This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
Isn't it about time that attitudes changed towards rape?
The current law (in the UK and probably in most countries) defines rape in such a way that only men convicted of rape:
But imo, the law on rape is outdated and quite stupid. Anyone who has had sex or watched porn knows that women can take an active role in sex. It's not just men who do all the work. Women can do cowgirl, bouncing up and down on a man's rod. Hell, in the doggystyle position, instead of the man thrusting from behind, the woman can just rock forwards and backwards against his cervix smasher.
Additionally, it's well known that men can get unwanted erections. Hence it makes sense that they can be "raped" by women.
Since it's clear that women can take an active role in sex, why can't they also be convicted as rapists? Why can't the law be changed to accomodate women into it as being capable of committing rape? Why is it that only men that must bear the shameful and destructive title of "rapist"?
Many times I read of a man and woman who got drunk in a club and eventually had sex. Then many people (usually feminists) would claim only the woman was raped. I'm like "Wtf?" How can they come to such a retarded and dangerous opinion? Both the man and woman were drunk when it all happened. The woman may have taken an active role during the sex session (e.g. cowgirl). Does that mean the man was also raped? Or is drunken consent only considered irrelevant in the woman's favour just because she's a woman and therefore, the drunk man is automatically the rapist? Don't they know that encouraging the woman to report the incident as rape can cause unnecessary hurt if the man was innocent of rape?
Isn't it about time that attitudes towards rape changed globally? Isn't it about time that women were also known as rapists instead of men only?
I think the attachment of the "rapist" title to men only is quite sexist. Which begs the question. How come I haven't seen many protests in the name of feminism for women to also be convicted of rape? They have the time to protest against page 3 girls and girls freely choosing to wrestle half naked in jelly at Cambridge Uni. But they don't seem to have much time to protest against the inequality of only men being convicted of rape. Do feminists (generally) only want equality where it suits women afterall?
So what do y'all think? Should the law on rape stay the same? Or should women also be convicted of rape? And what are your reasons?
1-(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents
But imo, the law on rape is outdated and quite stupid. Anyone who has had sex or watched porn knows that women can take an active role in sex. It's not just men who do all the work. Women can do cowgirl, bouncing up and down on a man's rod. Hell, in the doggystyle position, instead of the man thrusting from behind, the woman can just rock forwards and backwards against his cervix smasher.
Additionally, it's well known that men can get unwanted erections. Hence it makes sense that they can be "raped" by women.
Since it's clear that women can take an active role in sex, why can't they also be convicted as rapists? Why can't the law be changed to accomodate women into it as being capable of committing rape? Why is it that only men that must bear the shameful and destructive title of "rapist"?
Many times I read of a man and woman who got drunk in a club and eventually had sex. Then many people (usually feminists) would claim only the woman was raped. I'm like "Wtf?" How can they come to such a retarded and dangerous opinion? Both the man and woman were drunk when it all happened. The woman may have taken an active role during the sex session (e.g. cowgirl). Does that mean the man was also raped? Or is drunken consent only considered irrelevant in the woman's favour just because she's a woman and therefore, the drunk man is automatically the rapist? Don't they know that encouraging the woman to report the incident as rape can cause unnecessary hurt if the man was innocent of rape?
Isn't it about time that attitudes towards rape changed globally? Isn't it about time that women were also known as rapists instead of men only?
I think the attachment of the "rapist" title to men only is quite sexist. Which begs the question. How come I haven't seen many protests in the name of feminism for women to also be convicted of rape? They have the time to protest against page 3 girls and girls freely choosing to wrestle half naked in jelly at Cambridge Uni. But they don't seem to have much time to protest against the inequality of only men being convicted of rape. Do feminists (generally) only want equality where it suits women afterall?
So what do y'all think? Should the law on rape stay the same? Or should women also be convicted of rape? And what are your reasons?
(edited 10 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Original post by Cable
I think the attachment of the "rapist" title to men only is quite sexist. Which begs the question.
I think the attachment of the "rapist" title to men only is quite sexist. Which begs the question.
There is a disturbing attitude among some people that rape is a male problem and that men need to be told not to rape. This is clearly offensive to men but also a counterproductive approach to the problem of how stop rape.
Men are not rapists. Rapists are rapists. If you want to stop rape then you need to speak out to people who are rapists rather than men in general.
Rape is treated by some people to be similar to crimes such as stealing, cheating and lying. Everybody does these things a bit. Everybody will steal if they think they can get away with it and still feel okay about themselves for doing it. The solution society uses to stop such menial criminal behavior is punishment and humiliation. And these solutions work well to stop crimes everybody commits.
