High court ruling brings new hope to rape survivors

One of the things men are particularly insensitive to – either deliberately or because they are hard-wired that way – is when their physical advances to a woman are rejected.

We point to men in this context because they are by far the majority of those accused of sexual violence.

And, in a society like ours, they still hold the power over women, which means that, in many cases, rape is not so much sexual as it is an intimidatory exercise of that power.

Outside of the brutal rapes carried out by complete strangers, sexual assaults between people who know each other – whether they have just met or have known each other for years – throw up a different dynamic.

In a world where men misinterpret even the most innocent of actions or gestures to convince themselves that “she was begging for it”, it has become very difficult for women to say “no!” when they are under attack.

ALSO READ: ‘It’s a great relief,’ says rape survivor after court declares sections of Sexual Offences Act unconstitutional

Often rape victims freeze and so, in the eyes of their attackers, are not offering noticeable resistance. This, then, is translated into “consent”.

Under our law, as it currently stands, if a woman doesn’t offer a physical objection to her violation – by screaming or fighting – her rapist may use that fact in his defence by claiming he believed he had consent.

That is why this week’s high court ruling, declaring sections of the Sexual Offences Act unconstitutional, is so important.

Now, a sexual assault accused must take “objectively reasonable steps” to ensure the complainant consents to sexual activity.

It doesn’t completely remove the defence of consent, which is was gender-based violence activists are pushing for – but it is a step in the right direction.

ALSO READ: Justice in sight for survivor of Prasa rapist’s terror

We salute The Embrace Project, along with survivor Inge Holztrager, for pursuing the action and giving a little more hope to rape victims.