Hey, Can A Woman "Ask To Get Raped"?

having made this your position I now fully expect you to join me in kicking these cases where the act was run of the mill male/female bonding but where after the fact consent was hazy out of the criminal system. I also expect you to allow those who have had a few drinks to have sexual relations without one or both of them being criminals.

Hawkeye Firefly had made me see the light and I now wish to turn myself in for raping my wife many times over in Cancun Mexico.

Hell I even rape her before she was my wife and once I was such an evil sexual perverse that I even rape my wife with my own mother along on one of the trips.

And the deed is so evil that my wife does not even to this minute understand what I had done to her. She is still in the dark just like I was before firefly enlighten me.

However the man at the FBI laugh at me and the same happen when I call the Mexican consult office.

It seem I will need to go to Cancun and turn myself in there for justice to be done.

Thank you firefly and please do not stop trying to bring Hawkeye to the light.

I see that you took notice that the saviors have taken to reporting rape rates which include huge chunks of the number (one report was 30%) who are people that the saviors are calling rape victims but where the presumed victim refuses to consider themselves a rape victim. According to the feminists they have been programed by the rape culture, and are in need of the feminists to reprogram them. No word yet on what the preferred remedy is, perhaps these victims who refuse to except that they are victims need to be committed to a residential feminist run reprogramming program so that they can be made to fully understand how evil men are.

This would be a rip off of the treatment for Childhood sexual abuse protocol, where those struggling with childhood abuse as adults while they find themselves married to men that they met after are often strongly encouraged to move out of their house and cut off all contact with their husbands so that they can be programed without male interference.

I'm having a real discussion on rape with relevant social impact with Firefly. I'm not interested in your catch-all bullshit.

A
R
T

I'm enjoying Firefly's feedback too. It's been quite informative.

A
R
T

In this case the definition of "real" being the 10% of the subject matter that is approved by feminist to be open for discussion. I am sure that this will be very illuminating.

You do a very good job of staying in your place, I am sure that the women are proud of you. You might even earn a blow job one day.

The only reply this garbage you're spouting deserves is that you're trying far harder to play a gender card against me than any feminist ever has. I'm not moved by your gender baiting. I don't need to prove my manhood to the world, I'll leave that to people less secure with who they are.

I am quite happy with my life, and my sympathy and empathy has not come at any sacrifice to myself. I've not betrayed myself, as you accuse me off, nor have I played minstrel to women, as you imply.

A
R
T

This whole several year bruhaha has - to me - been about hawkeye wanting to call his wife liking him to rape (conquer) her, rape. Which none of us thought in the first place.

Perhaps you are one of the few men on the planet that is not a rapist but you are not a nice guy at all.

As far as anyone being able to have an intelligent conversation with firefly, you have to be kidding me.

She is almost a cartoon character on the subject of sexual assault.

As long as he does not go near any of her body openings anything is possible.

What do you think Bill, Time us to move on for now till this subject comes up again....hopefully then with a few more free thinkers around? The thread count is 1,470, it must be about done I think. Maybe the Female Sexual Victims Admiration Society can find something to talk about to keep this thread going for a bit, but seriously doubt it.

So we'll go, there will be a bunch more posts about how horrible we are, and then this thread will sink out of view. Sound like a plan?

You two take this thread by Firefly way out of its immediate serious interest .. You don't give a hoot about any of us who have dealt with real rape, me only once but significantly, because you're off on boys being boys, and the thrill of faux rapine, and then expand on that, and then dwell for hundreds of posts about non rape and court issues having to do with non rape.

You are, at the least, lacking in courtesy.

I think Bill and hawkeye are two very little, unhappy men, and I think the women in their lives deserve all of our sympathies.

All of these vague, non-specific complaints (or, at least, all of the ones that I can understand) are equally applicable to any other crime, not just criminal sexual assault. So my question still stands: what other safeguards do you want for men who are charged with criminal sexual assault?

"Perhaps you are one of the few men on the planet that is not a rapist" Billy said with his eye's full of tears, his voice quivering as his jaw shook, "but you are not a nice guy at all!" Billy then turned and stormed out of the room tears streaming. His moans and whimpers only drowned out by the sound of his sneakers squeaking on the polished floor. He gave one hard sob as he crashed through the door then promptly slammed it behind him. Billy's mother would call a few hours later and apologize to the other parents for her son's tantrum. Billy showed up to class the next day with a Tupperware full of treats from his parents for the whole class. He bit his lip and didn't make eye contact with any of the other students. Silent through most of the first and second period, he sulked at his desk and mumbled to himself.

