I can't tell what specific case you are referring to, so I can't say that you aren't falling into the exact foolish fallacy I pointed out a number of posts ago.
The one point you have is that the tautological formulations of "rape culture" do suffer from bordering on your formulation of "murder culture".
Not a rape accusation, but a public circus over a public accusation, usually before any charges are filed or considered. So, no.Originally Posted by Greyblades
I am trying to be generous to you, but do you really not understand that in legal terms and in statistical terms "sexual assault" and "rape" are indeed two distinct crimes that are treated differently, but that both fall under the broader category of sexual crime?counting it as it's own crime, so I'm not sure why its presented as proof of a rape culture.
Let me be more straightforward: municipalities pay for rape kits and their testing. Don't be obtuse.So you agree with me.
No - the legal standard is that, like juveniles and animals, an intoxicated individual is incompetent to give consent. When intoxication results for a given individual under given circumstances, or the wider philosophical questions surrounding the nature of law in light of philosophy of mind, do not change that this is the given legal standard that we rule by.So I can have sex with a willing woman but if she has any amount of alcohol in her it's rape?
Bookmarks