.
People must be clear in communication around sexual relations, by way of
example, a woman when confronted with a male in a manner that is uncomfortable
to her should respond by saying, PLEASE STOP WHAT YOU ARE DOING – an affirmative
request to cease is the clearest means by which to be sure what you are saying is
understood. There is room for misinterpretation in the interface unless a very
clear AFFIRMATIVE request to cease is made.
People refer to the presence of rape culture, it is important
to break out all the aspects of the issue – there is the patriarchy – there are men
who rape women, but they are unrelated. The patriarchy marginalizes women by systematizing
male privilege, and rapists rape. The patriarchy has an imperative to protect women,
an imperative that is part and parcel with “chauvinist” inclination; the
protective inclination as a “stand-alone” entity is a good thing. Patriarchs in
the traditional sense see rape as a crime, as women do. A convicted rapist or a
person compelled to act to rape when the opportunity presents, should be contemplated
separately and apart from the male population generally. One hears women referring to
the “rape culture” as though it is a general practice of “most” men. Most men I
know are kind, loving and respectful towards women. The general state of
patriarchy effects less than desirable outcomes for women in society at large –
this is in no way a rape culture, it is a culture of privilege for men.
The awkward fusion of Stoicism and Christian
Theology has created a culture where women become devalued when contemplated in
the context of sexual relations; this reality then contributes to male disrespect
for women in some circumstances. This may be the source of some violence toward
women – this is the point where violence against women can be attacked
culturally. Presently, we are at an awkward point in the evolution of female
sexuality in society at large, women have evolved perhaps in advance of society
as a whole, which is abrading against old perceptions on the part of males.
Due to the reality that rape is very difficult to prove and
is subject to interpretations of discourse between people, caution is warranted in how we
respond to accusations of rape. Also, given that the data associated with
conviction is ofttimes the interpretation of interface between two people,
there is a high possibility of wrongful convictions. Given these realities, it
is important that people convicted of rape once, who have served their sentence,
be permitted to enter society in an unfettered fashion. So the answer to the question - To publish
rapist names - seems simple enough, the first time through the process NO, if a
person re-offends, then society needs to protect all concerned. There is
wrongful conviction, especially in the area of rape; rape is very difficult to
prove for the reasons stated above – so if someone is convicted and serves
their sentence, they deserve the benefit of the doubt. There should be no
question that if there is an offender that has more than two convictions, steps should be taken to ensure the public can manage their presence in any
given community.
What is missing here, and is missing throughout our corrections
processes, is criteria-based advancement. There needs a series of steps people
go through to regain their place in society at large having committed a crime. Multiple
time offenders are by definition “repeat offenders”, so our approach to them needs
to be different than a person that is a first-time offender. The key here is
assessing each case and then making a choice to publish data or withhold it.
The challenge with publishing the names and locations of
offenders is that we marginalize them more and subject them to people inclined
to “name & shame”. Naming &
shaming offers no value in the case of an individual intent on reforming and
fails to arrest the actions of an individual who is compelled to act as a
result of illness. The general public ofttimes is out to effect vengeance –
rather than exercise a measured response to people accused or convicted of
rape.
Rapists that have offended eight times (as was the subject
of the CBC program that has prompted this blog) require NO consideration with
respect to privacy, they need to be managed. In the case of repeat, “high risk”
offenders, they should be monitored 24/7, ankle bracelets and other technology to
communicate their location to the police or a monitoring body is warranted and or an
isolated living circumstance – perhaps a community that is designed to house and
contain the negative affect of repeat rapists.
It is critical, however, that people, having served their
punishment, and having been released on the first occasion be given the opportunity
to reintegrate into society – unobstructed. A person in this circumstance
should never be exposed to “community” type interventions, because, for the
most part, there is an absence of evolved enough people to involve themselves in
the private lives of others. There tends to be a vindictive, small-minded cohort
that finds their way into the “community justice” space, people absent the
understanding of fundamental law and ignorant of critical elements related to
civil rights.
The other challenge is the reversion to an “ancient” moral
perspective, a degree of righteousness emerges along with a “vigilantly” mentality.
This is exacerbated by people who have been affected by rape as they become
involved in processes related to “community” interventions, people traumatized by
an event are unlikely to be able to find an objective place from which to
actuate.
Within our society there is a wide cultural variation with
respect to sexual discourse, this is allowed, and the response to sexual deviation
tends to drive us backward to a strict and highly traditionally moralized stance. It is the
merger of sex and all the associated baggage it carries and violent suppression that drives
the rebuke. The focus of response needs to be on violence and the violation of
being overpowered – to be forced to action absent consent.
Ideally, society would be free of rape, there is no more grievous
injury to the sole than to be overpowered, rendered defenceless and sexually assaulted.
Ideally, women would be treated the same clothed in a burka or a bikini – the reality
is they are treated differently. Ideally, women could run in the parks at any
time of day or night by themselves absent of fear, the reality is however, they
are at risk when they do. The prevalence of rape is shocking to me, when I
inventory the women in my life whose personal lives I am familiar with – the percentages
that have been affected by rape is staggering. I am unsure what drives it, I
only know it exists, the only way to manage it is to recognize its presence, to
understand the modalities that lead to it occurring and then find a way to lower
the risk, and contain perpetrators.
Click Below
No comments:
Post a Comment