The news story below involves a physician on trial for rape based on the word of a patient. Her name is not published; his name is splashed all over the news.
What do you think will become of his medical practice even if he is innocent?
Of course the double standard in this area is not fair. Feminists argue that the crime of rape is so psychologically devastating and so harmful to the reputations of the accusers that if the alleged victim's name were not protected, she would not come forward.
Do these women give any thought to the harm a false rape charge causes an innocent man? In fact, as we know, the feminist sexual assault lobby blinks at the rights of men with respect to rape. To them, men accused of this crime have no rights because they are rapists.
Perhaps the double-standard would be fair if the feminist canard were true that only two percent of all rape claims were false. But we know that is a lie, a myth perpetrated by disingenuous feminist legal scholars, certain feminist writers, and the sexual assault counseling industry. As it stands, a woman can blacken a man's reputation forever with nothing more than her word, while her name will never be publicized.
It is far more likely for an innocent man to be plausibly accused of rape than for any other serious crime. It is most unlikely that he could be plausibly accused of robbing a bank, or murdering someone, or even assaulting another person. But a false rape claim, by its very nature, can easily happen to virtually any man or teenage boy because all it takes is a female to lie about one of the most fundamental human acts known to mankind, consensual sex. Given the ease with which these claims are made, what is astounding is that there are not more of them.
So, no, it is not fair. Not by any measure. Not to the countless innocent men who have gone through this ordeal, where the very claim of rape itself, regardless of whether there is any evidence for it, can destroy a man's reputation. Forever.
Consider this case, and ask yourself: shouldn't the accused's name be withheld until a guilty verdict, if any, is entered?
Doc calls rape accuser a liar
By Sibongile Mkani, crime reporter for Daily Dispatch Online
A lawyer representing a King William's Town doctor accused of raping his patient called the complainant a liar and an untrustworthy witness on Monday.
During closing arguments at the Zwelitsha regional court, defence lawyer Thembekile Malusi described the 33-year-old woman as a "self confessed liar who lied in court on a number of occasions".
He argued that the complainant had, in a recorded phone call between her and his client Dr Sizwe Mxenge, admitted that the alleged rape was false.
He said the complainant only made the allegation because the accused did not show care or affection for her.
The State accuses Mxenge of raping the Lovedale College student, who cannot be named, on October 30, 2006, at the Bhisho hospital doctor's quarters.
The accused reported the rape on November 1, 2006 - two days later.
Comparing the case to that involving ANC President Jacob Zuma, Malusi argued that the complainant had made no attempt to hit, bite, scratch or resist the alleged rape.
He said in the Zuma case the complainant did not scream during the alleged rape, even though Zuma's daughter was in the same house and there was a police officer on the premises.
Zuma was acquitted. Malusi said in the Mxenge case, the complainant and accused passed through the security gate at the hospital without the complainant alerting the guards to what had happened.
Malusi also argued that the complainant did not scream during the alleged rape.
He called the complainant's version of events as a fabrication and asked the court to find his client not guilty.
The State argued that the complainant had told the court she had not been feeling well and that was proof she could not have consented to sexual intercourse.
Senior prosecutor Zola Sotenjwa added that the complainant had nothing to gain by falsely accusing Mxenge of rape, and that Mxenge's version of events was a fabrication. He called for a guilty verdict.
Throughout the arguments, Mxenge sat calmly in the dock alongside his wife. Members of his family and friends sat behind him in the gallery.
The case was postponed to September 17 for judgment.