Define RAPE/sexual assault.

Rape is the action of forcing sex upon someone that is not consenting, or having sex with someone that is not in the position to consent.

It used to be that you could hardly pin rape on someone, because the definition was so restrictive, but now we have gone to the other polar extreme, and if you do anything it's rape. Good thing guys are so damn horny, or we'd be completely discuraged from ever having sex again.

The most ridiculous thing i've heard, was on Nightline, and they said in Illinois if a girl consents to sex and you start doing her, and then she changes her mind and no longer consents, then it is the same as if she had never consented in the first place.

Give me a break, it is becomeing superfluous, and giving women, as well as some men the easy way out. It's almost like they've lost all responsibility for their actions. If you say yes, and you are not forced, then it is not rape. Keeping in mind that being drugged is being forced.
But, can people even be held responsibile for having sex with people that are Drunk, or kind of drunk? Trained professionals have to use special equipment to tell if someone is drunk, and people expect and average joe to know?

If you are having sex with someone and she says stop (for whatever reason), and you continue and she tries to pull away - you now have the right to force her?

That is the scenario that this law addresses. And that is just fine.

I'm a guy, but when I want to stop, I stop. If a lady wants a break, 'prior consent' to mean shiite. Whats the matter with you?

and if she says "no" and ask what does she mean /no what? are you a rapist?

that law doesn't specify that. The second she decides to withdraw consent you're a rapist and have no grace period to pull out.

did you read the law??

it doesn't address any of that and all it says that if she withdraws consent it is the same as she had never given the consent.

I never sleep with a woman unless I live with them might conseider sleeping with them if I had a longterm commited relationship and she was not under the influnace of alcohol or drugs. And guys should not have one night stands if they do it they should get it on audio tape. unles it is with a really good good friend whom yall trust. Besideds if your girlfriend whom you live with gets drunk and wants to sleep with you and rembers littl or nothing the next day I don't think she is going to go claim rape. I think next relationship I might just waitand let her bring up the topic of sex.

Any how Id like to know what kind of women are you guys sleeping (no offence) with that you have to worry about false allegations of rape. I would never sleep with a woman that I would have to worry about geting falsely accused of rape.

Come on people if your in a loving long term relationship or a couple who are to busy at their work to have that and just need some one to sleep and talk to (which is one of those you wanbt to have on tape) and you don't go forceing yourself on your partner than what is it you have to worry about.

It no longer allows the judge to do a case by case basis, and condemns someone for something that is hardly a crime. If she says stop, and I am on bottom, and she keeps going, then have I committed rape?

How is the judge not able to make a judgement? The law doesn't prevent him from looking at the facts of the case.

This also doesn't address that the scenario you describe simply would not happen.

I will say one thing further on this matter. Forget about this particular law. Let's just discuss it on a moral and ethical level. You do not have the right to force someone to have sex with you. You do not have the right to force someone to continue to have sex with you if they don't want to. If they tell you to stop you must stop. Period. I really cannot for the life of me see why this is hard to understand or where the ambiguity comes from.

I also cannot understand where the idea that there is a problem with false rape accusations comes from.

jurors are triars of fact and judges are triars of law in jury trials. The rest of what you said is spot on.

Okay, the scenario that I describe would never happen, first of all it will, and furthermore, either way the law alows for this scenario, and allows for an innocent kid to go to jail. Does it really matter if it will happen or not, a law that allows for this is ridiculous.
You must be very nieve about such topics if you don't think it will ever happen.

I'm sorry, I guess i didn't realize that every sexual act is so cut and dry, I didn't know that things were so blatantly obvious. If you are this willing to dismiss my arguments so quickly, then you have much to learn. You have said hardly anything to my argument except that it is stupid, and simply would not happen, so I'm hardpressed to come up with a rebuttle, because you did nothing. But after reviewing you're last sentence, I quickly realize the folly's I am dealing with.

