The Canadian criminal justice system has seen many progressive changes to the way sexual assault cases are investigated and prosecuted over the past several decades. From the acknowledgement of spousal rape to the introduction of rape shield provisions, the law has seemingly changed to broaden the definition of what is considered a sexual assault. However, sexually-based offences are still vastly underreported and have the lowest attrition rates of indictable offences. Larger societal discourses around sexual assault and survivor-hood consist largely of rape myths, such as the idea that “real rape” only occurs when an “undeserving” woman is sexually assaulted by a “stranger in the dark.” These discourses permeate the Canadian criminal justice system, negatively influencing the experience of survivors who do not fit the narrow mould “real rape.” Drawing from Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis and Stuart Hall’s Discursive Approach, this Major Research Paper traces the effects of these discourses on constructions of sexual assault and survivor-hood in the legal system. Through a theoretical analysis of existing literature on the experiences of sexual assault survivors, this paper also examines the ways in which the language we use to describe sexual assault serves to cement rape myths and invalidate survivor experiences in every stage of the Canadian criminal justice system.
The Canadian criminal justice system has seen many progressive changes to the way sexual assault cases are investigated and prosecuted over the past several decades. From the acknowledgement of spousal rape to the introduction of rape shield provisions, the law has seemingly changed to broaden the definition of what is considered a sexual assault. However, sexually-based offences are still vastly underreported and have the lowest attrition rates of indictable offences. Larger societal discourses around sexual assault and survivor-hood consist largely of rape myths, such as the idea that “real rape” only occurs when an “undeserving” woman is sexually assaulted by a “stranger in the dark.” These discourses permeate the Canadian criminal justice system, negatively influencing the experience of survivors who do not fit the narrow mould “real rape.” Drawing from Norman Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis and Stuart Hall’s Discursive Approach, this Major Research Paper traces the effects of these discourses on constructions of sexual assault and survivor-hood in the legal system. Through a theoretical analysis of existing literature on the experiences of sexual assault survivors, this paper also examines the ways in which the language we use to describe sexual assault serves to cement rape myths and invalidate survivor experiences in every stage of the Canadian criminal justice system.
English and Welsh responses to rape have long been critically examined, leading to attempted improvements in the criminal justice system. Despite this, little attention has been paid to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (CICS) and the difficulties applying it to rape. To begin addressing this gap, researchers interviewed three, and qualitatively surveyed 22, Independent Sexual Violence Advisors. The findings suggest that CICS may not only reinforce rape myths and disadvantage vulnerable survivors, but is also a source of validation and contributes to survivor justice. The study, while exploratory, therefore, highlights the need for further discussion about rape survivor compensation.
(DE)CONSTRUCTING THE “PERFECT RAPE VICTIM”: AN ANALYSIS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND SURVIVOR DISCOURSES IN THE CANADIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM