Rupert_Baehr Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 No squeals of outrage here..in fact I read it as humour more than anything. Maybe we could call it "Unwanted artificial insemination" "man attacks woman with loaded weapon". Nah Rape is pretty self explanatory. Your post is assuming that the history of rape and pregnancy is somehow a major factor or even synonymous..it isn't, it's a contributing factor well after the attack...and the "well after" could be as early as a feeling of safety from her attacker. I'm sure women while being raped are more concerned with breathing their last breath rather than the possibility of pregnancy. What if the woman is sterile and her attacker infertile? Serious assault?, very serious assault? Not so serious as "very" but serious non the less?...gets all very murky dunt it. I would bet a lot of money pregnancy is a smokescreen for the real reason/s, being chattel, belongings, slave, property. She is mine to do as I wish not yours..and I have a piece of paper to prove it, and that paper makes it all cushty. It isn't rare to find a lover dump or run off because his 'loved one' has been defiled and he just can't quite get to grips with it. Some even stone to death a victim you know..and it's men who do the stoning... That's an opinion - and you are entitled to it. I didn't think up (I'm not that smart at this time of day) the reasons for rape - those are the reasons I was taught when I was a student. As for the case of the 'after the event' rape, the players thought they were in an empty room when they started. Some other people entered the room while they were 'busily engaged' and - in the words of the lady who claimed [the next day] that she had been raped: "We thought we'd better be quiet, because we didn't want them to hear us." (Being raped and didn't dare cry out? :hihi:) People can - and occasionally do - change their minds retrospectively. I don't know how it works (I'm not a psychologist) but I understand that the facts may well change to fit the fiction. - And the fiction emerges to obfuscate the truth. That particular case didn't last long. It took the Judge about 45 seconds to dismiss it. The plaintiff was misrepresenting the truth - but (as she saw it) with good reason. Had her husband discovered that she'd been screwing around, she would've had a few problems. She seemed (as did the court) to ignore the fact that had her lies been believed, her consort would've sent a few years in jail. Replace the crime 'Rape' (can only be committed by males, but the victims can be either male or female) with 'Serious Sexual Assault [you could always call it 'SSA'] and you might - just might - persuade female victims that they will be treated equably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 It's only difficult if you think rape is only confined to strangers where one imposes his will on another. If a woman feels threatened by an unknown man and gives consent so as to reduce her ordeal...is it rape? Is the fact that they are connected by a physical relationship a factor which reduces the ordeal? Personally I think the mindset still exists that if a woman is somehow in a relationship with a man, that relationship is a ticket to abuse if he so wishes. A woman who is raped by a stranger is more likely to report than a woman who isn't, because mostly the attached woman has to take many factors into consideration..not so much how he will be treated but how she is. As long as that mindset exists many women won't come forward, which could have a knock on effect to those women who are raped by strangers who are presently in the minority. Drive them underground and you lose any reference to statistics, by which it becomes a free for all. Now..this is SF forum..If your mindset reflects this "It may be more accurate to use the term undesired sexual relations rather than rape in the scenario you referred to" then you are one, one of many who have contributed to the thread. Personally I don't think you are the only one with that opinion, you're not unique..I think that opinion is pretty widespread on this forum when you read between the mostly you don't have to lines of MANY posters, and I think it's pretty widespread beyond SF. If you bundle all that misogyny, pure disregard sexually for the opposite sex or any attempt to excuse it, then you had seriously better lock your daughters up. Btw..you can attribute this to ANY form of rape "undesired sexual relations". I'll give it you though..it does sound rather harmless and fluffy. You need to realise that rape is an offence when consent is not given. No one would defend rape. What you are trying to do is extend the boundaries of the offence. Let's look at a different scenario. If a woman has sexual relations with her husband with the sole intention of obtaining something from him ie gifts is she a prostitute ? I do not think so but it is the type of reasoning you are using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Or everyone treated everyone equally making judges redundant. We have sex discrimination laws because it exists, not because it doesn't. Please expound. What do judges do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 A lot of people disbelieve women who have been raped regardless. Are you implying that some of the respondents to the survey lied? I hope not. This just highlights how widespread sexual violence is. he? was implying that without knowing how these stats came about it is not possible to take them at face value. Which is how I feel, it is better to disregard them I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 Ok..it's massively exaggerated.. Give me an agenda as to why? as an example, it would increase funding and sympathy to their cause. I am not saying they have I am just saying they have an agenda! Also I would not blame them for doing it, statistics are often massaged which is why I always take them with a pinch of salt. Especially when I don't have a clue how the number came about. It would probably be best to have the statistic discussion on another thread to be honest. The fact is if rape wasn't involved this statistic just would not be believed at all. There is no methodology given and no sampling information, that just makes it a random number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 How do you work this out? It seems quite straight forward to me. Have you ever been raped? No. Has anyone ever attempted to rape you? Yes. Have you ever been raped? Yes. What is there to misinterpret, misextrapolate, misrepresent. This figure was not arrived by any other means. 1 in 4 women have experiemced domestic violence, no one seems to be questioning this statistic. There will be some overlap between these two groups as many women in abusive relationships are routinely raped. 25% appears to be a consistent figure as it's roughly the same for children who have been sexually abused. By refusing to believe it, you are unwittingly aiding and abetting it. This one is one that requires further explanation with regards to the statistic. How do you define attempted rape? If someone grabs you and kisses you whilst you push away that would not be an attempted rape to me but to others it might be? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 What could anyone possibly hope to gain by lying in an anonymous survey? They are more likely to not admit it as they don't want to confront it rather than give a false 'yes'. Women who make false allegations do so to a) get attention b) get revenge c) out of fear of a partner finding out about a sexual infidelity. How does giving a false 'yes' in an anonymous survey achieve any of these aims? was it anonymous? I didn't see that stated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 You need to realise that rape is an offence when consent is not given. No one would defend rape. What you are trying to do is extend the boundaries of the offence. Let's look at a different scenario. If a woman has sexual relations with her husband with the sole intention of obtaining something from him ie gifts is she a prostitute ? I do not think so but it is the type of reasoning you are using. No I'm not, I'm exploring your interpretation of consent in the same way a judge or jury would, not extending it. What you seem to be doing is classifying consent as "yes" If she says yes then it's consent..right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
llamatron Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 I'm beginning to wonder if there are any parallels to be drawn between those who seek to downplay sexual violence against women and those who deny the holocaust. Interesting. he is only questioning the statistic, which is just a number with no mention of how it was obtained. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted July 19, 2012 Share Posted July 19, 2012 No I'm not, I'm exploring your interpretation of consent in the same way a judge or jury would, not extending it. What you seem to be doing is classifying consent as "yes" If she says yes then it's consent..right? What you are saying is that it the reason for giving consent that causes the offence. So in your reasoning is the cause and not the act the greater offence ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.