Things are not black and white, especially when dealing with such a confusing and unpredictable event. This law alows for women to unfairly charge innocent boys with a terrible crime. IF you would like to address this, or something on my other post I would be happy to continue the argument.

If the facts of the case are that the girl told to boy to stop, and the boy was not in a position to realize what she was saying, and to recognize her will to stop, then that boy will be convicted of rape. You see no problem with this? They are creating victims where their are none. If the girl is putting the other person in an impossible position

If you're not sure what she means, stop and clarify. Easy enough. You don't need a stopwatch. If you continue, it's rape. The way you pose your aurgument implies you want a grace period of several seconds because YOU don't want to stop, or you are looking for a "loophole" to give yourself permission to hurry up and get it off before a 30 second grace period runs out.

Your example isn't particularly useful either. You're minimizing the issue of rape by posing a scenario in which consensual sex is taking place and the woman just wants to stop for no reason whatsoever.

The law simply clarifies that a person still has the right to say no or withdraw consent even after some sexual contact has taken place. It's not an effort to trick men or set them up for unfair accusations. It just means that having some sexual contact does not give another person a blank check to continue without consent, or with other sexual acts not initially contemplated

Let me pose this hypothetical to you. What if you are with a woman who gets turned on by massaging your balls. You like this. She starts applying more pressure, and it feels better and better to you, but at some point it starts to become painful for you. You tell her to stop or try to push her hand away. But it's a turn on for her, so she would rather continue. So, she continues even though you told her to stop it. It's a turn on for her so she keeps applying even more pressure even though you clearly withdrew your consent. If she could just have another 10 or 15 seconds she would climax, even though you are now INSISTING she stop and trying to push her away. She persists until she climaxes, your balls hurt like hell and you're furious.

You initially consented to sex, and initially you liked having your balls massaged. Did you have any right to change your mind once it started getting rough? Did you have any right to say no to massaging your balls in the first place if other sexual contact had already taken place? Does she get a grace period to ponder what you mean, and whether you really mean it? Does she get a grace period since she is getting pleasure from this and is close to climax? Was she wrong to continue? Did she rape you?

Girls definitaly have the right to stop during sex, but you have to keep in mind that the other peson isn't always aware of the girl simply saying stop. To many that could be considered kinky forplay.

This law opens countless avenues for countless boys to be convicted of heinious crimes, simply because they were confused, and in a impossible position.

There's an implicit bias in your argument. First, there's a thread running through our culture--you can witness it in almost any movie--that suggests "no" means "yes." Girls want to be pursued; girls don't know what they want; some obscure and arcane set of "rules" reminds women to "play hard to get." As far as I'm concerned, NO MEANS NO. No doesn't mean "try harder" or "try again" or "ignore that." If I want to have sex with someone, I make that clear.

of rape because they changed their minds.

A kid having sex with a consenting girl, can be charged with rape because that girl decides it was a mistake, or she does not want responsibility. This law protects girls from rape, but on the other side of the coin, it condemns people for something they have con control over.

If the girl decides the withdrawl consent, she may just stay stop, and I can forsee a confused boy who's experiencing this for the first time, not comprehending such a request, and not putting two and two together. This law allows for such a circumstance to be punished with rape conviction, even if you say this scenario will never happen, never the less the law allows for it

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

rape according to many people here is everytime the girl says so....

btw. I was the same Nightline and Roy Black was great.

once the girl says no if force follows: that is rape. Grace periods don't enter into the picture. After a no if FORCE is applied: that's rape. There is no reason to STRUGGLE with the definition anymore than that. As soon as FORCE is applied behind her no... WE ARE TALKING RAPE.

Perhaps we should have Eminem bust a rhyme on it in an effort to clear up any further misunderstanding and answer any other concerns one might have on the topic.

Rape is every time the girl says NO.

I will say if no time at all is given then there is a problem. But if no is said and the man just keeps going then that is rape. I fail to see the problem with that.

if she says no, and I'm a first time confused boy that is scared out of my mind, odds are I won't translate that into her wanting me to stop, and/or won't even recognized what she said at all. Well that probably won't happen alot, but this law allows for this situation to be rape.

