The International Journal of Human Rights

Vol. 13, Nos 2–3, April–June 2009, 233 –250

Gay male rape victims: law enforcement, social attitudes and barriers to
recognition
Philip N.S. Rumney

Department of Law, University of the West of England, UK

This paper examines the experiences of gay male rape victims. It discusses findings from
empirical studies of police attitudes along with an increasing number of studies that have
examined the experiences of these victims. It also considers social attitudes to this group
of victims and the way in which those attitudes impact legal responses to the problem
of male rape. Further, this paper identifies three barriers to the recognition of male
rape: denial of the problem, hierarchies of suffering, and victim-blaming. Finally, it
concludes by considering two possible strategies for improving the treatment of male
sexual victimisation within the criminal justice system in England and Wales.
Keywords: male rape; sexuality; police; criminal justice; victims; social attitudes

Introduction
In the last two decades there has been a significant growth in research examining the
problem of adult male rape, on such issues as the problem of male sexual victimisation
within institutional settings,1 within the general population2 and during wartime,3 and
also the nature, dynamics and impact of male victimisation.4 More recently, there has
been a growth in research examining male victims’ experiences of the criminal justice
system. Such research has challenged many societal myths regarding adult male sexual vic-
timisation and has also highlighted the extent to which misunderstandings regarding male
rape influence the attitudes of criminal justice professionals and of the wider community.5
Despite claims to the contrary,6 there exists a significant body of work that examines
adult male sexual victimisation. There are, however, specific areas that have received
little sustained attention. One of these areas concerns the treatment of gay male rape
victims within the criminal justice system. This is a particular problem because a significant
number of male rape and sexual assault victims are gay and epidemiological research
suggests that homosexuality is a particular risk factor in cases of adult sexual victimisation.7
Gay men also face physical and sexual assault as part of homophobic attacks8 and are also
targeted for rape within prisons where they tend to appear to receive little protection from
authorities.9 The combination of sexual victimisation and negative societal attitudes
towards homosexuality does raise the question of whether gay male rape victims are sub-
jected to a form of double victimisation. After being sexually victimised, do they also face
particular difficulties in securing appropriate treatment by the criminal justice system?
An examination of social and legal responses to gay male rape victims gives us an


Email: [email protected]

ISSN 1364-2987 print/ISSN 1744-053X online

# 2009 Taylor & Francis
DOI: 10.1080/13642980902758135
http://www.informaworld.com
234 P.N.S. Rumney

insight into the extent to which progress has been made in addressing sexuality-based
discrimination, while recognising the difficulties facing male rape victims irrespective of
their sexuality.
This paper seeks to draw together existing evidence that examines rapes of gay men as
well as the policing of such sexual violence. Further, it will analyse the ways in which nega-
tive social attitudes may hinder the reporting of male rape to the police and the enforcement
of the criminal law when it is reported.

Social attitudes and rape law enforcement

There is compelling evidence that social attitudes have a negative impact on the enforce-
ment of the criminal law on rape and sexual assault. Temkin and Kraché have recently
engaged in a detailed analysis of the impact of social attitudes on rape law enforcement
in cases involving female victims. They argue that the treatment of rape cases by the
criminal justice system relies upon

stereotypical beliefs about rape which contain a restrictive and inaccurate understanding of
what ‘real rape’ is. By reducing the range of what is considered a genuine rape complaint,
these stereotypes are a contributory factor in the justice gap. Rape stereotypes affect the judg-
ments made by individuals dealing with rape cases, for example as police officers, judges or
members of a jury, and thereby shape the understanding of rape as it is represented and
dealt with in the criminal justice system.10

Myths, stereotypes and negative attributions can be seen as a thread running through social
and legal constructions of what constitutes a ‘genuine’ rape deserving of criminal sanction.
It is evident that myths and stereotypes regarding rape that exist within general society are
also in evidence in legal responses to rape. This occurs in cases involving both female and
male sexual victimisation. However, some negative attitudes may differ in their nature and
effect. It seems likely that one of the most distinctive points of departure between female
and male rape concerns the issue of sexuality. The issue that arises is the extent to which
negative attributions towards homosexuality impact attitudes to male rape and the treatment
of such cases by the criminal justice system.
Another aspect of this problem is how negative attitudes are shaped and influenced.
Recently, some commentators have linked gay pornography to rape-supportive attitudes
in the context of male rape. Kendall has argued that pornography featuring male rape
and sexual assault causes real harms to men and promotes a model of sexuality that is
‘depicted as hierarchical and rarely compassionate, mutual, or equal’.11 The author
borrows from feminist theory in arguing that gay pornography

relies on the inequality found between those with power and those without it; between those
who are dominant and those who are submissive; between those who are top and those who
are bottom; between straight men and gay men; between men and women. From these and
other materials, we are told to glorify masculinity and men who meet a hyper-masculine,
muscular ideal. The result is such that men who are more feminine are degraded as ‘queer’
and ‘faggots’ and subjected to degrading and dehumanizing epithets usually invoked against
women, such as ‘bitch’, ‘cunt’, and ‘whore’. These men are in turn presented as enjoying
this degradation . . . Insofar as sex equality is concerned, the result is the promotion and main-
tenance of those gendered power inequalities that reject a non-assimilated gay male sexuality
and that ensure that homophobia and sexism remain intact.12

Kendall argues that such imagery supports a view of sexuality that encourages rape by a
variety of means, including the promotion of myths, for example that men enjoy being
 The International Journal of Human Rights 235

raped.13 In reality, it is difficult to determine what impact, if any, such imagery has in
reinforcing the myths to which Kendall refers. What is much clearer, however, is that
societal conceptions of male rape are shaped by myths and stereotypes. This paper proceeds
by examining the various ways in which these myths and stereotypes impinge on societal
and police attitudes towards male rape.

Reporting by gay male rape victims

Since it became first legally recognised in 1994, there has been a significant increase in
offences of male rape recorded by the police in England and Wales. In 1995 there were
150 offences of male rape recorded by the police;14 for 2004 – 05 the figure was 1135.15
The most recent figure shows 1150 recorded offences of male rape.16 This, however, is
likely to be a gross underestimate of the actual prevalence of male rape given the level
of under-reporting. Early small-scale domestic studies of male rape and sexual assault
suggested that between 12%17 and 20%18 of victims reported to the police. In an epidemio-
logical study of 2474 males Coxell et al. found that ‘[d]ata from 37 of the 40 men who
reported having had non-consensual sex with men showed that . . . only two men reported
their experiences to the police’.19 Abdullah-Khan recently found a reporting rate of between
8% and 44%.20 Men give many reasons for not reporting to the police. The 2002 Her
Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate/Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Consta-
bulary (HMCPSI/HMIC) joint inspection report noted that in the year 2000, of the 586
callers to the support group for victims of male rape, Survivors UK, only 11% had reported
to the police.21 Based on research from Survivors UK, the report suggested various reasons
for non-reporting by males, including ‘not knowing that it is a crime’, ‘fear of not being
believed’ and ‘concerns that sexuality may become an issue’.22 Sivakumaran explains
the link between sexuality and why some male victims fail to report: ‘The fact that survivors
of male/male rape question their sexuality and that society considers them homosexual
would not be a reason for non-reporting were it not for society’s treatment of homosex-
uals.’23 There is also some British evidence that gay male rape victims are less likely to
report to the police than heterosexual male victims.24 Finally, in the most recently published
research on the subject, Abdullah-Khan surveyed those who counsel male victims. Coun-
sellors provided a number of reasons for male rape victims’ non-reporting to the police:
‘Challenges to sexuality and homophobia were frequently mentioned, along with the
macho-type organisation that the police service is, which suggests that the police would
challenge survivors’ masculinity, be unsympathetic and uncaring.’25
Interestingly, Abdullah-Khan also found in her study that a minority of police officers
suggested that gay men may be more willing to report rape than heterosexual males. Some
of the reasons given, however, are revealing in that they include negative attributions
towards gay male rape victims:

Homosexuals are promiscuous by nature and are more likely to report. Heterosexuals are less
likely as they may be thought of as homosexual.26
Homosexuals would report more rapes as they (a) more likely to be raped (b) enjoy the atten-
tion and drama (c) may be antipolice regarding police as homophobic.27

Other officers identified problems facing heterosexual male victims, including their fear that
they might be deemed as gay. One officer argued that men may be less willing to report
rape than female victims because of ‘[s]ocial stigma – feeling of perhaps being labelled
homosexual when heterosexual’.28 It is evident from victims and those who counsel
236 P.N.S. Rumney

victims that what has been termed the ‘taint of homosexuality’29 impacts perceptions of
male rape and may therefore influence men’s willingness to report.
A further factor that may impact reporting is the reluctance of men to view their experience
of non-consensual sex as rape. In her interviews with male rape victims, Allen found that
‘homosexual men generally had more fluid definitions of their experiences of sexual
violence and the processes by which they came to define their experiences as rape were
more complicated than for heterosexual men’.30 This resulted from a range of factors that
made it less likely that gay male rape victims would, initially at least, name their experiences
as rape. For example, some gay men found it difficult to distinguish between situations
‘where they had been “forced” or “persuaded” to have intercourse’.31 A previous sexual
relationship between victim and offender resulted in men not tending to initially regard their
experiences as rape. For others there was a belief that sex with partners was obligatory,
which again hindered the recognition of non-consensual sex as rape.32
Given concerns that some male victims have in disclosing their victimisation to the
police it is likely that similar concerns may well apply to disclosures to friends and
family. In her study, Abdullah-Khan found that two of the 16 men did not disclose their
rapes to anyone. Part of the reason for their non-disclosure was that ‘they feared that
they would be labelled as homosexual or that they “asked for it”’.33 There is also potentially
another problem that impacts specifically gay male rape victims. That is, the reactions
of other gay men to their experiences of rape. Funk argues that

[a]lthough there does seem to be some room for men to discuss their experiences and obtain
support from certain aspects of the queer community when discussing being raped as part of
a gay bashing, these resources are, in fact, limited and ‘ghettoized’. Men who are raped by a
date or spouse often do not receive support from within the community, but often are explicitly
told not to talk about the incident or are threatened with being removed from the community.
The queer male community seems both extremely reticent to discuss the issues and all but
unwilling to offer supports [sic] to gay and bi men who are sexually assaulted.34

Such negative responses suggest that victims may not risk further disclosures to anyone,
including the police. Isely has noted that

[male victims] often feel safer suffering in silence and are reluctant to be revictimized by an
unsympathetic legal system or disbelieving treatment professionals . . . Those who do report
a sexual attack often experience hostile and isolating reactions from the very service providers
that are available to provide help. Too often, seeking assistance in dealing with the trauma that
can follow a rape too often becomes a humiliating experience in which feelings of depression,
anger, guilt, sexual confusion, and anxiety are reinforced in survivors as they become revicti-
mized by the police, community agencies, and bewildered friends.35

The experience of men who report

For those men who do decide to report to the police, the existing literature indicates that there
are significant differences in men’s individual experiences. Some measures of their experi-
ences have been somewhat crude and limited. Early research conducted by support group
Survivors UK found that, of the 62 men seen at the Wharfside Clinic at St Mary’s Hospital
Paddington in 1993, seven reported to the police, with three reporting a positive response and
four a negative response. In 1992, 70 men were seen at the clinic, eight reported to the police,
with six indicating a positive response and two reporting a ‘very negative’ response.36 In a
study involving 115 male victims of rape and sexual assault, King and Woollett found that
only 17 of them reported to the police: ‘In 8 cases the police’s reaction was reported as
 The International Journal of Human Rights 237

helpful, whereas in 5 it was perceived as negative. Seven men were glad (for 3 of whom
the assailant had been apprehended) that they had reported to police.’37 Hillman et al.
found that only two out of the 12 males were satisfied with their contact with the police.38
A feature of the current literature indicates that sexuality and negative attitudes towards
homosexuality characterise the experiences of some men who reported. In a study of 40
British male rape victims, Walker and colleagues found that five reported to the police.
The authors noted that

[o]f those who did report, only one man said that the police were responsive and helpful. The
other four found the police to be unsympathetic, disinterested, and homophobic. They felt that
their complaint was not taken seriously and all four regretted their decision to tell the police.39

Some caution must be had when considering whether these specific findings prove a
continuing problem in police responses to male rape. According to Walker et al., the
‘mean time between the assault and participation in the study was 10 years’.40 Conse-
quently, we do not know when the five men reported. Clearly, a male reporting rape41
that occurred 10 or 15 years ago might have received very different treatment from one
who reported a recent rape. This point is also made in recent research on men and
women’s experiences of reporting same-sex domestic abuse to the police. Researchers
found that victims ‘got a mixed response’: ‘Some had a sympathetic response but no
follow through in terms of applying the law to the abusive partner . . . A small number
had very unhelpful responses from the police though these said this had happened
a long time ago.’42 Indeed, in the most recently published research, Abdullah-Khan
found that of the seven men who reported to the police six were satisfied with their
treatment.43
Research from the United States suggests that negative police reactions are reported as
common. Scarce notes that

[o]f those survivors I interviewed who reported their rape to authorities, all but one had an
intensely negative experience. The one survivor who was the exception had only a neutral
interaction – neither helpful nor overtly detrimental. The most common complaints I have
heard from male survivors who I interviewed and have worked with professionally have
been disbelief, mockery, homophobia, or a combination of all three from police officers.44

There is evidence to suggest that negative reactions may be a particular problem with
respect to male rape victims who are gay or who are presumed to be gay. Such men
appear to have their experience of rape taken less seriously. For example, in a British
study of prison sexual violence, Banbury cites the experience of one male victim thus:
‘When I tried to report [a sexual assault], one of the [prison] officers laughed and just said
“come on mate, you’re gay, hows [sic] that gonna sound?” I had basically been told to
forget the incident because I was gay and hence “I wanted it” and the incident was not
reported.’45 Similarly, a study of prison sexual assault in the United States found that ‘gay
inmates, or those perceived as gay, often face great difficulties in securing relief from
abuse. Unless they show obvious physical injury, their complaints tend to be ignored and
their requests for protection denied.’46 Likewise, on the basis of research involving the
completion of questionnaires by police officers and by male rape victims, Lees found that

[v]ictim feedback suggested that gay men are treated less sensitively and sympathetically by
the police than heterosexual men. Some police officers seem to believe that rape is less trau-
matic for gay men. Analysis of both police and victim questionnaires shows that police officers
238 P.N.S. Rumney

are more likely to regard the testimony of homosexual victims as ‘unreliable’ – ether to assume
that the sex was consensual or that the complaint was malicious.47