The problem is that rape is not a crime everybody will commit. The typical approach rape is to treat it like cheating, lying or stealing. Assume that everybody will do it under the right circumstances i.e. assume all men are potential rapists. Prevent it using humiliation and punishment i.e. telling people how terrible it is to rape and how everybody will despise them and put them in prison.
We need to stop thinking of men as potential rapists and instead try to target rapists in an effort to stop victims of rape ever occurring. The line "tell men to not rape" is not only incredibly offensive but also remarkably stupid.
It's considered a male thing because it's women who tend to report it (because society wouldn't believe men), as there's the perception that "How could a little woman overpower a man"? I mean, from one of the few episodes of Desperate Housewives I've watched, if you've got the right drugs you can, although god knows why anyone would, but why would anyone rape, ever? Couldn't a woman also sexually assault another woman? But yes, the law should be changed because women could theoretically rape men, although the likelihood of her being physically strong enough to force them is lower. On another note, societies views towards women domestically abusing men needs to change as well, many men wouldn't hit a woman because that's how they were brought up. In films, if a male character slaps a female, he's a b******, if a female character slaps a male one, well, he probably deserves it, doesn't he? Um, no, actually, nobody should be hitting anyone. The whole "You go girl!" mentality around girls hitting guys being ok is just ridiculous. And yet it's all over the media so girls (including myself) grow up with this belief in the back of our heads that it's alright when it's really not. I could give a dozen examples off the top of my head, half of them from things being shown to children.
I don't want to think about this anymore, I'm going to bed.
I don't want to think about this anymore, I'm going to bed.
(edited 10 years ago)
Probably for the simple reason that most men would consent to sex, always, thus the action not be officially categorized as rape.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Cable
The current law (in the UK and probably in most countries) defines rape in such a way that only men [\b]convicted of rape:
Read it carefully. The law was actually changed partly so it can refer to anyone with a penis. That could be a transsexual woman (prior or not decided to have surgery) or someone who is intersex.
I'd like to know if use of a strap on penis makes it rape. Blurry line there...
But imo, the law on rape is outdated and quite stupid. Anyone who has had sex or watched porn knows that women can take an active role in sex. It's not just men who do all the work. Women can do cowgirl, bouncing up and down on a man's rod. Hell, in the doggystyle position, instead of the man thrusting from behind, the woman can just rock forwards and backwards against his cervix smasher.
Additionally, it's well known that men can get unwanted erections. Hence it makes sense that they can be "raped" by women.
Since it's clear that women can take an active role in sex, why can't they also be convicted as rapists? Why can't the law be changed to accomodate women into it as being capable of committing rape? Why is it that only men that must bear the shameful and destructive title of "rapist"?
Many times I read of a man and woman who got drunk in a club and eventually had sex. Then many people (usually feminists) would claim only the woman was raped. I'm like "Wtf?" How can they come to such a retarded and dangerous opinion? Both the man and woman were drunk when it all happened. The woman may have taken an active role during the sex session (e.g. cowgirl). Does that mean the man was also raped? Or is drunken consent only considered irrelevant in the woman's favour just because she's a woman and therefore, the drunk man is automatically the rapist? Don't they know that encouraging the woman to report the incident as rape can cause unnecessary hurt if the man was innocent of rape?
Isn't it about time that attitudes towards rape changed globally? Isn't it about time that women were also known as rapists instead of men only?
I think the attachment of the "rapist" title to men only is quite sexist. Which begs the question. How come I haven't seen many protests in the name of feminism for women to also be convicted of rape? They have the time to protest against page 3 girls and girls freely choosing to wrestle half naked in jelly at Cambridge Uni. But they don't seem to have much time to protest against the inequality of only men being convicted of rape. Do feminists (generally) only want equality where it suits women afterall?
It's
nism. Campaigning for men's rights and issues falls under egalitarianism and MRA. Not feminism. Which makes sense when you consider the literal meaning of a feminist. Of course, feminists do care but not because they are feminist, because they would be egalitarian (where you are simultaneously a feminist and a masculinist). Does that make sense, now?Yes I think the law should change. Women can rape men if we're using the common sense definition of forced sexual intercourse. I suppose the law is being cautious about where to draw the line between sexual assault and rape. But yeah, conviction shouldn't be restricted to only those with a penis to utilise.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Classical Liberal
There is a disturbing attitude among some people that rape is a male problem and that men need to be told not to rape. This is clearly offensive to men but also a counterproductive approach to the problem of how stop rape.
