According to data from the Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT), for 2014-2016 nearly one woman in three has been subjected to either physical or sexual violence, with more than 6% of them being a victim of rape or attempted rape. As “Il Sole 24 ore” notes, however, most cases still go unreported. Among those interviewed, only 11.4% of Italian women and 17% of foreign women who admitted to being victims of sexual violence actually reported it to the relevant authorities.
Statistics show that sexual assault is most likely to occur within a family or a relationship, and yet myths of men in dark alleys attacking girls who shouldn’t be walking alone still prevail in media stories. Furthermore, media attention lingers -- often morbidly -- on rape cases perpetrated by foreigners, especially if they are non-white.
When covering violence against women, stereotypes play a major role in public opinion, as reported in a 2002 study by Professors W.H. George (University of Washington) and L.J. Martìnez (University of California at Berkeley). If the offenders are black, the study shows, public opinion is strongly biased by racist stereotypes of them “being animalistic in their sexual appetite, and lusting after and desiring to rape White women”.
This tendency also applies to the Italian media, where major differences can be found between the media’s coverage of sexual assaults committed by Italian men and those committed by foreigners: in the case of the former, locals who raped or harass women, the news is more likely to blame or question the victim, whereas with the latter, attention switches almost entirely towards the demonization of the rapist.
Raped by the “good guys”
Looking at the national media’s coverage of rapes perpetrated by locals, one notices how often suspicion is cast upon the female victims. See, for instance, this article by Ansa, one of the leading news agencies in Italy. Last May, a young English woman was raped in Sardinia while on holiday. She had chosen the off- season in the hopes of a relaxing holiday, but this is what the article reported:
"An unusual choice for a girl her age: this time of the year, Cardedu -- a coastal municipality with less than 2 thousand inhabitants -- is almost uninhabited and lacking in services, it only gets busy during the summer."
[...] "According to the first information collected by the investigators, during her stay, the young Englishwoman had come to be known to the locals in the village because she loved going out and in the evening she went to the bars of the city centre."
Why is this relevant? Why concentrate on her holiday destination or her partying and not the fact that someone felt entitled to take advantage of her? The article basically suggests that she put herself in a dangerous position by travelling alone in a sparsely populated area while also making herself an easy target; the focus should be on the crime.
The Italian media also frequently insinuates a woman’s lack of caution or fatal naivety by questioning their choices during the time leading up to an attack, for example, how much alcohol they had or what constitutes consent. On August 29, 2018, Il Resto del Carlino -- a local newspaper which covers stories from Emilia-Romagna and Marche -- reported on a sexual assault which took place in Rimini, when two police students raped a German girl they met on holiday. The group spent the night chatting and drinking, at some point the girl’s friends left while she chose to stay. According to the article, she fancied one of the boys and when they started kissing, she said she didn’t want full sex, but she was forced to comply and was then raped by both men. The article puts the two sides of the story on the same level right from the beginning:
"The version of the young woman who is accusing the two young men of rape is diametrically opposed to that from the two police students"
[...] "they had chatted and drank together, but without exaggeration.”
[...]"[one of them decided to stay], because she fancied one of the two boys."
"No one heard either screams or strange noises coming from that room."
Why mention the drinking, specifying that she didn’t drink too much? How would her state of inebriation affect her consent and make the attack less of a rape? And why is it so common to refer to heard or unheard screams? Research has found that it is extremely common for victims of sexual assault to experience paralysis during rape, so why do they need to indirectly suggest that there should have been a loud response to a traumatic event?
As we can see from another report on the same case by Il Resto del Carlino, the woman is perceived as complicit in the violence while her rapists are humanized as men whose life has been ruined because of this woman “pointing the finger” at them. All the attention is focused on describing the offenders:
"Both dreaming of becoming policemen, but they will never wear the uniform. A terrible accusation is hanging over their heads: gang rape. Pointing the finger against them, [is] a German tourist, slightly younger than them, only 19 years old. And yesterday these two senior students of the Polgai police school in Brescia found themselves on the other side of the barricade, first as suspects and then as the accused. In front of those policemen whose career they dreamed of, but without having their calibre."
The journalist adopts the boys' perspective by focusing on their aspirations while it is the girl who "points the finger" against them -- almost as if they were not discussing a violent attack but rather a whim.
