The act emphasizes the role of consent on the part of the victim, rather than the use of force, as the definitional element in rape. It also requires the defendant to be reckless of the presence of consent as a mental element in the crime. Thus, it is critical that judges remain neutral in such cases, as jurors may come to the trial with prejudices that disfavor the rape victim. Judges must acknowledge and set aside their own prejudices in such cases to adhere to the spirit, as well as the letter, of the law. By the attitude toward the complainant, by emphasizing lack of consent, and by protecting the complainant against cross-examination about prior sexual history, the judge sets the tone of the court. Despite the act, the female complainant still finds herself having to justify her lifestyle apart from the alleged rape. Undermined by cross-examination on her motives for bringing a charge, she frequently is further discredited by the judge's warnings about the dangers of uncorroborated testimony. The effectiveness of rape law enforcement depends ultimately upon official and lay attitudes toward the crime. Changes in attitudes toward rape victims and in the law and its interpretation are needed so that women no longer have to endanger themselves physically to satisfy the courts.