Isely found that their disclosures of being victims of sexual assault had been met with
negativity: ‘Members shared personal stories about the negative responses of significant
others when the rape was disclosed. Frequently, the men had encountered reactions such
as hysterical laughter and assumptions about how “gay men would want to be raped”.’48
Similarly, Jim, who had been sexually assaulted while homeless, told The Big Issue, ‘I
was kipping on the Strand one night and woke up to find a man with his hand inside my
sleeping bag. He had his hand between my legs. It really shook me up. But when I confided
in my friends they were just embarrassed and laughed.’49
Collectively, these findings are troubling. While some men do report a positive
response, some police officers and other criminal justice professionals appear to attach to
gay men or those they perceive as gay highly questionable assumptions regarding credi-
bility, trauma and truthfulness. This suggests some degree of crossover in police attitudes
towards female rape, where some officers make similar assumptions regarding credibility
based on highly suspect criteria.50
One of the male complainants interviewed by the author for previous research suggests
that issues of sexuality and other problems exist in police attitudes to male rape complai-
nants. ‘Steve’ recollected that he was disappointed by the treatment he received when he
reported to the police. He stated: ‘One of the officers told me that in these types of cases
it was virtually impossible to get a conviction. I thought he was trying to put me off. Do
the police only prosecute [sic] if you’re attacked by a stranger?’ Despite being heterosexual,
Steve felt that homosexuality was an issue as he was asked questions about his sexuality. In
addition, he described himself as being upset by one officer’s reaction to other disclosures,
which he interpreted as disbelieving:

I had to tell them that he’d tried to masturbate me during the attack and that I’d got a bit of an
erection. One of the officers just went, hang on, how was that? You know, what he meant was
how was that possible if you’re saying you didn’t want it?51

Steve’s experience was also characterised by a classic example of a police officer second-
guessing the reactions to a complaint at later stages of the criminal justice process, by
suggesting the difficulty of securing a conviction. Studies involving female victims have
shown that officers do sometimes warn complainants of such difficulties. Harris and
Grace note that ‘[i]n warning complainants about the difficulty of securing a conviction,
the police might put complainants off pursuing their case without meaning to’.52 This
was clearly Steve’s reaction and contributed to his negative experience in reporting. The
apparent reaction to the disclosure that Steve had experienced an erection is particularly
serious given that we know significant numbers of male victims experience erections
during rape and sexual assault.53
Some victims of male rape and sexual assault have reported aggressive questioning by the
police. In the United States, the experience of Christopher Smith, who was raped at gunpoint
by a stranger, gives an indication of the sense of despair that some male victims experience
and the way in which unskilled questioning can have a negative impact on a victim’s ability to
accurately recall a traumatic event. He recounts his experience with the police:

Then I told the story again. Then again. They asked questions. They interrupted. They told
the story back to me, but changed things. They inserted information that I did not provide.
Questions sprayed at me from every direction like bullets from a machine gun. Everything
became so cloudy and confused.
 The International Journal of Human Rights 239

The officers also asked a series of questions that he found distressing. In addition, the issue
of sexuality also arose, but in a context that made little sense:

Do you have any friends who are gay? . . . Why didn’t you just run? He wouldn’t have shot at
you, it’s hard to hit a moving target. I would have just started running. Why didn’t you run? . . .
After being degraded and humiliated in so many different ways, I had reached the lowest point
ever, I was convinced I was a terrible person. I didn’t even feel recognized as a human being.54

Finally, an interesting perspective on the treatment of male victims comes from

Abdullah-Khan’s survey of police officers. She asked participating officers how the treat-
ment of male victims compared with that of female victims, and found that 58 officers
suggested that the treatment was similar, four claimed that men received better treatment
and 17 that men received worse treatment than female victims.55 Some officers in the
latter group pointed to a lack of training and awareness of male victimisation56 and
Abdullah-Khan describes their view of police responses thus: ‘many officers are
unsympathetic and do not take male rape seriously’.57 While such statements reflect
obvious concerns in the treatment of male rape by the police, one should show caution
about suggesting that men or women receive preferential treatment within the English
legal system.58 On the current evidence, it is simply not possible to make a resilient
argument in favour of preferential treatment of either male or female complainants.59

Barriers to recognition and law enforcement

Negative social attitudes towards male rape manifest themselves in the denial of male
victimisation, victim-blaming and a range of other negative attributions. Collectively,
these negative social attitudes operate as barriers to recognition of the problem and have
the potential to influence decision-making by the police and the wider criminal justice
system. This section analyses several examples of barriers to recognition.

Minimising the problem and denying the possibility of male sexual victimisation
The minimising or denial of male rape as a problem takes many forms. At its worst such
attitudes suggest that male rape is physically impossible. Recent research by Anderson
and Doherty involving focus group discussions found one participant who expressed
such a view when discussing a scenario involving an alleged male rape. The participant
‘Mike’ stated:

I was a bit suspicious when it was the one man who raped him because I think that unless this
chap who was allegedly raped, and he was enormously weaker than the other guy, there’s no go
considering the muscularness of like where he was raped, there’s no-one going in there like
unless he wants it, like.60

Scepticism regarding the possibility of men being raped has a long history. In his study of
law and sex in late imperial China, Sommer notes that

the judiciary was highly skeptical that a man could be raped at all: if sodomy had been
consummated with an adult male, then it must have been consensual. Only a powerless
male could be penetrated against his will – and the most unambiguous form of male power-
lessness was youth . . . We should not conclude that older males were never in fact raped,
but rather that there existed a strong judicial bias against accepting an older male as a rape
victim.61
240 P.N.S. Rumney

Within the scholarly community there is evidence of a tendency to dismiss the

importance of male rape as an issue worthy of analysis by criticising any attention it
receives. This has included responding to a large-scale study of male rape as a ‘matter
for concern’ because a similar study was not being conducted of female victims.62 More
recently, Novotny has argued that media coverage of the sexual abuse of boys by a
number of Roman Catholic clergymen was ‘hardly newsworthy’.63 In some sources, the
dismissive treatment is less forthright, and surely unintended. In his study of the
Auschwitz concentration camp, Rees discusses the rape and sexual exploitation of
women by SS guards at Auschwitz, as well as the experiences of women working in a
brothel within the camp.64 His characterisation of most of these experiences is unsurpris-
ingly negative – he discusses the rape of these women, as well as the ‘suffering’ of
those working in the brothel ‘who were forced to have sex’.65 Yet by contrast, on the
basis of the testimony of one inmate, who refers to adolescent boys working for ‘prominent’
inmates and a ‘sexual relationship [that] would often develop between them’.66 There is no
suggestion by Rees that these ‘relationships’ might have involved coercion. We know,
however, from other sources that unsurprisingly such ‘relationships’ could involve
sexual victimisation.67
In the context of police attitudes, a particular method of denial is to suggest that the
problem of male rape is exaggerated. In her survey of attitudes to male rape held by
London Metropolitan Police officers, Abdullah-Khan found two respondents who ques-
tioned the extent of male rape as a social and legal problem:

I think the homosexual lobby in this country is increasingly vociferous and my perception that
male rape is growing problem might just be an indication of the success of this lobby.68

I think there may be a perception that it has been overblown by the gay lobby, to get attention
and resources.69