Because it seems like that is what you are saying.

If at some point during sex she says no, and she becomes more resistant, and starts to fight and starts to push you off, and starts screaming and crying and clawing at you, are you still able to maintain an erection and then orgasm? Is the orgasm really worth it compared to the risk of being charged with rape? (I mean, street hookers are cheap.)

If this is true then I suggest psychotherapy.

Very nice delineation there.

then their COULD be some confusion, and if the guy is to excited to process such a request instantly, then he has committed rape. You don't find this unsavory?

that's the only way you'll be able to prove it.
Worst case scenario you'll get charged (in some states) with tape recording without consent, beats being a "rapist"...

because from what I understand might also come the time where the burden of proof might shift more onto the accused: He will be asked to prove rape did not occur. I have not been able to find any mention of this shift in the burden from the accuser to the accused here in the states. As it stands now the burden of proof falls in the lap of the accuser. In South Africa it seems their Rape Laws have shifted the burden a bit onto the accused as well.

snip

Lillian Artz, a criminologist at the University of Cape Town, said the amendment represented a "radical departure" from the old definition of rape.

"The woman will no longer need to prove she did not give her consent," Artz said.

"The accused will have to prove there was sex, but no force was used and she had given her consent.

"There will be some burden on the woman to prove the rapist used force should the defence raise it in court."

The current definition under the common law reads that rape is "intentional, unlawful intercourse with a woman without her consent".

http://www.cab.kabissa.org/raplaw.htm

the state has to prove the crime. In reality you're guilty the minute she says you raped her.

that is not the reality. the state has to prove a rape occurred beyond a reasonable doubt. the jury has to hand in a unanimous decision to convict. the accused does not even have to take the stand. While he might feel guilty upon being accused; while some might feel he is guilty after hearing about the charge, the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

But you can go round and round with this in your head as long as you need. The law is clear. The process is clear. The burden of proof so far as I know in the states remains in the lap of the state (or the accuser). What has been clarified is a woman has rights to withdraw consent. I believe this was clarified in the states effort to crackdown on date rape. If they also shift burden of proof a bit onto the accused, they might have a shot at actually increasing conviction rates and more rapists will be taken off the street, rather than be let free to rape again.

Now if you still find yourself confused about these laws, perhaps it is best you make sure you have plenty of batteries for that tape recorder of yours. If someone should cry foul, at the very least you will be confident you can substantiate your side of the story.

as far as what the media /people think of you. You're guilty and your reputation has taken a major beating regardless of the outcome of the trial.

why not shift the burden on all crimes then? John Ashcroft would love that...sure a few innocent people would go in jail but we'd take more criminals off the street. Maybe cut down the Bill of Rights a bit...

on edit: I would not need the batteries because I'm confused of the laws; I need them because of FALSE accusations. Yeah only 2% - x% of them are but guess what, try being that guy in the 2% - x%...

this actually gives the woman the RIGHT to withdraw consent, which hopefully will ensure her RIGHTS are not negated by a male who decides it is his privilege to deprive her of her vote. This new clarification of the law amends the bill of RIGHTS even further, wherein now in accordance with the bill of RIGHTS, a woman's RIGHT to withdraw consent is now protected.

The male's privilege to FORCE SEX at this time has been REVOKED!

then to court will not accept it as evidence.

Now pehaps they won't let you use it as evidince on the record (offically) but if your on trail for rape it might be worth a chance to press play and hold it up to the microphone on the stand when you testify in your own defence sure you may be held in contempt and the Judge would tell the Jury to disregard that but the Juiors are not robots their humans and will take that into consideration in their minds.

Iam sure attorneys and defendents or plantinifs said things (I have watched court tv) that they know full and well the jury would get an order to ignore that. But they know it will be in the back of their heads and will take it into consideration and it would be to their favor.

