Aliraza Javaid. Victims & Offenders. Volume 13, Issue 7. October 2018.
Introduction
The police culture is characterized as being masculine, referred to as a “cult of masculinity.” In other words, the police culture is a form of hegemonic masculinity, “a ‘macho’ police culture that foster[s] heavy alcohol consumption and sexual bravado” (Rowe, 2009, p. 129). Linked to this ideology, other commentators have distinguished certain key features to be embedded within the police culture; for example, skepticism about rape cases (Sleath & Bull, 2012), solidarity, and cooperation (Walklate, 2004). Reiner (2010) found suspicion, solidarity or isolation, machismo, conservatism, and racial prejudice to be some of the key characteristics embedded in this culture, though the police culture is dynamic, fluid, and vulnerable to change. In addition, police cultures are contextual and situational, “mediated by particular working environments” (Rowe, 2013, p. 138). Regardless, the police culture is, it is argued, sometimes perceived as being the foundation of all policing-ills because the cooperation and solidarity components are recognized as giving “cover” for illegitimate policing actions.
Given these serious concerns, in the present article I focus on social and cultural constructions of male rape in police forces and the policing of male rape in this article. From a sociological and poststructural perspective, I closely examine the ways in which police officers construct and respond to male rape with the support of empirical data. This is important to examine to fully answer the research question: How do conceptions of male rape construct and shape police officers’ attitudes toward, and responses to male victims of rape and sexual violence in Britain? Drawing on a theoretical framework informed by sociological, poststructural and queer theories, the focus here is on police officers’ interactions with, and cultural constructions of, male rape victims, to theorize power and social relations between officers and male victims of rape. From the qualitative data presented and analyzed, informed by sociological and cultural studies, themes of power, discourse, culture, values, norms, and beliefs emerge. I primarily draw on Foucauldian understandings of the social world, making sense of officers’ cultural perspectives of male rape. For instance, the main conceptions informing the analysis are elaborated in poststructural comprehensions of discourse (Foucault, 1972), the body (Foucault, 1982), power, and discipline (Foucault, 1977). It is suggested that we ought to suspend judgments from rightness or wrongness in the ways in which male rape is policed; instead, one should consider the minutiae of officers’ interactions with male rape victims to gain some understanding of the social and power relations inherent in that to better understand how to change them in the future. This article will increase our understanding of how male rape is culturally constructed in the policing landscape. Qualitative research can offer a way to understand the officers’ subjective readings of male rape because it seeks to gain an understanding of underlying reasons, opinions, and motivations. The purpose of this article is to advocate Foucault’s approach to discourse analysis, and, more specifically, his idea of power and knowledge as a theoretical approach that other writers can productively adopt to develop a better understanding of the relationship between power and knowledge in the context of the policing of sexual violence.
Backstory
Male rape cases usually rely on a range of factors including recent physical evidence, adequate victim contact that perpetuates support for a prosecution, and robust shared values between the Crown Prosecution Service and the police that maintain a culture of prosecution. Rowe (2013) argued that police cultures/forces across Britain no longer exist in exactly the same form because police officers’ duties are multifarious and contextual. Changes in police practice means that the police now have targets to hit in terms of reaching a certain number of arrests, which may help increase prosecuting offenders of male rape (Javaid, 2017a). An important detail that is frequently omitted in research (due to the limited data available) is the number of male rape cases that reach the trial stage and how the police serve male rape victims up until the trial (that is, if their case reaches the courts). We know little of how male rape cases get processed and moved through the criminal justice process.
Developments in the police include the emergence of sexual offences investigation trained (SOIT) officers, and specially trained officers (STOs). These officers are dedicated to investigating cases of rape and sexual assault. They importantly take initial and full statements, act as a liaison and support for victims throughout the remainder of the legal procedure, and arrange forensic examinations. The accessibility of STOs can be problematic, however, regarding the most readily available officer being called on because they have other duties and commitments, which may impact on their service provision to sexual assault and rape victims (Jamel, 2010; Jamel, Bull, & Sheridan, 2008). In addition, the majority of STOs are women, which can be problematic if some male rape victims want a male specially trained police officer (Jamel, 2010; Jamel et al., 2008). Moreover, Sleath and Bull (2012) found victim-blaming attitudes toward rape victims among SOIT officers and STOs, which is problematic because one would expect that specialist training to handle sexual crimes would include training that would address misperceptions about rape.
Another example of the change in policing policy is the emergence of “rape suites” that are specifically designed to accommodate all rape victims, including male rape victims. The rape suites include additional sensitive and comfortable environments, often somewhere that is not near the police station, wherein to interview and medically examine sexual assault and rape victims. Jamel (2010) showed that these changes have not noticeably reduced the level of under-reporting of male rape. The reporting of male rape is still an issue, then, given that many male rape victims are still reluctant to engage with the police. Furthermore, in my prior work (Javaid, 2017a), I showed that there is a lack of consistency of police care; for instance, the changeover of SOIT officers and subsequent disruption (if not elimination) of the relationship created between the victim and SOIT officer. Consequently, there may be attrition of male rape cases because of the lack of confidence in the police response and treatment experienced by some male rape victims. It could also be suggested that previous experiences of the police responses and treatment, regardless of the crime type initially reported, could impact the victim’s expectations of the subsequent police responses and attitudes toward their male rape case. Walklate (2004) argued that managing policing is not about developing police officers’ skills and expertise in practice; instead, it is about making sure the officers adhere to the internal hierarchical authority. Therefore, this may leave the police culture to evolve without any managerial supervision in practice. In other words, negative attitudes, beliefs, and values could go unseen when police officers are policing, which in turn might impact on the delivery of services to male rape victims. Arguably, in sexual crimes, whether the victim is male or female, the victim rather than the offender(s) invariably seems to be “put on trial” (Javaid, 2017a). It may be that these negative attributes emanate from the police culture, which can be dominated by a White, heterosexist, male culture (Loftus, 2008). If the police culture holds misguided views, it can impact on how the police treat all types of male rape victims (Javaid, 2017a), particularly gay male rape victims (Javaid, 2017b). Abdullah-Khan (2008) argued that the treatment of male rape victims is largely determined by the gender bias instilled in the police culture.
