Rape is now guilty before proven innocent.

To be fair no man was ever penetrated against their consent with a vagina

I didn't mean that. And I am not trivializing rape. So please don't think that.

To be fair no man was ever penetrated against their consent with a vagina

Actually this has happened. Men have participated in sexual intercourse against their will (men cannot always control getting an erection). These "made to penetrate" cases involving female perpetrators legally class as rape/sexual assault in the US and Canada, for example. According the the US CDC, some 5 million men in the US have been forced into sex by a female partner against their will [link].

EDIT: unless you mean 'literally penetrated by a vagina' (which would be impossible, I agree).

It's losing your family, all your friends, your career, and consequently your life.

Worse still, this is not something you can control. You cannot even tell yourself 'I'll be strong and this will be over one day' because you will not be hired.



So you've been accused of being raped? If not, your experience does not add to the 'argument'.

Regardless, there is no argument. What I'd prefer is not necessarily what you would prefer.



How about because of the fear of being accused of rape and never talk to any woman ever again?



As if people who have been falsely accused of rape do not experience the same thing.



The difference between being raped and being accused is that, with or without PTSD, you're losing your career if you're being accused, no matter what; if you're being raped, you may not.



Not only is their anonymity granted for people who accuse of other people of rape, but this also does not make being raped better.



You didn't respond to this this.



As if living through a court case does not follow you the rest of your life, both emotionally and practically.



There will always be people like you around, who would accuse of people 'thinking women are merely chattel' when you don't realise the fact that I'm not even straight and thus have no desire for any woman whatsoever.

'Feminists' like you just automatically assumed that people are anti-feminist or something when people merely disagree with you. For the last time, the question asked what I'd prefer. I answered, and if you cannot deal with the fact that not everybody feels the same way you do, maybe you should grow up. Or just stop responding telling me what I should prefer.

To be fair no man was ever penetrated against their consent with a vagina

O

Given the choice, would you prefer to be raped or accused of rape?
I think it's a fairly simple conclusion for most people - and it's worth noting that men can be victims as well as perpetrators.

I agree with the view that false allegations are absolutely destructive to a person's life but equally I think that has to be viewed on balance against the psychological damage and unequivocal violation of personal autonomy that rape represents.
At the end of the day this has to be viewed in context, the law isn't saying that you need a 'receipt of consent' or video evidence, or that you are 'guilty until proven innocent'; the point is that if you have any doubt as to whether someone is able to consent then you shouldn't be having sex with them and that responsibility rests with you. It's exactly the same principle as the informed consent required in Medicine; you don't need proof but you need to be certain of it before you proceed and if needs be, be able to justify that decision later. Frankly, any half reasonable person should be doing this already anyway...

Posted from TSR Mobile

have you ever had sex before?



I think it makes sense when the prosecution is susceptible to significant stress and trauma from the defendant.



yes, if you were too drunk to consent and she was in a position where she could make a rational decision. if she knew what she was doing, then yes, of course you can.



not necessarily. If, in the unlikely case you were falsely accused of rape, it would be very easy to prove your innocence; if it was after a night out, friends would have probably seen you, and would have been able to testify on how drunk one of you was. I think there's very few people in this country who would ever outright lie out of the blue that someone raped them. It's usually the result of an underlying problem or to get back for something else.

That's a rather silly and pointless question.

Women are severely affected by rape obviously. If a man is falsely accused, then he may lose his friends, family, job etc - even if the charges are later dropped.

I'm afraid that we disagree both on the relevance of the question and, I suspect, the answer.

At any rate the change in advice increases neither the likelihood of you being accused of rape nor the likelihood of you being convicted based on a false accusation - the only difference that it will make is to encourage the police/CPS to continue investigations further.

You are completely missing the point. Nobody should be convicted of anything if there isn't enough proof, particularly with a crime like rape. You're turning it into an emotional issue and being and somewhat manipulative.

A lot of sick and twisted women are gonna have fun with this...

Campaigners hail DPP's tough new rape guidelines as 'huge step forward'


Radical changes to the way sex offences are investigated have been hailed as a “huge step forward” by campaigners.

New guidance to be issued to all police forces and prosecutors will require rape suspects to convince the authorities that a woman consented to sex.
Police and prosecutors must now put a greater burden of responsibility on rape suspects to demonstrate how the complainant had consented “with full capacity and freedom to do so”, according to the new guidance.
Rape victims should no longer be “blamed” by society if they are too drunk to consent to sex, or if they simply freeze and say nothing, Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said.
“For too long society has blamed rape victims for confusing the issue of consent - by drinking or dressing provocatively for example - but it is not they who are confused, it is society itself and we must challenge that,” Mrs Saunders told the the first National Crown Prosecution Service/Police Conference on Rape Investigations and Prosecutions in London.
“Consent to sexual activity is not a grey area - in law it is clearly defined and must be given fully and freely.
“It is not a crime to drink, but it is a crime for a rapist to target someone who is no longer capable of consenting to sex through drink,” Mrs Saunders continued.
“We want police and prosecutors to make sure they ask in every case where consent is the issue - how did the suspect know the complainant was saying yes and doing so freely and knowingly?”
The ability to consent to sex should also be questioned where the complainant has mental health problems, learning difficulties or was asleep or unconscious at the time of the alleged attack, Mrs Saunders said.
Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt, the Association of Chief Police Officers lead on adult sex offences, said: “As report after report has shown, there is still far too much variation in the way that forces move a complaint of rape through the system.
“Reporting of sexual offences is up 22 per cent in the latest statistics because of increased confidence in our service and recording but we have further to go.
“We need to tackle the iconic issues of 'no further action' and, particularly, 'no crimes' head on and reduce inconsistencies in our processes so that we can send a clear and unequivocal message to victims about how they will be treated.”
Around 85,000 women per year are victims of rape in the UK; some 90 per cent of these women know the perpetrator.




http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/campaigners-hail-dpps-tough-new-rape-guidelines-as-huge-step-forward-10009595.html

Be prepare to record all your sex with hidden camera guys, u gonna need it. Or get 4 witness to watch you having sex, that will work too.

There's no straight forward way to go about such a horrible case, but why is he guilty without proof? Imagine accusing an innocent man of something so vile.

For the hundredth time...The DPP is NOT advocating that anyone be convicted without proof, or presumed guilty until proven innocent for that matter - they lack the power to make a change like that.

All that has changed is that the police/CPS are now ADVISED to pursue an investigation if an accusation of rape is made and the defendant is unable to demonstrate a reasonable belief that the victim consented/was capable of consenting to sex.
To put it in context:

1) Officer: "Why did you believe X was consenting to sex?"

Defendant A: "She invited me back to her house, undressed and started kissing/undressing me and continued to make it clear that she was enjoying herself throughout/at no point indicated in any way that she wanted to stop."

Officer: "That's great, have a nice day."

2) Officer: "Why did you believe that X was consenting/able to consent to sex?"

Defendant B: "She kissed me earlier at the start of the party and she was really, really drunk but hey, she never said no!"

Officer: "I am arresting you on suspicion of rape, you do not have to say anything..."

Hope this helps!

Sorry darling.
I didnt exactly read every answer.