Summary Of The Court Case Of R. V. Rhodes

An incident in a court case where race, white privilege and rape myths are at play is the case of R.v. Rhodes (Busby, 2014,p.257-293). In this case, Rhodes was convicted of sexually assaulting C.P, an Indigenous woman half his size and sixteen years younger, in the woods off a secluded highway in Manitoba (Busby, 2014,p.257-293). C.P’s stated that she feared for her life and that she objected vaginal penetration but Rhodes continued to penetrate her in various ways without taking any steps to reassert her consent (Busby, 2014,p.257-293). In court, the judge stated that the complainant and her friend were a “ provocation” and “enticement” to the act (Busby, 2014,p.257-293). One rape myth at play here is the myth that when women wear provocative

Another rape myth present in this case is that an aroused man is entitled to sexual release and should not be convicted for an uncontrollable urge (Busby, 2014,p.257-293). Making hormonal urges be an excuse and a defence in this rape case. The connections in the R.v. Rhodes case between race, white privilege and rape myths are inevitable because all three stem from socially constructed norms. In court cases regarding sexual assault racialized women are stereotyped, judged and unfairly treated due to societies perception of certain cultures. Racialized communities are considered “inherently violent” by society thus making society accept violence directed at racialized women and reduce the chances of convicting men of sexual assault (Pietsch, 2006,p.136-140). In the Rhodes case , C.P was an Indigenous woman , where the judge stereotyped and perceived C.P as being violent and intoxicated due to social conceptions about her race (Busby, 2014,p.257-293). On the other hand men who fit in the category of white privilege are held to a higher standard by society and put on a pedestal and as a result are more believable to the judge and jury and more frequently get acquitted from their charges in sexual assault