But it -is- very easy. Let's turn the scenario on its head:
Person B has consensual sex with person A. It turns out to be disappointing and she doesn't enjoy it and does feel let down and angry with the person she had consensual sex with.
Is that rape?
Because if it -isn't- rape, then you have a de facto case for saying that there is no after-the-fact rule with regards to rape. If someone says no, they mean no and regardless of how they feel about it afterwards, it fits the definition of rape.
However, it would be very difficult to bring charges in that case. Not least because the girl herself wouldn't press charges in all likelihood.
It makes sense, indeed. I was rather too caught up in the reaction A had afterwards and judging it more on that rather than consent which is entirely wrong after all.
The study was released this summer and published in November, most of the people in my country find it is justified even if not given consent. So that clearly affected my view.
Thats the difference with members of the public. Woolly thinking and they arent likely to know what the law is anyway. No dount some wuld answer the same in the UK, but they would be wrong.
It's the law that decides whether something is rape or not. Ot requires consent or at least the reasonable belief that it has been given.
The study was released this summer and published in November, most of the people in my country find it is justified even if not given consent. So that clearly affected my view.
Rape culture means some people are prepared say that some clear cut cases of rape are justified, unshock.
Rape culture means some people are prepared say that some clear cut cases of rape are justified, unshock.
The male that dominates the woman is probably still the most popular view even today, especially in countries that don't have access to sexual education.
Also, no...I get that she could have defended herself, he, whoever. But it turns out they didn't, as most people probably wouldn't get away. But I see now that you're the type who strictly puts the blame on the person: "she got violently raped. But meh she could have defended herself so who cares."
Lol, not yelling. Sorry.
I'm the type who is trying to understand both sides and get more informed on such aspects, not blaming or trying to come as I'm defending anyone.
If she enjoyed it she was sufficiently aroused and lubricated not to feel a lot of pain (unless that's her thing!), which means, physiologically speaking, her body liked it, yes, she enjoyed it! It's still rape though, she just happened to like it? Kind of like how girls like it rough and all that. It's a bit messed up tbh, I think women are a bit messed up tbh
no - forcing someone to have have sex with them despite them not wanting to is messed up.
Person B does not allow Person A to leave, which escalates into Person B physically restraining Person A.
Person B begins to grope and then initiates sex with Person A. Person A does fight back and tell Person B to stop. This goes on for a while.
Near the end of the act, Person A realizes they're enjoying some aspect of what is happening. Assume it's unknown to Person A exactly what they're feeling as it is happening, and feel free to conjecture on it.
At the end of the act, Person A and Person B make up and remain together.
Person A doesn't suffer through the feelings of betrayal of their trust, even though they did intend to end the relationship and did mean it when they asked Person B to stop. Even though Person B used physical coercion that Person A objected to at the moment that it happened--holding them down, pulling them by their hair, biting, face slapping--Person A looks back on the act specifically (that is to say, Person A is looking at this specific event and not just at the acts if they were to happen between two consenting adults) and feels aroused. Person A doesn't feel anger toward Person B for it." (this is a hypothetical situation taken from another site)
-> one of the replies: "Both any physical response that would suggest enjoyment and any feeling of attachment can all happen with sex itself due to over flow of hormones and oxytocin, the bonding hormone. This is how many kidnapper rapists trap their victims and confuse them. The person may not feel anger or anything towards their rapist if they had a prior relationship. That combined with the hormone overflows can cause a false sense of attachment."
Person B does not allow Person A to leave, which escalates into Person B physically restraining Person A.
Person B begins to grope and then initiates sex with Person A. Person A does fight back and tell Person B to stop. This goes on for a while.
Near the end of the act, Person A realizes they're enjoying some aspect of what is happening. Assume it's unknown to Person A exactly what they're feeling as it is happening, and feel free to conjecture on it.
At the end of the act, Person A and Person B make up and remain together.
Person A doesn't suffer through the feelings of betrayal of their trust, even though they did intend to end the relationship and did mean it when they asked Person B to stop. Even though Person B used physical coercion that Person A objected to at the moment that it happened--holding them down, pulling them by their hair, biting, face slapping--Person A looks back on the act specifically (that is to say, Person A is looking at this specific event and not just at the acts if they were to happen between two consenting adults) and feels aroused. Person A doesn't feel anger toward Person B for it." (this is a hypothetical situation taken from another site)
-> one of the replies: "Both any physical response that would suggest enjoyment and any feeling of attachment can all happen with sex itself due to over flow of hormones and oxytocin, the bonding hormone. This is how many kidnapper rapists trap their victims and confuse them. The person may not feel anger or anything towards their rapist if they had a prior relationship. That combined with the hormone overflows can cause a false sense of attachment."
Would you consider this rape? Why/why not?
I would certainly say that the intent to rape was there and that for at least part of the act, it should be deemed rape.
Yeah, but if person A considers atm it's not rape? Does it change anything?
Well strictly speaking the decision regarding proceeding with a rape allegation is that of the individual in question. If person B considered the dominance to have outweighed the lack of consent then as much as i may consider A to be an inferior form of life, there's no obligation on you to have the guy prosecuted.
Ultimately there are girls out there who want a master/slave relationship or want it incredibly rough (i had a girl tell me that if i could not make her cry then it was not rough enough) and if you are content to be with a man who does not believe consent is important then that is your decision as an individual.
The study was released this summer and published in November, most of the people in my country find it is justified even if not given consent. So that clearly affected my view.
The results are strange. Why Netherlands is so different from Belgium and Slovenia from Croatia? It makes no sense. It seems that there are some loopholes in the methodology.
The results are strange. Why Netherlands is so different from Belgium and Slovenia from Croatia? It makes no sense. It seems that there are some loopholes in the methodology.
The real question here is why would A forgive and marry this person that is quite clearly a rapist? Sounds like clear control and abuse from B's side. A needs help. I agree with a previous poster, why does OP's question even have to be asked?
While i agree that person B is a rapist i tend to disagree with the view that there is any abuse or control that is not warranted here. As much as feminists and the like may not like it, there are women that enjoy being submissive and giving their partner control. Now in cases like this i would say that it is wrong for the state to intrude on what individual A has decided was okay behaviour even if i agree person B is an ass.
Kind of like how a lot of people don't feel that sex with a drunk girl is wrong even though it technically may be. Ultimately, that is for the individuals in question to decide.