There is something disturbing about the way this rape case is being described in this BBC article:
Police have launched an investigation into the "horrific" rape of a 14-year-old girl at Glasgow's main bus station. The youngster was forced into an area of undergrowth at the Buchanan Street station and assaulted on Friday night.
Her attacker was accompanied by another man, who stayed with the girl's male friend while the incident took place. Det Insp Douglas Weir said: "This was a particularly horrifying ordeal for a teenage girl and it's vital we trace the individuals involved."
Strathclyde Police said the girl had been left "traumatised" by incident, which happened at about 2045 BST
What stands out to me in this case versus other rape cases against teenage girls I've read about is:
1) Her rape in particular was "horrific."
2) She was accompanied by a male friend.
3) She was raped before 9 pm.
4) She wasn't grabbed in an isolated or otherwise "dangerous" location.
5) Because an accomplice stayed with the victim's friend this was clearly a premeditated sex crime.
6) It is noted that this victim was traumatized.
These contrasts seem to highlight how other sexual assault victims aren't viewed as being blameless and their rapes are neither horrifying nor traumatic. What this does is fault the 2 men involved not for being involved in a sexual assault, but for where and how they committed this type of crime.
This goes back to the idea many people have that some sexual assault victims are not innocent victims because people can empathize with the perpetrator's rationalizations.
This gives us people who view certain rapes as a just punishment for arousing a man or boy. These people define themselves as anti-rape by denying that the sexual assault in question was real rape.