Let’s get a few things clear

Misinformation abounds about the Dewar ruling

I am one of the organizers of the rally that was held on Feb. 25 calling for Justice Robert Dewar’s resignation from the bench.

Dewar has contributed to worsening the existing rape culture in which we live.

The call for accountability from Dewar is not being made by a lynch mob – it is a legitimate call that attempts to reconcile the existing constraints of our legal system with the damage Dewar has done to our society’s notions of sexual consent, what constitutes rape and what constitutes a “major sexual assault.”

I have read and re-read the sentencing transcript. Far from leading me to believe that the criticism of Dewar’s comments were unfair, it has reinforced the importance of pursuing the matter.

Dewar had a responsibility to hold the convicted rapist, Kenneth Rhodes, to a reasonable moral standard for failing to control his sexual impulses. Dewar himself acknowledged that Rhodes showed no remorse.

The victim in this case picked up a stick in anticipation of trouble, feared for her life, ran away without pants and still fears social situations.

For the judge to deem Rhodes a “clumsy Don Juan” who pulled a “one-off” rape (Dewar’s language, not mine) is abhorrent.

I understand that the judge had to weigh the impact on the victim against the future risk to society and what is fair to the perpetrator. I am not concerned now about disputing the sentence handed down – that is more a matter for the victim and the Crown to consider.

But for the judge to allow considerations of the victim’s attire and apparent willingness to kiss and hold Rhodes’s hand to influence his sentencing decision is inexcusable. Dewar had a responsibility to send a clear message to all would-be rapists that failure to control yourself, no matter how aroused you are, is no excuse.

Instead, he has re-muddied the waters regarding sexual consent. He has added to a clearly deficient and outdated body of legal decisions on rape.

He has surely reinforced for many women that reporting rape is still fraught with pitfalls. His words imply that no matter how clear the evidence is, your right to control your own body will be called into question, one way or another.

So, let’s get some things clear.

First, rape and sexual assault are inherently violent acts. The victim does not have to be physically beaten for the claim of sexual assault to be considered serious or legitimate.

Rape is about treating someone else’s body as your property, and it is carried out through domination, control and humiliation.

Second, sexual assault is not a crime that consists of women regretting their sexual experience, nor is it falsely reported more than any other crime. There is no grey area. If a woman says no, that means no.

“No” can be expressed in many different ways, from “get away from me” to “I’m not comfortable” to “that hurts” to hesitation about the sexual experience. Whatever verbal or non-verbal way “no” is expressed, it must be respected. Anything less than clear and enthusiastic consent is “no.”

Third, women have the right to say “no” at any time and for any reason during an encounter. There is no reasonable expectation of going “to the next level” as Dewar suggested Rhodes was at least partly entitled to think.

All these arguments about women creating “inviting circumstances” and “confusing men” by what they wear or their actions play on three basic assumptions.

The first is that men have uncontrollable sexuality. The second is that women must be the gatekeepers of that uncontrollable male sexuality. The last is that if women aren’t successful in controlling it, they didn’t try hard enough.

What follows from this are the hurtful and destructive arguments that have circulated lately: anything that happens to a woman who does not accept a man’s uncontrollable sexual advances is somehow at least partly to blame for her rape.

We cannot hold men fully responsible for any of their conscious decisions because they just can’t control themselves, or so the argument goes. 

If a man cannot control himself when he is aroused then he is most definitely a danger to society.

Kudos to those men who do take responsibility for their sexuality, but it’s clear this has not become universal.

Alanna Makinson is the chairperson of the Canadian Federation of Students – Manitoba.

Published in Volume 65, Number 24 of The Uniter (March 24, 2011)

Related Reads