Watching BBC News this morning, they were discussing rape, and they basically said that the rate of rape convictions are too low in the UK. They did not even mention once that a lot of that is because of women lying about it in the first place, they ignored this fact, instead, they insinuated that all women who cry rape are telling the gospel truth, and that the police aren't working hard enough.
They then went on to say that there should be specialist rape inquiry squads in all police stations, teams dedicated to only getting the rape conviction rate up, which really sounds scary to me, it's as if they want the law changed to assume guilt on the man being accused, no matter what.
They finished their article on it with this little "fact", that only a small minority of rapes are reported in the first place. Now how the hell can they possibly know this? It came across like: "The conviction rate of rape doesn't match with our extremely low opinion of men, so most cases must not be getting reported then".
Disgraceful, here's the story: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7496013.stm

Indeed even a moment's thought reveals this idea as absurd.

If people are found innocent then they are....duh duh duh....innocent.

We only have the word of feminist nutters that there are squillions of phantom rapists out there who aren't being caught.

The rule is: innocent until PROVEN guilty. Where's the proof?

Or is it now to be: Innocent until a sociologist says you aren't?

The UK has the lowest rape conviction rate in Europe because we allow more flimsy, groundless, rape cases to come to court than the rest of Europe. You are not comparing like with like. You don't have to be a genius to work that out. The UK seems to have had a common sense failure about most things and this is just another example.

Rape is the great manipulative 'bloated' political tool for feminists. They daren't acknowledge that the numbers of rapes are genuinely falling (any sane person would surely welcome this?), or that the majority of allegations are false.

Instead, they seek to lessen the burden of proof and thereby sacrifice untold numbers of innocent men to artificially sustain an illusion of a 'rape epidemic.' This ensures the jihad on men is sustained whilst continuing to ride the lucrative gravy train.

Celtic Druid,

What makes you think that the majority of rape accusations are false?

If you think about the fact that people who commit rape (with the definition of "rape" being forced physical sexual contact), and yes it is mostly men, are deviants, and you look at the relatively low percentage of the population who would fit into the definition of "deviant", it follows that the number of rapists and rapes is relatively small. Even if you accept that the average rapist will commit more than one rape, it's still relatively small.

Further, women are very encouraged to report sexual assaults, and are very supported when they do so. If a woman has been drinking and engages in casual sex, it can technically be counted as rape. In addition, women who report rape are taken at their word, and we've all seen the stories in the newspapers about the accused being arrested first and ask questions later.

Finally, given this "I believe you were raped" culture, the idea that all men are latent rapists, and the fact that the number of rapes reported is rising, I think it's pretty logical to say that a large percentage of the accusations are false, either in that what happened isn't really "rape", or that nothing really happened.

I don't think this supports the fact that the majority of rape accusations are false; I think that would be a bit of a stretch. But I do think it's closer to half than to zero.

That's really hard to know, I guess.....considering we don't really know how many rapes go unreported. And I imagine it's quite a few. I mean, who in their right mind wants to go through the ordeal of reporting a rape? I know personally what it's like, and it's no walk in the park. It's humiliating, it's frustrating, it's emotionally overwhelming and draining...and most would rather avoid this if they could.

It's the few histrionic, mentally ill, attention seeking, or vengeful types that enjoy making accusations that are false. And I think these are not representative of the masses.

But....that's just my own opinion.

What to me is more important than how many accusations are false, is that when it happens, the accuser gets little more than a slap on the wrist. The act itself is not treated as seriously as it should be. A man who is accused of rape stands to lose his job, his family, his reputation, his freedom, his (anal) virginity. His life can literally be ruined.

The punishment for inflicting that on a person should be comparatively severe.

It is a very usual feminist ploy that went unchallenged from the start. The 'tip of the iceberg' arguement. It is no arguement of course - it is simple stupidity. But so few people stand and ridicule it.

Try this as an arguement :- There are very few UFO sightings reported now. That's because no one took them seriously, because we are societally prejudiced. The demands for proof and evidence was just anti-alienism and the reports could not be 'proven' to the satisfaction of these bigots who were just keeping us oppressed. Hah ! Now we are overflown by flying saucers thirty times a day and aliens are living next door. And still no one does anything about it ! They put probes in your bum, you know!

I agree....false accusers need to be punished much more severely for their crimes.

This sentiment is often expressed here. But what is an appropriate punishment?

On another current thread, Police are said to be issuing 80 squids fixed fines. That is about the level of a parking fine.

Others have suggested the same incarceration that a man would get if found guilty when he was in fact innocent. But if the hoax is discovered he doesn't get a sentence.

There have been only a few cases where a defamation case has been brought (2002, a man was awarded 400,000 squids.) That sounds a lot and in comparison to other defamation cases, about the same level, even though we would all agree that a rape accusation is a tad more damaging than most other defamations.

Personally, I think a jail sentence is needed but the man needs to be compensated as well. Simple punishment of the false accuser does little to repair the damage to reputation and family and health of the victim.

So, what is an appropriate punishment?

A lengthy jail sentence, and monetary compensation for the male victim and his family. Also, if desired by the victim, a public apology. And for serial accusers, the jail sentences and fines should go up exponentially each and every time.

My thoughts are that there should be no leniency, even for first time offenders, the only exceptions are the very young, but even then, they should be held accountable in some way that deters them from doing it again. If that means time in juvie, so be it.

What do you think?