The same happens in this article found by NarrAzioni Differenti. The author reports on the case of a 65-year-old professor who harassed a 15-year-old student in 2017 and was sentenced to two and a half years in prison.
Underlined parts:
"Sexual groping of a 15-year-old student, or affectionate caresses which were misunderstood by the girl? This is the doubt that the court of Ascoli Piceno must dispel [...]. "
Although the man had already been charged, the use of the rhetorical question casts suspicion on the validity of the girl's testimony. According to her, the man "came from behind, hugged [her] lightly touching [her] breasts, legs, and bottom, he pinched [her] face and brought his face close to [hers]", and yet the journalist wonders whether these might just have been “affectionate caresses which were misunderstood”. The author then adds: "It was the student who got the teacher into trouble". The choice of showing the girl as an active subject makes this sentence ambiguous and puts the responsibility for the charge on her.
Later on, the journalist asks whether the man will still be able to teach. Why is the attention focused on the man’s career as if he was the victim while the real victim is questioned? Why does the author indirectly wish for the man to return to his job when that is the environment where the harassment took place?
Rape victims see their credibility regularly questioned, as happened to a young Peruvian woman who saw her alleged rapists cleared of all charges partly because she looked too masculine thus apparently resulting too unattractive to the male gaze. The decision was taken in 2017 by an all-women court, but its motives were made known only on Friday. More than 200 people protested outside Ancona's court of appeal against the groundlessness of an acquittal based on the judgment of the looks of the alleged victim by the defendants' rapists and the judges.
At the beginning of September 2017, two American students claimed they were raped in Florence by two Italian Carabinieri police officers who gave the young women a lift after a night out -- illegally, because they were on duty and any passenger must be reported, which didn’t happen. The men denied all the allegations at first but stated later that although the girls were quite drunk, the sex was consensual. Further investigation led to the suspension of both policemen and a sentence of four years and eight months for Mario Camuffo, while Pietro Costa is still waiting for his trial to begin. They were both charged with sexual assault and abuse of authority.
This case is the perfect example of victim-blaming: the Italian media immediately cast suspicion on the girls by insinuating that the students were deceivers and promiscuous money seekers. Their testimony was further downplayed by spreading fake news -- according to the Italian newspapers, the girls had purchased insurance against rape before leaving the US, thus insinuating that they falsely accused the police officers to get the money. The media reported fake data by claiming that 90% of rape reports made by Americans in Florence were completely made up. This news appeared on several famous newspapers including Il Secolo XIX and La Repubblica (left-wing newspaper; which later updated the article, leaving out this note):
Translation:”There are three theories about what happened. There was the off chance, which has been immediately discarded, that the students made the whole story up. Another theory is that of consensual sex between the girls and the uniformed Carabinieri which was then denounced as sexual assault; the third and way more serious case is actual rape. In support of the second scenario, the two girls have, apparently, an insurance against rape; whereas the third one is supported by the fact both were drunk and therefore not able to defend themselves.”
The theory was discarded by the girls’ lawyer, who stated that they were covered by the university’s general insurance which included rape, but that they were not aware of it.
Despite the groundlessness of these allegations, their testimony was attacked in all possible ways: the media emphasized that they were drunk, and therefore not reliable and that no one in the building heard anything (again), not even a scream, which is basically saying “no cry, no rape”.
After all, medical checks uncovered that they had had sex in the previous days, but who says it wasn’t consensual (apart from the raped girls and the doctors)? Girls were even asked whether they found men in uniform sexy during the questioning. The “good guys” confirmed they had sex, but that it was consensual. “Everyone knows that more often than not these Americans make advances,” Costa told the police, while Camuffo stated that he “realized that there was a chance of sex and so we [they] behaved as boys do”.
And yet, in a story which is -- according to Il Corriere della Sera -- “Still dark, weird, full of doubts and contradictions, a bringer of truth or lies and that risks throwing shadows and mud on an institution, the Carabinieri, that is a symbol of legality and justice.” the men were presented as respectable professionals and family men, as we can see in Corriere della Sera and Il Mattino:
“He is just under forty and has twenty years of service, he’s high-ranking officer, has a wife and a son. A professional [and a] great connoisseur of Florence. He comes from Tuscany as the colleague from Prato does, who’s thirty years old, a carabiniere scelto (with distinction), the dream of entering the dog handlers, a "good guy”, a military man who “loved his job”, his friends say. This is the first and brief identikit of the two carabinieri suspected of the rape of the two American students.”