Similarly, Washington (1999) found that, from the six male rape victims in the sample, five chose to not report to the police due to fear of “being revictimized” (p. 727); they feared that they would not be taken seriously because of their gender and were worried in case they would be blamed. Walklate (2004) argued that stereotypical assumptions linked with female and male behaviors ingrained in societies inevitably reflect in the police, even though the police present themselves as being neutral when dealing with victims. This is in agreement with other work (Javaid, 2017a), in which it has been argued that the criminal justice system’s views are sexualized (i.e., they render homosexual victims invisible and heterosexual victims visible). Similarly, there is recent documented evidence to suggest that homophobia is present within the police culture (Abdullah-Khan, 2008), and that male rape victims see the police as intrinsically homophobic (Walker, Archer, & Davies, 2005). For instance, Rumney (2008) argued that:
The unearthing of homophobic attitudes in the context of male rape might be explained in various ways. One of the reasons may be the equation of men being anally penetrated with being less masculine and therefore gay…The association of anal intercourse with homosexuality can also be linked to attitudes that blame gay males for their own victimisation. But of course, it goes further. This linkage can also support an assumption that by being anally penetrated (and therefore less masculine), male victims must be gay. (pp. 78–79)
This highlights that the police are likely to express victim-blaming and homophobic attitudes to male rape victims, regardless of their sexual orientation. This is a process of secondary victimization. The police are also likely to believe that male rape is a gay problem because of the sexual practice associated with male rape (i.e., anal penetration being performed). It cannot be assumed, however, that male rape victims are solely homosexual because some male rape victims are heterosexual, bisexual, and other. The quote ignores that women and transgender people not only through forced anal sex, but also through oral sex can rape men. A male person can also be drugged and raped by a woman who forced the victim to penetrate her.
It has been argued that gender expectations of men may also form negativity toward male victims who do not fulfill the gender expectations (Javaid, 2017b). It may be argued that state attitudes and responses toward male victims of rape are premised on the ideology of hegemonic masculinity. Because other issues may have a role to play, it is not wise to exaggerate the influence of societies’ views on the police. Thus, it is important to not downplay the police responses to male rape victims, especially when they have made some effort to improve treatment and responses to male victims of sexual assault and rape. It could also be suggested that homophobia is difficult to measure, as it comes in many different forms.
However, the overall evidence in this section indicates that the police culture can restrict a complete understanding of male rape. This section also demonstrates that male rape myths are common in the police culture. The evidence herein suggests that the source of the officers’ hostility toward male rape victims lies in male rape myths, prejudicial attitudes, and stereotypes that have been found to be prevalent within the police culture. This is evident in research by Abdullah-Khan (2008), in which 71 male police officers in her sample said that they cannot be male rape victims, suggesting that they are physically large enough to defend themselves or that they do not make themselves susceptible to male rape. From this evidence, as well as others (e.g., Jamel, 2010; Rumney, 2008), it can be argued that the police demonstrate a scarcity of awareness of the realities of male rape. This may be because they have a lack of training or experience regarding the handling of male rape cases, as was evident in Jamel et al.’s (2008) study in which some SOIT officers noted that they have a lack of experience and training regarding the handling of such cases. In addition, other research has found the police to be homophobic when dealing with male rape victims (Javaid, 2017a; Walker et al., 2005). Rumney (2008) argued that the police execute homophobic attitudes to male rape victims because of the homosexual activity that male rape is equated with, so officers support the male rape myth that male rape is a homosexual issue. What is missing from the literature is empirical evidence of how the police serve male rape victims in practice and how the police construct (and reconstruct) the issue of male rape.
Method
The present study, which is theoretically and conceptually informed, is concerned with exploring police responses to, and interactions with, male rape victims. I employed qualitative interviewing with a sample of 25 police officers, male rape counselors, therapists, and voluntary agency caseworkers, who live in England and I also gathered 45 qualitative questionnaires with individuals of the same occupation. The qualitative findings of this study are based on 25 interviews and 45 completed questionnaires. Similar questions were asked in both research methods; some questions in the questionnaire included: “Are there any strengths and weaknesses of the service given to male rape victims?” and “Whom do you think are most likely to become male rape victims and why?” The main focus of this article is on the policing of male rape. When I refer to “the police,” I refer to the ways in which the police handle male rape cases, drawing on British police data from the study to support the arguments. It is important to draw on the data from the previous participants because they each often liaise with each other and can give a good understanding of the differing ways in which the police construct and respond to male rape. A University Research Ethics Review Board granted ethical approval for this research, which adopted a qualitative approach. There was a commitment to seek to comprehend the views of those being researched.
I employed purposive and snowball sampling methods because they were the most appropriate sampling methods to select state and voluntary agencies that specifically deal with male rape cases, and that then accordingly gave information required to locate other state and voluntary agencies that have had experience of dealing with male rape cases or are dealing with such cases. This means that specific people working in state and voluntary agencies were selected because they would provide me with the most appropriate information, as they work very closely with male rape victims on a one-to-one basis. It is impossible to formulate a random sample of state and voluntary agencies that deal with male rape because the population is not only difficult to reach, but also there are not many agencies that specifically deal with male rape in England.
I approached the state and voluntary agencies through email, describing the research and the benefits of participating to help increase the sample size. I approached 13 police forces and 10 voluntary agencies in Britain. Ultimately, five police forces and four voluntary service provisions participated in the research. In respect of how many police forces and voluntary agencies declined to take part in this study, eight police forces and six voluntary agencies refused. For the interviews, 15 police officers and 10 practitioners from voluntary agencies took part. For the questionnaires, 38 police officers and seven practitioners from voluntary agencies filled out, completed, and returned them.
The research participants are diverse in regard to amount of experience handling male rape cases, educational level, ethnic background, and training of rape cases. Participants included the following: specialist police officers working in criminal investigation department (n = 4), police detectives (n = 4), police constables (n = 34), detective sergeants (n = 9), police response officers (n = 2), male rape counselors (n = 7), male rape therapists (n = 3), and voluntary agency caseworkers (n = 7). Due to the lack of male rape counselors, therapists, and caseworkers who specifically deal with male rape victims across Britain, this made it difficult to get an equal representation across various stakeholder groups. The gender of the participants comprised 33 men and 37 women. The sample was predominately White and most of the participants were under 40 years of age and were mostly from highly educated and middle-class backgrounds. The respondents provide services for many male rape victims, although they often serve more female rape victims due to the higher number of female rape victims who come forward. On average, the respondents had had around seven years of experience of working with male rape victims and male victims of sexual assault. Most of their clients have been middle-class men. Some of the participants had no training on male rape and sexual assault against men, but most had training on female rape and sexual assault against women.