OR if you are basketball player give it to the media and they would see to it the people of America would hear it incuding possible Juiors,Judges,DA's,the person claiming rape and everyone else.

Your mother says yes you can have a cookie, you put your hand in the cookie jar and she says, oh wait a minute, you just had a piece of cake and dinner is in 30 minutes and she says no and you don't know what that means?

No means no. And it doesn't mean you're such a love machine you can coax her or woo her or say oh come on or think you'll change her mind or any other crazy thing in your head. It means something is wrong and you have an obligation to stop and find out what it is. And if you want to have a happy marriage I suggest you figure that out because I've changed my mind for a variety of reasons over the course of my lifetime and my husband has not once been confused or unconcerned about what's going on with me. And he can be a real jerk, but I guess he's not that big of a jerk that he doesn't understand no.

Before you sleep with her make sure yall understand the boundries when to start and stop. Discuss it with her.

Truly.

But the boundaries are, you did this and it made me remember that and freaked me out so STOP!!! Or, what are you doing, I didn't say you could put that there!!!! Or, stop, that position hurts. Or, what did you say you pig, get the fuck off of me. Or something like that. Women can be sort of emotional. :-)

If she says stop or shes says get the f--- off me or don't put that there then you stop and apoligize and talk though it. But i would discuss what goes where and what positon is comfortable communication is a must. I would never sleep with a woman with out having a understanding of what is and is not acceptable in bed.

and she stops in the middle than it would be rape to continue, and who's to say some outside circumstance would prevent me from understanding her saying stop, or being mentally aware of such a request.

Sex without the consent of one of the people involved. If someone wants it but then changes their mind halfway through and the other keeps going anyway, then it is rape.

If a woman says "no" it means no. If the man is having sex with her and she says "stop" the man should withdraw.

if you think of it as having sex WITH someone vs. "doing her," perhaps that will help clarify things for you. i can see the confusion..."doing her," implies that she really isn't involved in the process. her function is to simply consent to being "done." however, if you think of it as having sex with an actual person, you might recognize that it's a mutual experience, meaning she can tell you to stop, not an opportunity to "do her," which implies that she has no say after the initial consent. i hope this helps.

more very good advise! I hope it helps too!

When I read the "doing her" part of that post, I could no longer keep an open mind about the argument.

the post of the day!!

:toast:

is nonconsensual a word? :shrug:

I never sleep with a woman unless I live with them or might would consider it if I had a long term committed relationship with them and they were't under the influnce of alcohol or drugs. I think the next time I'm in a relationship I will let her ask to sleep with me then me sleep with her. Guys should never have one night stands and if they do make sure they get it on audio tape to for proof that it was not rape unless maybe it is with a really good friend whom you trust.

Now if you live with your girlfriend or yall have been in a sexual relationship for a long time and she gets drunk and wants to sleep with you. And wakes up the next morning and rembers it or rembers nothing I don't think she would go to the police and claim rape.

I would like to know what kind of people you guys are sleeping with since I would not sleep with someone if I was going to live in fear of false alligations of rape. I mean come on people if you have a loving comittied relationship and you don't go forceing yourself on your partners what do you have to worry about unless you are having one night stands.

"Give me a break, it is becomeing superfluous, and giving women, as well as some men the easy way out. It's almost like they've lost all responsibility for their actions. If you say yes, and you are not forced, then it is not rape."

You speak of responsibility;what of the responsibility to themselves? the easy way out would be to continue to do something they did not feel comfortable with.
and what of the responsibility the other person has to respect their sexual partner and take responsibility for their own actions? do men lose their ability to hear and reason when having sex?

if you say yes then no but your partner continues against your will that is rape.

NO means NO.

you're like those stupid men who claim they "can't say anything" to women for fear of being nailed for sexual harrassment. 99% of all men know how to speak to women but there's that one percent too f***ing ignorant to know.

99% OF ALL MEN KNOW WHAT RAPE IS. 99% OF ALL MEN CAN DRINK AND BE HORNY WITHOUT EVEN THINKING ABOUT RAPING A WOMAN.