At recess he was approached by another boy named Hawkeye. "Forget those jerks" said the boy offering out his hand. We can have a boys only club!" Hawkeye held out his hand and Billy smiled. "You in?"
"Only if that meanie Art can't join!"
"Deal."
"Honest?"
"Honest." Both boys smiled at each other and then ran off to the baseball diamond.

Hawkeye and Billy spent that hot summer building their tree house and fishing. They shared everything. Billy admired Hawkeye. He was the exact opposite of Art: He was a rapist and a very nice guy. Billy wanted to be just like him.

A
R
T

Most of us don't care, if they would only shut up. It's a plague of twisted junior high across the earth.

No criminal laws are written to specifically take into account psychological trauma to the victim of the crime. The laws describe only the actions that constitute a violation of the law. And offenders are charged only with the laws they have actually broken. The psychological impact of the crime on the victim is not part of the offense, or even part of the seriousness of the crime.

For instance, if you enter my house, without my consent, and remove my property, without my consent, you will be charged with the crime of burglary. How your crime psychologically or emotionally affected me, as the victim, isn't part of what you are charged with or punished for. I might have all sorts of traumatic reactions as a result of your burglary (a feeling of being unsafe in my home, nightmares about someone breaking in again, etc.), but you will still be charged only with burglary.

I think it is really the same with sexual offenses. They may be graded in terms of the degree of physical assault involved, with those involving more serious physical penetrations of the victim's bodies as carrying harsher penalties. So forced sexual intercourse (either male on male or male on female) is punished more harshly than forced fondling of the genitals or breasts, because it involves penetration of the body--the assault on the body, and the physical trauma to the victim is greater with intercourse than it is with fondling.

So rapes are among the most serious types of sexual assaults--they involve penetrations of the bodies of the victim with a penis. In some places, like England, the term "rape" is used only with a male offender and a female victim. In other places, the male on male forced anal intercourse is also legally regarded as rape. Even where the male on male situation is not legally called a "rape" (in NYS state, for instance, it is called "deviate sexual intercourse" and I think it is a violation of a sodomy law) it is now regarded with the legal seriousness and punishments that would go along with a similar rape charge.



There is no way of comparing the psychological nature of the aggressors. That is not a relevant factor of the law. The law simply refers to the act committed.

An object can cause considerable physical damage, much more than penetration with a penis might cause. Because this type of assault is not called a rape does not mean it is not punished as severely as the crime of rape is punished. It is punished just as severely.



First you applaud Canada for doing away with the term "rape" and using "sexual assault" instead, and now you are saying we need the legal term "rape"? Funny you should say that, because I read that, since Canada stopped using the term "rape", that the sentences, for that same crime, are not quite as severe. So there is an emotional weight to the term "rape" which might argue in favor of retaining it.

In ordinary everyday speech we may not always use terms in the exact way as the law does. Because the person feels they have been "raped" with an object, doesn't mean that their attacker will be charged with a rape.

Most sexual assault laws distinguish between unwanted penetration of the body by a penis or by an object. They are two different types of crimes. Penetration by an object is not legally designated as "rape". In NYS, for instance, it is called Aggravated Sexual Abuse, and there are various degrees of this crime.


Notice that crime is a class B felony. But, so is this one...



So, what difference does it make whether it is called rape if a penis is involved, but aggravated sexual abuse if an object is involved? The important thing is that the crime being charged fits the description of what was done to the victim. One is not a "lesser" crime compared to the other--they are both class B felonies, and carry the same sorts of punishments.

This is a description of all the sex offenses in NYS. It really covers everything.
http://ypdcrime.com/penal.law/article130.htm

Also, you have to remember that there are different degrees of all of the types of sexual assaults. Some rapes carry harsher penalties than other rapes,etc. And you can have more than one count on some of these criminal charges. And sometimes force is accomplished by using a gun or knife. So those weapons charges are added. The victim might gave been held captive during the crime. That's another charge. The D.A. breaks down every element of what was done to the victim and charges the offender with as many different crimes as he thinks he can get convictions on. So just because a serious sexual assault isn't called a "rape" doesn't mean the offender won't wind up severely punished, even more severely punished than someone convicted of rape.


Have you read the actual sexual assault laws in Canada? I'm not sure that they actually say what you think they say. I can't find them on the internet, with descriptions of the actual sexual assaults and the types of punishments they carry. It may be that rape is still rape, as a sexual assault crime involving penile penetration, but they are just not calling it "rape". The "gender neutrality" may simply be that it covers male on male penetration with a penis, as well as penetration of a female. And, if that is the case, they would not necessarily regard forced sexual intercourse of a male victim by a female as the same crime as when a male penetrates the female without consent. Do you know for sure how they treat these crimes?