I conducted a discourse analysis on the qualitative findings, focusing on power relationships in the police and how they construct the issue of male rape as expressed through symbols, meanings, languages and practices, and based on the theories of Michel Foucault. From such a Foucauldian lens, I caution against arguing that there is a simple cause and effect relationship. Rather than singular causality, this means looking for contingencies that may or may not have a role in events. I am also against searching for truths as if they are external to power relations within police agencies. They are not. Power produces “truths” at particular contexts, times, and places, which always shift in and through social structures (Javaid, 2018b). It is interlinked between male rape victims and the police, but power relations are not solely oppressive. Instead, they are part and parcel of one’s own interactions and practices, according to Foucault. Power is a type of relation between the police and male rape victims. Foucault ([1982] 2000) referred to power relations as a “management of possibilities” (p. 341). I examine such possibilities next.
Cultures and Police Discourses in the Policing of Male Rape_
Police officers’ discourses form and shape the ways in which they perceive, respond to, and deal with male rape cases. As a result, police officers construct and conceptualize male rape in certain ways. Consider the following excerpt as an example:
We are pretty cold when it comes to [dealing with male rape]…we are not qualified to sort of try and give like counseling. That’s why [male rape victims] interpret the questions [and police investigations] as being quite cold and calculated…someone else will sort out the ‘emotional stuff,” if I say touchy and feely stuff, afterwards who are better trained to deal with [male rape]. That’s probably the best way, because if we try to do it, we’ll probably make a right mess of it….From a victim’s point of view, it’s better that they see services who are qualified and trained to sort of deal with [their rape]. (Specialist Police Officer 1, male)
Although the police are not a homogenous group (Chan, 1996), I seek to gain an insight into the police officers’ discourses and cultures to make sense of their cultural world, which male rape is a part of. For Foucault (1972), discourse is “an individualisable group of statements” (p. 80). It is a body of knowledge that is shaped by social structures, social practices, and social institutions. A “culture” is a set of norms and values that are not fixed but are always relational, contextual, and situational (Holdaway, 1983; Reiner, 2010). The concept of police cultures is a fluid, dynamic, and cultural phenomenon. It is shaped by social, cultural, political, and institutional factors. Different components ingrained in police cultures can be present at particular times, places, and contexts, and negotiated through social and power relations, such as (though not limited to) paranoia, insularity, prejudice, gender bias, homophobia, pessimism, and intolerance. Focusing on discourses and cultures in the police, Specialist Police Officer 1 (Male) hints that some police officers express discourse to male rape victims in a “cold” fashion. Thus, some officers’ cultural discourse may not be underpinned by robust training, excluding any training surrounding counseling for male rape victims, and are potentially unable to provide an empathetic and sympathetic approach to male victims of rape. Through social relations between the police and male rape victims, their interactions can be seen as a product of discourse; for example, the interactions are shaping and reshaping discourses of male rape, meaning that officers come to learn about male rape in different ways depending on their interactions with male victims of rape. Discourse is central to understanding the ways in which the police respond to and deal with male rape victims. As the Specialist Police Officer 1 (Male) highlights, this “cold,” unemotional, and insensitive approach that some police officers may demonstrate through discourse can metaphorically and symbolically inscribe or mark the bodies of male rape victims, whereby these victims are “made” (Foucault, 1982, p. 208) or transformed into certain subjects that some officers see in a certain way depending on their own cultures. This interpretation of the previous quote is not only representative of male rape, but also apparent in interactions of the police with female victims (see Maier, 2008).
Some officers conceptualize male rape victims as “emotional” or symbolically representing emotion, sensitivity, and fragility (see subsequent quote from Police Constable 1 [male]). This discursive idea or perception of male rape may not only legitimate the “cold” and unsympathetic discourse circulated against male rape victims, but also conceptualize male rape as signifying femininity as it is often intertwined with emotion. The discursive idea of male rape symbolizing emotion and so femininity in some police officers, then, circulate a discursive body of knowledge metaphorically, culturally, and symbolically “marking” the bodies of male rape victims as emotional and feminine. The “cold” discourse symbolically and metaphorically mark male rape victims’ bodies as emotional and feminine, which can be enacted as a bodily discipline (Foucault, 1977), through discourse that is founded on a “cold” approach comprising unemotionality and coldness by some officers. The victims’ bodies, then, metaphorically and symbolically transform into “women” because emotion marks the body as feminine and nonheterosexual (Foucault, 1977) for some officers who circulate discourse reflecting such discursive ideas. For example:
I know that some officers treat male rape victims like female rape victims because they just aren’t real men anymore after their rape, so they are often seen as women. I know they aren’t literally. But they are like female rape victims, because they come across as defeated, powerless, weak and so on…I know then that this can influence how the police treat them, some will just overlook or poorly deal with them. (Police Constable 1, male)
By exploring the ways in which police officers respond to male rape victims and how discursive ideas and knowledges of male rape are corporeally marked on male rape victims’ bodies, one is able to consider the different ways in which social interactions between the police and male rape victims are regulated and managed in particular ways regarding discipline and the shaping of behaviors. It could be argued that, in the police, certain discourses relating to male rape can “systematically form the objects of which they speak” (Foucault, 1972, p. 49). Thus, as the material effects of discourse, the bodies of male rape victims may be configured, reconfigured, and shaped and reshaped in their social interactions with the police. For example, if police discourse is hostile, some victims are likely to withdraw their engagement from the police and from criminal proceedings. The following quote by a female police constable reflects this: “A lot of [male rape] victims deal with character assassination by the police rather than looking at the bare facts…it’s very difficult to get a conviction for rape, then” (Police Constable 12, female).
This excerpt suggests that the effects of police cultures and discourses can be harmful on some occasions because some officers may conduct “character assassination” against male rape victims, controlling and regulating their bodies that are metaphorically and symbolically “marked” as “suspicious.” When some officers do character assassination, they are questioning and unraveling the validity of the male victims as authentic rape victims. According to some officers, therefore, the victims may no longer embody a rape victim identity in a legal context and framework if he or she withdraws from their allegation and if his or her rape victim identity is undermined and tarnished through character assassination by some police officers. Male rape cases do not often come to the police’s attention due to a lack of reporting. This is consistent with empirical research that shows that men rarely report their rape to the police for fear of being ridiculed, disbelieved, and secondary victimized (Javaid, 2017a; Walker et al., 2005). Wolitzky-Taylor et al. (2011) found that, since the 1990s, rape reporting had not altered very much, so rape victims are still highly reticent to report and to engage with the police. These authors found dissimilarities between types of rape (i.e., those involving alcohol or drug facilitation or incapacitation being less likely to be reported than forcible rapes). As a result, the “dark figure” of male rape is likely to occur whereby many reports of male rape go unreported to the police, suggesting that the already reported numbers of male rape represent just a fraction of the true rate of male rape.
