Image via Wikipedia
Rape gets a new dress. Finally. Rape has been wearing that same worn-out, out-of-date style since 1929.
Let’s start with HR#3. I’m not trying to be political here, I'm just going to present some information as understand it. When Obama came out with his healthcare changes, there was a great deal of concern by a portion of our citizenry that federal tax money would now go to pay for abortions. You see, some of the insurance policies would be subsidized by federal monies and most private insurance pays for abortions. Now, it is illegal in the United States for federal monies to pay for abortions and therefore a complex calculation and some CPA magic was put into place to make sure that no federal monies went to pay for abortions.
Still there was unrest. So the Republican party set forth HR#3 to make absolutely sure that federal monies were not spent. Here’s the thing though. The Hyde Amendment does not say that federal monies will not be spent on ALL abortions. It allows for federal monies to be spent in the cases of rape, incest, and when the life of a mother is endangered. So, HR#3 tried to redefine several of these criteria, namely incest only if under the age of eighteen, and rape only if it were forcible.
I think that there are two important things in the news this year that led to the wardrobe change over at the FBI, and they aren’t obvious in theme, but they had an impact: HR #3 abortion bill and the TSA. See? I told you that it wasn’t an obvious couple.
WHAT???? Yes, let me run that by you again. Rape - only if it was forcible. Okay. So what is forcible rape? No one knows. There is no federal criminal code defining just how much you have to fight back, how bloody, and bruised, and broken, and battered you have to be in order to prove forcible rape.
In 1929, the FBI came up with a rape definition: “Carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” Huh. Well that seems to leave a lot out of the rape crime scene doesn’t it?
What about a guy? Can’t a guy be raped? I mean there are all of those prison references…
What if a person has physical or mental limitations?
What if the victim were unconscious because she was drugged or had self-induced too many drugs or too much alcohol? (statistics for this kind of rape run from 22% of all rapes to 77%. If we pick an in between number that means maybe half of all rapes?)
What about anal rape?
What about being forced to have oral sex?
Why does it matter? Here’s the thing, in 1929 the FBI started to gather data on rape. The ONLY data they gathered then and the ONLY data they gathered up until now is data that met the criterion of their 1929 definition. So, what if you are a man and you were raped? You don’t count. Should you even report the crime? The victim has such a narrow definition of what constitutes rape that they keep that forced oral rape to themselves. Rape is grossly under reported.
The under reporting of rape has many problems. First, let’s help the victims Let’s get them the services they need. More reported rapes means more money needs to be set aside to get victims the mental and physical help necessary following the crime. But too, rape is a serial crime. Approximately 90-95% of rapes are perpetrated by serial rapists. When the rapes are reported and get police focus – maybe they can stop the rapist. Maybe they can protect future victims.
When public scrutiny was in play and there was an outcry over the “forcible rape” portion of the HR#3, it was removed. But the idea became part of our public debate.
What else became part of our public debate? The 92 year-old grandma who was getting the pat down by the TSA. Now granted, being a TSA officer must be a job from hell. I just can’t imagine how bad things would have to be in my life to take that on. But these agents do have an incredible amount of access to our personal space. And that is the gist of the TSA debate. In the land of the free, I want to be free of exploring hands, thank you very much.
I believe that these two public debates, about encroaching upon and forcing ones will upon another person’s private body, encouraged the FBI to respond with a new and wonderfully inclusive definition.
“Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
There now. Doesn’t that fit better? It’s about time the FBI’s definition got a wardrobe update.
If you would like to leave a comment below please just click on the comments button. Thanks for visiting,
I've been date rape and a guy I lived with for 6 years thought he could have sex whenever he wanted. He also believed women can't be raped. All they have to do is close their legs. Yes, I know, why would I stay with a ignorant ahole like that? It's complicated but I did leave him -- and he did come after me.
ReplyDeletePersonally I think there are too many people without wombs deciding what and how women can do to their bodies. Viagras covered by a number of drug plans, but besides HR#3, these same groups are fighting to keep any type of birth control paid for with the same money that would get any man viagra. So I guess man getting a hard on is more important than a woman being able to control the size of her family.
There's a cartoon circulating that shows a gloved TSA employee standing in the metal-detector frame. Hanging above him is a sprig of mistletoe, and he's leering at passengers lined up for his pat-down.
ReplyDelete