What is rape?

ViveLaVie

I'm posting this here because I want the widest range of possible opinions.

Okay, here goes. I recently came across a thread on Reddit asking posters had they ever raped someone. Some of the responses made me re-evaluate my understanding of what rape is.

A few people seemed to think they had raped someone if they didn't have explicit verbal permission to continue but had done so anyway. The general consensus amongst female posters was that a man should always ask and never assume a woman wishes to progress things sexually even if she seems to respond/initiates. One man said that he is so concerned about accidentally raping a girl that he makes sure to pause before progressing to each sexual act and gain her express verbal consent to continue.

I am female myself and I found reading this quite
problematic. How can you have healthy sexual experiences if they are stunted/interrupted by this worry? I would be annoyed if a man kept stopping and saying ''do you wish to continue?''. It's a step away from drawing up a contract and getting the girl to sign it! I feel like people shouldn't have to worry about things like this. Maybe I am naive?

If a woman is responding favourably in a physical manner to sexual advances then it indicates consent to me and I think things get very problematic if a woman can say after that she didn't actually give verbal consent and so was effectively raped.

If I were in a situation where I didn't wish to continue I would say no and react unfavourably with my physical person. I find it surprising that some women don't say no if they don't want to have sex and that some men may feel like they are forcing women if they don't get verbal consent. Is that rape?

I am not for one second victim blaming. I think anyone that pins any blame on a rape victim is morally wrong to do so - but doesn't a victim have to actually indicate they don't want to have sex if things are heading that way? If she does then of course it is rape if this refusal is ignored. But can it be considered rape if the man doesn't receive any signal to indicate his attentions are unwanted and the woman has engaged in sexual behaviour with him?

Another thread on boards had me thinking about drunken sex and rape too. A significant number of people believed that when a man and a woman have drunken sex, the man has raped the woman because she was unable to consent. I found this line of thinking appalling.

I'm also wondering where the boundaries lie between assault and rape.

TL;DR Is it rape if a woman doesn't expressly say yes? Can a woman claim rape if she doesn't give a verbal/physical refusal?

Thoughts?

donvito99

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.




No really, stop it.

Praetorian Saighdiuir

Simply, it's a situation where someone forces a sexual act on another without their verbal or physical consent.

minidazzler

OK that post is TL;DR

But to me, rape is when a woman signals verbally or physically that she doesn't want to do anything.

If she just lies there hands by her side as I go for it, I'll stop because I wouldn't think she wants it.

A girl doesn't have to specifically say "I wanna have sex with you" but when you are kissing, getting the condom on and she's pulling you in that's not rape.

When she lies there and you do the business, that's far more questionable, while not necessarily rape, it could be "wrong" if she didn't want it but was too afraid to physically or verbally say it.

It comes down to mens rea, if a guy knows a girl didn't want it and continues it's rape, if he thought she did and she did nothing to change that thought it's not.

the_monkey

ViveLaVie wrote: »

I'm posting this here because I want the widest range of possible opinions.

Okay, here goes. I recently came across a thread on Reddit asking posters had they ever raped someone. Some of the responses made me re-evaluate my understanding of what rape is.

A few people seemed to think they had raped someone if they didn't have explicit verbal permission to continue but had done so anyway. The general consensus amongst female posters was that a man should always ask and never assume a woman wishes to progress things sexually even if she seems to respond/initiates. One man said that he is so concerned about accidentally raping a girl that he makes sure to pause before progressing to each sexual act and gain her express verbal consent to continue.

I am female myself and I found reading this quite
problematic. How can you have healthy sexual experiences if they are stunted/interrupted by this worry? I would be annoyed if a man kept stopping and saying ''do you wish to continue?''. It's a step away from drawing up a contract and getting the girl to sign it! I feel like people shouldn't have to worry about things like this. Maybe I am naive?

If a woman is responding favourably in a physical manner to sexual advances then it indicates consent to me and I think things get very problematic if a woman can say after that she didn't actually give verbal consent and so was effectively raped.

If I were in a situation where I didn't wish to continue I would say no and react unfavourably with my physical person. I find it surprising that some women don't say no if they don't want to have sex and that some men may feel like they are forcing women if they don't get verbal consent. Is that rape?