Within the police service another means of potentially denying the problem of male rape
is through the recording of rape allegations. The London Metropolitan Police recently
published statistics on the recording of allegations of male and female rape: of the 677
allegations of rape reported in London between April and June 2005, 511 (75.5%) were
recorded as crimes, with 32 (4.7%) being ‘no crimes’ and 134 (19.8%) recorded as ‘not
crime’.70 This study also found that ‘[w]hilst only 23% (143) of female complainants’
allegations were recorded as “No Crime”/“Not Crime”, 41% (24) in cases of male complai-
nant allegations [were] recorded as “No Crime”/“Not Crime”.’ In cases involving male
victims, charges were more likely to be reduced from rape to a lesser offence and ‘a
higher number of false complaints linked to mental health issues were recorded with
male complainants’.71 The linkage of mental illness to ‘no crime’ is also a striking
feature of studies involving female complainants.72 One of the questions raised by these
findings is the extent to which the use of the ‘no crime’/‘not crime’ designation is generally
appropriate. For example, are men and women with mental health problems more likely to
make false allegations or are the police inappropriately labelling reports by these persons as
false?73 A further question that arises is what other factors may influence police treatment
and recording of male rape allegations. Abdullah-Khan’s survey of police officers found a
range of views on the level of false reporting of male rape. Among some officers who
thought the false reporting rate was high, the following were described as being sources
of false complaints: ‘Rent boys, blackmail, vagrant on vagrant revenge’ and ‘Again
promiscuous homosexuals’.74
 The International Journal of Human Rights 241

Hierarchies of suffering
It is a well-established finding within the research literature that, in social and legal attitudes
to female rape, distinctions are made between the seriousness with which differing types of
rape are viewed.75 It is also becoming increasingly apparent that distinctions are made
between male victims based, in part at least, on their sexuality. In a survey of victims
and police officers Lees found that ‘[s]ome police officers seem to believe that rape is
less traumatic for gay men [and are] more likely to regard the testimony of homosexual
victims as “unreliable”’.76 In attitude surveys it has been found that students attribute
more blame to heterosexual female and gay male victims of rape than to lesbian and
heterosexual male victims.77 White and Kurpius found that students attributed inter alia
more blame to male than to female rape victims and more blame to gay and lesbian
victims than to heterosexual victims.78 Similarly, Mitchell and Hirschman found that students
were prepared to attribute more blame and pleasure and less trauma to a male rape victim who
is gay than one who is heterosexual.79 More recent empirical research provides further
evidence of such hierarchies. In their focus group research, Anderson and Doherty found
that in discussions involving male rape a ‘hierarchy of suffering is established whereby
rape is judged to be worse (more “horrible”, “disgusting”, “shocking”, . . . “destructive”,
. . . “traumatic”) . . . for heterosexual men than it is for women or gay men’.80 Similar findings
have been found by Abdullah-Khan in her research involving police officers.81
It is worth noting, however, that there is evidence of other ‘hierarchies of suffering’
within the literature. Bourke has found evidence of nineteenth-century feminists denigrat-
ing the trauma of male sexual victimisation. She notes that in the context of young
males coerced into prostitution, those feminists suggested that the harm suffered by
young women was greater than that suffered by their male counterparts.82 Similarly,
Hite, writing in 1981, suggested that certain forms of sexual assault could not be
humiliating to a male victim.83 Recourse to hierarchies of suffering has also been
evident within the parliamentary process. During the parliamentary debates over the
legal recognition of male rape in England and Wales, Lord Swinfen stated:

Non-consensual buggery for a homosexual man would be an extremely traumatic experience.

For a heterosexual man it would be an even greater trauma. However, if it happens to a woman
it could be more distressing still because not only is she being violated, but her total femininity
is being destroyed at the same time as she would not be used in a natural manner that one might
expect.84

Here again, the trauma suffered by gay male rape victims is seen as less serious than that by
heterosexual males. However, unlike some of the other hierarchies, female rape is seen as
the most traumatic. Another trauma hierarchy in evidence within the literature is the
suggestion that no trauma should result from male rape. Pelka, who has written about his
experience of being raped, recounts being told the following by a police officer: ‘The
good cop told me how upset he’d seen “girls” become after being raped. “But you’re a
man, this shouldn’t bother you.”’85 This is an assertion that appears to be based on a
notion of masculine strength and invulnerability to physical and psychological harm.
This is a recurrent theme in the literature and will be discussed in the later section in the
context of physical resistance to rape.
What is the reasoning behind the assertion that rape of gay men is less traumatic than of
heterosexual men? Anderson and Doherty argue that ‘victims constructed as “heterosexual”
are likely to be judged to have genuinely suffered, principally on the grounds that they are
assumed to have experienced a sexual act that is foreign to them’.86 Such views are
242 P.N.S. Rumney

problematic for two reasons. First, it is based on the mistaken assumption that all gay
men have anal sex. Second, this reasoning is akin to that contained in judicial decisions
that suggest that a woman who is raped by her husband is less traumatised than if
she were raped by a stranger, because of the previous consensual sexual contact with
her assailant. Such a view confuses the crucial distinction between consensual and non-
consensual penetrative sex acts and shows little understanding of the impact of sexual
victimisation.87

Victim-blaming, negative attributions and expectations of resistance

Since the 1970s we have seen the development of a vast literature that illustrates the ways in
which female victims of rape may be blamed for their own victimisation. Negative social
judgments are made regarding such things as ‘inappropriate’ behaviour prior to a rape88
as well as complainants failing to react as expected during and following rape.89 Collec-
tively, these and other attitudes serve to excuse, minimise, justify or deny rape in cases
involving female victims. It is becoming increasingly apparent that similar attitudes are
in evidence in the context of male rape.
In their focus group research, Anderson and Doherty asked students to consider a
vignette featuring a male, previously a victim of rape, who was walking in an area
where previous rapes had occurred when he was allegedly attacked again.90 The response
of some students was to ‘project “subconscious” homosexual desires onto the alleged
victim as a way of making sense of and dismissing the rape claim in the vignette’.91
Further, participants described the victim as ‘extremely stupid’ and referred to him as
‘very stupid or more probably he was asking for it, or hoping it would happen’.92 Repeated
references were made to the victim ‘wanting’ to be raped:

Tony: Yes, it is, it is very odd, I mean either he’s very naı̈ve or he’s making something up or he
wants to be raped, or hoping that it would happen.93
Fiona: Maybe he was sub-consciously, he wanted it . . .94

Tony: Maybe he’s homosexual and he’s really embarrassed about his sexuality and er, hoping
that some guy comes on to him at 9.30 on the campus, no, I’m serious, maybe he actually was
hoping it happened, maybe he’s really interested and curious and excited by it.95

Blaming victims of male rape who are gay is a consistent feature of the literature on
attitudes to male rape. In her study of correctional officers, Eigenberg found that, of the
166 correctional officers surveyed, 46.4% ‘believe that inmates deserve rape if they have
consented to participate in consensual acts with other inmates’.96 In a recent review of
the existing literature on attitudes towards male rape, Davies and Rogers observe that

[a]ll, without exception, and regardless of the assault situation, have found that gay victims are
judged to be more at fault or to blame than heterosexual victims are. It is reasoned that the
homosexual (albeit non-consensual) nature of male rape inspires homophobic attributions
that result in victim blame and other negative attributions towards male victims.97

