ee a paged, _ » the other.press ; -March/7,,1977 J FIND THE DEFENDANT NOT GuiLTY OF RAPE AND SENTENCE THE PlAWTIFF TO § YeaR ToLIFE FOR INCONVENIENCING 4 THE COURT. by Maureen O’Hara the provincial parliament and resisted. And in 50 per cent of | every normal personwho should _has the advantage of surprise. OTTAWA (CUP)--Frederick Storaska has a lot of enemies. _ Storaska is responsible for a film about rape which is being circulated throughout Ottawa and other cities across Canada and the U.S. The film has been denounced by virtually every rape crisis centre in North America, and the American National Organi- zation of Women is taking Storaska to court as a result of it. 5; The film, How to Say No to a Rapist and Survive, is used by the Ottawa board of education, the RCMP, the Ottawa city police and other agencies as a guide to preventing rape. And according to representa- tives of various crisis centres, it is ‘harmful, unrealistic and based on false assumptions.”’ They say. the film could influence women to put them- selves in vulnerable and dan- gerous situations by accepting the methods suggested in the film. The film shows one of the several hundred lectures Stor- dents since his individual cru- sade against rape began more than 10 years ago after witnes- sing and breaking up the rape of an 11 year old girl by a gang of rapists. Since that incident, Storaska has become a self-appointed authority on the prevention of rape. He has lectured to more [than one million people and written a book by the same name as the film. He is the founder of the National Organi- zation for the Prevention of Rape and Assault and is consul- tant to the National Crime Prevention Institute in the U.S. GOOD INTENTIONS In a letter to various munici- pal agencies like the board of education, Ottawa members of aska has given university stu- city police, Rosemary Billings, a worker in the field of rape prevention in Ottawa for the past three years, points out that while the intention of organiz- ations showing the film is admirable because they want to present the facts about a tradit- ionally unmentionable crime, ‘they could not have selected a worse tool with which to achieve their aim.”” Members of the Upstream collective in Ottawa screened the film recently and found it objectionable in the contradict- ory approach Storaska takes in viewing and dealing with the crime. On one hand, he is manipul- ative and intimidating as he presents his measures for deal- ing with a rape situation, falsely reinforcing his arguments with statements that suggest if ax. woman chooses not to follow his techniques, she is as good as dead. “It’s your choice, he says, ‘I’m not going to be there.”’ At the same time, he deals lightly and comically with the situation using jokes and sexual innuendo. From the outset, the film insists that women have little chance of escaping rape by using self defence or screaming. Storaska says that kind of behaviour will only anger a potential assailant and cause a violent reaction. FEMININE WILES The action a woman must take is to exercise her feminine wiles, play up to the rapist, offer him sexual favors and hope to outwit him and escape in the end, he says. Several studies into rape con- tradict this method, including the Stanford University study which found that out of a group of women who had escaped rape, 100 per cent actively. these cases the attacker was repelled by a loud noise alone. Another study by Denver psychologist James Selkin, found that by hesitating and playing along with a potential rapist a women assures him that she will be his victim. A number of studies, includ- ing Selkin’s, found most rapists follow a pattern that starts with choosing a victim, testing her vulnerability, threatening and then acting as if it is apparently *“*safe’’ to do so. Fear and hesitation encourage the rapist to follow through once the hesitation provides a chance to check whether the victim is alone and without means of escape. In a paper objecting to Stor- aska’s film the Toronto Rape Crisis Centre points out that lack of resistance is the first thing defence lawyers look for in a_rape case. “If a woman followed Stor- aska’s advice of playing along and leading the man on, and then was raped, she would find it almost impossible to prose- cute,’’ the paper states. Jutta Tiegeler, educational and community liaison co-ordi- nator at the Ottawa Rape Crisis Centre, adds that by playing Storaska’s ‘‘ego-flattering con game..there will be no physical evidence of a struggle’’ and “‘your own statements... will be used against you as evidence of your consent to the act.”’ In the first part of the film, Storaska warns women against struggling, claiming that strug- gle is sexually exciting and encourage a rape. For evidence to this, he tells the women in his audience to try it next time they make love with their boyfriends. He goes on to say the assault- er is a person to be viewed not as a faving lunatic but as ‘someone with the same needs as be loved and respected. Kind- ness, love and understanding are the best ways to deal with him, Storaska says. Members of the Toronto met- ropolitan police have objected to the film saying...*‘the subject of the violence of rape is not treated realistically.”’ VIOLENT CRIME The Toronto Rape Crisis Cen- tre says Storaska views rape as a crime of sexual passion rather than one of violence, humiliat- ion and control. **Storaska sees rape as a crime of sexual passion that occurs when a woman, con- sciously or unconsciously, pro- vokes a man to the point where he can no longer control his desires.”’ e But, the centre maintains “rapists are not driven by a need for sexual contacts and outlets’’ and ‘‘it is ridiculous to assume their aggression can be appeased through intercourse.”’ _ As pointed out in the Toronto Centre’s paper, ‘‘violence arises from the deep-rooted aggres- sion necessary to commit rape’’ and *‘the idea that a woman will only get raped if she resists passively has no basis in fact.”’ Articulating the view of al- most every rape crisis centre in North America, Teigeler says a confident woman who is accur- ately informed as to who the “real’’ rapist is, and what his likely behaviour will be, has ‘‘a better than good chance of initiating resistance action and escaping rape.”’ : SELF DEFENCE Their reasoning validating the effectiveness of self defence is: -A woman who has learned self defence gains an air of confidence which diminishes the likelihood that she will be chosen as a potential victim. -Rapists do not expect their victims to retaliate, soa woman -Resistance at the beginning of an attack doesn’t give the assailant a chance to assess the situation. Putting up a loud strong resistanct attracts other people who may be able to help. According to Storaska, the first attitude to be adopted if rape is to be avoided is that } women are by nature victims and shouldn’t do anything that might put them in apotentially dangerous situation like living alone, hitch-hiking or dating without explicitly articulating the limitations in regard to” physical contact. As Tiegeler points out, Stor- aska is saying any woman who does such things ‘‘goes outside mainstream social norms and has made herself stupidly visi- ble to a potential victimizer. If she is then raped, she has only herslef to blame.”’ There are few films on rape and rape prevention but the Toronto Rape Crisis Centre urges people to be patient until | better films are made. ‘‘Although there are no films that we can wholeheartedly recommend, anything is better than How to Say No to a Rapist and Survive.”’ It seems curious that Stor- aska, who in no way identifies with the victim position he has assigned to all women, should be the person interpreting the experience of a woman who finds herself in the horrifying reality of a rape situation. Maureen O’Hara wrote thi article for Upstream, a collect ively run women’s newspaper it Ottawa. The article is reprintec | with permission and distributior by Canadian University Press.