I am not for one second victim blaming. I think anyone that pins any blame on a rape victim is morally wrong to do so - but doesn't a victim have to actually indicate they don't want to have sex if things are heading that way? If she does then of course it is rape if this refusal is ignored. But can it be considered rape if the man doesn't receive any signal to indicate his attentions are unwanted and the woman has engaged in sexual behaviour with him?

Another thread on boards had me thinking about drunken sex and rape too. A significant number of people believed that when a man and a woman have drunken sex, the man has raped the woman because she was unable to consent. I found this line of thinking appalling.

I'm also wondering where the boundaries lie between assault and rape.

Thoughts?

http://t.qkme.me/35ks4y.jpg

Strawberry Fields

man commits rape if—

(a) he has unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman who at the time of the intercourse does not consent to it, and

(b) at that time he knows that she does not consent to the intercourse or he is reckless as to whether she does or does not consent to it,

and references to rape in this Act and any other enactment shall be construed accordingly.

(2) It is hereby declared that if at a trial for a rape offence the jury has to consider whether a man believed that a woman was consenting to sexual intercourse, the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for such a belief is a matter to which the jury is to have regard, in conjunction with any other relevant matters, in considering whether he so believed.

charlemont

It takes two to tango, And if one person doesn't want to dance well then that's rape..

BUBBLE WRAP

the_monkey wrote: »

http://t.qkme.me/35ks4y.jpg

http://www.smosh.com/sites/default/files/bloguploads/ancient-aliens-th_0.jpg

Perhaps!?

minidazzler

charlemont wrote: »

It takes two to tango, And if one person doesn't want to dance well then that's rape..

The problem comes into it when you don't know if that other person wants to dance. Which is why the law does actually explicitly have a clause for the guilty mind.

For me, if it's unclear I'll pause and say it.

Pottler

It's rape if there isn't a method statement and a risk asessment. Apparently.

Oat23

Ireland 1-6 Germany

minidazzler

Oh, one more thing from me on it, if a girl consents to sex saying put a condom on and a guy doesn't strap up, that's at very least sexual assault to me, but more probably rape. She didn't consent to non-protected sex.

Indo404

Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse, which is initiated by one or more persons against another person without that person's consent. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority or with a person who is incapable of valid consent, such as a person who is unconscious or incapacitated.[1][2][3][4] The term is most often defined in criminal law.[2][4] Wiki

Peregrine

.

Stheno

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Another thread on boards had me thinking about drunken sex and rape too. A significant number of people believed that when a man and a woman have drunken sex, the man has raped the woman because she was unable to consent. I found this line of thinking appalling.

Why? Do you think it's ok for a guy who is drunk to go ahead and have sex with a drunk woman who may not be aware of what is going on?

minidazzler

Stheno wrote: »

Why? Do you think it's ok for a guy who is drunk to go ahead and have sex with a drunk woman who may not be aware of what is going on?

If he's as drunk as her and doesn't know what's going on, they are pulling at each others clothing or whatever, it's not rape.

She's passed out or unable to move. That's rape.

ViveLaVie

Stheno wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Another thread on boards had me thinking about drunken sex and rape too. A significant number of people believed that when a man and a woman have drunken sex, the man has raped the woman because she was unable to consent. I found this line of thinking appalling.

Why? Do you think it's ok for a guy who is drunk to go ahead and have sex with a drunk woman who may not be aware of what is going on?

The man would also be drunk in this scenario. I don't believe the man should be made to bear full responsibility for his drunken actions if a woman is not.

Dangerous Man

donvito99 wrote: »

Baby don't hurt me, don't hurt me, no more.




No really, stop it.

I just came in to post the above but was beaten to it. So I thanked the post. You can get back to your stupid fucking thread that's been done to death a million times already...

THINLY VEILED.

mauzo

Rape is penetration or a sexual act that hasnt been consented to by a man or a woman.

Just because you're not saying no, doesnt mean you're saying yes.

TheBoss!

Rape to me is when someone is:

Sexually penetrated against their expressed wishes or ..
Sexually penetrated in a state where it would be impossible to give or express consent.

ViveLaVie

mauzo wrote: »

Rape is penetration or a sexual act that hasnt been consented to by a man or a woman.

Just because you're not saying no, doesnt mean you're saying yes.

This is what I find problematic. Surely there is a responsibility to indicate you don't want to continue? In my scenario, two people are engaging in sexual behaviour and the man progresses it but the woman says nothing to stop him and doesn't seem to react unfavourably. How is he to know she doesn't want to??

