Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gilda
The idea that rape requires physical resistance on the part of the victim has been discarded pretty much everywhere in the US. Once she says "No," regardless of what went before, and regardless of how much she resists physically, if he proceeds, he's raping her.
|
Totally agree with this point.
Consent is a binary situation, and can be withdrawn.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Halx
I'm stating that putting a law in the books to define a situation that has already been defined is bad. We already know what rape is, but placing a switch that any female can flip to get her partner in jail is the problem. I'll state again that this is an attack on pre-marital sex.
|
Sorry Hal, but I disagree on several points.
There is constant clarrification of what constitutes "right" and "wrong" in law. Otherwise our lawmakers would only need to make laws about new types of crime (so the only new laws in the past few years would be related to technological advances). After all, people have been murdering since Caine and Abel, so why do we need new laws about murder - ever?
Your statement "a switch any female can flip to get her partner in jail" raises two points that need attention; firstly - men can be raped too (ever seen Blue Velvet?) not to mention homosexual anal or oral rape; secondly, in the UK (and I believe in the US) rape is one of the hardest crimes to prove in court. It has the highest rate of cases not making it to court, and the lowest conviction rate for the cases that DO make it to court - something like 4% of victims alledging rape actually see a conviction.
As for it being an attack on premarital sex, other people have raised the issue of rape within marriage.