THEGAYUK

Author: Joshua Vaughan

  • COMMENT | Gay Rape. It exists and we need to talk about it

    COMMENT | Gay Rape. It exists and we need to talk about it

    Rape is a most detestable crime.

    It is a crime that involves sex but also violence, deceit, power and in some instances romance. As a society, we have come to the (unfounded) conclusion that rape is a violent affair, committed by a stranger in a dark alley at midnight and victims are always women. How wrong we are.

    Historically, there has been little consideration of men as victims of rape. The law only recognised non-consensual penetration of the anus as rape in 2003 under the Sexual Offences Act. But male rape in the twenty-first century is, more than ever, a social issue.

    According to the most recent government statistics, The British Crime Survey (2013) found that out of 473,000 victims of sexual assault, 72,000 are male. Narrow this to rape and it is estimated that 78,000 people in the UK are victims of rape, of which 9,000 are believed to be men. For those who like statistics, male rape accounts for almost twelve per cent of the estimated national total; a figure that cannot be ignored.

    Whilst this is a serious social issue, you wonder why a gay lifestyle magazine is raising the subject. The reason is that current law is gender specific, meaning only men can be perpetrators of rape, not women. In other words, men are raping 9,000 other men a year. Gay rape exists and we need to talk about it.

    The most basic definition of rape is sexual intercourse without consent. The issue with this is that there exists no clear definition of what consent means and it presupposes that both parties define consent in the same way. As a result, victims often don’t understand that they have been abused.

    When violence is involved, it is easier to identify a lack of consent because there would often be evidence of resistance. Although it is no longer necessary to show that force was used to prove that sex was non-consensual, it remains difficult for most to understand this and a gap is created between principle and practice. In principle, any submission to non-consensual sex is rape. Yet those who are subject of rape will often fail to recognise this and would not consider themselves victims.

     

    It is alarming to discover that the real rape stereotype, mentioned above, is so wrong. In most instances the victim is raped by someone known to him and this is known as acquaintance rape; often this involves some form of deceit, intoxication and also romance. Note that violence is very rare in this scenario and it distinguishes between force and unwanted sex. It is important for us as a community to recognise this distinction and recognise the later as the most prevalent form of gay rape.
    In large, social attitudes are to blame for us not recognising rape when it happens. But another hurdle for male rape victims is the police. Since the legal identification of male rape, there has been an increase on police reporting every year. However, these figures are an underestimation of the true reflection of male rape due to the reluctance many have to report their experience. The statistics in this instance are merely the tip of the iceberg.
    Recent reports* have suggested that police officers responsibility and care for victims of male rape is very poor. Treatment provided is completely insufficient because there is a lack of training, awareness and understanding. Compare this to the extensive training and recent reform gone in to female rape and it may appear somewhat homophobic, that the police consider male rape as a less serious issue. All this adds to the reluctance victims have to report their rape to the police.
    As a result of poor education, police often challenge male rape victims’ sexuality and masculinity. In instances of acquaintance rape (which we know is the most common form) police tend to view victims as somewhat culpable for their rape because they failed to fight off their attacker. Consequentially, the police are far more likely to blame homosexual male rape victims than heterosexual male rape victims for their rape. This would suggest that the police consider sexual violence less distressing for homosexual men and are more likely to view the rape as consensual sex.

    Despite all this, if a rape victim manages to be taken serious and the case was to proceed to trial, the victim has to endure the gruelling process of cross-examination. As questions surrounding the male rape victim’s sexual history with the alleged perpetrator are allowed at trial, it can be argued that if consensual homosexual sec took place previously, it was also consensual sex at the time in question. In addition to this, the victims’ physical response can be used to discredit the male rape victim. For example, if the victim were to have an erection and ejaculate, despite this being an involuntary reaction. Yet this involuntary body response is used as to argue that the male rape victim consent to the sexual activity.

    It is evident that there is a lack of understanding to manage male rape victims because there is a lack of understanding and knowledge of male rape. This is amplified by the continuing presence of rape myths and stereotyping certain (homosexual) victims of male rape. The only way to counter this is to demand attention and to discuss the issue, amongst ourselves, with the police and if be it in court.

     

    * Javaid, A. (2014) Male Rape: The Unseen World of Male Rape. Internet Journal of Criminlogy, ISSN 2045 6743

    Khan, N. A. (2008) Male Rape: The Emergence of a Social and Legal Issue. Great Britain: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Rumney, P. (2008) ‘Policing male rape and sexual assault.’ Journal of Criminal Law, 72 (1), pp. 67-86.

    by Joshua Vaughan | @Joshua_Le_Von

    If you need to report a sexual assault or need to talk to somebody about issues raised in this article please contact the Victims Support Helpline on 08 08 16 89 111

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, its management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | Cost The Reason HPV Vaccinations Aren’t Offered To Boys?