I think our laws are really fair to men who are victims of sexual assaults by females. The problem isn't with the law, it's getting people to report the crime, and having enough evidence to prove it. Like the man who went to the police and said his neighbor forced him to have intercourse with her. The man isn't bruised or beaten, and he has no evidence that the sex act even occurred, let alone that it was non consensual. This is the same problem that women have had in terms of being believed, except women usually have the man's DNA as part of the rape kit evidence, so they can at least establish that sexual intercourse took place.

But, when there is no other evidence or witnesses, and it boils down to just he said/she said, how can you establish non consent, particularly in date rape situations? It's very tough. The police said they investigated the man's complaint. Well, if they spoke to the neighbor, she could deny she even had sex with the man. If she admitted to having sex, she could say he initiated it and it was consensual. So the police are left with no case, they can't arrest the neighbor without any evidence. That's what happens with most of the date rapes or acquaintance rapes reported by women. Without some evidence of force, or non consent, these cases can't go to court. So, even though men may be forced to have intercourse with females, they would have a tough time proving it wasn't consensual. But that puts them in the same boat that female victims have been in. So, finally we have gender equality.

I do think that women might sexually assault men for the same reasons that men assault women. I do think it is about dominance, power and control. I don't think it's really about sexual gratification with either gender. The notion of "sex starved females" raping men sounds like a male myth to me. Forcing someone to submit to unwanted sex is a power issue with both genders. The domination becomes an important part of the gratification, and may be the main source of gratification.

I would say yellow, but that is already taken for a much nobler cause.

Yeah, go out into the streets to protest. That should take care of the rapist problem. Could get a bit messy though when you find out that the support you want is not there. Criminals out of good people????

Better to make good people out of criminals.

Keep positive. Am I the only one here who had to look up "BDSM", interminably mentioned by Hawkeye?

At last I found out where all those weird punk fashions come from - until now I thought scuba diving suits are only worn underwater and couldn't understand why anyone would run around in scuba gear on dry land, let alone pay Karl Lagerfeld $8,000 for one of his

You had pointed out that rape is defined differently in Canada and the U.S.A. Canada reformed rape laws back in 1983 and has looked at them since. The following is the result of the reforms.

The Working Group of Attorneys General Officials (1992) opined that low reporting, charge, and conviction rates as well as victim harassment were associated with the old rape laws. A study done in Winnipeg in the mid-1970s indicated that only 10% of original charges resulted in convictions, 20% were reduced to lesser charges, and more than 70% of the charges were filtered out of the criminal
justice system (Gunn & Minch, 1988). Similarly, rape continued to be a difficult crime to prove in other jurisdictions. Fewer than one third of all rapes resulted in arrest, and a much smaller fraction resulted in conviction in the United States (Doudna, 1990).

In 1983, amendments were made to the Criminal Code (C-127) that specifically abolished some rules that perpetuated bias against women. The purposes of these reform statutes are as follows:

1. To encourage the victims of sexual assault to report incidents to the police (Roberts & Grossman, 1994). As mentioned, low reporting, charge, and conviction rates as well as victim harassment were related to the old rape laws.

2. To focus on the violence committed by the assailant rather than the sexual nature of the offence (Gunn & Minch, 1988; Stuart, 1992).

Feminists had lobbied hard for reform that would emphasize the violent nature of rape and minimize the sexual aspects of the offence.

3. To limit judicial discretion and the legal link between unchastity and low credibility.

Until 1983, Canadian law incorporated biased views that lowered the credibility of sexually assaulted women and presumed that sexually active women were more likely to consent to sex.

Some significant changes resulted from these reforms. The offence was redefined in gender-neutral terms. The term sexual assault replaced rape because a whole range of sexual activities were now studied. Rape was reclassified as a type of assault. The recent-complaint requirement was abrogated, and the special rules of corroboration were repealed. Inquiries into the complainant’s sexual conduct with other people were restricted. As discussed later, this rape-shield rule was soon challenged in the courts and was subsequently held unconstitutional in the Supreme Court of Canada. Finally, the examination of the victim’s sexual history in regard to her credibility was prohibited.

Progress was also made in instituting the prohibition of spousal rape. In addition, Criminal Code provisions have made it possible to introduce into the 260 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology sentencing process a statement of the impact of the crime on the victim (Working Group of Attorneys General Officials, 1992). At present, there are three offences:
(a) sexual assault; (b) sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party, or causing bodily harm; and (c) aggravated sexual assault. The maximum penalties of the assault offences are imprisonment for 10 years, 14 years, and life, respectively.