Rape Shield Laws

Rape Shield Laws are implemented to limit a defendant's ability to cross examine rape complainants about their past sexual behavior. The term also refers to a law that prohibits the publication of the identity of an alleged rape victim. This phenomenon has brought about "rape shield laws," by which special rights appear to be granted to women. This might not be so bad if we know for certain that 100 per cent of women are honest. Is this, however, a realistic expectation? Although the originators of rape shield laws may have had the best of intentions, women are often predetermined to not have the criminal or dishonesty gene under this system. Is this a realistic, reasonable and just assumption? Is it fair to women who are true victims of rape and is it in accordance with our American way of justice? Under rape shield laws, men are usually considered guilty by reason of gender, and evidence pointing to their innocence is often not even allowed into the courtroom. Men's rights are subsequently removed and rendered null and void. According to local statistics, approximately 45% of rape cases are false rape cases. Therefore, women are falsely accusing men of rape in the court of law. Although humans are flawed beings, is this action justified? Shouldn't this statistic imply that in the case of rape, we need to implement more concrete legislation ?