    Extending the HPV vaccine to gay men could help the fight against cancer.

    Dr Gillian Prue, lecturer of chronic illness at Queen’s University of Belfast, recently published in the British Medical Journal, that the current girl-only vaccination programme leaves men who have sex with men (MSM) at risk of infection from the human papilloma viruses (HPV).

    HPV is a common virus that has more than a 100 different strains. Some of them being common and relatively harmless with most people having some form of the virus during their lifetime. For most people, it will cause no symptoms and goes away on its own.

    But there are some strains of HPV that can cause changes in the cells of the lining of the mouth and throat as well as the penis and anus, known as high-risk HPVs. These changed cells have an increased risk of becoming cancerous.

    There are also strains of HPV that cause warts and verrucas, most commonly found on the hands, feet, genital area and anus. But can also be found elsewhere on the body.

    The danger with HPV is that it can be easily spread through skin contact, open mouth kissing and certain sexual acts. Infection is common in men and reports of infection have increased in the past two decades with HPV causing 5% of all human cancers.

    In September 2008, a free vaccination has been readily available for young girls aged between 12-13 in the UK with a catch-up programme for girls up to 18. Heterosexual men gain protection from the virus via vaccinated women but gay and bisexual men have no such protection and are therefore at a higher risk of infection.

    But by introducing the vaccination to men, vaccinated men would be protected against non-vaccinated girls and other men.

    Many countries have already introduced the HPV vaccination to boys such as Canada, Australia and the US. Studies have shown that vaccinating boys will produce both health and economic benefits, reducing the incidences of HPV-related genital warts and cancerous cells developing.

    And although gay and bisexual men are at a higher risk of infections, a programme targeted solely at the gay and bisexual men in the UK would be limited because many gay and bisexual men acquire HPV as teenagers and many have already been exposed to HPV already according to Prue. It has also been criticised that such a programme would appear to discriminate against young heterosexual men who are also susceptible to the risk of HPV.

    Last November the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation agreed to begin work on the possibility of offering the HPV vaccination to adolescent boys and MSM. No doubt the main deterrent for introducing the vaccination will be the cost of the vaccination, estimated to around £24,000,000.

    The most beneficial response to this would be a gender neutral vaccination strategy in schools. Anything else would simply be discriminatory. With the cost of the vaccination paling in comparison to the cost of cancer treatment caused by HPV, it seems like the next logical step in the fight against cancer.

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | World Health Organisation Moves To Medicate All Homosexual Men

    For the first time in history, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has suggested that all men who have sex with men should take antiretroviral medication. Warning that if no action is taken, there would be a serious risk of an HIV infection rates exploding around the world.

    The WHO is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations. As such, they are responsible for leading global health matters, shaping the research agenda and setting the standards in health trends.

    Gottfriend Hirnschall, the head of WHO’s HIV department, says that infection rates of HIV among homosexual men are on the rise again, 33 years after the epidemic hit. Further, than this, he believes that the infection doesn’t hold as much fear to a younger generation with access to drugs that enable users to live with AIDS.

    The guidelines have been published after a period of a significant drop in HIV transmission rates between 2001 and 2012.

    Antiretroviral medication is the most common used method of managing HIV/AIDS, treatment being a combination of two drugs, in one pill, taken daily for the rest of the individual’s life. There are several issues with the use of such medication, the main one being an intolerance to the drug, which can have serious side effects such as gastrointestinal tract intolerance, hypersensitivity and central nervous system adverse effects. With such severe side effects, it must be questioned why the WHO would subject them on healthy individuals unnecessarily.

    The suggested approach is known as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), meaning that even those who are not infected would be required to take the medication. With the hope that it could cut the number of new diagnoses by up to 20%.

    The WHO believe that medicating ALL homosexual men will provide an additional method of preventing infection. Along with condom use and regular testing. But activists have suggested that introducing government mandated antiretroviral would discourage the use of condoms, currently the best method to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted infections. Resulting in an increase of other sexually transmitted infections such as gonorrhoea, chlamydia and hepatitis in the gay community.

    PrEP treatment averages at roughly £10,000 a year, per individual. This is an extremely expensive medication, especially considering that the majority of those who will be forced to take the medication will not be infected. Unfortunately, by increasing the number of people taking the drugs, with the same supply, the cost of the drug would rise. This is one of the main complaints about the proposal, as it encourages the use of a costly medicine for a preventable disease.