3ndahalfof6

the word rape dose not allow it self to the female persuasion alone, many men and young boys have been raped, while rape is the term used, completely destroying a person forcing them to do any one thing that they do not want to do and are forced to do (in a sexual sense) is murder,(for that person)

while some people might be able to cope with it, others will be driven to extremes, killing themselves or recreating their situation, putting them in the power position,

there is nothing nice about it, it happens and will keep happening, I do think there is no answer to your question, if I could give an answer or some advice, it would be eyes opened wide.

stop animal cruelty

minidazzler wrote: »

If he's as drunk as her and doesn't know what's going on, they are pulling at each others clothing or whatever, it's not rape.

She's passed out or unable to move. That's rape.

That is a fair point.

usernamegoes

4.—(1) In this Act “rape under section 4 ” means a sexual assault that includes—

(a) penetration (however slight) of the anus or mouth by the penis, or

(b) penetration (however slight) of the vagina by any object held or manipulated by another person.

(2) A person guilty of rape under section 4 shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for life.

(3) Rape under section 4 shall be a felony.

Stheno

stop animal cruelty wrote: »

That is a fair point.

and one the OP seems to be ignoring

GalwayGuy2

Oh, one more thing from me on it, if a girl consents to sex saying put a condom on and a guy doesn't strap up, that's at very least sexual assault to me, but more probably rape. She didn't consent to non-protected sex

Agree, but what about the cases where a woman pretends to be on the pill, or other form of contraceptive, would that be the woman guilty of sexual assault or rape?

Stheno

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Agree, but what about the cases where a woman pretends to be on the pill, or other form of contraceptive, would that be the woman guilty of sexual assault or rape?

Deception at the very least, and if I understand it correctly and the man then gets an STI, assault

DEFTLEFTHAND

ViveLaVie wrote: »

This is what I find problematic. Surely there is a responsibility to indicate you don't want to continue? In my scenario, two people are engaging in sexual behaviour and the man progresses it but the woman says nothing to stop him and doesn't seem to react unfavourably. How is he to know she doesn't want to??

It can be a bit of a grey area in the legal sense. There is often times though that I'd imagine the woman or man even fails to resist out of fear.

ViveLaVie

Stheno wrote: »

stop animal cruelty wrote: »

That is a fair point.

and one the OP seems to be ignoring

Apologies, what am I ignoring? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

up for anything

ViveLaVie wrote: »

The man would also be drunk in this scenario. I don't believe the man should be made to bear full responsibility for his drunken actions if a woman is not.

How is a court supposed to assess levels of drunkenness?

ViveLaVie wrote: »

This is what I find problematic. Surely there is a responsibility to indicate you don't want to continue? In my scenario, two people are engaging in sexual behaviour and the man progresses it but the woman says nothing to stop him and doesn't seem to react unfavourably. How is he to know she doesn't want to??

Perhaps the fact that he has to hold a knife at her throat?

In many rapes the person being raped doesn't indicate unwillingness or say an outright no because they are in fear of the rapist and think that by staying quiet they have a better chance of living after the rape. Does that mean that they haven't been raped because they didn't say either verbally or physically? I don't think so.

Stheno

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Apologies, what am I ignoring? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

The fact that if a woman is too drunk to consent, and a man goes ahead it's rape.

xxmeabhxx

I don't think consent has to be verbal. If a woman is doesn't say anything to suggest she doesn't want to have sex and reacts favourably to advances then that is not rape. In the case of drunken sex, if they're both as drunk as each other, then no rape has taken place, if one is less drunk and the other is passed out or close to it, then that's rape.

ViveLaVie

up for anything wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

The man would also be drunk in this scenario. I don't believe the man should be made to bear full responsibility for his drunken actions if a woman is not.

How is a court supposed to assess levels of drunkenness?

ViveLaVie wrote: »

This is what I find problematic. Surely there is a responsibility to indicate you don't want to continue? In my scenario, two people are engaging in sexual behaviour and the man progresses it but the woman says nothing to stop him and doesn't seem to react unfavourably. How is he to know she doesn't want to??

Perhaps the fact that he has to hold a knife at her throat?

In many rapes the person being raped doesn't indicate unwillingness or say an outright no because they are in fear of the rapist and think that by staying quiet they have a better chance of living after the rape. Does that mean that they haven't been raped because they didn't say either verbally or physically? I don't think so.

How then can a court assess the woman is too drunk to consent but the man isn't?

Sorry but in my very SPECIFIC scenario I said that the woman is happily engaging in sexual behaviour with the man and he progresses it. There is no knife and no physical coercion. He simply starts to initiate penetrative sex. The woman thus far has been happily engaging. She does not say no and doesn't struggle but after claims rape. THIS is what I am struggling.to comprehend, not a situation that is threatening.

Chuck Stone

If you're going to engage in sexual acts with another person then just be sure that they are sure they want to too; if there is any doubt whatsoever then don't do it.

This is not complicated stuff.

ViveLaVie

Stheno wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Apologies, what am I ignoring? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

The fact that if a woman is too drunk to consent, and a man goes ahead it's rape.

I replied to this already. Perhaps you didn't read it? I said if a man is as equally drunk as a woman and they have sex happily then how has a woman been raped? How can a man be held accountable for his actions if the woman isn't?

3ndahalfof6

Stheno wrote: »

The fact that if a woman is too drunk to consent, and a man goes ahead it's rape.

While I agree with your post, if they are both pissed it might be the end result of the conversation they were having most of the night,

pissed people are pissed no rational, they only remember the good parts of the conversation.

Stheno

ViveLaVie wrote: »

I replied to this already. Perhaps you didn't read it? I said if a man is as equally drunk as a woman and they have sex happily then how has a woman been raped? How can a man be held accountable for his actions if the woman isn't?

You didn't, my scenario is that the woman is too drunk to consent, and the man takes no notice?

ViveLaVie

Tayla wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Sorry but in my very SPECIFIC scenario I said that the woman is happily engaging in sexual behaviour with the man and he progresses it. There is no knife and no physical coercion. He simply starts to initiate penetrative sex. The woman thus far has been happily engaging. She does not say no and doesn't struggle but after claims rape. THIS is what I am struggling.to comprehend, not a situation that is threatening.

Well in this specific situation does she believe she was raped or is she just making it up?

Yeah she believes so. This is what I find problematic because she never communicated that sex wasn't wanted and he believed she did want it.

GalwayGuy2

In many rapes the person being raped doesn't indicate unwillingness or say an outright no because they are in fear of the rapist and think that by staying quiet they have a better chance of living after the rape. Does that mean that they haven't been raped because they didn't say either verbally or physically? I don't think so.

The person you're replying to is more talking about a woman not saying she does not want to have sex because she is physically intimidated by the male.

Lingua Franca

...

ViveLaVie

Stheno wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

I replied to this already. Perhaps you didn't read it? I said if a man is as equally drunk as a woman and they have sex happily then how has a woman been raped? How can a man be held accountable for his actions if the woman isn't?

You didn't, my scenario is that the woman is too drunk to consent, and the man takes no notice?

Well if the man knows she doesn't want sex or is too drunk to consent and isn't too drunk himself then yes that is rape, of course.

What I referred to in the OP though is the belief that some people hold that a man has raped a woman if they are both drunk even if they both consent at the time. Their argument is that the woman is too drunk to consent however the man is also in the same state. How can he be held accountable when she is not?

Stheno

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Well if the man knows she doesn't want sex or is.too,drunk to consent and isn't too drunk himself then yes that is rape, of course.

What I referred to in the OP though is the belief that some people hold that a man has raped a woman if they are both drunk even if they both consent at the time. Their argument is that the woman is too drunk to consent however the man is also in the same state. How can he be held accountable when she is not?

In fairness most men in that state of drunkeness wouldn't be able to get it up?

up for anything

ViveLaVie wrote: »

How then can a court assess the woman is too drunk to consent but the man isn't?

Sorry but in my very SPECIFIC scenario I said that the woman is happily engaging in sexual behaviour with the man and he progresses it. There is no knife and no physical coercion. He simply starts to initiate penetrative sex. The woman thus far has been happily engaging. She does not say no and doesn't struggle but after claims rape. THIS is what I am struggling.to comprehend, not a situation that is threatening.

To answer that first question, perhaps they rely on witness statements - if the woman is practically comatose but the man is just very drunk but able to support her as they leave wherever they have been for wherever the sex is going to take place that could be an assessment of their levels of drunkenness. I'm sure every case is different.

