Women's Views on News |
| Online-dating related rape increases Posted: 08 Feb 2016 01:20 PM PST
Figures released recently show there has been a six-fold increase in reports of online-dating related rape offences over a 5-year period, according to analysts. The National Crime Agency's Serious Crime Analysis Section (SCAS), which supports police investigations into serious sexual assaults committed by strangers, identified an increase in the number of people who were raped during their first face-to-face meeting following initial contact through an online dating website or app. The number of reports has risen from 33 in 2009 to 184 in 2014. Eighty-five per cent of the victims were women and 15 per cent were men. Of the men, 25 per cent of victims were aged between 15 and 19. Forty-two per cent of female victims were in the 20-29 age groups, 24 cent were from the 40-49 age group. Sean Sutton, head of the Serious Crimes Analysis Section, said further work was needed before potential reasons for the increase were fully understood, but the team was considering whether these could include: The fact that people feel protected online, and their communication can escalate rapidly to become sexual in nature, leading to mismatched expectations when they meet for the first time; Deliberate targeting of online sites and apps by offenders who intend to commit sexual assault – there was some evidence of coercion and persuasion being used by offenders to encourage (often reluctant) victims to meet sooner than they would like, and 43 per cent of first face-to-face meetings took place within one week of the initial contact being made online; Victims having more confidence to report assaults to the police; and Whether more people are spending time in private on a first date and so putting themselves at risk – 41 per cent of victims had spent time in private on their first date. In total, 71 per cent of the rapes that occurred on the first face-to-face meeting following online contact were committed at the victim's or offender's residence. The National Crime Agency (NCA) team is also looking at the differences between perpetrators who met their victims online and other sexual offenders. For example, the former appear significantly less likely than other sexual offenders to have a previous criminal conviction. Figures say that 84 per cent of people convicted of stranger rape have previous convictions, typically for serious offences that are not of a sexual nature. For those suspected of stranger rape where the contact is initiated online, that figure falls to 49 per cent – alongside a decrease in the severity of the crime previously committed. Sutton said: "More than nine million Britons have logged on to online dating sites, and the majority have found that they are a convenient and safe environment to find a relationship. "This initial work clearly raises a lot of questions and we will be working with academia to build a more complete picture. " However this will take time and we wanted to release our headline findings at the earliest opportunity. "Our aim here is to make people aware of the potential danger, so they can be better prepared and make the choices that are right for them. "A rape victim is never at fault and we do not want the circumstances in which these assaults take place to cause any victim to doubt that. "Sexual assault is a crime, full stop, and we want victims to feel confident reporting it to the police." Martin Hewitt, from the National Police Chief's Council, said: "Regardless of the circumstances, sexual activity against your will is a crime. "The Serious Crime Analysis Section works together with every police force in the country ensuring that victims are supported when they take the difficult step in coming forward to report these serious offences." The NCA published its findings along with new guidance to help users of online dating sites and apps reduce their personal risk. Get Safe Online recommends the following safety advice for online dating: 1. Plan it. Say it. Do it. It's your date. Agree on what you both want from it before you meet up. Don't feel pressured to meet before you're ready or for any longer than you're comfortable with – a short first date is fine. 2. Meet in public. Stay in public. The safest plan is to meet somewhere public and stay somewhere public. Make your own way there and back and don't feel pressured to go home with your date. If you feel ready to move to a private environment, make sure your expectations match those of your date. 3. Get to know the person, not the profile. The way people interact online isn't always the same face-to-face. Don't be offended if your date is more guarded when meeting in person, or if things don't progress as fast face-to-face. 4. Not going well? Make your excuses and leave. Don't feel bad about cutting a date short if you're not keen. You don't owe the other person anything, no matter how long you've been chatting or what's been suggested. 5. If you are raped or sexually assaulted on your date, help is available. No matter what the circumstances, sexual activity against your will is a crime. Police and charities are here to help and support you. If you need help, contact Rape Crisis or The Survivors Trust; or for more information and advice, including other charities and support groups, click here. To read the National Crime Agency's full report, click here.  |
| The right to be civil partners Posted: 08 Feb 2016 03:20 AM PST
The case of Rebecca Steinfeld and Charles Keidan, a heterosexual couple who want to have a civil partnership instead of getting married, will resonate with many couples today, a growing number of whom are questioning whether the traditional means of committing to each other and legally binding their relationship is in line with their desires and values. After being told in 2014 that they couldn't enter into a civil partnership because they did not meet the legal requirement of being of the same sex, Steinfeld and Keidan decided to take their case to the High Court on the grounds of discrimination based on their sexual orientation. Although the couple's claim for judicial review was dismissed at the end of January, a decision which they intend to appeal, it has nonetheless triggered a debate on the problematic aspects of conventional marriage and its place in modern society. Steinfeld and Keidan describe themselves as feminists and said that they wish to be civil partners instead of husband and wife because civil partnerships "focus on equality" which is something they do not feel marriage does. It certainly cannot be denied that marriage is a fundamentally patriarchal and slightly out-dated institution and for many it is an endorsement of traditional gender roles and symbolic of the oppression women have suffered for centuries. The traditional marriage vows, in which a woman says that she will ‘love, cherish, and obey’ her husband, are a stark reminder of this, and it is not uncommon for couples to leave out the word ‘obey’ – or write their own vows altogether. Many would argue that marriage can be whatever people want it to be and that modern couples are reinventing marriage as an institution which promotes love and equality, but there still appears to be a romantic emphasis on the bride being given away by her father and taking her husband's name – both undeniably patriarchal elements of marriage signalling the ownership of a woman by a man throughout her life. Not everyone takes it to mean that any more, and of course women can get married without adhering to either of those traditions. But for an increasing number of people, myself included, these customs are emblematic of an unnecessary and expensive fanfare, the foundations of which conflict with their beliefs and the fight for equality. Marriage does however afford couples significant legal advantages, including exemption from inheritance tax, pension benefits and parental responsibility for children. Civil partnerships, introduced under the Civil Partnership Act 2004, offered the same rights as civil marriage to same-sex couples. But, as of 2013, same-sex couples are now able to get married on exactly the same terms as heterosexual couples, meaning that they now have the choice of signing up to a civil partnership or for marriage. While the idea of discrimination against straight people initially sounded a little odd and even slightly ridiculous, the introduction of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 has made an unlikely case for it, as demonstrated by Steinfeld and Keidan. It is of course well overdue that same-sex couples shoud have the same rights as heterosexual couples and that their relationships be recognised in law. And the discrimination that they face should not be underplayed. Nor should we be duped into thinking that the LGBT+ community now stand on completely equal footing with everyone else. But, in terms of the options of ways in which to legally bind one's relationship, there is now an imbalance which contradicts the concept of equality. The legalisation of gay marriage has been pivotal in challenging traditional gender roles and stereotypes and conventions of marriage, and it is a critical step towards equality for all in society. However, shouldn't straight couples also have the opportunity to defy these traditions by not getting married, without having to forfeit the legal benefits of marriage? For same-sex couples, being able to get married means that they are recognised as equal to heterosexual couples. For many women, being able to have a civil partnership would mean that they would be recognised as equal to men. It seems only fair that all couples, regardless of gender or sexual orientation, should have the same choices and rights. The government is now reportedly considering getting rid of civil partnerships altogether, meaning that any couple wanting to have their relationship recognised in law will have no option but to marry. Steinfeld and Keidan's continued fight, and the increasing support for their cause – demonstrated by their petition which has been signed by over 37,000 people – however, offers hope that one day civil partnerships may be available to all.  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |