Printable View
I don't know if a similar thread already exists, but this has been on my mind recently and I've had a few discussions. More input would be appreciated.
What is rape? How does one define it? What is (are) the qualitative difference(s) between sex and rape?
The difference is if the other person does not aprove of the sex, it is rape, regardless of how much they enjoy it. Of course the law has called sex with minors also rape, because minors are not considered human. :inquisitive:
Rape here(Urbana) is the forced('forced' includes the partner agreeing to have sex while drunk/high which is STUPID in my vastly superior opinion) insertion, or attempted insertion,(well I think 'penitration' alone is used, which includes attempted insertion) of the penis into the vagina, anus, or mouth(not sure about the last one). Oh yes, and any sex between adults and minors is rape, consentual or no
Rape is considered a violent crime of power it is not a heavy handed version of sex.
Consential S&M is not rape.
Seduction of a minor is rape.
If we could leave legalities aside as stand-alone, definitive answers, I would very much appreciate it.
I heard the other day that some wack-job feminist has publically stated that all heterosexual sex is rape. Is this idea entirely far-fetched, or no?
Even when the age difference is 1 or 2 years? What is allowed in age difference?Quote:
Oh yes, and any sex between adults and minors is rape, consentual or no
Even when the difference is one or two years. Even if they were born days apart to the best of my knowledge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke John
1. The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
2. The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
3. Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.
tr.v. raped, rap·ing, rapes
1. To force (another person) to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse; commit rape on.
2. To seize and carry off by force.
3. To plunder or pillage.
Webster's Definition of Rape.
By Law (in the U.S. Anyway) there is a legal age at which a person can have sex...generally the legal age is 16 but varies by region (anywhere from 15-18). It is the persons responsibility (assuming he/she is above the legal age of consent) to know the age of the person they are going to have intercourse with, if a person over the legal age of consent has intercourse with someone under the legal age of consent, it is by default, statutory rape. Which does not fall under the same legal guidelines as forced rape, but still carry heavy fines, perhaps some time in prison, and a criminal record. Also, in some cases, depending on the nature of the "consent" the person may also have to register as a sexual offender.
Oh, and the feminist is, as you said before. A Whack-job, or perhaps a Shaker (religious sect in America that does not have sex).
You've got to be kidding! So when a boy and girl are both 17 they can happily have sex but when one becomes 18 they cannot have sex until the other also becomes 18?! :wall:Quote:
Even when the difference is one or two years. Even if they were born days apart to the best of my knowledge.
If 2 kids of 15 years old have sex can they be fined? If one turns 16 it will suddenly become rape even when they had sex when they were 15?Quote:
By Law (in the U.S. Anyway) there is a legal age at which a person can have sex...generally the legal age is 16
It wouldn't matter if the two kids were 15, and then one turned 16 say a week later, because at the date of the crime, the person would still have been 15.
(Finds Legal Dictionary)
In referring to your question, it wouldn't fall under California State law as being a felony. Instead, it falls under Family Law Guidelines Section 502, Article A.
Doesn't say much, just says that at the age, basically it is up to parents to decide how to deal with the matter, they can sue for in Family Court for youth misconduct. But if foul play is suspected, the case would be switched to Criminal Court pending a trial.
oh and your other question, Discovery1 pretty much hit the nail right on the head. However, if say they were weeks apart, you could plea negligence.
So there ya have it. DJ, it is up to the parents to decide how they want to persue the matter.
I meant that what if 2 15-year olds had sex. According to the US law it would be up to the parents what to do with it. And 6 months later the 2 still have sex, but one is now 16 and the other still 15, so a new "crime". Would it then suddenly become rape because of Websters' definition: "if a person over the legal age of consent has intercourse with someone under the legal age of consent, it is by default, statutory rape"? Or is this a law that is commonly put aside in normal cases (teens just having sex) but to have something to fall back on when foul play is suspected as you wrote?Quote:
It wouldn't matter if the two kids were 15, and then one turned 16 say a week later, because at the date of the crime, the person would still have been 15.
Regarding your question, if say they were both under the age of consent it would be considered negligence and probably settled in family court (or not at all). But say 6 months later one turns 16 (legal age of consent), but the other is still 15, and they decide to have sex again, it would then be considered a different crime, and statutory rape. Which is a felony, and would be settled in a Criminal Court.Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke John
But the notion of "teens just having sex" is probably a common defense, and 99% of the time, these sort of cases never even make it to a court anyway. Unless foul play is suspected, and the person under the legal age of consent comes foreward with rape allegations.
In the end, people under the age of consent and therefore emancipation is up to the parents to decide what to do. I could go into all the legalities of it, which is severely exhausting to type, and I don't want really want to write a thesis paper on it.
Suffice it to say, that if the person under the age of consent has sex, with someone over the age of consent, if his/her parent's decide to persue a criminal conviction, but the person under the age of consent turns 16 a week later, she can opt to drop the charges, because she is considered to be at the legal age of emancipation.
Ok, thanks for explaining it all :bow:
I know that MacKinnon considers anything that is meant to look like rape as rape. Then again, she somehow thinks the words, "Only Whites," are inherintly discriminatory in the way that they are making differences negatively. Which obviously isn't the case since I just wrote, "Only Whites," and there was nothing prejudiced about it. (Discrimination, strictly speaking is seeing a difference between two things.)Quote:
I heard the other day that some wack-job feminist has publically stated that all heterosexual sex is rape.
Rape=unwanted sexual contact with intent; different degrees for differing severity. So, under my definition, molestation would be rape.
I've read one feminist even felt science was sexist: the fact that solid state physics is better understood than fluid dynamics (you see, solid state = erect penis, fluids = menstrual etc etc)...
I feel that to call all sex rape says more about her experiences than anything else. I've met some extremely predatory women / girls and it'd take one hell of a lot of explaining to get me (or them for that matter) to believe that they were being raped! :dizzy2:
~:smoking:
No in TEXAS anywhere from three years after 15 the penalty is much less. IIRC I could be wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by discovery1
Around here we used to have two grades of rape in the law books - rape and what probably translates to "aggravated rape" or somehting along those lines. Naturally the latter gets harder sentences. It was removed some time ago, which duly gave the yellow press a field day with senastionalist headlines.
What they, true to form, failed to mention was that the single remaining degree was the old harhser-punishable one without the prefix, ie. there was no longer a "rape lite" in the books.
:dizzy2:
Yellow press. Gotta love those bottom feeders, and by all accounts *ours* are nice and well-behaved compared to, say, the British ones.
In Dutch Law, rape is defined as using violence or threats of any kind to force someone to undergo penetration.
Sex with people under the legal age of consent and having sex with someone who is drunk/on drugs is covered by seperate articles.
I raped my hand repeatedly when I was stationed in Korea.:2thumbsup:
:inquisitive:
Just where exactly in your hand is there a... no, I'm so not proceeding any further.
Rape in Norway is defined as enforced sexual activity(AFAIK). For a couple of months a ago, a women was charged for having raped a man the oral way while he was asleep. Can`t remember if she was found guilty.
I've had someone try to tell me that a lot of scientific theories would be very different if they had been discovered by women. I asked her to explain how Newton's laws would differ if Newton had been a woman.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
She didn't have much to say, if I recall.
Feminists are fun...Quote:
Originally Posted by Big King Sanctaphrax
It's always fun when dogmatists paint themselves into corners.
She was :2thumbsup: .Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
I remember that case so well.
That guy had alot of balls reporting to the police that he have gotten raped by a woman that's for sure :laugh4:
Was she hot? ya, know the phrase "you can't rape the willing" :laugh4:
I can't recall that any pic of the rapist was ever released.
The victim was engaged I think at the time of the incident which is probably why he refused.
If the rapist was hot however then respect to the guy :2thumbsup:
Umm, you have to be a complete idiot to report oral sex give to you by a woman as rape. Unless she game you HIV or something(highly unlikely), you should also be shot for doing that. :no: :no: :no: :no: :skull: :no: :no: :no:
Or he loved his fiancee so much that he didn't wanna lose her and decided to do what no one has ever done before, getting a woman guilty of raping a man.:idea2: :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine Prince
Actually, there have been documented cases of women raping men. They're usually not sexual in nature, except by means of humiliation, and are usually brutal and violent. There have been female-on-male gang rapes of the same variety as well.