    The second danger of introducing this medication would be running the risk of the HIV virus evolving immunity to current drugs. Recently there has been much concern about the overuse of antibiotics and how they have become less effective as viruses evolve immunity. HIV is already a deadly disease that has been a cause of death across the globe. If it were to further evolve, current treatment would become ineffective and we would be faced with the same crises that were present in the 70s and 80s.

    Those that are most at risk of infection are gay and bisexual men, who are up to 19 times more likely to be infected with the virus than the general population, according to WHO studies. But for transgendered women, injecting drug users and female sex workers, the risk of infection can be up to 50 times higher than the general public.

    So why are the homosexual community the only ones being targeted by the WHO? By targeting the homosexual community specifically, the WHO are contributing to the stigma that HIV is a “gay disease”.

    That, in turn, creates the impression that gay sex is wrong. using HIV as a way to discriminate against homosexuals.

    In a world where homosexuality is a capital crime in five countries and punishable by imprisonment in over 70 more, the issue of stigma, discrimination and violence are still a real threat to the homosexual community. The WHO has made it clear that it does not class homosexuality as a disease, but the recent guidelines would result in homosexuals being medicated as if it were one.

    The sad truth is, that almost every other high-risk group are seeing a decrease in HIV infection rate but the homosexual community is seeing an increase since 2012. New HIV cases are being seen, mostly, in young people. This can easily be explained by the fact that gay sexual education is far more unique and complex than what is being taught or more importantly what is not being taught in schools.

    Let’s not forget that compulsory sex education is not required by UK law and back in January an amendment to introduce compulsory sex education, including information about same-sex relationships, sexual violence, consent and safe sex, was rejected by the House of Lords.

    A far cheaper alternative would be mandating by law that all young people should be taught about every form of contraception, safe sex methods and importance of regular testing. With a comprehensive sexual education, the dangers of HIV/AIDs and other STIs will be made known to the next generation. Equally as importantly, taught in such a manner, the stigma attached to HIV as the “gay” disease would hopefully be removed. Education is clearly preferable over medication.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.

  • OPINION | Why the EU is important for the LGBT Community

    With the rise of extremist parties in the UK and the challenges that face conventional political parties, one of the most contentious battles is over membership of the European Union. The United Kingdom became a member of the EU on the first of January 1973, and have since enjoyed the privileges of a single internal market, a standardised system of laws that apply in all member states and of course human rights.

    But why is the EU so important to the LGBT community?

    LGBT rights are protected under a range of EU treaties and laws that decriminalises homosexuality across all member states. But more than this under EU law there are provisions that combat discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation, which have been legally binding across Europe since the 1990s. The EU had single-handedly managed to create a framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation for our community.

    In practice, the law protects every person who identifies with the LGBT from being discriminated against in the work place. This includes refusal of a job, being dismissed and even harassment during work.

    But this is not all the EU has done for our community. In 2009, Lithuania was a battleground of gay rights and abuse. The European Commission made it a point to tone down the homophobic language and abused used freely in the country and even went as far to support the gay pride parade under threat of banning.

    Since then the Council of the European Union have created a binding guideline that instructs EU diplomats around the world to defend the rights of the LGBT community. This is a global effort on behalf of the EU to protect the rights we have fought so hard to gain.

    The legalisation of same-sex marriage in the UK has also been strongly influenced by the EU. Although the EU does allow some level of discretion in the implementation of the EU wide laws, some countries have abused this discretion to prevent same sex marriage. However the views of the EU are clear. It can be seen through the case law of the EU Court of Justice that same sex partners must be treated the same as those who are married.

    The EU has ensured that Europe is most progressive continent in the world for recognising LGBT rights. Legalising same sex activity, marriage and slowly the right for couples to adopt. As well as providing a frame work of anti discrimination laws in the work place and allowing gays to openly serve in the military.

    There is no doubt that the EU has made the world a safer and more accepting place for us. If the UK were to remove its self from the EU then it would also remove all EU wide law that protects our rights. Although we would have domestic law that to some extent offers similar protection, membership to the EU provides safeguards that force even the government to protect our rights.

    No matter your views or opinion on the EU, we can all agree that they have significantly contributed to the protection of our community and without their support, it is highly unlikely that we would have come as far as we have in the struggle for equality.

     

    Opinions expressed in this article may not reflect those of THEGAYUK, it’s management or editorial teams. If you’d like to comment or write a comment, opinion or blog piece, please click here.