Saturday, February 26, 2011

Rape Case

Here's the story. Public reaction here, and victim's reaction here.

I am so angry with this judge's decision that I am shaking as I write this. This is an issue that is deeply personal to me, not because it's ever happened to me (which it hasn't, by the way), but because it has happened to people that I am very close to.

This judge's ruling - and his comments - have made me so angry, I just can't understand how he can keep his position of power with views like his. He has revictimised this woman, and all other women who have been or will be raped. Women are already reluctant to report rape because "women and children already feel shame, already wonder if they couldn't have done something differently. They're afraid they won't be believed and the stink will be on them." -Lindor Reynolds, Winnipeg Free Press writer.

"Women...who have never told anyone [about being raped] will grow even more fearful and mistrustful of the system ... Sexual assault victims often report shame and self-blame, as well as the feeling of having been violated. And the judge's ruling and remarks are likely to deter some from coming forward in the future." -Lorraine Parrington, sexual assault crisis program co-ordinator at Klinic.

No woman would ever dress up and go out with the intent of getting raped.

No means no. Period. Doesn't matter what she is wearing, or how she acts. There is no implied consent. If she says yes, then yes. If she says no, that means no. If she says nothing, that means no. Bottom line.

My friend Sherrie wrote a note on Facebook (linked with permission). In it she shares her own thoughts about this case, I encourage you to read it. She includes a link to a petition to have Judge Robert Dewar removed from the bench.

Read and sign the petition here.

1 comment:

  1. I meant to ramble about the idea of "implied consent" in my note, but forgot. But its pretty plain and simple, since there's no such thing. :)

    Thanks Stacey!