She Couldn't Call it "Rape"

For the last blog of the quarter I read an article in People (yes, I know, People, but it was an interesting article). Tory Bowen was 21 when she woke up to find she was being raped. She tried to stop the man, but he said that she had consented the night before. She didn't remember this though. Eventually the police did arrest the man who had raped her and the case went to trial in 2006 in Lincoln, Nebraska. The Judge was Judge Jeffery Cheuvront and before the trial he met with Bowen to discuss the case. To her surprise the Judge said that she, "could not use the words 'rape' or 'sexual assault' while testifying, nor could she say she thought Safi [the rapist] drugged her" (84). This caught me off guard and I had to read it a couple times to understand what that meant. To think that you were raped and now this was thrust upon you seems horrible to me. I can't fathom how this could even happen, it's America, we have freedom of speech. It says so in our constitution. I had to double check that the story was actually happening in the US. The Judge defends his view by writing, "To many people the connotation of the word 'rape' involves a vicious and violent assault involving force" (84). This, "would be 'inflammatory' to use it" (84). But no matter what way you put it, there is nothing that excuses this injustice. The first amendment gives us Tory Bowen the right to call it rape, sexual assault or an elephant. If we take this right away, the next thing you know they'll be blaming the victim for the assault. Weisensee, Nicole Egan. "She Couldn't Call it 'Rape.'" People. Oct. 27 2008: 83-84.