Artikel

Judicial vision : rape, prostitution, and the "chaste woman"

Verfasst von: Scutt, Jocelynne A.
in: Women's studies international forum
New York [u.a.]: 1994 , 345 - 356 S.

Weitere Informationen

Einrichtung: Ariadne | Wien
Verfasst von: Scutt, Jocelynne A.
In: Women's studies international forum
Jahr: 1994
Sprache: Englisch
Beschreibung:
In 1991 Judge Jones of the Victorian County Court said that the law is the same for women working as prostitutes as it is for everyone else. He then sentenced a man convicted of rape of a sex worker to a lower penalty because the women was working as a prostitute and therefore was "less psychologically harmed by the rape" than a "chaste women" would have been. The public protest against the decision was enormous. The case went on appeal to the supreme court of Victoria, but the principle was left intact. In 1981 the Spreme Court of victoria had already established this notion firmly in the law. They went further - as did the County Court judge. They held that a "sexually experienced" woman is less harmed by rape than a "chaste" woman. What is a "chaste" woman? According to the Supreme Court of Victoria, it is a "married woman, living in a flat, "who in the absence of her husband is raped by a man coming in the window". How "sexuelly experienced" does a woman have to be not to be so damaged by rape? Apparently judges of the Victorian Supreme and County Courts are unable to tell the difference between sex-with-consent and sex-without-consent. How else could they establish a "principle" that a sexually experienced women will be less psychologically harmed by rape than a woman without such experience? The public outcry shows that the community is more in tune with the reality of rape and woman's experience of it than was so in the past. Now - the question is, when will the judges catch up?
Anmerkung:
Literaturverz.
Gesamten Bestand von Ariadne anzeigen
Datensatz im Katalog der Einrichtung anzeigen

Standort

Ariadne

Ähnliche Einträge