As to the second SPECIFIC scenario, how many rapes are reported to have taken place in this way and how many actually get prosecuted to a successful conclusion for you to ask this question? In the real world I would imagine that there are few like this but not many, because to cry rape like that takes a very nasty person. How many ordinary people do you think would put themselves through the ordeal of a rape exam and trial just because they regretted a drunken act of sex?

ViveLaVie

Lingua Franca wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

This is what I find problematic. Surely there is a responsibility to indicate you don't want to continue? In my scenario, two people are engaging in sexual behaviour and the man progresses it but the woman says nothing to stop him and doesn't seem to react unfavourably. How is he to know she doesn't want to??

Well. Let me give a scenario.

A young woman is intimidated by what a man says. He has sex with her.

She let him do it for fear of her life, but didn't tell him "I'm worried you might beat or kill me if I refuse."

What was the case in this scenario, rape or not? Who was responsible for obtaining/giving consent?

Yes I believe that is rape, absolutely. She was intimidated.

Maybe I am not being clear but I am talking about a very specific situation. A girl and a boy are kissing, touching, removing clothes and engaging in oral sex. This is all consensual. She is happy to do this and so is he. He believes sex is the next step and initiates penetration. He has done nothing to intimidate her or make her feel like she has no choice. They are kissing and touching when penetration occurs. At this point the girl does nothing and says nothing. The boy thinks she likes it. Has she been raped?

stop animal cruelty

Stheno wrote: »

and one the OP seems to be ignoring

l don't have the need & l don't have to comment for every post l read thank you very much!

Stheno

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Yes I believe that is rape, absolutely. She was intimidated and he basically kidnapped her.

Maybe I am not being clear but I am talking about a very specific situation. A girl and a boy are kissing, touching, removing clothes and engaging in oral sex. This is all consensual. She is happy to do this and so is he. He believes sex is the next step and initiates penetration. He has done nothing to intimidate her or make her feel like she has no choice. They are kissing and touching when penetration occurs. At this point the girl does nothing and says nothing. The boy thinks she likes it. Has she been raped?

Would it really be that difficult for the boy to ask if the girl would like to have sex?

ghostchant

Stheno wrote: »

In fairness most men in that state of drunkeness wouldn't be able to get it up?

You make it sound like 'getting it up' is an entirely voluntary process. I certainly wouldn't consider it any sort of proof that the guy wasn't that drunk. And even if he couldn't and they just decided to use their hands, that would still fall under the banner of rape if we ignore the mutual intoxication but still focus on the lack of consent.

TheBoss!

Stheno wrote: »

In fairness most men in that state of drunkeness wouldn't be able to get it up?

Might be true of some men but some have no trouble in that regard, as was clearly the case with the recent English woman who ended up getting jailed for lying about being raped:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056758411

Stheno

stop animal cruelty wrote: »

l don't have the need & l don't have to comment for every post l read thank you very much!

Wasn't replying to you there?

ghostchant wrote: »

You make it sound like 'getting it up' is an entirely voluntary process. I certainly wouldn't consider it any sort of proof that the guy wasn't that drunk. And even if he couldn't and they just decided to use their hands, that would still fall under the banner of rape if we ignore the mutual intoxication but still focus on the lack of consent.

True I was being limited thinking of penetration

TheBoss! wrote: »

Might be true of some men but some have no trouble, as was the case with the recent English woman, who was jailed for lying about being raped:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=80902783

Hard to quantify as an average

I can't see most men wanting to go ahead and have sex with someone who is comatose from drink though.

If there is anything that boils my blood it's false rape allegations, but there is a line that should not be crossed.

Be sure you both want to and go ahead.

Sofiztikated

I only got through page one of the replies, but women are quite capable of rape, as well.

It's not an act that is only limited to the male of the species.

say_who_now?

Stheno wrote: »

ViveLaVie wrote: »

Another thread on boards had me thinking about drunken sex and rape too. A significant number of people believed that when a man and a woman have drunken sex, the man has raped the woman because she was unable to consent. I found this line of thinking appalling.

Why? Do you think it's ok for a guy who is drunk to go ahead and have sex with a drunk woman who may not be aware of what is going on?

I remember the thread the OP is talking about, and it was nothing even like a "significant" number, more like five out of 80 or so contributors to the thread. That's why I wasn't going to bother contributing to this one as I can see it already taking the same circular argument nit picking direction the last one did.