@panzade,
Quote:While Firefly, on the other hand, is holding out for a single definition of rape without any qualifiers.
Not exactly. There are many different types of situations in which rape occurs and the circumstances of these rapes differ considerably.
What is common to all of them is that the sexual contact has been made without the consent of one of the parties, it was non consensual sex. That is the one definition that is consistent throughout all the rape laws.
Hawkeye and Bill seem unable to come to grips with the term "consent". All their repetitive babbling, about confusing hypothetical scenarios which might occur, have really been attempts to subvert a reasonable discussion of the initial topic of rape.
The law defines rape, and juries determine whether it has occured.
Most reasonable, normally intelligent, male adults can tell the difference between a woman's free consent to engage in sexual activity ,or a specific sexual act, and her resistance or reluctance, to engage in such behaviors as judged by her verbal statements ("No", "Stop" "I don't want to"), and her actions (pushing, shoving, trying to get up or leave etc.).
I am sure that Bill and Hawkeye know the difference between being confronted by a panhandler asking for some change and a mugger who is demanding their money. When the panhandler asks for change, and it is refused, he is expected to walk away, and, if he doesn't, and persists, and
takes your money from you, he has become a mugger. The difference between who is considered a panhandler and a mugger is whether your money is freely given or taken without your consent.
The difference between rape and consensual sex is also whether something is freely given or taken without permission--in this case, entry to the woman's body. Has she freely allowed this entry, or was it against her will? This is not difficult to understand. And the laws pertaining to consent, do define it in terms of what a reasonable person understands to be the case. And all the rape laws revolve around the issue of consent--consent prior to the sexual act and for each specific sexual act. Consent, or the lack of it, is the one defining factor common to all rape laws.
The law excludes certain categories of individuals from being legally able to give consent--the mentally impaired, the severely emotionally disturbed, the cognitively impaired, those who are not fully conscious or aware of their surroundings, those who have been drugged by another person, those who are below the age of consent, etc. Sexual contact with such individuals is automatically legally regarded as rape. Obviously, those cases are irrelevant to our discussion. Only, Hawkeye, who believes children below the age of legal consent should be allowed to personally consent to sex with adults, seemed inclined to argue this issue.
Bill has gotten hung up on the hypothetical of whether consent was given, or taken back, or given, but the woman later regrets it, or is angry at the man, and so later falsely accuses him of rape. While false allegations can, and do occur, they have been regarded as abhorrent by everyone posting here. And most women do not make false allegations, any more than most men are rapists. But Bill continues to raise this issue, mainly to deflect the topic discussion from the problems of women who have actually been raped.
Both Hawkeye and Bill have tried to drag the discussion into the problems the rape laws create for men. While a perfectly valid topic for discussion, it is not the topic of this thread, and it deserves a thread of its own. Hawkeye asserts it is his right to subvert threads, with topics, or preoccupations, of his own, and has said he can't post his own thread about men and the rape laws, because he doesn't think anyone would read it.
.
So, a main struggle in this thread has been an effort, by the majority, to simply keep this thread on the topic of rape, particularly date rape, or acquaintance rape and the sorts of societal attitudes that make it difficult for a woman
who has actually been raped, as defined by law, to report her rape, have it appropriately investigated by law enforcement, and objectively considered by juries.
The topic which I initially posted was really about date rape, and that's why the question can a woman "ask to be raped" was asked? Because that is what a woman often hears after she has been raped in such a situation--she "asked for it", by dressing provocatively, or by having some drinks, or by flirting, etc. In other words the fault was hers, she was responsible for her own rape. That sort of "rape apologist" attitude shifts blame from the rapist, who is the only one responsible for the rape, to the victim. It is a dangerous attitude because it fosters rape by making it a fairly easy crime to get away with, and that is the issue, and the reason, I posted this thread.
Problems the rape laws create for heterosexual men belongs in a separate thread. I invite someone to start such a thread.
I'd like to go back to the problems faced by women
who have actually been raped. Or the problems for male victims of rape by other men, if people wish to discuss that. But essentially focus on rape victims--why rape victims hesitate to report the rape, why hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of rape kits go untested, why negative stereotypes persist about those who get raped, and how attitudes about such victims can be changed to help insure that rape will not be a crime that is so easy to get away with. And that is the topic that most of the posters here have been trying to talk about--including one poster who revealed she was a rape victim.
