bones

'Consent' has yet another role to play in a case of sexual assault. in reviewing the act, in seeking to determine whether or not a crime was committed, the concept of consent that is debated in court hinges on whether or not the victim offered sufficient resistance to the attack, whether or not her will was truly overcome by the use of force or the threat of bodily harm. the peculiar nature of sexual crimes of violence, as much as a man's historic perception of their meaning, has always clouded he law's perception of consent.

It is accepted without question that robbery victims need not prove they resisted the robber, and it is never inferred that by handing over they money they 'consented' to the act and therefore the act was no crime.

..handing over money at knife point, or dipping into one's wallet to assuage a weapon-less but menacing figure on a dark, deserted street, may be financially painful or emotionally distressing, but it hardly compares to the massive insult to one's self-determination that is sustained during a sexual assault.

in a sexual assault physical harm is much more than a threat; it is a reality because violence is an integral part of the act. bodily contact and physical intrusion are the purpose of the crime, not appropriation of a physically detached and removable item like money.

Under the rules of law, victims of robbery and assault are not required to prove they resisted, or that they didn't consent, or that the act was accomplished with sufficient force, or sufficient threat of force, to overcome their will, because the law presumes it highly unlikely that a person willingly gives away money, except to a charity or to a favouite cause, and the law presumes that no person willingly submits to a brutal beating and the inflictions of bodily harm and permanent damage.

but victims of rape and other forms of sexual assault do need to prove these evidentiary requirements - that they resisted, that they didn't consent, that their will was overcome by overwhelming force and fear - because the law has never been able to satisfactorily distinguish an act of mutually desired sexual union from an act of forced, criminal sexual aggression.

Susan Brownmiller

------