Furthermore, it has also been stated that during the criminal treatment, the rape victims are often prejudged and ill-treated.
The research of Fawcett Society (2007) stated that in the UK, at least 47,000 adult females are raped every year and according to public approach towards female rape victims, 34% of public consider that the victims are partially or completely liable for being raped as they behaved in flirtatious manner.
In a society, it is usually accepted that public have a tendency to perceive victim of rape in somewhat negative manner. People basically observe world as just a place where misfortune happens only to those who earn them. This statement reflects that in several rape circumstances, the incidence is described by considering the situation where victim should have done something in order to evade being victimised. Several researchers have identified that in rape case, victims are regarded as sole initiator of their victimisation (Hart & et. al., 2007). According to Wolfgang (1958), victims’ direct and instantaneous action often leads to misfortune. In rape based action, several authors disputed that victim’s characteristic matter more in comparison to their activities. According to Frederick (1987), factors such as victim’s class, background, image of decency and physical appeal have certain impact on crime liability. Workman & Freeburg (1999) also stated that female victim’s physical attractiveness, sexual appetites, degree of intemperance and dress pattern can influence negative ascription in female victimisation. Belknap (1996) noted that the institutional beliefs in gender role stereotyping influence the rape case proceedings in present century.
Literally, a woman who appealed to be a victim of rape is treated with doubt.