No, they don't. A claim of rape should be looked at based on the evidence in that case, not on whether it's statistically likey to be true or not.

But the cases themselves aren't looked at in this way, and we're not sat in a court of law. If we're looking to explode myths we'd need documented proof that something is a myth. Which is where the figures come in.

_________________
"Even when you're a super-computer with an IQ of 2000 it's brown trousers time."

Reclaiming "methinks" for the nation

Latest blog post - 2011 - a review (updated 07/10)

Amy Winehouse's boyfriend devastated after being arrested on suspicion of rape

No mention of how the alleged victim is feeling.

Insinuation that the accusation is dubious, voiced by "a friend", not challenged or balanced in the article; indeed, the language supports it:


A claim has quite different connotations from an accusation. Contrast that with Reg's friend, who went beyond merely claiming, s/he "insisted" on their point of view. Meanwhile, the woman did not make her claim, let alone insist on it: in fact, in the Mail's sentence she is totally detached from it. The claim "had come", of its own accord presumably, "out of the blue" — that's to say, from nowhere, from (a) nobody. The accuser is wiped out of the picture. We're not dealing with a human being here, with the possibility that a woman was raped by a man. No, we're dealing with words, claims, floating language. And in this case, Reg's friend uses his celebrity status to drum up sympathy for their side of the story ("Reg is devastated"), while the Mail obligingly uses the anonymity of the alleged victim against her, to dehumanise her, to make her into a nobody.

ETA: Mail hypocrisy special, from the Ched Evans story:


It's wrong for fans of Evans' team, for his team-mates, for even his girlfriend to stand by him now that he's been convicted of rape. But it's okay for the Mail to print one-sided stories in support of a celebrity who has merely been accused of rape.

Further to what Ezinra just said, if any of the right-wing newspapers were serious about men accused of rape having anonymity, why would they publish their names in the paper?

_________________
"Educate a boy and you educate only that boy, educate a girl and you educate her entire family." - Seen outside a school for girls in Afghanistan.

Dragons' Den star Hilary Devey reveals how she was raped at age 12 and kept it secret for 43-years

Various types of dodginess in this article.

Firstly, it makes me uncomfortable when celebrities choose to disclose their rape experiences in an autobiography. A quick google doesn't bring up any proof that Hillary Devey has worked with gender-based violence charities or similar. Perhaps she does, but keeps it secret. In any case, I don't like rape stories being used as a marketing device.

That's no reason for the tabloids to focus so heavily on the rape narrative, which presumably takes up about one page of the book. The Mail's article (which is lifted from The Sun) mentions nothing else at all from Devey's autobiography, while providing a lot of unnecessary and heart-string-tugging detail.

The banality with which the subject is treated by hack JJ Anisiobi can be summed up by the final paragraph:


The experience of rape can be summed up in a few tabloidy adjectives — but don't despair, victims, because if you keep the right attitude, you may find that being raped turns out to be good for you, as Hillary's inspiring story shows. I mean, for fuck's sake.

Then we have the comments:

Likening being raped to a bank account. I mean, for fuck's sake.

Another victory for rapists.

Hmmmm except don't you think there is a similarity between your comments and the ones you quoted?

_________________
Blog...http://itsjustahobby.wordpress.com/

Soon, if we are not prudent, millions of people will be watching each other starve to death through expensive television sets. Nye Bevan

I hoped not. I hoped I'd avoided that. On re-reading, I see I got it wrong. Thank you for pulling me up on it.

As regards Michael K, I obviously don't agree that victims of rape should keep quiet about their experiences, regardless of when they happened. If Hillary Devey's autobiography gets one more person to speak out about theirs, then she's done a good thing. I should have acknowledged that. I don't much like how she has written the passage, but that's my problem not hers.

I don't contest the truth of Devey's story, unlike Claire's comment. I struggle to understand why celebrities' rape experiences get publicity and media coverage: I don't for a second believe that the Mail is doing it as a public service. However, thinking about it, I accept that more good than harm is likely to come out of it, and I wish I'd been more circumspect in critiquing this article.

I hope u dont mind, I just think we have to be careful not to treat celebrities differently simply because they are celebs. Of course you differe from those denying her story, but she has the right to tell it, regardless of the motives we might give her.

_________________
Blog...http://itsjustahobby.wordpress.com/

Soon, if we are not prudent, millions of people will be watching each other starve to death through expensive television sets. Nye Bevan

The headline has made me so angry that I dont have the mental energy to parse the article...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -ball.html

_________________
Blog...http://itsjustahobby.wordpress.com/

Soon, if we are not prudent, millions of people will be watching each other starve to death through expensive television sets. Nye Bevan

You didn't miss anything.

Just what is the relevance of her being married and "pretty"?
Why are these mentioned in the headline?

Could it be that in Mailworld raping single women is less of an offence?

Is being "pretty" asking for it in their view?

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...

It's the ol' "Well, she was wearing that short skirt and a low cut top, she was asking for it!" argument.

_________________
Changin' avatars like there's no tomorrow

Now you see why I was too angry to even comment...she was a "nice girl" and married so clearly not lying. They are mentioned in the headline to elicit sympathy and offer evidence for her story. These are the same reasons that the young girls in the Rochdale case were not listened to.

_________________
Blog...http://itsjustahobby.wordpress.com/

Soon, if we are not prudent, millions of people will be watching each other starve to death through expensive television sets. Nye Bevan

Considering how much the mail complains about men accused of rape not being given anonymity, the story doesn't read as if it's from an ongoing trial (apart from the final sentence) - they make it sound as if the man's guilt has already been proven. And using "pretty" in the headline and "attractive" in the first sentence is just awful - is it less serious to rape an unattractive woman? Or is it impossible for a pretty woman to have sex with an unattractive man unless it's rape?

I think its the second, basically she could have sex with anyone so she clearly wouldn't have had chosen to have sex with this man.

_________________
Blog...http://itsjustahobby.wordpress.com/

Soon, if we are not prudent, millions of people will be watching each other starve to death through expensive television sets. Nye Bevan