Not her fault

Teen forced into car, pack-raped by trio

Stuff.co.nz and Waikato Times | Monday, 6 August 2007

Police in Morrinsville are investigating the pack rape of a teenager at the weekend. The 16-year-old girl was walking home alone along Page Street in the early hours of Saturday morning when she was approached by three men in a dark coloured station wagon.

The teenager, who had been reportedly out drinking with friends, was forced into the vehicle and raped by all three men.

Now I might be able to forgive the “early hours of Saturday morning” comment as a non-judgemental statement. But there is absolutely no excuse for saying she was out drinking with friends, particularly when the writer doesn’t appear to know whether this is true or not.

But this article in theHerald is even worse:

Teen pack-raped near home

Police say the pack rape of a teenage girl in Morrinsville should serve as a warning that women should never walk home alone in the early hours.

The 16-year-old was raped by three men early on Saturday, only 300m from her home.

…

He warned that women should not walk alone late at night or early in the morning, to keep safe.

“Always have somebody with you when you’re walking. Otherwise get somebody to pick you up and take you where you need to go. But we don’t want to be seen to be criticising [the victim's] actions, that’s not what she needs from us.”

Well guess what? By saying this you are criticising her actions, and you are implying she was at fault.

How about you follow your own advice. Never go anywhere alone at night. Never go anywhere not adequately lit. Don’t walk at night (and you can’t take taxis because many women can’t afford to do that). Don’t drink. Don’t have sex. Don’t speak to strangers. Live in constant fear. See what your quality of life is like.

Repeat: sex is a consensual act

‘Man found dead was on child sex charges’

This headline says it all

‘Court hears details of alleged sexual assault of murdered girl’

In other words, they accept the murder happened but not the sexual assault. I wrote about this type of discrepancy here.

Allegedly again

Unfortunately this article doesn’t seem to be following the lead of this one. Every mention of abuse is preceded by “allegedly” or words to that effect.

I’ve outlined the problems with this here, but I think it’s worth noting other examples.

A positive example

Here’s a positive example of how newspapers can – and should – not question the veracity of what happened to the person who was sexually assaulted, but at the same time not assume the guilt of the perpetrator.

If only more journalists did the same.

A 54-year-old car salesman is to appear in court today on charges relating to the abduction and sexual assault of a 13-year-old girl in West Auckland two weeks ago.

So the article assumes the events have happened, but states that the man has been charged with them, not that he did them.

The girl was walking along West Coast Rd in Glen Eden on her way to visit a friend when she was lured into a car.

She was sexually and physically abused during her 45-minute ordeal in West Auckland.

So there is no use of the word allegedly here, that these events happened is not questioned.

The man had allegedly asked the teenager for directions, then insisted she get into his car to show him the way.

Here the word allegedly is used, and whilst it’s not the ideal phrasing it is only done here because it is describing his involvement in what happened, rather than just what happened.

The man will appear in the Rotorua District Court to face charges of abduction, sexual violation, and assault with intent to commit sexual violation of a girl aged between 12 and 16 years.

A straightforward statement of fact, with no judgement implied on either his guilt or her truthfulness/reliability.

How it could be done

This article has nothing to do with rape, but these lines stood out:

The owner of New Zealand’s largest kennel and cattery has been charged with animal cruelty – but he claims he’s the victim, not the animals he cares for.

Two cat owners returned from their holidays and claim their pets – Choco, a purebred Tonkinese, had a dislocated hip and a ginger cat called Basil was dehydrated – were injured in Sean Cleary’s care.

What the author has done is reported the harm done to the animals without assuming the guilt/responsibility of the accused.

I’ve written here about the use of the word ‘allegedly’, and how in rape cases it’s often used not just to not imply the guilt of the perpetrator, but to question whether the event actually occurred. The above article is an indication of how that issue could be tackled.

Sex vs Rape again

Salvation Army makes more payouts to sex victims

One more time (or two, or ten, or a million).

Sex is a consensual act between two individuals of an appropriate age to give true consent. Whilst it may be regretted, it is not something that has victims. This is not sex – it is rape and abuse.

Telling her story

I’ve got some mixed feelings about this story in The New Zealand Herald.

On the one hand, I think it’s great that they are giving a rape survivor the opportunity to tell her story (and I admire her for doing so).

On the other hand, this story does fit all the criteria a lot of society – and the media -  view as important for being sympathetic to a rape survivor:

• She did not know her attacker
• She was at home
• She did not let him into her house
• She told the police
• She has positive things to say about the police
• She left evidence for the police
• The rapist was convicted

Her story is no less important for all that, and I’m glad it was published. But I would like to see the stories of other rape survivors who don’t fit as many – or any – of those expectations of what happened to them and how they reacted printed more often (without the implication that they may be lying or at fault).

Allegedly

Posts so far have particularly focussed on ‘victim blaming’. In this post I want to highlight another recurring problem with the media – the use of the word allegedly.

Now I don’t generally have a problem with referring to someone who has been accused of, arrested for or charged with a crime (but not convicted) as an alleged criminal. I am aware that, as with other crimes, a person can be accused of a rape they didn’t commit (and often for reasons other than a malicious complaint).

However, in newspaper reporting of rape cases, they often go one step further. Not only do they refer to the alleged perpetrator, but also the alleged victim, and the alleged crime – like here, for example. This doesn’t seem to apply to other crimes. How often have you heard the newspapers refer to an ‘alleged burglary’ or an ‘alleged murder’?

The implication goes beyond a non-presumption of guilt, and moves into questioning whether the event actually happened. This is not being careful not to incorrectly tarnish someone’s character, but is casting doubt on the character and truthfulness of the person who reported it – usually the survivor and reinforcing the idea that women can’t be trusted to tell the truth about these issues.