Not a subject I would normally associate with political correctness but after the extraordinary policy statement from the PC Brigade's feminist-in-chief Ms Harriet Harman in 2005, I felt it was worthy of a page in itself!
According to Ms Harman, The Solicitor General (has a certain ring about that title - perhaps it's too much like Witchfinder General) one in twenty women has been raped. Not only that, apparently too many men are getting away with it!
Like all members of the PC Brigade, Ms Harman's common sense was surgically removed when she joined. With about 30 million women in the UK, it would mean that 1.5 million have been raped. Assuming that a woman only gets raped once between the ages of 15 and 50, then that equates to about 100 rapes a day. If that figure was true, we would be constantly hearing of women raped locally and it would be the major news item on TV each day.
When one dissects her dodgy statistics, it turns out that most of the 7,000 women involved in a survey didn't say they had been raped at all. Most said 'they had sexual intercourse against their will' which is a totally different thing.
Even the chairman, sorry chairperson of the National Family Campaign said that 'these figures do seem extraordinarily high and out of line with others published. Data used should be robust, scientific and unchallengeable.'
Martin Bowley QC said 'that discussion of the proposed new law had been bedeviled by the use of selective statistics. The conviction rate of rape cases brought to court was 41.2% not the 7% Ms Harman stated which was the conviction rate related to the number of allegations initially made.'
What most sensible people would think of as rape is a violent sexual attack by a stranger. Incidents of this kind are a rarity now. That is one reason why less rapes are reported. The other is caused by the enormous increase in casual sexual relationships. Women who make allegations do so for a variety of reasons. In the cool light of day, they often withdraw them. Ms Harman thinks this is always caused by intimidation and intends to bypass the victim as a necessary witness in court who can be cross examined. She proposes that the case can go ahead without her and her statement will be read out in court 'in the public interest.' Seriously flawed thinking! Surely the most likely causes of the retraction are:
sobering up and perhaps recalling the actual event
thinking you now had a boyfriend and later finding out he wasn't interested
evidence uncovered during the police investigation
Rape is such a horrible crime and the stigma attached to it for the actual alleged rapist is such that accusations of rape may be made for a number of reasons. It may be that the women had sex with the man thinking that he was now her boyfriend, only to cry rape some days later when she found out that he wasn't interested. Sometimes, as in the case here, it may be made to distract attention from the woman's other problems. Political correctness just distorts the dispassionate view with which we should view and investigate rape as we would with any other crime. Ms Harman's politically correct words are designed to distort.
Ms Harman also opposes anonymity for the defendant in rape cases on the grounds that defendants in other criminal cases will demand it as well. But the woman bringing the case IS given anonymity. Sounds like PC double standards are alive and well and living in cloud cuckoo land!
Changes in the law mean that a man now will have to prove they had a reasonable belief that consent was given and display the steps they took to establish this. Perhaps Durex will oblige and the back of the packet could have a form on it that the woman could sign?
Rape is a horrible traumatic experience and anyone who has experienced it has my utmost sympathy. I am just pointing out the stupidity of Harriet Harman's remarks. If you do fear rape then look at this wonderful device invented in South Africa. Just don't forget to take it out when you get home!!!
In June 2009, Harriet Harman was at the dodgy statistics game once again. She was given an official warning for exaggerating the pay gap between men and women. Britain’s statistics watchdog accused Labour’s deputy leader – who is also the Women’s Minister – of using a figure that more than doubled the real divide.
Sir Michael Scholar said her office had been warned that including parttime workers in her calculations could be misleading but they had pressed ahead regardless. They claimed that women were paid 23 per cent less, but Sir Michael says 12.8 per cent would be a more accurate figure. Sir Michael wrote to Miss Harman: ‘ The Statistics Authority is concerned this may undermine public trust in official statistics’.
Sir Michael, where have you been for the last 12 yrs?
Stumble It!