The view that male rape is underreported is likely to shape some officers’ discourse pertaining to the frequency and significance of male rape, in that it is an unimportant issue. For instance, “None of the police believe [male rape] is important because they’ll say rape generally, not just male rape, but rape generally, is underreported” (Specialist Police Officer 1, male). Christiansen and Fischer (2016) argued that, to construct discourse, knowledge claims ought to be founded on systematic observations of measurable phenomena. This suggests that some police officers may rely on police statistics to construct and develop their discourses and cultures relating to the issue of male rape and its prevalence. As one officer stated, “You can only base your statistics on the crimes reported. For that reason, then, the rape of men does not occur per se, in as much as the rape of women” (Police Constable 27, female). For other officers, however, police statistics are unreliable and inaccurate to develop a true “picture” or representation of male rape, so there is a “dark” figure of male rape that does not consider the amount of unreported and unrecorded crime. For example:
The issue is you’ve got underreporting, which means you got that black “dark figure” of crime…there has been a lot of criticism of police officers’ recording of crime…I do personally know of instances where lads have said that they had been raped and they have told me that they have not been taken seriously, so you can’t completely discount this idea of the “grey figure” of crime…they have told the authorities and the authorities have shoved it “under the carpet” basically or didn’t accept that it might be happening…you are almost given less credibility. (Police Detective 1, female)
For Foucault (1976), these discursive ideas and beliefs systematically construct the subject matter of which they speak. In the cultural world of policing, then, male rape is insignificant or implausible for some individual police officers, while for others, it is equally important as female rape in terms of care and attention: “We always provide adequate training to officers and adequate care for male rape victims” (Specialist Police Officer 2, female). As such, this discrepancy in discourse suggests that discourse is fluid, vulnerable, and open to change, depending on officers’ different contexts and situations in their own cultural world of policing. Arguably, this occurs because culture is never fixed; it is invariably changing, influenced by social divisions, social structures, and institutions (Jackson, 2007). For example, some police officers’ discourse conceptualize male rape victims as powerless and voiceless:
[Male rape victims] may feel the police will treat them as a statistic rather than a survivor. Also they may feel they will have more control of things with an external agency rather than with the police who may take over with their investigation goals (Police Response Officer 2, female).
However, because of notions around hegemonic masculinity, male rape victims often feel discouraged to embody emasculation and powerlessness since some do not want to project a “failed” man image to the social world for fear of backlash, disgust, and disdain being directed toward them by other men with power (Javaid, 2014, 2015a, 2015b). Some officers may, indeed, express discourse that metaphorically and symbolically conceptualizes male victims of rape as “numbers.” For Foucault (1991), power is omnipresent; it is embodied and diffused in discourse. While Foucault (1991) suggested that power is not an inherited entity, power then becomes a relational concept that can be negotiated, meaning that police officers’ discourses can be challenged. The police are able to express power supremacy “with their investigation goals” (Police Response Officer 2, female), which may not prioritize male rape victims’ needs. Power can flow through police institutions that allow some officers to express power and social supremacy through discourse by way of placing male rape victims in less than desirable subordinate positions, notably categorizing them as a “statistic.” By doing so, officers construct male rape victimology that allows for power to be uncontested. However, power is relational, contextual and situational (Connell, 2005), so male rape victims can challenge these perceived superior police powers at the same time, meaning that police discourse can be confronted, shaped and reshaped. Therefore, power is not necessarily a “bad thing,” for example:
We must cease once and for all to describe the effects of power in negative terms: it “excludes,” it “represses,” it “censors,” it “abstracts,” it “masks,” it “conceals.” In fact power produces; it produces reality; it produces domains of objects and rituals of truth. The individual and the knowledge that may be gained of him belong to this production. (Foucault, 1991, p. 194)
Police officers often have managerial supervision to ensure that targets are met and that male rape cases are properly investigated according to the rules and regulations that each police force work by. Foucault (1991) notes that people behave in expected ways and learn to discipline themselves. Police officers may, then, conform to the rules and regulations set out by each police force when investigating male rape allegations. Police training is one example of the developments in policing, whereby officers can be better trained to respond to male rape victims’ needs. Police training can provide officers with a lens or discourse that is reshaped with which to serve male rape victims. The findings suggest that the police have a lack of training regarding male rape; a majority of officers have a lack of training regarding male rape in Britain. However, it is important to note that most British police forces that were researched expressed a need to have training that focused on male rape, as well as female rape, but failed to implement male rape training. Instead, many police forces would draw on their training of female rape when dealing with male rape victims. Some police officers’ discourse, then, is likely to circulate knowledge based on female rape. However, we know that there are unique differences (and some similarities) between male and female rape. For instance, men often question their sexuality and masculinity after their rape in contrast to female rape victims (Javaid, 2017b). The findings are in agreement with Jamel et al. (2008), who argued that “The standard of available training in sexual offences investigation was found to be variable across police forces” (p. 491). As an example, the lack of police training dedicated specifically for male rape can be seen in the following exchange of communication:
Interviewer: So what kind of training did you have to undergo in order to work in this department that is dealing with male rape victims?
Specialist Police Officer 1 (male): Erm, well, not so much me myself. The front line officers obviously a lot of them have SOLO training (sexual offences training). It’s not specifically generically toward men, it is toward victims of sexual violence, so it is a bit generic. It doesn’t sort of specify, “Oh, this is a male victims course.”
This is just one example of where police training is generic and does not include any form of training relating to male rape. This lack of police training on male rape was found in almost every single police force in England that was researched. Another officer, similar to many others in the sample, stated that she does not have police training to be able to handle male rape victims, as exemplified in the following quote:
I think the police recognize we’re investigators you know. We haven’t got the best knowledge of training to be able to support a [male rape] victim (Specialist Police Officer 3, female. emphasis added).
