Your thinking is most confused.

Do you think naming would send out a believable signal that it's all hunky dory now so no problems reporting, clearly not if you accept that reporting of such offences would decline.

I have made perfectly clear my position - I quote

"I'm not saying that anonymity should be removed at the moment"

"The "fact" that publicity does/would prevent victims of sexual coming forward - A "fact" that most, including myself, accept."

Do you think naming would send out a believable signal that it's all hunky dory now so no problems reporting, clearly not if you accept that reporting of such offences would decline.

This where you are getting muddled!

In an earlier post you responded to my comment, "That implies that there is still a level of shame attached to the victim in such cases which needs to be addressed" by stating -

"I don't think it sends out any such indication of the type you are suggesting, it's simply a recognition of fact"

You have pointedly not replied to the question I posed, "If it's not a perceived sense of shame by either the victim or society, or both, then what is the reason for this "fact"?"

It's all very well saying, as you have, that as a father and husband I should know why anonymity is important - I DO know why it is important at the moment, it is because of society's attitude towards the victim and the victims own self esteem conditioned by society's attitude.

You don't accept this as the reason apparently so perhaps you could answer the question as to why lack of anonymity for the victims in such cases does undoubtedly reduce the number of victims coming forward.