Rape victims should be called "accusers," not victims until rapist is convicted.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/...-redefine-rape-victims-accusers_n_818718.html

Long story short: Georgia State Representative Bobby Franklin thinks that rape victims should no longer be considered "victims", and instead should be called "accusers" until the accused is convicted.
First the "forcible rape" thing and now this.


EDIT: This is the same guy who doesn't believe in Driver's Licenses.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/bobby-franklin/2011/02/

 

This is absolutely ridiculous. If a person has been raped, then they are a victim of rape whether or not the rapist is convicted.

 

Yes, but what if the "rape victim" is lying? What can you call them then?

 

If they happen to be lying, then they were not raped and therefore don't have to be called anything. If have not been proven to be lying, then they are still called victims.

 

I saw somewhere that only two percent of reported rapes are flase.

Either way, it is already hard enough for someone to comr forth about being raped. Making it even harder for them by doing this is one of the worst things someone can do. The person who started this should not have any power and is disgusting. ​

 

Note, this post won't be pretty. I've had a past of sexual abuse and have a very strong opinion of it.

I am absolutely disgusted by this idea. People already have problems bringing it up, and also the thing is... That most feel already either it's their fault or are too embarrassed to tell anyone about it. It's very, very, very, rare to accuse false rape. And even if it's true, most people don't believe them at first.

With DNA testing, most rapists are caught unless they're really good. Like using a condom. And I think this person who brought it up should be hanged for suggesting it. Thank god it's not in my state or I would hunt the person down. *semi-joking*

Sorry, but this is a sensitive topic for me, it took me YEARS to tell my parents, (I was under eighteen at the time) that my boyfriend was sexually abusing me. It took me more longer years to openly mention it outside of boyfriends and very close friends about what happened. If I ever heard someone give me pity about it, I'd blow it off, I know it happened and it doesn't effect me anymore nearly as much. Note, it still does, but not at a massive level as it used to. If someone ever called me an accuser of saying my boyfriend sexually abused me, I'd probably punch them.

That's the damned truth.

 

Well who cares about rape? It's not like it changes the fact that we're alone in the universe and all gonna die an awful death.

 

Nobody's truly ever alone,unless they give up on everyone they know and care about. And what makes you so sure we will die an awful death?

 

I HAVE NOBODY! AND I KNOW BECAUSE I'M LIVING THROUGH IT RIGHT NOW! lol

 

When we simply look at the cold hard terminology, he is probably correct. Unfortunately for him terminology should not overshadow common sense, according to which he's just an idiot.

 

I must say I have to agree with you 100% I also have a past with sexual abuse that went on for years. At a point in my life aswell my screwed up grandmother told me not to call myself a "victum". Been free of the abuse for about three years and now she blames me lol

but back on topic this guy is a total idiot. If something like that would have happened to a kid I doubt he would be coming out and saying all this crap. If someone was raped the person who did it should be harshly punished and the person he/she did it to is a victum."accusers" my ass =/ I really feel bad for the adults/kids who have a bad past with this who read this. You can really get mentally screwed with something like that. why can't this world ever make sence? thats right its now allowed to 8/

 

But do we use this sort of terminology anywhere else in the legal system, and call the victims 'accusors' in any other situation?

 

It depends. Suppose a guy claims that he was burgled, and that his house was stripped of all its valuables.
Another guy, suspect of the crime is being put on trial. Then there are three possible outcomes:
A) The suspect is indeed the burglar. In this case, the accuser is also a victim.
B) Someone other than the suspect turns out to be the burglar. Then the accuser is still a victim.
C) The man actually hid away his valuables and wanted to frame the suspect. In this case he is no longer a victim.

Since every suspect is supposed to be innocent until proven otherwise, and seeing as situation B doesn't occur too often in the case of rape (unless combined with murder), then by definition the victim cannot be called a victim either, until proven otherwise.
Note that all this is disregarding the humane aspect of the terms, which I am against. Calling supposed rape victims "accusers" isn't exactly a tactful way of describing them.

I don't care whether these are the terms used in the legal system. These are the terms such as most people define them.

 

Who cares about rape? How about all the people out there who have been raped and their families who support them, also not everyone dies an awful death, some people die peacefully in their sleep, I know this is true because that's how my granddad passed.

You only think you have nobody, I haven't checked how old you are, but you sound like an attention seeking teenage who's having issue with your mum and dad, but I don't know you so I could be wrong.

As for the topic on hand rape victims should not be called accusers but to me, it sounds like they are being called lairs, and they can have family members or friends already calling them that, even when the victim is just a teenager who really does need the support of people around them. I've only come across one person claiming she was rapped just because a guy tried to kiss her (Sorry if this seems mean but I don't see that as rape, since I've always seen rape as someone forcing someone to have sex with them) but she was an attention seeker.

 

Anyone think we might be making a bit too big a deal about this? I don't really like it either but it's not that big of a deal, really...what's in a name?

 

This makes sense, yes I understand where the guy is coming from but that's more on a legal and gramatically correct level. However, I think being correct on an emotional level is more important. I luckily have never experienced anything like this, but I can imagine that being called an "accuser" makes you feel like you could be lying or that somehow you're the bad person in this. I think this is wrong as I can understand how hard it must be to tell someone and doing this will just make it even worse, leading to rapists not being caught. Drastic yet true, yes.