Truth about Acquaintance Rape: Because it's not all strangers in the dark

Can we talk about acquaintance rape for a minute? I know this is a really heavy topic, but I came across a paper I wrote in school and in honour of April being sexual assault awareness month (SAAM), I thought I would share it. This isn't going to be a post for everyone and thats ok. This was written in the 2000's so some of the information may have changed.

Views and Effects of Acquaintance

Rape on Men and Women

Dione Mingo

UBC Okanagan

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for SOCIO 496D

Dr. Thea Cacchioni

The treatment of women after sexual assault crimes has been one of controversy for decades. Laws have been implemented that were meant to protect women, and hopefully increase the reporting rate of such terrible crimes. However, there are always loopholes that can be found that continue to protect perpetrators. Acquaintance rape is a serious, and often silent crime. Men and women have suffered the shame and humiliation of being sexually assaulted by someone they know. Over the last twenty years, advances have been made in making the public aware that acquaintance exists, and although it as far more underreported it is as serious as aggravated rape (Palmer, 1988). Despite these advances, however, many people still do not view acquaintance rape as a serious crime, and often still resort to victim blame. Victim blame is one of the major reasons for under reporting. Bill C-127 was meant to benefit the victims in sexual assault cases, however both bills still fall short. The law needs to protect instead of revictimizing the very people it is meant to help.

            Until rape reforms were made to the law rape was still only punishable as a common law offence. The original Canadian law was derived from the British common law. Common law thought of rape as an extension on abduction. Women being the property of the men in her life, rape was mainly thought to be a crime against the husband or the father of the woman (Estrich, 1987; Jones & Christie, 1992, as cited by Tang, 1998). Before the reforms husbands technically still had “unlimited sexual access to their wives” (Tang, 1998, p. 259), because of this marital rape was not recognized. Women were also not considered to be able to be trusted to give an accurate testimony, and the woman’s testimony was not enough to convict an accused. If a complaint was not made immediately after the assault it was not considered, and women’s sexual histories were admissible in a trial. In the eyes of the law a rape had not occurred unless there was vaginal penetration by a penis. In 1983 Bill C-127 made many changes to the previously mentioned archaic laws. The term sexual assault replaced rape, allowing for a broader definition of what constituted an assault. Marital rape and acquaintance rape was included in the new reforms. Sexual assaults against men were recognized, meaning that vaginal penetration was no longer mandatory for an assault to have occurred. Sexual histories of the victims were also no longer admissible. The main hope of the reform was to increase the reporting rates of sexual assaults.

            It is unfortunate, but there is still a common myth that when a person is raped it must have been by a stranger in some dark place. The reality is that the majority of rapes are committed by someone that knows the victim knows. This type of rape is most often referred to as acquaintance, date or simple rape. Date rape is a misnomer, because not all acquaintance rapes occur between people who are dating, and rape is never simple, therefore, for the purpose of this paper only the term acquaintance rape will be used. Acquaintance rape is defined as an act of sexual coercion resulting in some type of sexual act that is perpetrated by someone that the victim knew previously (Gillen & Muncer, 1995; Verberg, Wood, Desmarais, & Senn, 2000). The most common perpetrators are husbands, boyfriends and friends (Gillen & Muncer, 1995). However, rapes that are committed by a person who has only recently met the victim are also considered acquaintance rape.

            Many factors are thought to contribute to the cause of acquaintance rape. Familial views are thought to play a role (Quinones, Phares, Bryant, & Stenmark, 1999). Generally, the beliefs held by parents are carried on by their children. A family’s belief in traditional gender roles for males and females often leads to the belief that men are aggressive and dominant, and that women are submissive. This allows men to illicit sex from women with force, without breaking traditional gender roles. In another view, if a male is an admitted offender, or if he has a high acceptance of sexual coercion, the likelihood that his peers share his views on coercive sexual behaviour is far greater (Bondurant & Donat, 1999; Monson, Langhinrichsen-Rohling, &Binderup, 2000; Frese, Moya, & Megias, 2004; Adams-Curtis & Forbes, 2004). In this view, sexually aggressive males run in groups, such as fraternities, and sports teams. It has been well publicized that a great deal of college rapes are perpetuated by society. The way a woman dresses and her level of intoxication are often considered as contributors to rape (Adam-Curtis & Forbes, 2004; Bondurant & Donat, 1999; Frese et al., 2004; Gillen & Muncer, 1995; Monson et al., 2000). Rape shield laws are meant to protect women’s sexual histories from being used in trial, although there have been cases of lawyers proving that this information is relevant to prove the innocence of the perpetrators. If this is the case it is to the discretion of the presiding judge whether or not to allow it as evidence. It is commonly thought that if a woman dresses provocatively or becomes intoxicated she was inviting someone to rape her. Another major issue regarding a reason to rape is the idea behind the “token no” (Muehlenhard &Hollabaugh, 1998). The issue with the token no is that traditional gender roles dictate behaviour. Women do not want to be seen as promiscuous, therefore, even though a woman wants to have sexual relations with a partner she has to say no so she does not seem easy. If a male encounters a token no just once it re-enforces the belief that women will eventually give in, and say yes (Muehlenhard & Hollabaugh, 1998).  The worst contributor to acquaintance rape is the idea that if a person says yes once, they have no right to say no on another occasion. Shotland and Goldstein (1992), found that if a woman had had as few as 10 sexual encounters with a partner, she had less right to say no at any given time to sex. This is also true of married couples. It is generally thought that being married gives the husband certain sexual rights to his wife. However, if a husband assaults his wife while he is intoxicated, people generally have more sympathy for the woman (Frese et al., 2004).