Although similar quotes came from different types of police officers, it was striking to observe that specialist police officers would also state that they have no specific training on male rape. One would think that their specialist training would include some basic training on male sexual victimization, as it is presumed that specialist training would thoroughly cover all facets of sexual violence. This could mean that specialist police officers’ discourse may circulate male rape myths, as there is no training to eradicate such myths. Because there may be no form of training regarding male rape, male rape myths (e.g., men cannot be raped or rape only happens to women) are likely to circulate via discourse, even among specialist police officers. For example:
There is too much focus on female rape in training and…because nobody discusses male rape, it can’t possibly happen. It’s almost like well, “It [male rape] mustn’t have happened because I never had any of this on my training.” Again, that contributes to the cynicism of officers…I used to run training in my police force for CID [criminal investigation department] officers and for various different departments, mainly investigative interviewing, but I am not aware of any particular course that just deals in isolation with male rape. As far as I’m concerned, there isn’t one. There is no specific course on male rape. (Police Detective 1, female)
This excerpt suggests that male rape myths can circulate through police discourse because officers may not receive any specific training on male rape to tackle such myths. Venema (2016) argued that training in police forces is needed and should be compulsory, stating, “Training on sexual assault was described as a need within police departments. Officers indicated the need for training among all patrol officers, while acknowledging limited resources to do so” (p. 889). While this suggests that knowledge on male rape is important, police forces may not have sufficient resources to be able to provide specialist training on male rape.
As highlighted previously, if no training on male rape develops, police discourse is likely to perpetuate the discursive idea that male rape does not occur or that rape only happens to women. Although training may prevent male rape myths from circulating through police discourse, it can also work against male rape victims. For example, Venema (2016) argued that “a poor fit exists between police training and what is helpful to victim-survivors of sexual assault [since] [p]olice officer training emphasizes skills to identify indicators of doubtful credibility when interacting with crime victims” (p. 893). As Police Detective 1 (female) stated: “Male rape is not within my sphere of understanding, I’ve never had any training on it, and therefore, it doesn’t ring right.” Similarly, it was found that an absence of police training on male rape can circulate doubtfulness of male rape in police discourse (i.e., the discursive idea that male rape does not occur). Logan (2016) suggested that police training to train officers to be “professional” may be ineffective. Concurrently, Dwyer (2015) found that police training can shape police discourse, teaching officers, either explicitly or implicitly, masculine qualities that function to deleteriously serve victims who are unmasculine. Male rape victims may be seen as unmasculine as their victimization contradicts notions of hegemonic masculinity.
It is clear that police training can shape police discourse relating to male rape, configuring it to fit the needs of female rape victims. As male rape is absent in police training, some officers’ discourse may function to exercise power with precise and diverse techniques. For instance, some officers are likely to circulate discourse to suggest that male rape is nonexistent due to a training neglect incorporating male victimology or a social neglect of police acceptance of male victimology. Male rape victims, then, may be deemed as abnormal or deviant for discourse on male rape victimology when it is actively forgotten in police training. Alleged male rape victims may, then, be controlled under “biopower” (Foucault, 1978), which is having power over other bodies, “an explosion of numerous and diverse techniques for achieving the subjugations of bodies” (Foucault, 1978, p. 140), that they may have to negotiate with some police officers who are untrained in respect of male rape. By controlling the actions and bodies of male rape victims that may become “docile bodies” (Foucault, 1991), which Foucault (1995) writes in Discipline and Punish that “a body is docile that may be subjected, used, transformed, and improved. And that this docile body can only be achieved through strict regiment of disciplinary acts” (p. 136), police training can normalize what has been “made” as abnormal. The rapist controlling the actions of a male body and placing them in a subjected subordinate gendered position could mean that their bodies are perceived as “docile bodies.” Therefore, police training should normalize perceptions of male docile bodies to remove the social perception of gender deviancy when rape occurs. Otherwise, female rape may be constructed as a “normal” discursive idea in contrast to male rape for some officers. Police training can work to configure and reconfigure police discourse to dominate and control victims’ bodies that challenge police discourses and cultures. For Foucault (1977),
These methods [such as police training], which made possible the meticulous control of the operations of the body, which assured the constant subjection of its forces and imposed upon them a relation of docility-utility, might be called “disciplines”….The historical moment of the disciplines was the moment when an art of the human body was born, which was directed not only at the growth of its skills, nor at the intensification of its subjection, but at the formation of a relation that in the mechanism itself makes it more obedient (p. 137).
Through police training in which constructions of rape are made “normal” or “abnormal,” police officers’ bodies are disciplined into docility. Police training is a form of oppression and domination that is useful for the oppressors, such as those whom are higher up in the managerial levels. However, research also shows how formal training can be resisted or undermined by informal on-the-job training, too (Fielding, 1988). When police training circulates, it can work to express power and control over officers who are “trained” and are mere “docile bodies” (Foucault, 1991) that are disciplined, subjected, and controlled through which officers become obedient. Police training, then, becomes “an apparatus that makes it possible to supervise” (Foucault, 1977, p. 281). It is argued that the aspect of police training seems to be a characteristic and fundamental dimension of the social and power relations that exist between the police and male rape victims. Discourse and control are key aspects that are in constant flux within police institutions. As the police themselves are under supervision and control through the apparatus of police training, so too are male rape victims through the apparatus of police discourse.
Social Constructions of “Deviancies” and Queerness_
Officers’ ideas and views of male rape differ on a social continuum. For each officer, his or her ideas and views are constantly in flux. This brings us to the point that “deviancies” in the policing of male rape are also socially and culturally constructed. Here I focus here on particular “deviancies” in the policing of male rape, such as homosexuality, because it is culturally “made” “deviant” through social and power relations between some police officers and some social bodies that may or may not include male rape victims. As Christiansen and Fischer (2016) demonstrated, “Things (objects and events) and quasithings (concepts) are real because they are made” (p. 9) in a dialectical and reciprocal relationship between officers and with social agencies. In the findings, the social constructions of mental health and homosexuality emerged. For example:
We’ve had incidents where young men have obviously end up going out, getting involved in a situation, end up having sex or whatever, and the next day they regret it and think “I’m gonna falsely report”….People who get prosecuted are the ones who tell lies, falsely report, get people arrested, maybe go through the court process, and perverting the course of justice… we’ve done people for wasting police time for falsely reporting….We do get a lot of allegations with people with mental health issues, falsely report, ends up being false. (Specialist Police Officer 1, male)
Some police officers in the sample often believed that they are better able to recall incidents in which male rape victims have lied to them; they remember false reports rather often and easily, than male rape cases that were seen to be fairly genuine. It was found that the common explanation used to regard a male rape case as “false” was that the participants believed male victims to conceal sexual acts that they either regretted or wanted to hide from societies; for instance, experimenting with homosexuality. In the policing of male rape, homosexuality is often constructed as “deviant” (Rumney, 2009; Javaid, 2018a; see also Burke, 1994). This may make it difficult for some officers to regard rape allegations from gay male rape victims or victims presumed to be gay as legitimate allegations, and so their complaints may be constructed as “false” due to the construction of homosexuality as “deviant” and “abnormal.” Foucault (1978) expressed that the construction of homosexuality induces some level of fear and backlash against it because it poses a threat; it, therefore, becomes repressed. Could it be safe to argue that, due to the close intertwinement of homosexuality with male rape, rape allegations from gay men (or presumed as such) may be constructed as “invalid” or “illegitimate” because, in some police officers’ construction of “normal” heterosexuality, homosexuality is excluded, marginal, and placed at the periphery of what is socially constructed as “normal.” In agreement with Foucault, Jeffrey Weeks (1977) argued that it is necessary to see the social construction of nonheterosexuality in institutions, such as police institutions, as a perversion and an abnormal deviation from normalized heterosexuality, leading to social control. It could be argued that social control can manifest itself in several ways, one of which is to deem male rape reports from gay men as “false,” so as to perpetuate normative heterosexuality in some police institutions, in which heteronormativity stubbornly persists (Jackson, 2005).