A further belief that impacts the recognition of male rape concerns an expectation of
victim resistance. Sommer notes that in late imperial China the penetrated male suffered
great social stigma.98 While legal codes recognised that young males could be victims of
rape perpetrated by older males, outside of this situation ‘[m]ales were not expected to
be weak . . . They were not supposed to be penetrable at all, but rather penetrators, subjects
 The International Journal of Human Rights 243

rather than objects of action. Even so, Qing law acknowledged that males could be raped,
and that they might consent to sodomy. But for this penetrability to make sense, the male
had to be somehow less than male.’99 He observes that in ‘late imperial China, common
sense held that to be penetrated would profoundly compromise a male’s masculinity; for
this reason, powerful stigma attached to a penetrated male’.100 Indeed, Sommer found
that the stigma of being penetrated was also shared by family members and that sometimes
‘such shame provoked family members to violent acts against the penetrated male
himself’.101 The shared sense of shame created by male rape is also in evidence in more
recent literature. In his prison memoir A Sense of Freedom, Jimmy Boyle recounts that
young or young-looking prisoners were gang-raped by a particular group of prisoners led
by an inmate who became known as ‘The Poof’. Boyle notes that some prisoners would
‘have a go at him’, but says ‘I felt deeply humiliated that another prisoner could allow
himself to be “used” in this way by [the gang].’102 Boyle’s sense of shame is clearly
based on an assumption that an inmate should resist gang rape and anything short of
physical resistance constitutes a prisoner allowing himself to be raped.
Assumptions regarding the ability of men to protect themselves and prevent sexual victi-
misation are also in evidence among some police officers, as the following quotes indicate:

It is difficult for officers to see how an adult male can let himself get into a situation where he
can get raped and be unable to physically protect himself.103

There is a definite problem with this male issue. A man is a man and should be able to look after
himself. This is how I feel policemen see it. Therefore little sympathy.104

In the United States, a civil case was brought against prison officials who allegedly
failed to adequately protect an inmate, Roderick Johnson. He claimed to have been repeat-
edly raped by a prison gang, but prison officials disputed his claims of victimisation on
questionable grounds:

In pretrial testimony, Jimmy Bowman, another defendant, explained that Mr. Johnson’s account
was not credible because he had failed to resist the men he said raped him. ‘Sometimes an inmate
has to defend himself’, Mr. Bowman said. ‘We don’t expect him not to do anything.’105

This quote illustrates the strength of the belief that men should resist their attackers.
Roderick Johnson claimed to have been the victim of repeated acts of rape and the trial
testimony indicated he was, in effect, owned by a prison gang and subjected to threats
and violence.106 In such circumstances, it is difficult to see how someone could resist.
The problem with the expectation of resistance is that it fails to show an understanding
of the way in which male victims react to rape. Some men verbally and physically resist
their attackers. But there is also a consistent finding within the literature that ‘men are
either too afraid to resist or fight back, or [freeze] with fear’ and that ‘contrary to widely
held beliefs that “real men fight back”, men often do not or cannot fight back’.107
The question of course for this paper is whether such beliefs relating to victim resistance
pose a particular problem for gay men. As already noted, Anderson and Doherty’s focus
group discussions appeared to centre on the issue of homosexuality and there was also a
suggestion that ‘victimisation only happens to effeminate individuals who are, necessarily,
less than “real men”’.108 It may be the case that in some instances an association is made
between lack of resistance and consent and if there is consent then the victim is, by defi-
nition, gay. This might be a particular problem in the case of so-called ‘effeminate’ men
who may be seen as unmanly and therefore more likely to be gay.
244 P.N.S. Rumney

Themes and possible explanations

Many of the attitudes discussed in this paper represent a view of masculinity as strong and
invulnerable. The result is a reluctance to acknowledge the existence of male sexual victi-
misation and to treat the penetrated male as in some way devalued, as less of a man, for
allowing ‘himself to be used in this way’, as suggested by Boyle. The difficulty some
people have in acknowledging male rape is reflected by comments in which criminal
justice professionals and others have trouble understanding why a man cannot resist an
attack by a rapist, the suggestion that a man cannot be physically penetrated against his
will or that a man should not be traumatised by rape. Challenging such views requires
acknowledgment that ‘each and every body is permeable and appropriable’.109
A further issue is why homophobic attitudes arise in the context of male rape. One of the
reasons may be the equation of men being anally penetrable with being gay and therefore
less masculine. In their interviews with gay men who engaged in anal intercourse, Kippax
and Smith noted that for some of the participants there was an ‘incompatibility between
being masculine and receptive’ and for some ‘[r]eceptivity is automatically associated
here with being gay and feminine, suggesting one is more or less gay according to
whether or not one engaged in “feminine” sexual practices’.110 A similar point is made
by McGhee: ‘male homosexuality and female sexuality are presented in legal discourse
and practices in terms of passivity and receptivity to an active and penetrating “heterosex-
ualised” male anatomy and sexuality’.111
The association of anal intercourse with homosexuality can also be linked to attitudes
that blame gay male rape victims for their own victimisation, but, of course, it goes further.
This linkage also reinforces the assumption that, by being anally penetrable (and therefore
less masculine), male rape victims must be gay. Anderson and Doherty note that ‘the
projection of a gay identity onto an alleged victim (and this may happen to any victim,
regardless of his sexual identity) results in reframing the depicted rape as a consensual
sexual encounter’.112 Thus, it cannot be assumed that the issue of homosexuality only
arises in the context of gay male rape victims. Another explanation for the linkage of
male rape and homosexuality is that it serves as a form of ‘distancing’; as Anderson
observes, ‘close association between male rape and homosexuality/homophobia may be
one way for participants to express their disgust at this act . . . for male participants, male
rape perception may be linked to a combination of hegemonic masculinity . . . and emotion-
ally defensive/distancing factors’.113

Conclusion: future directions in law and policy

This paper has shown that one of the emerging features of societal and legal attitudes to
male rape is the influence of negative perceptions of the crime and its victims. These
views, to varying degrees, are held by members of the public and criminal justice
professionals. Negative judgments regarding homosexuality seemingly impact not only
men who are gay but also heterosexual men. Attitudes towards homosexuality are
combined with other beliefs regarding trauma, victim resistance and victim blame.
Consequently, some male victims face significant difficulties when seeking help
following rape.
A crucial question, therefore, is how such problems should be addressed so as to afford
gay male rape victims equal protection under the law without discriminatory treatment.
From a human rights perspective, one possible strategy relates to positive obligations of
the state to secure the rights of its citizens. It has recently been argued that the incorporation
 The International Journal of Human Rights 245

of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights114 into UK law, through the
enactment of the Human Rights Act 1998, places on the state a number of positive obli-
gations concerning the treatment of rape complainants, including the existence of effective
laws against rape and effective investigation of rape allegations.115 Allegations of male
rape that are incompetently investigated116 or influenced by myths and victim-blaming
might fall within such a legal framework. Furthermore, in conjunction with Article 3, it
might also be the case that Article 14 of the Convention that has for long been accepted
as prohibiting sexual orientation discrimination may be invoked where ineffective
investigations result from such factors as homophobia.117
A further strategy to address the problem of male rape is to challenge ignorance, myths
and stereotypes that impact criminal justice responses to male sexual victimisation.
This requires the training of criminal justice professionals. In the context of the police,
Abdullah-Khan notes that some officers are well informed about male rape, but also
observes that for other officers there is a ‘huge gap in information about male rape, a
gap which respondents themselves readily acknowledge’.118 In a recent British study
involving interviews with gay and lesbian victims of domestic sexual and physical
abuse, researchers found that the response of agencies was mixed. The study found that
voluntary and statutory agencies have no

coordinated responses for responding to domestic abuse in same sex relationships . . . Many of
the problems lie in agencies being governed by a domestic abuse model that is heterosexual and
it is this that often prevents an appropriate response because of assumptions made about who
might be the survivor/perpetrator.119