Although, the general public may believe that a husband has full access to his wife, bill C-127 ensured that a wife could charge her husband with sexual assault. Another significant problem that bill C-127 has had to face is implied consent. The defence of many acquaintance rapes is implied consent.

“In Canada, the defence of honestly mistaken belief has been

intensely debated. First, the “honest belief”  that the complainant

in sexual assault case consented to the conduct constitutes a

successful defence and would exonerate the accused if there is

a reasonable evidential basis” (Tang, 1998, p. 264).

This becomes a persuasive defence for case of marital rape and the rape between those that had been dating.  The Supreme Court of Canada has allowed this defence as long as the evidence has an “air of reality” (Tang, 1998,p. 264).  Implied consent became codified as Section 265 of the Criminal Code of Canada. Men and women tend to have different views pertaining to acquaintance rape. By and large, men are more inclined to believe that women are showing sexual interest towards then if the woman is being friendly. This misinterpretation in women’s friendliness is a common reason cited by perpetrators for the cause of the rape, this is of course is directly related to honest belief (Bondurant & Donat, 1999; Gillen & Muncer, 1994; Tang, 1998). It is often believed that the woman did not say no clearly enough however, research shows that women are saying no clearly enough but their physical resistance to the continual coercion is only moderate (Koss, 1998, as cited by Bondurant & Donat, 1999). Sexually assertive men are also more apt to not view acquaintance rape as serious, and are more likely to have less sympathy for the victim, compared to women (Bondurant & Donat, 1999). Although men consider acquaintance rape as less serious than women do, society as a whole judges acquaintance rape as less serious than aggravated, stranger rape (Bondurant & Donat, 1999; Gillen & Muncer, 1994; Monson et al., 2000; Shotland & Goldstein, 1992; Tang, 1998). In instances of acquaintance rape, people are more inclined to blame the victim for the assault, for reasons such as she should have not gone with him, she was drunk, or she could have fought harder. People are also more prone to take into account the victim’s past sexual history with the assailant. If there was any prior relationship between the victim and the perpetrator, people are less apt to view it as rape (Frese et al., 2004; Monson et al., 2000; Shotland & Goldstein, 1992). Acquaintance rape is reported less often than aggravated rape is, but when it is reported, sentencing is considerably less than for aggravated rape (Bondurant & Donat, 1999).

            Most often when rape is discussed, it is thought that the victim is a woman. However, there has been an increase in reports of men who have been raped, with the perpetrators being both men and women. Although reports of male rape are on the rise male rape is still reported less than female rape. This is in part due to the legal definition of rape, which, for a long time, did not include the possibility that men could be raped (Davies & McCartney, 2003; Struckman-Johnson, 1998; Vearnals & Campbell, 2001). Since bill C-127 vaginal penetration was removed as being mandatory for a rape to have occurred, but society still does not recognize that men can be raped (Tang, 1998). Although female victims are often blamed for their own acquaintance rapes, male victims are blamed even more than females in both aggravated and acquaintance rapes. This is due to the belief that men are stronger than women, and therefore, should be able to defend themselves (Davies & McCartney, 2003). Although, sexual assault against men sometimes involves homosexuals, there are many more heterosexual men who are raped by heterosexual men, and women (Smith, Pine, & Hawley, 1988). The common belief is that the willing cannot be raped, and if a man obtains an erection the thought is that he must have wanted to have sex. This however, is no necessarily true. Women can also have sexual responses to an attack that they do not understand, such as vaginal lubrication and this is also true for men. It is possible for a man to have an involuntary erection when he is angry or scared (Smith et al., 1988). Men can and have been raped by women. Women have used coercion, but the threat of violence has also been used to elicit sex. Women can have sex with a man who is intoxicated, without his consent (Smith et al., 1988). Like women, men who have been sexually assaulted face a road of recovery. Heterosexual men often doubt their sexuality; this is not dependent on whether on whether the assailant was male, or female. This is because they feel that they should have been able to prevent the assault. Many men also experience “post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, panic attacks and low self-esteem” (Smith et al., 1988; Vearnals & Campbell, 2001, p. 282). There is also a greater instance of substance abuse and self-harm. Men, like women, also experience difficulty with trust in relationships and sexual difficulties, “irritability, emotional distancing and loss of self-respect” (Smith et al., 1988; Vearnals & Campbell, 2001, p. 283).

