|
|
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
Can you imagine a person who's been robbed being barred from using the word "rob" at his assailant's trial? How can you tell a jury your wallet was stolen without using the word "steal?"
At Slate, Dahlia Lithwick writes of a Nebraska judge who has banned the words "rape," "assault," "victim," "assailant," and "sexual assault kit" from a rape trial. The victim says that after sharing a few drinks with a man in a bar, she blacked out, and awoke the next morning in the midst of being raped. But the only language left for her to use in the courtroom to describe this act is "sex" or "intercourse." As Lithwick points out, these are words that imply mutual consent. Is it any surprise the trial resulted in a hung jury?
The victim in this case is Torey Bowen. She has said, "This makes women sick, especially the women who have gone through this. They know the difference between sex and rape."
Why do we treat rape victims differently from the innocent victims of any other crime?
Bowen could not be more correct. My virginity was taken from me by a male friend, who, when I passed out, raped me. I woke up to him raping me and fought back. I got the DNA evidence and went into the police station to press charges.
The questions that followed were: why did you drink, why did you get a ride home from him, what were you wearing, why, why, why, why. We never ask people that report a theft, why did you park your car in that parking lot, or why do you live on this street? Yet we ask these kinds of questions about rape victims all the time.
My case was closed by the police because they said that since I blacked out there was not evidence that the sex wasn't consensual--even though I had the bruises and DNA to prove it. They silenced me.
I know that what happened to me that night was not sex: it was rape, pure and simple.
And the sad thing is, Bowen's and my story are not isolated cases. My heart goes out to her.