Despite the fact sexual violence affects one in four women the issue has all but disappeared from the political radar

Rape was a key feminist issue in the 1970s, generating anger and activism – alongside reclaiming the night (and the day), challenging victim blame, protesting the misogynist statements of judges and journalists we built new forms of support: helplines, self-help consciousness raising groups, advocacy. Rather than accepting advice to limit our lives we invented feminist self-defence, which presented the real risks – from known men - whilst enabling women to be in their bodies confidently, to trust their instincts rather than behave politely. In the process we discovered how the fear and threat of rape affects all women’s lives.

This sense of sexual danger feeds into everyday, routine activities. Two US researchers (Riger and Gordon, 1989) in a study of women in 11 US cities say:

"Most women experience the fear of rape as a nagging, gnawing sense that something awful could happen, and angst that keeps them from doing things they want and need to do, or from doing them at the time or in the way they might otherwise do. Women’s fear of rape is a sense that they must always be on guard, vigilant and alert, a feeling that causes a women to tighten with anxiety if someone is walking too closely behind her, especially at night."

We also uncovered the many faces of rapists, the majority of which were distressingly familiar - faces we encountered in our everyday lives; and that rape and sexual assault were depressingly common affecting at least one in four women over their lifetime.

But despite all of this, rape was virtually invisible in the feminist, policy and research agendas in the 1990s. Why did sexual violence virtually disappear from the political and policy radar, why was it more acceptable to invest in and innovate around domestic violence? And what have the consequences of this neglect been?

Costs and consequences

Revealing that the majority of sexual violence takes place 'close to home' was undoubtedly disturbing: the news that rapists were ordinary men even more unwelcome. In the 1990s we also witnessed the 'return of the paedophile' - a concept I despise, since it literally means 'lover of children' (sic) - and the serial rapist, returning us to the safer ground of the dangerous stranger and re-burying the brutality of partners, friends and relatives.

Judges and other opinion leaders continued to assert that rape by a partner was less serious, less traumatic, despite research evidence demonstrating that not only is physical injury more likely but the assaults will probably be repeated. The media favourite of ‘date rape’ not only misrepresents the context in which sexual violence takes place but serves to minimise and disqualify rapes by known men.

We have failed to create a sexual culture in which women’s sexual autonomy is cultivated and respected, for the majority of young people sex continues to be something men take, with young women’s ambivalence and uncertainty a challenge to be overcome.

(Hetero)sexual culture thus reproduces the conditions in which coercive sex is commonplace; an unwelcome message not only to government, policy makers but also many feminists. Recent research gives little comfort to those who championed women’s rights to sexual agency and pleasure. Whilst young women undoubtedly aspire to be sexual subjects, and resist sexual coercion, the overall context continues to be defined through powerful and essentialist notions of men’s sexual needs and desires.

What this neglect has resulted in, across Europe, is a failure of legal systems to deal with increased reporting of sexual violence by known men. England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland have the lowest conviction rates, falling from about a third of reported rapes in the mid 1970s to 6% or less today. There has also been a systematic failure, Scotland apart, to secure and extend support services.

Women who have been sexually assaulted are not sick, or ill or mad. What many want is knowledgable supporters who can enable them to cope with a painful and destabilising experience, a space to make sense of what happened and to work out how they reconstruct their sense of self and their sense of safety in a context where both have been profoundly shaken.

It is the NGO sector and Rape Crisis in particular that has developed a practice which both recognises and validates women’s strength and insights whilst not ignoring the impacts and harms. In other words treating the woman as a whole person - not simply a victim, or patient. Yet we have less Rape Crisis centres in the entire UK currently than in the state of Florida, and whilst here are 21 lap dancing clubs in London, there is no Rape Crisis centre – the nearest is in Croydon.

As I write I realise this is a story of how it is easier today to get away with rape than when feminists began organising in the 1970s, and more difficult to access support. Mary Koss, long time researcher in the US, uses the concept of ‘responsiveness’ to refer to the ways in which institutions and communities address sexual violence.

Community attitudes to rape, rapists and rape victims are measured not by the sympathetic pronouncements of public officials, but by the quality of services that are and are not available…. The quality, speed and sensitivity of services provided by law enforcement, medical, mental health and support agencies measures the true regard, dignity and safety that a community extends as a matter of course to member who become victims.

We have a very long way to go to become a responsive society, one which affords dignity, safety and true regard to victims-survivors of sexual violence.

Professor Liz Kelly, is Chair of End Violence Against Women and Roddick Chair in Violence Against Women, Child and Woman Abuse Studies Unit, London Metropolitan University

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website