Dianne Smith takes issue with a report about research into the tearing properties of underwear.
According to a report (4.4.12), a University of Otago study, recently published in academic journal Forensic Science International, purports to contribute to our understanding of false sexual assault allegations - by examining the tearing of underwear.
What the researchers have failed to grasp is that sexual assault means sex without consent. Brutal and injurious force sometimes accompanies rape, but not always. I can think of plenty of instances where sexual assault can happen without the tearing of underwear.
To list a few - a person pressures their partner into having sex by threatening to break up if the demand is not met. A person pressures another into having sex by threat of force. A person has sex with another who is drunk, drugged, unconscious or asleep. They are all sex without consent. They are all rape. Research indicates that rape scenarios involving coercion are very common (see http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/sexual-coercion-part-5).
But the implication of this study is that torn underwear, and more specifically underwear torn in a way deemed "authentic" by the researchers, can tell us whether a sexual assault complainant is lying.
Seeing as many sexual assaults occur without damage to underwear, I am confused as to what applications this research might have in the real world.
What of the survivor whose assailant cut her underwear with scissors?
(According to this article, scissor cuts indicate that the complainant cut her own underwear in order to mislead investigators.) And what of the rape survivor who preferred not to wear underwear at all?
Must so many survivors have doubt cast on their stories simply because a group of University of Otago researchers failed to recognise their situations as "real" rape?
The report said ''a sexual assault was reported to police about once every two or three weeks, with some reports fictitious". Research shows that fictitious reports are typically overstated, overestimated and misunderstood.
A recent book, From "Real Rape" to Real Justice by Elisabeth McDonald and Yvette Tinsley, suggests that the police "no offence" sexual assault complaint statistics are often popularly conflated with false reports.
False reports make up a small percentage of the "no offence" category, which also includes cases where a complainant has withdrawn a complaint, and cases where there was not sufficient evidence to proceed with a prosecution. Had the researchers who were so keen to analyse fabric tears extended their literature search, they might have known this, and resisted the urge to conduct a study which appears to be based on rape myths and mistaken assumptions. They might also have found out that nine out of 10 rapes are not reported to the police (see http://www.mwa.govt.nz/news-and-pubs/publications/attrition-pdf).
Moreover, had the ODT staff reporter who penned this piece sought the expert knowledge of rape and sex researchers in gender studies and sociology at the University of Otago, or the community education worker from Rape Crisis Dunedin, he or she might have been able to articulate a balanced perspective.
• Dianne Smith is administrative assistant at Rape Crisis Dunedin.
