This demonstrates that there needs to be greater measures taken in regards to SH and SA because the present laws are obviously not bettering the situation. Superson also believes that the fundamental part of this problem is that the way that SH is defined by many Titles can differ from the way SH is defined by society, therefore, SH that does not physically demonstrate to be harmful is often not considered to be an offense in the eyes of the law, even though it is just as harmful in the eyes of the victim (442). This is a major problem because of the fact that the majority of SH incidents happen in a verbal manner or simply touching without causing noticeable physical harm. This can result in a lost case for the victim while the perpetrator is being excused for his wrong actions. .
Although many of us may believe that in a courtroom justice should be served, this is not always the case, especially when dealing with cases where it may be more difficult to demonstrate that a perpetrator is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. A black robe demonstrates a Judge's impartiality among a case. Superson, doubts that a male judge may truly be impartial when dealing with SH cases. She believes that males and females "perceive situations involving SH quite differently" (447). Due to the fact that courtroom positions are usually fulfilled by male figures, Superson believes that cases regarding SH are viewed through "male eyes" and that this causes a judge to feel sympathetic towards the male perpetrator. Thus creating a disadvantage for the female victim.
Pineau, like Superson, believes that even though some rape laws have been replaced with new ones, they have not shown to be effective in any way with regards to solving the problems that still persist in SA cases (452). She mentions that many times the only evidence that can prove that actus reas is nonconsensual is the demonstration of physical injury (452).
