News report after mind-numbing news report details cases where false rape claimants are sentenced to less jail time than their victims served after being falsely arrested. The gross inequity of these sentences is a chronic source of outrage for anyone who studies the false rape epidemic. It is beyond dispute that false rape claims would be far more effectively deterred if charges were brought against false accusers with the frequency that other wrongdoing is sanctioned, and if false claimants were sentenced in proportion to the havoc they cause in the lives of innocent men.

Some radical feminists, of course, don’t think society should bother deterring false rape claims at all. One sexual assault counselor, for example declared that “false rape allegations were often triggered by traumatic experiences and questioned the benefit of prosecution in such cases.” One wonders if this counselor, who cited no evidence to support her claim, would adopt the same lenient approach with respect to a young man who raped because of a “traumatic experience.”

But deterring false rape claims by stiffening criminal sentences is the subject of another post. The subject of this one is another overlooked, but altogether critical, method for deterring false claims that anyone concerned about protecting the rights of innocent men should insist on: girls and young women, especially those in their teens, need to be taught what “consent” means. Many simply don’t know. The radical feminists who dominate public discourse about rape likely would recoil at this suggestion, and it is no wonder, since they are the ones feeding young women misinformation about consent.

False rape claims thrive in a culture that teaches young women that they are being sexually tyrannized by men, and that even sexual encounters considered consensual, both under law and by social compact since the beginning of time, are tantamount to sexual assault. Among other things, as Glenn Sacks has explained, young women are being wrongly taught that sex induced by a male's verbal “cajoling” without physical threat is rape; they are being wrongly taught that sexual relations not accompanied by a woman’s oral affirmation is, or at least should be, classified as “rape” (some insist that the affirmation must be “enthusiastic” -- as if “enthusiasm” is capable of being objectively quantified); and they are being wrongly taught that sex after a woman takes any alcohol or drugs invariably negates valid consent.

None of this is correct.

Young women need to be taught that valid consent to intercourse can be manifested in a variety of ways -- by oral affirmations or by non-verbal conduct; that it need not be “enthusiastic”; and that it may be effective even though – horrors! -- the woman previously had said “no” (this falls under the legal principle that women are permitted to change their minds). A woman’s secret, undisclosed intentions are impertinent to the question of whether she manifested consent. All that matters are her outward manifestations of assent. Likewise, a woman’s after-the-fact regret has no bearing on whether consent was manifested at the time the sex act occurred. A young woman can validly consent after imbibing alcohol so long as she is capable of making a rational decision.

To reduce false rape claims, why shouldn’t we insist that young women be taught about consent? Feminists are the first to insist that innocent males who don’t rape need to be “part of the solution” about rape, and our universities routinely subject young men who don’t rape to sexual assault indoctrination. (Radical feminists, incidentally, heap accusations of “victim blaming” upon anyone who dares to suggest that innocent women also bear responsibility for avoiding rape; when it comes to innocent people, it seems only males have a responsibility to eradicate rape.)

Teaching young women about consent is all the more important in light of recent studies that show women experience greater after-the-fact regret about sex than men.

“Eighty per cent of men had overall positive feelings about the experience compared to 54 per cent of women. . . . . The predominant negative feeling reported by women was regret at having been 'used'. Women were also more likely to feel that they had let themselves down and were worried about the potential damage to their reputation if other people found out. Women found the experience less sexually satisfying and, contrary to popular belief, they did not seem to view taking part in casual sex as a prelude to long-term relationships."

(Source: “Women Have Not Adapted to Casual Sex, Research Shows,” Science Daily, June 26, 2008)

What does this have to do with false rape claims? One of the common motives cited by experts for false rape claims is "remorse after an impulsive sexual fling . . . ." Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case, S. Taylor, K.C. Johnson at 375 (2007).

Instead of feeding young women misinformation that encourages them to invent rape claims, feminists should teach young women what consent means, and that after-the-fact regret about one-night stands -- although a common, indeed natural, feeling for women -- does not negate consent. This would encourage young women to be cautious before engaging in impulsive sexual flings, and to be judicious about crying rape after the fact.

[Pierce Harlan, Esq. is one of the bloggers at False Rape Society.] 

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 7th, 2009 at 4:09 pm and is filed under Crime/Criminal Justice System/Police, False Accusations, Education, Rape/Sexual Assault/Statutory Rape. You can trackback from your own site.