Men are not rapists. Rapists are rapists. If you want to stop rape then you need to speak out to people who are rapists rather than men in general.
Rape is treated by some people to be similar to crimes such as stealing, cheating and lying. Everybody does these things a bit. Everybody will steal if they think they can get away with it and still feel okay about themselves for doing it. The solution society uses to stop such menial criminal behavior is punishment and humiliation. And these solutions work well to stop crimes everybody commits.
The problem is that rape is not a crime everybody will commit. The typical approach rape is to treat it like cheating, lying or stealing. Assume that everybody will do it under the right circumstances i.e. assume all men are potential rapists. Prevent it using humiliation and punishment i.e. telling people how terrible it is to rape and how everybody will despise them and put them in prison.
We need to stop thinking of men as potential rapists and instead try to target rapists in an effort to stop victims of rape ever occurring. The line "tell men to not rape" is not only incredibly offensive but also remarkably stupid.
Men are not rapists. Rapists are rapists. If you want to stop rape then you need to speak out to people who are rapists rather than men in general.
Rape is treated by some people to be similar to crimes such as stealing, cheating and lying. Everybody does these things a bit. Everybody will steal if they think they can get away with it and still feel okay about themselves for doing it. The solution society uses to stop such menial criminal behavior is punishment and humiliation. And these solutions work well to stop crimes everybody commits.
The problem is that rape is not a crime everybody will commit. The typical approach rape is to treat it like cheating, lying or stealing. Assume that everybody will do it under the right circumstances i.e. assume all men are potential rapists. Prevent it using humiliation and punishment i.e. telling people how terrible it is to rape and how everybody will despise them and put them in prison.
We need to stop thinking of men as potential rapists and instead try to target rapists in an effort to stop victims of rape ever occurring. The line "tell men to not rape" is not only incredibly offensive but also remarkably stupid.
Looking at this literally - men have penises (almost all) and therefore since rape requires a penis, all men are potentially rapists (those with a penis).
But I see what you're trying to say. I don't agree however because I don't think it's as simple as 'rapists are rapists'. I think there are many 'normal' guys who are well-adjusted, happy, nonviolent people but in a particular context or via ignorance of what rape actually means will commit it on a girlfriend, girl they brought back etc. With the common saying 'when a girl says no she means yes' it's not very surprising. Guys are encouraged to keep pushing through the barriers girls are equally taught to put up against romantic and sexual advances. Rape is one step too far. I believe something alarming like 2/3 of rapists were known to the person they raped.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I cant imagine not wanting to have sex with a girl
Original post by blue n white army
I cant imagine not wanting to have sex with a girl
Not everyone's as desperate as you.
Original post by blue n white army
I cant imagine not wanting to have sex with a girl
So you're telling me SuBo couldn't rape you because you'd be well up for it?
Original post by Eljamaispa
Read it carefully. The law was actually changed partly so it can refer to anyone with a penis. That could be a transsexual woman (prior or not decided to have surgery) or someone who is intersex.
I'd like to know if use of a strap on penis makes it rape. Blurry line there...
It'snism. Campaigning for men's rights and issues falls under egalitarianism and MRA. Not feminism. Which makes sense when you consider the literal meaning of a feminist. Of course, feminists do care but not because they are feminist, because they would be egalitarian (where you are simultaneously a feminist and a masculinist). Does that make sense, now?
Yes I think the law should change. Women can rape men if we're using the common sense definition of forced sexual intercourse. I suppose the law is being cautious about where to draw the line between sexual assault and rape. But yeah, conviction shouldn't be restricted to only those with a penis to utilise.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I'd like to know if use of a strap on penis makes it rape. Blurry line there...
It's
nism. Campaigning for men's rights and issues falls under egalitarianism and MRA. Not feminism. Which makes sense when you consider the literal meaning of a feminist. Of course, feminists do care but not because they are feminist, because they would be egalitarian (where you are simultaneously a feminist and a masculinist). Does that make sense, now?Yes I think the law should change. Women can rape men if we're using the common sense definition of forced sexual intercourse. I suppose the law is being cautious about where to draw the line between sexual assault and rape. But yeah, conviction shouldn't be restricted to only those with a penis to utilise.
Posted from TSR Mobile
That'd be assault by penetration
Original post by snowyowl
So you're telling me SuBo couldn't rape you because you'd be well up for it?
She's a foxy lady!