“Now -- this could be the defence -- things like this are done only if there is complicity and not between strangers. [The men hadn’t known each other for long, ed] Moreover, it is easy to imagine that in the presence of more certain scientific elements, the defence will insist on the path of consensual sex. This instance could alleviate the crime of violence, but not the situation altogether, given that the military were still in service, in uniform and armed. [...] Unless it was a moment of madness that will still cost them very dear.
To their advantage, then, is that they are known to be two Carabinieri with a calm temperament, who have never given problems.”
The men are described as good Carabinieri, a job that seems to grant intrinsic great reputation and respectability. Even politicians supported the police officers:
Maurizio Gasparri (Forza Italia, Berlusconi’s party) (Nove, local newspaper):
"The defence of the bicentennial prestige and the history of the Carabinieri institution is a priority [that’s weird, one would say the priority of this case should be women’s rights]. Quibbles and other topics belong to the lawyers and to the inevitable discussion at the criminal court. [...] Behaviors such as those we read about are inconceivable and damage the hundreds of thousands of members of the police who protect the safety of citizens in difficult situations with self-denial, sense of duty, and with economic treatments that are not adequate to their commitment. [...]
We must also underline the serious responsibility of mayors and administrators who make places like Florence, the pride of Italy and the world, a sort of free zone for drugs and alcohol abuse. [...]
Italy must be an attraction for its beauty, its history, its culture. Not because - fault of irresponsible administrators - it becomes the theater of every excess that ends up infecting everyone, even those who should be carriers of security and not of error. "
Stefano Maullu (Forza Italia, Berlusconi’s party) (Nove, local newspaper) :
“Before judging the attitude of the Carabinieri of Florence, on the assumption (he doesn’t even use allegation) of rape from two American students, first of all, we should wait for the outcome of the investigation, a clear and unmistakable declaration of innocence or guilt. But a few days ago, with extreme regret, I noticed that someone has already started sullying the Carabinieri institution and his servants, which should only be defended, supported, defended.”
Filippo Bubbico, then Deputy Minister of Interior (Repubblica):
"If confirmed, the Florence case would be a very serious matter, causing serious damage to the reputation of Carabinieri, which have worked alongside citizens and in support of those who live in discomfort," said the Deputy Minister of the Interior. [...]
"It is important that American students learn, even with the help of the universities and of our institutions, that Florence is not the city of drugs and alcohol abuses."
It’s interesting to note that these statements completely ignore the victims: all attention is on the shame brought to the institution of the Carabinieri and the city’s decorum, but this is not the point. Blaming the girls because they were drunk and partying is rape culture, it is the men who felt entitled to take advantage of them who should be in the spotlight.
From the analysis of media reports, reactions from public opinion and politicians, we can say that more often than not victims tend to be blamed for the same violence they were subjected to, whereas the perpetrators are to be empathised, understood, cared for. But is this a rule? What does it happen when the offender is not originally from Italy?
“Don’t touch our women”
In the event that the offender is a foreigner, especially if they are non-white, the public debate focuses mostly on his nationality, thus revealing an underlying political agenda which promotes anti-immigrant sentiment. Take, for example, the Rimini case: at the end of August 2017 four men - originally from Morocco, Congo, and Nigeria - gang-raped a Polish girl, beat her friend and sexually assaulted a Peruvian trans woman while fleeing.
This time, the rapists were not “boys with a dream” but cold, cruel animals (they were called beasts, worms, a pack, etc) coming from abroad to threaten “our” women’s safety. Several Italian media outlets adopted a nationalist rhetoric based on the concepts of invasion and clash of civilizations. The extreme emblem of this attitude was Forza Nuova’s (Italian far-right party) adaptation of a fascist poster which was made against the Allies by Gino Boccasile and used by the Republic of Salò back in 1944.
The new poster - on the left - says “protect her from the new invaders, she could be your mother, your wife, your sister, your daughter”. The background depicts a black man lusting after a white woman while trying to take off her shirt, perpetuating the stereotype of over-sexualized black men who threaten white women’s decency. According to the message, moreover, women are to be protected from sexual violence not because of its intrinsic wrongness, but for their relation to men. Women's figures become, therefore, battleground, property; their bodies are national spaces.
*Written by Iris Pase, this article was originally published on Newsmavens.
