Leader: We must not dismiss or diminish allegations of rape

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange speaks from the balcony of the Ecuador embassy
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange speaks from the balcony of the Ecuador embassy. Photograph: Getty Images

Rape happens everywhere. It is happening today in Syria, as the Assad government’s thugs rampage and humiliate, and as a weapon of war in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo. It happened in mass rape camps in Bosnia in the 1990s. It happens to women and to men and to children. In June, it happened to a 14-year-old boy in a department store in Manchester. It happens on one-night stands and in marriages. It happens between strangers and friends.

No one can say for sure how many rapes happen every day, because the shame and stigma that surround the crime prevent many victims from going to the police. There seems to be a widespread misconception about rape victims. If a woman, the “perfect rape victim” is a virgin or, at least, monogamous. She does not wear short skirts or low-cut tops. She does not drink to excess or walk alone at night. She does not have sex with a man once and then change her mind. She is raped violently and knows instantly that she must report the crime. She does not wrestle with her experiences or wonder if a man she has previously liked and trusted can have invaded her body without her consent. She remembers every detail perfectly, despite the trauma she has been through, and can still recall it with perfect clarity many months later, when – or if – the case comes to court. If a rape victim breaches any of these unwritten rules, she is liable to be dismissed.

English law is clear about what constitutes rape: the intentional penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth of another person with a penis, if that person does not consent to the penetration and the perpetrator does not reasonably believe that the person consents. Consent to a previous sexual act does not matter; neither does the use (or not) of violence.

That has not stopped a series of men lining up in the past weeks to perpetuate some of the most pernicious myths about rape, particularly as a by-product of supporting the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange, in his fight against extradition to Sweden, where he has been accused of rape and sexual molestation. Monty Python’s Terry Jones wrongly claimed that Mr Assange was accused merely of “sex without a condom”. George Galloway, the Respect Party’s only MP, said that the Australian national had displayed only “bad sexual etiquette” to someone who was “already in the sex game” with him. Craig Murray, the former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, named one of Mr Assange’s accusers on the BBC’s Newsnight, before suggesting that her complaint could be dismissed because she had subsequently gone to a “crayfish party” with him. (He dismissed the outcry against him as a “fake campaign of indignation”.)

There is a reason why rape allegations are tested by juries – not by columnists, or blogs, or social media – and the New Statesman makes no judgement on the guilt or innocence of Mr Assange. Yet the misinformation spread by many of his supporters is cause for concern in a country where rape reporting rates are already low.

On 19 August, the Metropolitan Police’s specialist sex crimes operation, Sapphire, announced that the number of reported rapes had fallen by 14 per cent compared to last year. This is a grave human rights issue: roughly 400,000 women are sexually assaulted and 80,000 women raped each year in Britain, according to the British Crime Survey. It is estimated that nine in ten rapes go unreported.

Recent events have shown us that the gains made for women’s rights over many decades are more fragile than we might have thought. It is therefore incumbent on those who would call themselves progressive to acknowledge how widespread this crime can be and not to promote the myths that surround it.

53 comments

Mao's picture

"He definitely asked for it."

Just like his "rape victim" then?

Hikaru22's picture

Pavlova:

'It's legitimate cause for him to stop hiding out in this country...'

Assange is not 'hiding out in this country'. Rather, he has been formally granted political asylum by the government of Ecuador, at their embassy in London.

'...and evading justice.'

I would remind you that Assange has yet to be charged with, or found guilty of, anything.

'He definitely asked for it.'

And if that is not a tacit admission that Assange has been smeared by his 'powerful political opponents' through their 'favoured media outlets'....then I don't know what is.

Pavlova's picture

"he is not 'hiding out in this country'. Rather, he has been formally granted political asylum by the government of Ecuador, at their embassy in London."

Of course he is hiding in this country. He ran here and he's spent the last two years hiding out here, then when his bail ran out, he ran to the only building left here which would still have him

"I would remind you that Assange has yet to be charged with, or found guilty of, anything."

And I would remind you that you don't have to be charged or found guilty of something to evade justice. To evade justie you only have to do one of the following things: avoid police questioning, exploit the court system to continue avoiding police questionning, ignore a court order from the highest court in the land to attend police questioning, skip bail, hide out in some corrupt embassy, encourage a smear campaign against your accusers, allow your supporters to terrify all future accusers out of ever saying a word.

