Here Gittos says that the John Worboys case should not be used as an example in discussions of rape culture. Rape Culture Denial — A Response. He justifies his own claims by rubbishing academia, discussing select cases and weighing in with the words of lawyers he knows and of friends. This has led, he argues, to the erroneous belief that sexually aggressive behaviour has become normalized, thereby making actual rape and sexual violence more likely. Whereas Gittos dissected and rejected the ONS statistics, he readily accepts statistics that he finds agreeable.
Newsletters Never miss a beat Sign Up Now Subscribe now to get the latest news delivered right to your inbox.
Rape Culture Denial – A Response
I am baffled quite why married people should decide whether same-sex couples be legally permitted to marry! By insistently stating or implying that this is the case, the argument is rigged. Because she did not, it could very well be the case that the complainant knew full well when she had given consent and when not. He is also the legal editor for Spiked or Sp! More accurately, there is no consistency in research studies nothing unusual there but there is actually a great deal of research that demonstrates such links: Again, who gets to decide?
Also indicative of a toxic rape culture climate were the many vitriolic things said about the claimant. There is no attempt here at balance. How does a tactic like this not downplay the seriousness of rape? Although what is relayed by Gittos is sparse probably because the media coverage was similarly tersehe is quick to designate this a grave injustice against a child moreover, a child with mental illness and low IQ who was probably only experimenting sexually. Gittos is outraged that Ben Sullivan, president of the Oxford debating club, was advised to resign or take a leave of absence while a criminal investigation was under way. I have not felt a need to state that I am not anti-men or that men, too, are victims of rape and other forms of violence and abuse — I take this as a given and consider inequality on the grounds of gender contrary to the aims of equality and hence, of feminism. How is cohabitation not a commitment, or — necessarily — a lesser commitment than marriage?