sexual sanctity as her husband’s property and his alone hence once she has been raped that sanctity would have been breached or it could be a case of women thinking that it is in the best interests of both husband and wife not to remain with each other after the woman has been raped is a subject of further analysis that can only be substantiated through qualitative research. The level of education was not a factor in determining the response to whether a woman should remain with her rapist husband. Both the respondents with tertiary education and without thought that a woman should stay. A significantly higher number of both the tertiary and non-tertiary educated respondents also thought that a man should stay with his raped wife. Most persons under the age of 30 indicated that they would not stay with a rapist, whilst also a reasonably large percentage [25%] did not know whether they could stay with a rapist or not. The majority of the over 30s [60%] said they would stay with a rapist. Again this resonates with the shifting socialisation of the two age groups, with the slightly older people exercising higher “tolerance” or “acceptance”, while the younger people have become less tolerant of certain behaviour such as having a rapist for a husband or brother in law. Although the majority of the people in both age groups, [56%] of the under 30s and [66%] of those over 30 indicated that a man should remain with his wife after she has been raped, a significantly high number of persons under the age of 30 [28%] indicated that they did not know if they could stay with a rape victim. More people in the middle class agreed to stay with the rapist than in the working class. Significantly more middle class respondents [64%] also said they would stay with a raped partner than those from the working class [53%]. 4.1.8 Child Rape Significantly more men than women thought that when rape is perpetrated against a child it is not the child’s fault. However, it was perplexing to see that almost [45%] of women responded saying that they did not know whose fault it would be when a child is raped. This response reveals the attitudes of most women who fail to realise that when a child is raped, it is always the fault of the perpetrators, and frequently they will try and protect the perpetrators be it a relation or their spouse, or if it is a stranger they may try and force a marriage to legitimise the ‘illegal sex.’39 More men than women also said that they think if teenagers are raped it is likely to be their fault, but a significant number also said they do not know. This is not surprising given that it is mostly the men who engage teenagers in sex, either believing that the girls are of age or knowing that they are not of age, without qualms. These findings also explain why it is extremely difficult to enforce the law which prohibits statutory rape. For as long as society believes that a child who is a teenager can consent to sex, ignoring that whatever consent may be given is not full, well informed and well-reasoned consent, then we shall continue to have low reportage of statutory rape and high cases of victims of such rape marrying their rapists. In the responses to the survey question, it was clear that there is considerable confusion about who is a “minor.” The law has not helped to clarify this either as there is contradictions within the law. Under the Legal Age of Majority Act40 a minor is defined as a person under the age of 18 years. In the Children's Act, 41a child is described as a person under the age of sixteen years. In the Criminal Law Code, statutory rape is also defined as sexual intercourse, anal intercourse or any other sexual conduct 39 This reinforces the stereotype that any sex that a woman has outside marriage, with or without her consent is illegitimate but ceases to be so once the person she sleeps with has acquired the right to sleep with her through marriage. 40 Now part of the General Laws Amendment Act, 2005 (Act 6/2005) February 03, 2006. 41 Section 2 on Interpretations of the Children’s Act [Chapter 5:06] Acts 22/1971, 39/1973 (ss. 43 and 52), 43/1973 (s. 4), 18/1974, 44/1974 (s. 4), 26/1979, 15/1981 (s. 66), 29/1981 (s. 59), 15/1982;(s. 3), 11/1986 (s. 29), 24/1987 (s. 8), 2/1989 (s. 7), 20/1994(s. 3), 14/1995; 9/1997 (s. 10) , 22/2001 (s. 4), 23/2001, 14/2002 (s. 4); R.G.N. 327/1977; S.I. 689/1979.