Some police officers who suggest that the victim has lied or made a false allegation may then “no crime” their allegation, which means that such male rape allegations do not become a “crime figure” as such, but rather form part of the “dark” figure of crime. That is, the amount of crimes that goes unrecorded by the police, which in turn may give an inaccurate or misleading “picture” of male rape. In other words, male rape may actually be on the rise, but, given the under-recording of male rape based on male rape victims supposedly lying to the police, one is left with a distorted view of male rape.
Some officers may construct reports from gay male rape victims (or victims presumed as such) as “false”; this is even more likely to be the case in gay relationships. For example, an issue emerged regarding acquaintance rape in that some officers expect sex in this context. Therefore, the victims are less likely to be believed by some officers if they were raped in the context of acquaintance rape because, as the findings suggest, sex is always expected in homosexual relationships. For instance:
There is fear that [male rape victims] are not going to be believed [by the police]. Sometimes they put themselves in the position where they are feeling that it was deserved. It depends on the context in which they’ve been raped. If it was with a partner, who’s forced sex on them or somebody who they have had a one nighter with, or whatever, it kind of means…no means yes sort of arrangement. [The police] might think that they deserved that; they should do sex with their partner…they’ve said “no,” but then the partner said “you wanted it anyway.” (Voluntary Agency Caseworker 3, male)
This perception that sex is an expectation in gay male relationships may promote the male rape myth that male rape is solely a homosexual issue and that credibility for male victims of acquaintance rape may be undermined or weakened, which in turn may bring about disbelieving attitudes and responses against these types of victims by some police officers. Comparatively, in cases of female rape in heterosexual relationships or marriages, some criminal justice practitioners do not construct the female victims as “real” rape victims (Temkin & Krahe, 2008). In line with other recent work, “Typical sexual assault scenarios considered ambiguous include those involving…acquaintances, or those with a current or prior intimate relationship” (Venema, 2016, p. 883). What this means is that, similar to female rape by male acquaintances, male victims of acquaintance rape are unlikely to be constructed as valid or credible victims by some police officers, so they may be disbelieved, while some police officers may be suspicious or dubious against acquaintance male rape victims. Notably, not all gay relationships may be characterized as sexual, some of which may be asexual or not sexual in nature, and so they may be based on romantic love, intimacy, and friendship. Furthermore, the dynamics in gay relationships may be unique, involving two men, so which man in the relationship enacts the active role and the passive role. Do both men enact both roles? It is unclear which one would be seen as the penetrator and, therefore, offender. For Foucault (1978), these roles can be negotiated through social interactions with the sexual “participants,” whereby the “self” is in constant flux with the “other.”
Although previous research has found that stranger rape is less likely to occur against men than acquaintance rape (Lundrigan & Mueller-Johnson, 2013), the respondents sometimes suggested that male rape reports are more serious, more believable, or more legitimate if the alleged offender was a complete stranger. A stranger male rape case is seen as more serious since “stranger rape” may occur when a man is less likely to expect it to happen to him and it frequently includes more than one assailant, a high level of violence, and a weapon (Kaufman, Divasto, Jackson, Voorhees, & Christy, 1980). As the following respondents indicated:
You’ll have your stereotypical stranger rapist, which is like hiding in the bushes, dark, and grabbing a total stranger and raping them in the bushes. That’s the main type of rapist. (Specialist Police Officer 1, male)
From a total stranger rape of a man…if you are sort of young and you’re gay then you are probably more vulnerable to it. (Male Rape Counselor 1, male)
If it was a stranger attack of either men or women, there is more of a likelihood for that issue of being believed…the police are more inclined to trivialize acquaintance male rape instances than say a stranger dragging a person down the back alley and raping them, which is wrong, but it says something not just about policing, but also about the wider society that we live in. It’s almost like back in the days of, “well you can rape your wife.” R vs. R pre-1991, it was acceptable to rape your wife, and obviously in some of the countries like Pakistan, it is still acceptable to rape your wife. I think we still got reminiscence about dated attitudes that question the consent issue whether it’s a male or female victim of rape, where it involved the partner that they are seeing. (Police Detective 1, female)
These excerpts challenge a few respondents’ views that suggest that stranger rape is rare and that acquaintance rape against men is more common. The view that stranger rape is rare in contrast to acquaintance rape supports the research literature (Abdullah-Khan, 2008; Lundrigan & Mueller-Johnson, 2013). As examples of this view, consider the following excerpts:
If you look at a stranger male rape, how likely is that to happen, I would say probably it will happen because I know it’s been reported previously before, but it’s unlikely and it’s probably not as common as male rape where you’re in a male-male relationship. (Specialist Police Officer 3, female)
[I]t’s usually someone that they know. It’s unusual that it’s a stranger rape. Most victims are raped by their partners or family members or someone that they’re associated with. (Police Constable 12, female)
[S]tranger rapes with male victims are rarer than the grooming of young males so… males who already have a sexual preference towards other males would be more likely victims than heterosexual males. (Police Constable 18, male)
From the excerpts, it is clear that some inconsistences arise. A few officers believed that acquaintance male rape cases are more common than stranger male rape cases, and supporting the research literature (e.g., Abdullah-Khan, 2008; Stuart, McKimmie, & Masser, 2016). Although the few officers suggested that stranger rape is rare, they seem to suggest that male rape only affects gay men in a homosexual relationship, overlooking the issue that male rape can also affect heterosexual, bisexual, and other types of men. For example, the research literature suggests that heterosexual men are largely victims of male rape (Hodge & Canter,1998; Isely & Gehrenbeck-Shim, 1997). From the findings, it appears that male rape can occur in both a stranger and acquaintance rape context, but, because of the inconsistent views regarding which one is more prevalent, male rape victims are likely to receive inconsistent treatment by some officers. If male rape victims reveal no physical injuries from their rape that was experienced in doors or by someone whom the victims know and some officers believe that stranger rape is “real” rape, then not only may the victims be disbelieved, but also may have their attack trivialized. It may be that some officers construct victims with physical bruising as “real” rape victims. Through social practices with the police, the victims’ self and identity are constructed in certain ways at any given time; officers can draw on their cultural power to construct “real” rape victims. For instance, if “the subject is formed by a will that turns back upon itself, assuming a reflexive form, then the subject is the modality of power that turns on itself; the subject is the effect of power in recoil” (Butler, 1997, p. 6). The effects of power appear to construct “real” rape victims. As such, officers’ subjectivity is historically rooted and constantly being reconstructed in interaction with male rape victims, shaping their views of male rape.