When people make criminal accusations against people, there is a process to follow which allows said accusers the right to test your denials. He has so far deprived his accusers of that. He has so far deprived them of justice, and because of the length of time that has passed and the firestorm he has brought down on their heads, he has permanently deprived them of that.

His legal and self-appointed rights are more important than theirs you see. Because he's a man and they aren't.

"And if that is not a tacit admission that Assange has been smeared by his 'powerful political opponents' through their 'favoured media outlets'....then I don't know what is."

It's no such thing. It's an admission that his reputation is in tatters because of his own self-serving and damaging behaviour. The people who have been smeared by their political opponents and powerful media outlets are his accusers. The other people who have been smeared are all future women who try to bring rape accusations.

Simo n's picture

Hear, hear.

Simo n's picture

What a delicately worded and non-partisan article.
Unfortunately, your claim that "the New Statesman makes no judgement on the guilt or innocence of Mr Assange" seems to contradict with John Pilger's article "The pursuit of Julian Assange is an assault on freedom and a mockery of journalism", in which he describes Assange as "an innocent man" and describes evidence against him as "[demonstrating] to any fair-minded person the absurdity of the sex allegations".

plain john snith's picture

But he is a leftist who hates America and is friends with John Bilger: therefore he CANNOT be a sex criminal.

hugh markey's picture

When exactly did the custom of 'droit du seigneur or jus primae noctis(law of the first night) cease to be insisted upon by titled folk? NO, we're not trying to haul Prince Harry into this matter. But those same newspapers who have been frightened off by the Palace's flunkies are not trying but condemning Assange in the court of public opinion.
Oh, my! How the law of divide and conquer still works. Feminism is now a useful spanner in patriarchy's tool-box.
It's obvious the chance of Assange obtaining a fair trail is extremely doubtful. He is being 'hung, drawn and quartered' in public.
Still, Hollywood is making a movie about the Wikileaks caper. This might possibly affect the lynch-mob mentality of Assange's detractors.
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo movie, the Swedish version and the Hollywood one, certainly opened our eyes about Sweden.
Never realised some Swedes were so closely linked to the Third Reich.

Spoof Film

Pavlova's picture

It's just another example of misogyny that these three rape apologists/deniers accuse women of mock outrage over their comments. Just like women's mock accusations presumably. What startling levels of arrogance.

I for one have spent the part two weeks in an increasing state of depression, frustration and fury as man after man has lined up to make light of rape, to try to undermine the credibility of Assange's accusers, to trample all over women's rights in favour of men's. How these poisonous people are in positions of influence. How they have no shame about their comments. How It is highly likely other women have been raped who might not have been otherwise because some idiot has seen these comments as a green light. How many many women will have decided as I have that they would never report it if it did happen and we didn't fit the perfect victim bill. It is keeping me awake at night. There's nothing mock about it.

I would love to be in a room with Galloway, Murray or Terry, and Assange and his fanboys, with other women or rape victims and show him how mock our outrage is. I think they might find something out from that experience.

Kit's picture

Have you actually read the details of the case put forward by Assange's accusers? Have you not noted the bizarreness of the timeline of their accusations amongst many other aspects, the bizarreness of the prosecution process -- initially dropped, then taken up in another city for dubious reasons -- and the fishiness of the whole process? If you're concerned about rape, this is not the case on which to make any stand. You should choose other cases where there is a clear instance of guilt and obvious victims, not this murky tale coming out of a bizarre legal system in which the complainants do not seem like victims at all but more like persecutors.

Omniogignes's picture

Bizarreness of the timeline??? There are no the events happened in a natural order.

Bizarreness of the prosecution process??? Come on any one knows that charges can be drop to later be re-instated. It seems that they decided to get their own lawyer after the charges were dropped.

Clear instance of guilt??? In rape there are few clear instance of guilt. Even in an instance of a witness guilt is not clear.

Murky tale??? The continual shifting of arguments in support of Assange, but people who weren't witness to the accusations is "a murky tale."

Victims seem more like persecutors??? So, a victim of a crime should be happy-happy or suicidal. The women feel that their rights were violated so they have every right to be mad.

Latest tweets