News

International News Comment & Analysis Australian News Cultural Dissent Loose Cannons Cartoons

Archives

Browse Search

Hot Topics

Environment Workers & Unions Latin America Anti-war Art & culture Asia Region Indigenous rights

Discussions

GLW Discussions List Links Bolivia Rising Ecuador Rising LeftClick Live from Palestine

Advertising

The following ads are selected by google. For more info click here.

FEMINIST COLUMN
… and ain't i a woman?: No means no


3 June 1992

No means no

Sex without consent is rape. By definition, a woman can never “ask” to be raped. But logic is blocked out of prejudiced minds, even the supposedly best educated ones.

On May 4, the NSW Victims' Compensation Tribunal rejected a claim for compensation for rape on the grounds that the “applicant encouraged actions -- she must be responsible for her own actions”. The curt letter rejecting the claim concluded: “Costs were awarded in the amount of $0.00 plus $0.00 disbursements.”

Having spent a number of years in counselling over the attack, where she was repeatedly told it was not her fault, the 26-year-old woman was stunned and outraged by the decision. If she had been less aware of her rights, we might never have known about it. As it was, Josephine (not her real name) decided to go public. She took her case to shadow attorney general Paul Whelan, and agreed to being questioned about the tribunal's decision at a press conference on May 28.

She found some journalists supportive, others keen to look for a sensational angle and others showing residual doubt: one wanted to know precisely why it might have been thought that she encouraged the rapist's actions. All of which shouldn't be surprising, considering the way rape is still reported in the popular media.

Josephine's courage, and the straightforward way she spelled out the issues involved, are to be applauded. She said that the tribunal's decision could be giving would-be rapists the idea that “no” means “yeah, all right”.

It's worth reflecting on the fact that there remains in many people's minds the idea that there are “difficult” cases, where the issue of consent is not clear. For these people, the whole thing gets murky if a woman agrees to go back to a man's room or home after a party; if she has been flirtatious; if she sits on a sofa and talks until 2 a.m. Doesn't all that mean that sex is next on the agenda? Isn't she “unfairly” raising expectations?

None of this is even slightly relevant. If she says no, she means no, and that's that. The idea, celebrated in our sexist culture, that women are basically “coy”, that a “nice girl” might say no when she means yes, is nothing but an excuse for the denial of basic human rights.

By Tracy Sorensen

From: Comment & Analysis
GLW issue #58 - 3 June 1992:


  • Editorial: Democracy a...
  • Feminist column: …...


  • LinksLinks Resistance books Resistance - Australia Venezuela Solidarity Support Green Left Socialist Alliance Activist calendar Action in Solidarity with Asia and the Pacific