I can see why there needs to be a change, but I don't think the situation is bad as it is made out to be. Women can be prosecuted for a virtually identical crime of serious sexual assault - the only reason it seems so unfair to men is because of the social stigma of the word 'rape'. It is not that the crime is any worse when it is rape rather than forcing someone to penetrate, but when the word 'rape' is used, people see it as more serious. The law needs to be very clear about what a particular crime is so in this case, rape refers to a very particular act. However, in popular discourse rape would be used to refer to a woman who forced a man to have sex with her, despite the legal terminology. Therefore I don't see a huge problem with the law as it stands, but I would support a changing of the legal definition to include forcing someone to penetrate.
Original post by tehforum
That'd be assault by penetration
Use of a strap on?
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Eljamaispa
I think there are many 'normal' guys who are well-adjusted, happy, nonviolent people but in a particular context or via ignorance of what rape actually means will commit it on a girlfriend, girl they brought back etc. With the common saying 'when a girl says no she means yes' it's not very surprising.
Boyfriends can be rapists you know. Most normal guys are not going to rape a girl if she really resists.
Original post by Eljamaispa
yeah
I agree with your point, BUT how many men would actually go to the police and tell them that a woman tied them up, 'played' with them so they got hard, then raped them in the cowgirl position or whatever? I doubt many would admit it ...
Anyway, currently, a woman would still be commiting an offense if she did that, it would jsut be sexual assault, not rape.
Anyway, currently, a woman would still be commiting an offense if she did that, it would jsut be sexual assault, not rape.
(edited 10 years ago)
One double standard I personally don't care for is the attitude towards unwanted sexual attention from the opposite sex.
If a group of middle aged women on a hen party go up to a random man and start groping his crotch too many people see it as "all just a bit of fun"
Imagine the reaction if a group of men crowded around a young girl and started feeling her up in such a way.
Having said that girls are too often subjected to men grabbing their arses as they walk in clubs.
With regards to rape, men in general are stronger than women. There is absolutely no chance that most women could pin me down and force me to have sex with them. Consequently the 'temptation' for want of a better word is not as great for a woman. Plus if a woman wants sex, she can pretty much get it without having to force somebody. Even if one man in a club refuses her, chances are the next one will be desperate.
If a group of middle aged women on a hen party go up to a random man and start groping his crotch too many people see it as "all just a bit of fun"
Imagine the reaction if a group of men crowded around a young girl and started feeling her up in such a way.
Having said that girls are too often subjected to men grabbing their arses as they walk in clubs.
With regards to rape, men in general are stronger than women. There is absolutely no chance that most women could pin me down and force me to have sex with them. Consequently the 'temptation' for want of a better word is not as great for a woman. Plus if a woman wants sex, she can pretty much get it without having to force somebody. Even if one man in a club refuses her, chances are the next one will be desperate.
Original post by Classical Liberal
Boyfriends can be rapists you know. Most normal guys are not going to rape a girl if she really resists.
Sure. But for the normal guys who you don't think would but end up doing so, campaigns should be targeted at them. And because you can't tell who they are because they're everyday guys you target the campaigns at all men.
Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 10 years ago)
Discretion in sentencing for rape and sexual assault means that a woman who subjects a man to unwanted sex would likely get just the same punishment as the reverse (provided the circumstances are the same), so I think the only real problem is the stigma of being labelled a 'rapist'.
Unfortunately the only real way to fix this would be to change the definition of rape to something along the lines of 'having sex with the complainant without their consent' which I don't think is entirely feasible for a few reasons:
etc etc.
So, for the time being I don't think it's feasible, although I will admit that rape is one of the least well understood crimes - people often think they know exactly what it entails when in fact they're miles off.
Unfortunately the only real way to fix this would be to change the definition of rape to something along the lines of 'having sex with the complainant without their consent' which I don't think is entirely feasible for a few reasons:
•
It's far easily to forensically prove that a particular man has had (unprotected) sex with someone than the reverse - there will likely be residual semen in the vagina, etc which can be analysed. By contrast, it'd be a lot easier to avoid that sort of forensic evidence if the woman is the perpetrator since you'd be having to get samples from the defendant, which presumably would be fought every step of the way
•
A lot of men would be unwilling to admit they'd had sex forced upon them due to the apparent social perception of such
•
The line between the bottom end of rape and the top end of sexual assault would become too blurred - for example, what if a woman coerced a man into performing oral sex on her? The reverse would be rape, but should that be too, seeing as there's not necessarily any penetration?
etc etc.
So, for the time being I don't think it's feasible, although I will admit that rape is one of the least well understood crimes - people often think they know exactly what it entails when in fact they're miles off.
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
