know when to stop digging
I’m not often caught feeling sorry for a Tory but the other week was almost one of those rare occasions. Poor old Ken Clarke really put his foot in it by attempting to make a distinction between ‘serious rape’ and ‘other forms of rape’ and it almost cost him his job. When asked by BBC5 journalist Victoria Derbyshire why the average rape sentence was five years, he explained that “this includes date rape and 17 year olds having sex with 15 year olds”, adding that for “serious rape” the tariff was much, much longer. And just when you think it couldn’t get worse he then, in a failed attempt to limit the damage, paraded himself from one studio to another, digging ever deeper and deeper holes for himself and inventing a new term in the process: ‘classic rape’.
The sympathy I felt for poor Kenneth is that he is most likely an honourable man who was caught out using a few very clumsy phrases in the course of trying to do his job. Why he didn’t just simply explain that rape is rape but, as with all crimes, the actual circumstances and context need to be taken into account by the judicial system. Any sympathy however was short lived as the Cabinet Minister as firstly, he really should have thought about his choice of words far more intently than he obviously had done and secondly, he then reverted to Tory-type by becoming irritated by the interviewer, brusque, contemptuous, dismissive and unable to hide his all too evident sense of superiority.
The real crime in this pantomime however is actually his policy proposal whereby the sentence of rape offenders who plead guilty would be automatically reduced by 50% in duration, irrespective of whether it’s ‘classic, date, proper, serious or otherwise’! No amount of misplaced or misunderstood words could convey a diminished attitude towards the serious crime of rape like this act does and that would be a shocking and unforgivable mistake.
And in a related incident a senior Toronto policeman warned women students that they “should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimised”. Now, I fully agree that an individual’s cleavage or short-skirt is none of any one else’s business and under no circumstances should be viewed as complicit in any act of sexual harassment or act but surely this message is ultimately sensible and realistic. By no means should the victim be blamed and their dress sense should on no account be seen as encouraging any particular action but common sense must play a role here and they need to be aware of how their actions may be construed by the deviant and criminal within our society. Just be aware and keep safe.