Some officers believed that gay sex in a homosexual relationship is expected so may not necessarily be classified as “rape.” While this finding was inconsistent among the officers, those who subscribed to this view are likely to believe only male victims of stranger rape. Consequently, some police officers may neglect or overlook male victims of acquaintance rape, invalidating their sexual victimization in turn. Because most officers symbolize heteronormative and masculine bodies, they are able to regulate the conduct of bodies that do not conform to this symbolization (Foucault, 1977). Foucault (1980) argued that bodies are textual in origin because, through discourses, they are constructed; and these discourses are founded on regulatory norms and shared symbols. Gay male rape victims’ bodies may not signify heteronormative and masculine bodies because they may echo a powerful discursive idea of “looking queer.” That is, queerness may be considered as a discursive body of knowledge, marking the bodies of gay male rape victims (or presumed as such) that can be enacted as a body discipline with regard to what it means to be a homosexual (Foucault, 1977). In her theorization of performativity of sexed or gendered subjectivities, Butler (1990) demonstrated that queer bodies enact and perform nonheteronormative gendered and sexual subjectivities via “the mundane way in which bodily gestures, movements, and styles of various kinds constitute the illusion of an abiding gendered self” (p. 140). Therefore, as a display of what it means to do queerness as a “citational practice by which discourse produces the effects that it names” (Butler, 1993, p. 2), queer bodies perform discursive knowledge. In the case of gay male rape victims in homosexual relationships, for some officers, these victims are transformed into certain subjects with connection to certain discursive knowledges regarding whom is a “real” rape victim based on police subjectivity. The victims’ bodies can present manners in which their bodies are different from other bodies in ways that violate constructions of hegemonic sexuality. These concepts frame the ways in which some officers’ interactions with gay male victims of acquaintance rape are constructed and conceptualized.
The Interconnection between Mental Health and Male Rape
Specialist Police Officer 1 (male) suggests that the police get many allegations from men with mental health issues who “falsely report” rape: “We do get a lot of allegations with people with mental health issues, falsely report, ends up being false.” In this instance, there was no comparison to how he treats nonmale victims. It is unclear on what grounds they are assessed as having mental health issues. It is also unclear why the police mainly classify allegations coming from men with mental health issues as false. As Rumney and Hanley (2011) illustrated, “While it is known that men and women make false allegations of rape, we know little of how people decide when an allegation of male rape is false and on what evidential grounds” (p. 142). Perhaps officers are likely to “overestimate the percentage of false reporting” (Venema, 2016, p. 876) among male rape victims with mental health issues (or presuming they have mental health issues), or the police may be more likely to be discriminatory against male rape victims who have a mental health disorder, such as depression, which often occurs after an incident of male rape (Walker et al., 2005). Thomas Szasz (1972) highlighted the ways in which societies construct knowledge of mental health and so knowledge of the body, so speaking about male rape victims who may be experiencing mental health issues can construct knowledge about their body and about their credibility. For Szasz, mental health issues are neither illnesses, diseases nor pathological, but rather best conceptualized as “moral” issues. Mental illnesses become a social construction or myth that do not exist; they are, instead, “problems in living” (Szasz, 1972). This leads one to argue, then, that some officers are likely to classify reports coming from male rape victims suffering from mental health issues as “false.” Szasz argued that mental health issues are socially constructed to the extent that societies label them as “deviant.” Some officers may, therefore, classify some male rape victims with mental health issues as “deviant” or “abnormal,” which could increase the likelihood of some officers conceptualizing their allegations as “false.”
In the view of Erving Goffman (1963), mental health disorders are deeply discrediting. One effect of mental health disorders being stigmatized, as he suggested, is that it reduces the bearer from a whole person to one whom is incurably “tainted.” This construction of mental health as a person being tainted is socially damaging and can bring about repulsion against him or her. Therefore, through social relations and interactions with the police, male rape victims presenting a mental health issue may be deeply discredited by some police officers, and so their allegations are likely to be constructed as “false.” Men and women with mental health issues are more likely to be victims of sexual violence than are individuals in the general population (Khalifeh et al., 2015), which is problematic as devaluing these victims’ complaint in the criminal justice process may mean that some victims disengage with the police, as a stigmatized individual may be conceptualized as not quite human (Goffman, 1963). Some officers, then, may either consciously or subconsciously exclude male rape victims who present a mental health disorder to them through social interactions. Drawing on Goffman’s theoretical standpoint, they may become “blemished” victims who may be socially and culturally constructed as “deviant” or “abnormal.” Their stigma is so powerful that it can present barriers to getting equality and justice.