Clearly, raising awareness of rape outside of the male/female paradigm is crucial in

improving service responses. But improving criminal justice responses to male rape
requires a wider response than just the training of professionals. Negative social attitudes
inform legal responses and there is, thus, a need to address myths and stereotypes within
wider society. Recognition of the need for greater education has resulted in a number of
projects that are currently being run to educate schoolchildren regarding the law of rape
and related issues.120 In addition, there have also been education campaigns involving
the media.121 Given the ingrained nature of negative beliefs towards gay men and ignorance
regarding male rape, inclusion of this form of sexual victimisation in educational pro-
grammes would be helpful. But these programmes cannot be seen as a quick fix and it is
only through sustained education in society and within the criminal justice system that
myths and stereotypes can be properly challenged.

Acknowledgements
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Phil C.W. Chan for inviting me to contribute to this
special double issue and for his excellent editorial work on this paper.

Notes
1. S. Banbury, ‘Coercive Sexual Behaviour in British Prisons as Reported by Adult
Ex-prisoners’, Howard Journal 43 (2004): 113; I. O’Donnell, ‘Prison Rape in Context’,
British Journal of Criminology 44 (2004): 24.
2. A. Coxell, M. King, G. Mezey, and D. Gordon, ‘Lifetime Prevalence, Characteristics and
Associated Problems of Non-consensual Sex in Men: Cross Sectional Survey’, British
Medical Journal 318 (1999): 846.
246 P.N.S. Rumney

3. S. Sivakumaran, ‘Sexual Violence against Men in Armed Conflict’, European Journal of

International Law 18 (2007): 253.
4. See, e.g., G.C. Mezey and M.B. King, Male Victims of Sexual Assault, 2nd edn (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 2000); S. Allen, ‘Male Victims of Rape: Responses to a Perceived
Threat to Masculinity’, in New Visions of Crime Victims, ed. C. Hoyle and R. Young
(Oxford: Hart, 2002), 23; J. Walker, J. Archer, and M. Davies, ‘Effects of Rape on Men: A
Descriptive Analysis’, Archives of Sexual Behavior 34 (2005): 69; J. Walker, J. Archer, and
M. Davies, ‘Effects of Male Rape on Psychological Functioning’, British Journal of Clinical
Psychology 44 (2005): 225.
5. See most recently N. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape: The Emergence of a Social and Legal Issue
(Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008).
6. It has recently been claimed that there is ‘a small amount of research literature on male victi-
mization’: R. Graham, ‘Male Rape and the Careful Construction of the Male Victim’, Social &
Legal Studies 15 (2006): 187, 188. Graham’s analysis of our current understanding of male
rape and its representation in the scholarly literature is poorly researched and ignores work
in the fields of law, history, psychology, and medicine. As a result, many of her observations
and conclusions rest on outdated research and are either open to doubt or plainly wrong. For
analysis of some of her claims, see P.N.S. Rumney, ‘Policing Male Rape and Sexual Assault’,
Journal of Criminal Law 71 (2008): 67, 81– 2.
7. In a national British study of 2474 males Coxell et al., ‘Lifetime Prevalence’, found that men
who had experience of consensual sex with other men were six times more likely to have been
raped or sexually assaulted as adults than males who had not. In an earlier British study of 930
gay men, F.C.I. Hickson, P.M. Davies, A.J. Hunt, P. Weatherburn, T.J. McManus, and A.P.M.
Coxon found that a significant number were victims of non-consensual sex. Of those surveyed
it was found that 257 (27.6%) men reported that they had been ‘subjected to nonconsensual sex
at some point in their lives’. Of these, it was found that 45.2% (99) had been anally penetrated,
and in another 11 cases (5%) there had been an unsuccessful attempt at anal penetration; ‘Gay
Men as Victims of Nonconsensual Sex’, Archives of Sexual Behavior 23 (1994): 281. In a
survey of 287 gay men in Vancouver one-third ‘had been forced to have sex against their
will at least once in their lives’. However, it is not clear from this study whether all these
instances of victimisation occurred during adulthood: D.V. Janoff, Pink Blood: Homophobic
Violence in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press: 2005), 25.
8. See, e.g., Human Rights Watch and International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commis-
sion, More than a Name: State-Sponsored Homophobia and its Consequences in Southern
Africa (New York: Human Rights Watch, 2003); Janoff, Pink Blood; S. Hodge and
D. Cantor, ‘Victims and Perpetrators of Male Sexual Assault’, Journal of Interpersonal
Violence 13 (1998): 222, 234.
9. See, e.g., Human Rights Watch, No Escape: Male Rape in U.S. Prisons (New York: Human
Rights Watch, 2001); Banbury, ‘Coercive Sexual Behaviour’.
10. J. Temkin and B. Kraché, Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap: A Question of Attitude (Oxford:
Hart, 2007), 209.
11. C.N. Kendall, ‘Gay Male Pornography and Sexual Violence: A Sex Equality Perspective on
Gay Male Rape and Partner Abuse’, McGill Law Journal 49 (2004): 877, 905.
12. Ibid., 902.
13. Ibid., 908, 915.
14. Home Office, Crime in England and Wales 2001/2002 (London: Home Office, 2002).
15. S. Nicholas et al., Crime in England and Wales 2004/2005 (London: Home Office, 2005),
Table 7.01.
16. S. Nicholas et al., Crime in England and Wales 2006/07 (London: Home Office, 2007), 36.
Of these offences, 413 involved males aged 16 and over. Additional forms of male sexual
victimisation are covered by a range of other sexual offences: ibid., 37.
17. R.J. Hillman, N. O’Mara, D. Taylor-Robinson, and J.R. Harris, ‘Medical and Social Aspects of
Sexual Assault of Males: A Survey of 100 Victims’, British Journal of General Practice 40
(1990): 502, 503.
18. G. Mezey and M. King, ‘The Effects of Sexual Assault on Men: A Survey of 22 Victims’,
Psychological Medicine 19 (1989): 205, 207.
19. Coxell et al., ‘Lifetime Prevalence’.
20. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 189.
 The International Journal of Human Rights 247

