Natalia K Hanley

‘The Mythology of Male Rape: Social Attitudes and Law Enforcement’

ethinking Rape Law provides a comprehensive and critical analysis of contemporary rape laws, across a range of jurisdictions. In a context in which there has been considerable legal reform of sexual offences, Rethinking Rape Law engages with developments spanning national, regional and international frameworks. It is only when we fully understand the differences between the law of rape in times of war and in times of peace, between common law and continental jurisdictions, between societies in transition and societies long inured to feminist activism, that we are able to understand and evaluate current practices, with a view to change and a better future for victims of sexual crimes. Written by leading authors from across the world, this is the first authoritative text on rape law that crosses jurisdictions, examines its conceptual and theoretical foundations, and sets the law in its policy context. It is destined to become the primary source for scholarly work and debate on sexual offences laws.This chapter discusses findings resulting from focus group research which examined attitudes to male rape.

‘I Think it’s Rape and I Think He Would be Found Not Guilty’ Focus Group Perceptions of (un)Reasonable Belief in Consent in Rape Law

A legal definition of rape that exonerates an accused who ‘reasonably believes in consent’ is currently in force in a number of jurisdictions in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand. Limited empirical research has investigated community and professional perceptions of the adequacy and scope of this definition of rape. The present study contributes to qualitative research on ‘reasonable belief in consent’ by analysing key themes from 11 focus group discussions with professionals working in the sexual assault sector (counsellors, health professionals, victim/survivor advocates and police officers), legally trained professionals and community members interested in rape law reform. Across these backgrounds, participants expressed dissatisfaction with this definition of rape because the scope for reasonable belief in consent was seen as overly broad. In particular, participants expected that jurors would draw on a presumption of ‘implied’ or ‘continuing’ consent between former sexual partners to find that belief in consent was ‘reasonable’ when the victim did not protest or resist the assault. As a result, many of our participants were critical that the rape definition effectively maintains the onus on a rape victim/survivor to unequivocally demonstrate non-consent. Participants advocated further law reform to give effect to a more ‘affirmative’ or communicative concept of consent.

Improving the law reform process: Opportunities for empirical qualitative research?

Research on law reform has identified a variety of factors that help or hinder the reform process, but it has not systematically explored the role that empirical research plays and could play in enabling and enhancing law reform. Drawing on a series of qualitative interviews with criminal law reform experts in Victoria, we analyse the current uses and perceived value of empirical research in criminal law reform and explore opportunities for qualitative research methods to be used more systematically or extensively to improve criminal law reform processes and outcomes.