Legal sexism
Women suffer sexual harassment and sex discrimination daily, to varying degrees. Many of us make it a principle to object, at least to the perpetrator, in every single instance. The sheer volume of inappropriate sexual innuendos and sexist assumptions to which we are subjected can make this an onerous task, and when the perpetrator is not immediately available, as in the case of sexism in the mass media, it becomes impossible to respond to every single personal insult.
We have other things to think about, lives to live, work to do. The humdrum daily battle against sexism is, at best, a boring chore and, at worst, an energy-sapping series of disruptions, humiliations and degradations. The little prepared speech many of us have ready to deliver to the friends, workmates, bosses and complete strangers who react, offensively, to our gender rather than to our humanity can dampen spirits, freeze conversations and ruin atmospheres. A pledge not to endure sexism in silence, ever, is not an easy pledge to keep. Most of us let the little things go.
But we are still obliged, in many circumstances, to let the big things go too — even rapes, sexual assaults and serious discrimination and sexual harassment. The granting of formal equality to women, the reform of sexual assault laws and the introduction of sex discrimination and sexual harassment legislation have not provided a safe environment for women to report the crimes against them. Fighting back against the perpetrators of such crimes can still increase our suffering.
Many women report and prosecute sexual assault and discrimination cases knowing that they will gain no personal benefit from their actions, and even that they will suffer more for them. They do it so that other women will benefit, so that rapists and misogynists are exposed, precedents are set and society is put on notice that these crimes against women will not be tolerated. The courageous acts of such women have an important part in the history of feminism.
Judge Bland's comments in a Victorian County Court last month are yet another example of how a woman's determination to obtain justice can lead to yet further injustice in a fundamentally sexist legal system. Despite the fact that the accused man pleaded guilty to rape, the judge insisted on making the message to society not that rape will not be tolerated, but rather that women ask to be raped, rape proves male virility and rape can be erotic, romantic and titillating if committed in the right venue.
The young woman in the Victorian case was 15 at the time she was raped. Her 16-year-old assailant had drunk 10 cans of beer and three bourbons at a party after a football game. He hit her and raped her in a hay barn some distance from the party. We do not know what happened after that, but there can be no doubt that the process of reporting the rape and proceeding with the prosecution consisted of a series of gruelling and intensely unpleasant experiences. Despite the plea of guilty, the case was not concluded until some two years after the event.
At the sentencing, Judge Bland said, amongst other things, that "... despite criticism that has been directed at judges lately about violence and women ... it does happen, in the common experience of those who have been in the law as long as I have, that no often subsequently means yes".
This is not a new attitude. The chant, "yes means yes, no means no, whatever I wear, wherever I go", has rung out at many a feminist rally in recent years. T-shirts with the slogan "Which part of NO is it that you don't understand?" hang in many of our closets. It's not that they don't understand. Born-to-rule Bland and his ilk have dug in for a fight, but we can do that too.
By Karen Fredericks