21. HMCPSI/HMIC, A Report on the Joint Inspection into the Investigation and Prosecution of
Cases Involving Allegations of Rape (London: HMCPSI/HMIC, 2002), para. 6.20. In a survey
by M. King and E. Woollett, men ‘found it difficult to give reasons why they had not reported
to police. Six were too ashamed, 2 were trying to forget the assault, 2 were too frightened, 1
could not talk about it, and 1 saw no point in reporting’, ‘Sexually Assaulted Males: 115 Men
Consulting a Counselling Service’, Archives of Sexual Behavior 26 (1997): 579, 585.
22. HMCPSI/HMIC Report, ibid. See also P.L. Huckle, ‘Male Rape Victims Referred to a
Forensic Psychiatric Service’, Medicine, Science, Law 35 (1995): 187, 190; M. Scarce,
Male on Male Rape: The Hidden Toll of Stigma and Shame (New York: Insight Books, 1997).
23. S. Sivakumaran, ‘Male/Male Rape and the “Taint” of Homosexuality’, Human Rights
Quarterly 27 (2005): 1274, 1291.
24. Hodge and Cantor, ‘Victims and Perpetrators of Male Sexual Assault’, 231.
25. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 189. It was suggested, ibid., 190, by one counsellor that some
gay male rape victims may not report their rapes because they feared being arrested ‘for the
activity that led to the rape as outdoor sex in groups and toilets is illegal for men.’
26. Ibid., 148. While the suggestion that male rape is less reported than female rape is made
elsewhere (see Sivakumaran, ‘Male/Male Rape’, 1289–90), there is no compelling statistical
evidence to support such a claim.
27. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 150.
28. Ibid., 147.
29. Sivakumaran, ‘Male/Male Rape’.
30. Allen, ‘Male Victims of Rape’, 35.
31. Ibid., 32.
32. Ibid., 32–4.
33. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 215.
34. R.E. Funk, ‘Queer Men and Sexual Assault: What Being Raped Says about Being a Man’, in
Gendered Outcasts and Sexual Outlaws: Sexual Oppression and Gender Hierarchies in Queer
Men’s Lives, ed. C. Kendall and W. Martino (New York: Routledge, 2006), 131, 138.
35. P.J. Isely, ‘Adult Male Sexual Assault in the Community: A Literature Review and Group
Treatment Model’, in Rape and Sexual Assault III: A Research Handbook, ed. A.W.
Burgess (New York: Garland, 1991), 161, 164.
36. Private correspondence from Survivors UK, 8 November 1994 (on file with author).
37. King and Woollett, ‘Sexually Assaulted Males, 584.
38. Hillman et al., ‘Medical and Social Aspects’, 503.
39. Walker et al., ‘Effects of Rape on Men’, 74.
40. Ibid., 72.
41. Prior to the enactment of section 142 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (c. 33),
non-consensual penile –anal intercourse was classed as buggery, not rape.
42. C. Donovan, M. Hester, J. Holmes, and M. McCarry, Comparing Domestic Abuse in Same Sex
and Heterosexual Relationships (Bristol: University of Bristol, 2006), 21. The passage of time
is clearly an important factor, and in recent years there have been attempts made by the police
to improve responses to male rape and sexual assault.
43. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 211. This was a positive finding although, as with many other
studies, the small numbers make it difficult to draw general conclusions.
44. Scarce, Male on Male Rape, 216.
45. Banbury, ‘Coercive Sexual Behaviour’, 126.
46. Human Rights Watch, No Escape, 152.
47. S. Lees, Ruling Passions: Sexual Violence, Reputation and the Law (Buckingham: Open
University Press, 1997), 94. J. Gregory and S. Lees note the following reason given by a
police officer for regarding a male rape victim as unreliable: ‘He is described by his friends
as very promiscuous’, Policing Sexual Assault (London: Routledge, 1999), 126.
48. P.J. Isely, ‘Adult Male Sexual Assault’, 171– 2.
49. L. Johnston, ‘Homeless Sex Scandal’, Big Issue, 11–17 September 1995, 11, 15.
50. See, e.g., L. Kelly et al., A Gap or a Chasm? Attrition in Reported Rape Cases (London: Home
Office, 2005), 293; J. Temkin, ‘Reporting Rape in London: A Qualitative Study’, Howard
Journal of Criminal Justice 38 (1999): 17; J. Temkin, ‘Plus Ça Change: Reporting Rape in
the 1990s’, British Journal of Criminology 37 (1997): 507.
248 P.N.S. Rumney

51. It is not clear from Steve’s disclosures why the officer stated that ‘in these types of cases it was
virtually impossible to get a conviction’.
52. J. Harris and S. Grace, A Question of Evidence? Reporting Rape in the 1990s (London: Home
Office, 1999), 20–2.
53. There is research showing that males can experience an erection and even ejaculation during
sexual assaults by male or female assailants. In their study of 11 males sexually assaulted by
women either as children or adults, P.M. Sarrel and W.H. Masters found that ‘men or boys have
responded sexually to female assault or abuse even though the males’ emotional state during
the molestations has been overwhelmingly negative – embarrassment, humiliation, anxiety,
fear, anger, or even terror’, ‘Sexual Molestation of Men by Women’, Archives of Sexual
Behavior 11 (1982): 117, 118. See also King and Woollett, ‘Sexually Assaulted Males’,
587: ‘Just under 20% of the men were stimulated by their assailants until they ejaculated.’
In a small-scale study of male rape victims and offenders, A.N. Groth and A.W. Burgess
found that ‘[a] major strategy used by some offenders in the assault of males is to get the
victim to ejaculate. This effort may have several purposes. In misidentifying ejaculation
with orgasm, the victim may be bewildered by his physiological response to the offense and
thus discouraged from reporting the assault for fear his sexuality may become suspect. Such
a reaction may serve to impeach his credibility in trial testimony and discredit his allegation
of nonconsent. To the offender, such a reaction may symbolize his ultimate and complete
sexual control over his victim’s body and confirm his fantasy that the victim really wanted
and enjoyed the rape. This fantasy is also prominent in the rape of females’, ‘Male Rape
Offenders and Victims’, American Journal of Psychiatry 137 (1980): 806, 809.
54. Scarce, Male on Male Rape, 191– 2.
55. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 133 –7.
56. Ibid., 135.
57. Ibid., 134.
58. See Rumney, ‘Policing Male Rape and Sexual Assault’, 80 –5.
59. On a related matter, an examination of arrest patterns in 19 US states found inter alia differing
arrest rates for male and female same-sex domestic violence, noting that ‘[t]he offense need not
be very serious for an arrest to be made in cases of female same-sex violence’, but ‘it appears that
the commission of a serious offense is needed to make some police officers treat an incident
involving a male same-sex couple as a serious criminal matter’: A. Pattavina, D. Hirschel,
E. Buzawa, D. Faggiani, and H. Bentley, ‘A Comparison of the Police Response to Heterosexual
Versus Same-Sex Intimate Partner Violence’, Violence against Women 13 (2007): 374, 388.
60. I. Anderson and K. Doherty, Accounting for Rape Psychology: Feminism and Discourse
Analysis in the Study of Sexual Violence (London: Routledge, 2008), 97.
61. M.H. Sommer, Law, Sex, and Society in Late Imperial China (Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press, 2000), 133– 4.
62. T. Gillespie, ‘Rape Crisis Centres and “Male Rape”: A Face of the Backlash’, in Women,
Violence and Male Power: Feminist Activism, Research and Practice, ed. M. Hester,
L. Kelly, and J. Radford (Buckingham: Open University Press, 1996), 161.
63. P. Novotny, ‘Rape Victims in the (Gender) Neutral Zone: The Assimilation of Resistance?’,
Seattle Journal for Social Justice 1 (2003): 743, 745. For a critical review of this and other
claims made by Novotny, see P.N.S. Rumney, ‘In Defence of Gender Neutrality within
Rape’, Seattle Journal for Social Justice 6 (2007): 481.
64. L. Rees, Auschwitz: The Nazis and the Final Solution (New York: Knopf, 2005), 236–53.
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid., 252.
67. See, e.g., L. Smith, Forgotten Voices of the Holocaust (London: Ebury Press, 2005), 178.
68. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 123.
69. Ibid., 131.
70. Deputy Commissioner’s Command, Directorate of Strategic Development and Territorial
Policing, Project Sapphire, A Review of Rape Investigations in the MPS (London: Metropolitan
Police Service, 2005), para. 4.3. For definitions of ‘no crime’ and ‘not crime’, see ibid., 40.
71. Ibid., para. 4.6.
72. See P.N.S. Rumney, ‘False Allegations of Rape’, Cambridge Law Journal 65 (2006): 128,
156.
 The International Journal of Human Rights 249