WHAT'S YOUR F***ING PROBLEM ????????????????????????

Seems simple enough to me. If you're not sure, ask. Even raging hormones don't strike you deaf and dumb. Misunderstandings can be remedied. Rape is rape.

As for drugs/alcohol, when in doubt, don't. You don't need a breathalyzer to know that she is probably doing something that she wouldn't do sober. As for her "not being responsible", even if that's the case, it doesn't relieve you of your responsibility. Just because kids run into the street doesn't give you the right to run them down.

Besides, willing (even better - eager) sober ladies are a lot more fun. And, if you can't tell the difference - you aren't paying attention.

Just my $.02.

As Noiretblu said in a previous post, you don't "do" someone you care about.

If you want to "do" someone, get a blowup doll.

But if you're mature enough to have a loving relationship that includes caring and respect for your partner as a fellow human being, then this wouldn't be such an issue.

No. Nyet. Nein. Non. Nao. These words do not mean keep going.

Personally, I get ultra defensive and aggressive when I am drunk and don't even consent to sex with my husband and would beat up any guy that tried to touch me once I have about five drinks. Other people are evidently different.
By some definitions I am a rapist. I had sex with a friend who showed up at my dorm room one night wanting to have sex. We had sex once before but had talked about why we shouldn't do that sort of thing a couple days earlier. he smelled a bit like alcohol but I didn't know that he was really drunk until he vomitted. I felt extremely bad about the incident and was convinced that I'd be up before the college sexual assult board but I was suprised when he apologized for his behavior instead. My first sexual encounter with my husband was when he was rather drunk. I had no idea how drunk until he told me later. He says that the incident was alright because he was normally shy and wouldn't have made a move otherwise. If I had completely ignored him after the incident and treated him poorly, though, he said that he might have brought me before the sexual assult board.
I am not proud of these things. The only things that I can say in my defense was that I had had been drunk very few times and had found its effects on me to be towards non sexual and that in both cases, the drunk men iniatiated everything. Does this really make a difference though? Really, though, whether it is rape or not, I still do not think that it is good to have encounters with drunken people if there is any issue about whether or not this person would want to have sex with you if they were sober. Many people get hurt.

Now I know there are a few cases but how many guys esp college age gets assulted by women(not that they are't strong or clever enof I mean we have women in the armed services and physical sports) but it is uselly the guy who is begging for some sex any how If i am drunk or not and some girl that I know not a stranger forces me to sleep with her or sleeps with me without my knoledge I proberly like most guys (Not All) might be surprised and feel a lttle strange but would have no problem with it and proberly would consider it very Cool as long as protection was used and I did not get a STD or end up having a baby with the woman.

I know most(Not All) men really have a diffrent view of sexual harrasment some woman tells them a dirty joke or touches them in a sexual way. They would proberly act in surprise then laugh it off and enjoy it. A woman on the other hand would proberly slap them and feel very violated thats why men should ask permission before telling a dirty joke.

In part it is pop culture and how men and women are diffrent Men from Mars Women from Venus thinking.

But I like to think as many ways as we are diffrent we are alike in just as many ways.

At least thats how Iam sure some one is going to call me sexist but I am not and never have been or will and mean no offence to anyone.

You write

"The most ridiculous thing i've heard, was on Nightline, and they said in Illinois if a girl consents to sex and you start doing her, and then she changes her mind and no longer consents, then it is the same as if she had never consented in the first place."

Did they really put it that way, or did they simply determine that if the guy didn't stop, a rape had occurred?

I can see where something like this might occur. What if the act became painful for one of the individuals involved, for example, and one asked the other to stop? In that case, the person should have the courtesy to stop, and if he/she doesn't stop, and the act continues on forceably, then rape has occurred.

It beocmes rape when they say NO.

As difficult as that may be to comprehend,if you live by that standard, you'll never have a rape charge stick...You may have blue balls, but you won't be guilty of rape!