|
This is a correspondence between
a rape survivor and Channel 4’s Samira Ahmed. The rape survivor complained after
Ahmed interrupted Lisa Longstaff from WAR during an interview. Ahmed
accused Longstaff of being irresponsible for
criticising the police about their poor investigation of rape and the low
conviction rate making women vulnerable rather than supporting the police’s
warning to women to curb their drinking.
From:
Ahmed, Samira <Samira.Ahmed@itn.co.uk> Dear LP, Thanks for your email. I've been out of the office for a few days, which is why there's been this delay in responding. I take the issue of rape very seriously, and I'm so sorry to hear that you've been through it. The first thing I said to the guest was "This is not about blaming the woman", because I know all too well, that when a rape has taken place, the legal process still stigmatises the victim. My point was, can more rapes be prevented in the first place? This was nothing to do with the scandal of low conviction rates. The ACPO research looked at 120 rape cases where the women believed they'd been drugged. Toxicology tests found none involved Rophypnol. Some showed the use of recreational drugs and very high alcohol levels. It was important to confront the fact that while many women FEAR they'll be drugged by attackers, the reality found in this forensic survey, was that very heavy alcohol intoxication, possibly in combination with other drug use, has the same effect; and the difference is that women can control how much they drink and what drugs they take. Because bingedrinking is socially acceptable for men and women I raised legitimate question that there was a danger in overemphasising the risk of doping in comparison. Informing women about the risk of being preyed on when very drunk would empower them to reduce that risk. There's no blame in it. On News at Noon we've previously given extensive coverage to the danger of drug rape, including interviewing the man who funded a public information film about the dangers of doping, after a close friend was raped. It would have been irresponsible to then ignore the issues raised by the new ACPO research.
Yours sincerely,
Samira Ahmed
SAMIRA AHMED
From:
Ahmed, Samira [mailto:Samira.Ahmed@ITN.CO.UK] re my email reply to an individual viewer posted on the Women Against Rape website.
I support your campaigning work and I'm happy that you've printed my response to a viewer email, written by a woman who's been through the ordeal of rape and then seeing her rapist acquitted. But I would like to you to correct the misleading comment (below) you prefaced it with:
" Ahmed accused Longstaff of being irresponsible for criticising the police about their poor investigation of rape and the low conviction rate making women vulnerable rather than supporting the police’s warning to women to curb their drinking."
I said no such thing. I said the low conviction rate was not the issue in this story. It was about whether more rapes could be prevented in the first place. And my question was whether it was irresponsible of Women Against Rape to fail to inform women about factors they could control, factors which would empower women to reduce risk.
Thankyou. Yours faithfully,
Samira Ahmed
SAMIRA AHMED
Please Note:
Any views or opinions are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent
those of Independent Television News Limited unless specifically stated.
This email and any files attached are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual
or entity to which they are addressed.
If you have received this email in error, please notify postmaster@itn.co.uk
Please note that to ensure regulatory compliance and for the protection of our clients and business,
we may monitor and read messages sent to and from our systems.
Thank You.
21 December 2006 Dear Samira Ahmed
Thanks for your email expressing support for our work. We are also glad for the opportunity to clarify what we were trying to say.
We looked at the tape again. You said to Lisa Longstaff on air, "I think it's irresponsible of you, I put it [to you], to suggest that you blame the police, and don't tell women to control a risk factor that they can control." We consider what is on our website to be a fair summary.
You said in your reply to the rape survivor LP who first complained about your comment: "My point was, can more rapes be prevented in the first place? This was nothing to do with the scandal of low conviction rates."
But what Lisa Longstaff was trying to explain is that the low conviction rate (5.3% of reported rapes) has everything to do with preventing rape. At present, a man considering forcing himself on a woman (or child) is confident that he is likely to get away with it, since at least 95% of rapists do (many more in fact since most rape and sexual assault are unreported). What’s there to stop him?.
Again and again, we see the media putting the responsibility on women for how rape can be prevented. Many women think it is not up to the media, or the police, to tell us what to drink, what to wear, or where to go. Men have no right to assume they can take advantage of us just because we are drunk. To accept such an assumption amounts to believing that men are predatory by ‘nature’ and that nothing can be done to change them.
Men used to think they had the right to rape their wives. (Many still do.) Why? Because they thought that by marrying you gave away your right to say no. Most of the media used to agreed with them. Should women have avoided marriage or close relationships in order to avoid rape?
It took 15 years of campaigning to win the legal recognition that rape in marriage is a crime. We are still campaigning for all rape to be treated seriously so that the conviction rate goes up and men have to think twice about what they are doing, especially if the woman is drunk and in no position to consent.
Lisa Longstaff spoke for millions when she said the criminal justice system has a responsibility to bring rapists to justice, instead of offering them an open field. This point of view is constantly censored. Some journalists tell us explicitly that they want a more “positive” message. Unfortunately, a positive message about the police response to rape is not an accurate one, and only serves to delay the changes that women are crying out for.
Maybe our point of view is clearer now.
Yours sincerely Claire Glasman cc Fiona Railton
|