73. There are a number of questions that arise in the interpretation of these data. It is not possible to
know whether the cases that are classified as ‘no crime/not crime’ are appropriately labelled.
Research that examines the ‘no crime’ of rape complaints suggests that police officers often
apply the criteria inappropriately; see Rumney, ibid.
74. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 68.
75. See, e.g., D. Finkelhor and K. Yllo, License to Rape: Sexual Abuse of Wives (New York: Free
Press, 1985), ch. 8; P.N.S. Rumney, ‘Progress at a Price: The Construction of Non-Stranger
Rape in the Millberry Sentencing Guidelines’, Modern Law Review 66 (2003): 870.
76. Lees, Ruling Passions, 94.
77. A. Wakelin and K.M. Long, ‘Effects of Victim Gender and Sexuality on Attributions of
Blame to Rape Victims’, Sex Roles 49 (2003): 477, 483.
78. B.H. White and S.E.R. Kurpius, ‘Effects of Victim Sex and Sexual Orientation in Perceptions
of Rape’, Sex Roles 46 (2002): 191.
79. D. Mitchell and R. Hirschman, ‘Attributions of Victim Responsibility, Pleasure and Trauma in
Male Rape’ Journal of Sex Research 36 (1999): 369. See also K. Doherty and I. Anderson,
‘Making Sense of Male Rape: Constructions of Gender, Sexuality and Experience of Rape
Victims’, Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology 14 (2004): 85.
80. Anderson and Doherty, Accounting for Rape Psychology, 95.
81. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 143 –5. The author found that ‘[s]eventeen officers felt that male
victims suffer greater trauma than female victims, 2 believed males suffer less trauma, 52
believed the trauma levels are the same . . . 18 officers were undecided’: ibid., 143.
82. J. Bourke, Rape: A History from 1860 to the Present (London: Virago, 2007), 240– 1.
83. S. Hite, The Hite Report on Male Sexuality (London: Optima, 1981), 749.
84. Hansard (HL), 20 June 1994, col. 66.
85. F. Pelka, ‘Raped: A Male Survivor Breaks His Silence’, in Rape and Society: Readings on the
Problem of Sexual Assault, ed. P. Searles and R.J. Berger (Boulder, CO: Westview Press,
1995), 252.
86. Anderson and Doherty, Accounting for Rape Psychology, 103.
87. See Rumney, ‘Progress at a Price’.
88. For discussions of the impact of intoxication on judgments made by mock jurors, see E. Finch
and V.E. Munro, ‘Breaking Boundaries? Sexual Consent in the Jury Room’, Legal Studies 26
(2006): 303; P.N.S. Rumney and R.A. Fenton, ‘Intoxicated Consent in Rape: Bree and Juror
Decision-Making’, Modern Law Review 71 (2008): 279.
89. Negative judgments regarding victim credibility are sometimes a result of the complainant not
resisting her attacker or showing little emotion when recounting her victimisation; see
Rumney, ‘False Allegations of Rape’; Temkin and Kraché, Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap.
90. Anderson and Doherty, Accounting for Rape Psychology, 62.
91. Ibid., 100.
92. Ibid.
93. Ibid.
94. Ibid., 101.
95. Ibid.
96. H. Eigenberg, ‘Male Rape: An Empirical Examination of Correctional Officers’ Attitudes
toward Rape in Prison’, Prison Journal 69 (1989): 39, 48 –50.
97. M. Davies and P. Rogers, ‘Perceptions of Male Victims in Depicted Sexual Assaults: A Review
of the Literature’, Aggression and Violent Behaviour 11 (2006): 367, 371. Recent research
suggests evidence of ‘erroneous and mythical thinking’ about male rape, along with ‘some
evidence’ of homophobia: I. Anderson, ‘What is a Typical Rape? Effects of Victim and
Participant Gender in Female and Male Rape Perception’, British Journal of Social
Psychology 46 (2007): 225.
98. Sommer, Law, Sex, and Society in Late Imperial China, 148–51.
99. Ibid., 132.
100. Ibid., 117 –8.
101. Ibid., 150.
102. J. Boyle, A Sense of Freedom (London: Pan Books, 1977), 196.
103. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 131.
104. Ibid., 135.
250 P.N.S. Rumney

105. A. Liptak, ‘Inmate was Considered “Property” of Gang, Witness Tells Jury in Prison
Rape Lawsuit’, New York Times, 25 September 2005, http://www.njbullying.org/Inmate
WasConsideredPropertyofGangWitnessTellsJuryinPrisonRapeLawsuit-NewYorkTimes.htm
(accessed 11 March 2009).
106. A former gang member testified that if Johnson refused to comply ‘You’ll be beaten until you
say yes . . . He’d be beaten, stabbed, whatever.’
107. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 208.
108. Anderson and Doherty, Accounting for Rape Psychology, 100.
109. Bourke, Rape, 247.
110. S. Kippax and G. Smith, ‘Anal Intercourse and Power in Sex between Men’, Sexualities 4
(2001), 413, 420, 418 (emphasis in original).
111. D. McGhee, Homosexuality, Law and Resistance (London: Routledge, 2001), 75.
112. Anderson and Doherty, Accounting for Rape Psychology, 104.
113. Anderson, ‘What is a Typical Rape?’, 241 –2.
114. Article 3 prohibits inter alia the infliction of inhuman and degrading treatment.
115. P. Londono, ‘Positive Obligations, Criminal Procedure and Rape Cases’, European Human
Rights Law Review (2007): 158.
116. For an example, see Independent Police Complaints Commission, Report into a Complaint
by Geoffrey Vincent Cole against South Wales Police Regarding the Initial Police Actions
Following His Alleged Rape and Serious Sexual Assault on 18 October 2005, Executive
Summary, 3 –5, 10, http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/coleexecutive_summary_3_7_07.pdf (accessed
17 November 2008).
117. For a discussion of Article 14 as a freestanding right (which, however, requires ratification by
the United Kingdom of Protocol 12 to the European Convention on Human Rights), see P.C.W.
Chan, ‘Same-Sex Marriage/Constitutionalism and their Centrality to Equality Rights in Hong
Kong: A Comparative –Socio-Legal Appraisal’, International Journal of Human Rights 11,
nos 1 –2 (2007): 33, n. 62.
118. Abdullah-Khan, Male Rape, 226.
119. Donovan et al., Comparing Domestic Abuse, 20– 1.
120. Carol Withey, Senior Lecturer in Law at the University of Greenwich, has created a ‘School
Project’ in which university students go into school classes to explain the law of rape and
help pupils better understand the legal consequences of sexual violence.
121. Temkin and Kraché, Sexual Assault and the Justice Gap, ch. 5.