These victims’ identity, therefore, transform into a “spoiled identity” (Goffman, 1963). Resisting stigma can prove difficult (but not impossible) for these victims, involving the negotiation of discursive or structural contexts with which to negotiate an unspoiled social identity and to circulate unspoiled subject positions through social interactions with the police. Drawing on Foucault (1977), power operates to construct embodied subjectivities. While power is often in flux in police institutions, governed by knowledge regarding victims with mental health disorders, some officers are able to express social control against these victims. Constructing these victims as stigmatized (the subjects as “knowable”) produces the conditions for subjectivity (Foucault, 1978), and so some officers through face-to-face interactions with the male rape victims perform subjectivity. Butler (1993) demonstrated that subjectivity is “citational” and temporal, so it is susceptible to ongoing change; it is a performative and iterative concept. Through mental health discourse, constructing the “abnormal” is creating the “norm”; therefore, the “spoiled” identity can be negotiated through social interactions with the police. Social interactions between the police and male rape victims presenting mental health issues can be conceptualized as a discursive “practice through which we see and thereby come to know things” (Mason, 2002, p. 4) about the construction of mental health and male rape in police forces. However, Foucault (1977) stated that “the slightest departures from correct behaviour [are made] subject to punishment” (p. 178) by some police officers, meaning that male rape complainants who present mental health issues to certain officers may induce dubiousness and skepticism in police discourse against these victims due to the stigma embedded in mental health. Police officers learn to recognize what it means to embody discourses of mental health, shaping police interactions with male victims of rape and constructing their allegations as “false.”
Discussion
The aims of this article have been to critically examine police officers’ attitudes toward, and responses to, male rape victims in England. Moreover, how constructions of male rape shape the ways in which they think about and respond to male rape victims was also important to consider. Police cultures were critically examined to understand the dynamics and variability of such cultures and the impact of police cultures on male rape victims. In this article, I argued that cultures, discursive ideas, and knowledges create and shape how the police understand male rape and deal with male rape victims. Their discourses, constructions, and cultures are negotiated through social relations and interactions with male rape victims. This means that their perceptions and views of male rape are never fixed, but rather always in constant negotiation with, for instance, other officers and with interactions with male (and female) rape victims to make sense of male rape. It is through discourse about sexual violence, gender and sexuality that the police come to learn about and understand male rape, which in turn influences and shapes the ways in which they think about and respond to male rape victims in practice. To give some level of understanding of male sexual victimization, the policing of it and the discourses that surround male rape, I drew on sociological, cultural, and poststructural theories and conceptions using them to draw out the finer details of the analysis.
This work contributes theoretically and conceptually to discourses on gender and sexuality and supports the theoretical paradigms of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 2005) and heteronormativity (Jackson, 2005, 2007). It furthers our understanding of gender and sexuality conceptions and theories. This is because, before this research, there has been a lack of work drawing on gender and sexuality concepts and theoretical frameworks, such as hegemonic masculinity and heteronormativity, to make sense of male rape and of officers’ attitudes and responses toward male rape victims. By using these concepts in this project, I recognize the intricate and significant social constructions of masculinities and sexualities in state agencies. Notions of gender and sexuality influence and shape how state agencies consider and respond to male victims of rape in practice, such as the idea that men cannot be raped because they are expected to be powerful and strong is present across some officers’ perceptions. Foucault’s work on power and knowledge (1977), the conception of discourse (1972), and the “subject” and the body (1982) were heavily drawn on to shed some light on the ways in which male rape is understood and responded to. Officers, in a certain historical moment, draw on discourses to create knowledge about male rape. This leads them to carry out social practices (i.e., responses to male rape victims) that entail meaning with regard to male rape and sexual violence more broadly. Discourses influence and shape how they deal with male (and female) victims of rape since all social practices have a discursive element attached to them (Foucault, 1972). Officers’ discourses about male rape are culturally and historically specific, meaning that their discourses are neither determined nor fixed, but fluid, dynamic and changeable given the historical, cultural and social contexts that police officers situate. Thus, knowledges about male rape and the responses toward the victims of this crime are likely to alter through time and space.
I argued that power flows through police forces, and knowledge about male rape is linked to power relations; police agencies circulate and exercise power through discourse, as they are able to regulate male (and female) rape victims’ conduct in practice. For instance, when the victims report their crime, officers will rely on their discourse to respond to the victims in certain ways; some officers will construct the allegation of male rape as not “real” rape, whereas other officers will respond in a way that constructs the allegations as “real,” legitimate and authentic. Consequently, some male rape victims are likely to disengage with the police, making it difficult for the police to gather robust and reliable evidence, inducing secondary victimization, and increasing the “no-crime” rate, which could reflect badly on police practice. As Foucault (1977) argued, once circulated in the world, all knowledge has implications and effects. Knowledge, then, can restrain, control, and discipline male rape victims’ conduct, shaping their (dis)engagement with the police. I argue that there is a regime of truth in police agencies regarding male rape. That is, male rape is not a serious or “real” problematic issue or that men cannot be raped (among other male rape myths), so some officers perpetuate this regime of truth (i.e., perpetuating male rape myths) while others challenge it, depending on social, cultural, and ideological factors. Male rape victims continue to be subjected to police agencies’ power, dependence, and control; they become subjugated, voiceless, and “invisible.”
An important argument made is that the police officers and voluntary agency practitioners who interact with male victims of sexual assault and rape lack training to do so. I argued that the two types of professionals have had different forms of on-the-job training, and this training has ideological content. Although my suggestion for new training will also have its own ideological content, it is supported with academic literature and research evidence. For example, I suggest that policy and practice consider training as an important endeavor to help support male rape victims in practice because, as this research has found, it can work to construct and shape discourse around male rape in a more positive light, but this will only work if the training tackles the male rape myths outlined in this research. Consequently, one should see appropriate and professional attitudes and responses toward male (and female) rape victims. The training should highlight cultural myths that men cannot be raped or that “male rape is solely a homosexual issue” so that they can be dispelled. By doing so, this will help produce forthcoming discourses about male rape that stress to the police that all types of men can be raped, not just homosexual men. Therefore, the police need to be educated and aware of these issues, as this will help dispel gender and sexuality norms and values that may negatively shape the ways in which some officers serve male rape victims. Achieving gender equality is paramount when dealing with both female and male rape victims because male rape myths such as men cannot be raped can be eradicated once and for all.
There are some important limitations to the research methods used. For example, the officers would only give what they were prepared to reveal about their opinions and perceptions of male rape. However, these opinions and perceptions may be subjective, and so can shift across time, place and context. The findings cannot be generalized to all police officers, then. There are also issues of validity and reliability of the questionnaires. Given that only 45 questionnaires were gathered, the questionnaire data also cannot be generalized to all officers because of the openness of the questions that drew in open-ended, subjective, and bias responses. Regardless, this work has contributed to making rape against men an issue that has often been constructed as not a “real” issue in the police.