            There are many psychological effects that a person who has been raped may face. Women who have been raped may have a difficult time returning to their normal lives. Women often blame themselves for the rape and this is most common when the rape was committed by someone they know (Frese et al., 2004; McEwan, De Man, & Simpson-Housley, 2005). Women who blame themselves for the assault have a particularly difficult time with recovery. “Trauma-related guilt has been positively correlated with posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, negative self-esteem, shame, social anxiety and suicidal thoughts”(Kubany, Abueg, Owen, Brennan, Kaplan, & Watson, 1995, as cited by Frese et al., 2004, p. 144). Seeking help after an assault is the key to successfully moving past it. This does not have to include law enforcement, but some kind of counselling and support is important.

            As a whole rape reporting has increased since bill C-127 was passed (Roberts & Grossman, 1994, as cited by Tang, 1998).  The problem is that only a small percentage of the population is aware that bill C-127 exists. However, the majority of the public is aware that husbands can no longer sexually assault their wives (Tang, 1998). Acquaintance rape is still the least reported type of rape, but the reports of all types of assault have been on a slow and steady rise since the introduction of bill C-127. Victims are influenced by societal ideas of police insensitivity and re-victimization by the legal system. Special units of police departments, and hospitals have been trained in how to deal with men and women that have had to face sexual assault (Tang, 1998). More education is needed to teach the public about the seriousness of, not only acquaintance rape but all forms of sexual assault. Through education of law enforcement personnel and medical professionals, perhaps more people will feel comfortable with coming forward when they are assaulted (Palmer, 1988). Furthermore, public perceptions need to change, taking the blame away from victims and placing it onto the assaulter. Men and women face serious consequences when they are assaulted, especially when it is someone that they know. There are some gender differences when it comes to perceptions of who is to blame for rape. There are also differences in some of the psychological effects that men and women are faced with in recovery, but for the most part when a person is raped, the assault has devastating effects.

References

Adams-Curtis, L. E, & Forbes, G. B. (2004). College women’s experiences of sexual

            coercion. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5, 91-122.

Bondurant, B., & Donat, P. L. N. (1999). Perceptions of women’s sexual interest and

            acquaintance rape. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23, 691-705.

Davies, M., & McCartney, S. (2003). Effects of gender and sexuality on judgements of

            victim blame and rape myth acceptance in depicted male rape. Journal of

            Community & Applied Social Psychology, 13, 391-398.

Frese, B., Moya, M., & Megias, J. L. (2004). Social perceptions of rape: How rape myth

            acceptance modulates the influence of situational factors. Journal of

            Interpersonal Violence, 19, 143-161.

Gillen, K., & Muncer, S. J. (1995). Sex differences in the perceived casual structure of

            date rape. Aggressive Behaviour, 21, 101-112.

McEwan, S. L., De Man, A. F., & Simpson-Housley, P. (2205). Acquaintance rape,

            ego-identity achievement, and locus of control. Social Behaviour and Personality,

            33, 587-592.

Monson, C. M., Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., & Binderup, T. (2000). Does “no” really

            mean “no” after you say “yes”?. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 15, 1156-

            1174.

Muehlenhard, C. L., & Hollabaugh, L. C. (1998). Do women sometimes say no when

            they mean yes? The prevalence and correlates of women’s token resistance to sex.

            Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 872-879.

Palmer, C. T. (1988). Twelve reasons why rape is not sexually motivated: A sceptical

            examination. The Journal of Sex Research, 25, 512-530.

Quinones, B., Phares, V., Bryant, J. B., & Stenmark, D. (1999). Belief and attitudes about

            sexual aggression: Do parents and daughters share the same belief system.

            Psychology of Women’s Quarterly, 23, 559-572.

Shotland, R. L., & Goldstein, L. (1992). Sexual precedence reduces the perceived

            legitimacy of sexual refusal: An examination of attributions concerning date rape

            and consensual sex. Society for Personal and Social Psychology, 18, 756-764.

Smith, R. E., Pine, C. J., & Hawley, M. E. (1998). Social cognition about adult male

            victims of female sexual assault. The Journal of Sex Research, 24, 101-112.

Struckman-Johnson, C. (1988). Forced sex on dates: It happens to men too. The Journal

            of Sex Research, 24, 234-241.

Tang, K. L. (1998). Rape law reform in canada: The success and limits of legislation.

            International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 42,

            258-270.

Vearnals, S., & Campbell, T. (2001). Male victims of male sexual assault: A review of

            psychological consequences and treatment. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 16,

            279-286.

Verberg, N., Wood, E., Desmarais, S., & Senn, C. (2000). Gender differences in survey

            respondents’ written definitions of date rape. The Canadian Journal of Human

            Sexuality, 9, 181-190.