New rape law allows change of mind

[Velociryx]

I love phrases like that....

"Many" rape cases lack physical evidence.

Really? How many? What percentage? Of the total number of rape cases prosecuted last year, what percentage of them lacked any form of physical evidence (bruising, torn articles of clothing, semen)....how many?

Statistics aside, you still haven't addressed the point I brought up earlier, that being....a couple are having sex....in the midst of the act, the woman "changes her mind." Per your definition, at that INSTANT, it's rape.

Meaning, the man has no opportunity to respond whatsoever....no opportunity to pull away. Too late. Already rape.

No, I don't have any quick, easy answers for crimes on the other side of the coin (women forced to have sex under threat of violence). I admit that it happens. Can you now admit that this new law opens the door for a whole new field of abuse? Sure, it might catch a couple more rapists. It might also send a lot of men to jail just cos "she said."

But that's okay, isn't it?

-=Vel=-

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


I think it's just because they didn't have time to say it.

*Sava Commences sex*

Girl: "No I--"

*Girl looks over, Sava is asleep*

And the judges say
6/10 for Sava
10/10 for Boris

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher
Aye, so if she is drunk, and he bought her the drinks, and she never says 'yes' or 'no' then this rape?... If she feels afterwards that she did not want to have sex?

Under Illinois law, if the person is not in a frame of mind able to reasonably give consent, i.e., they were passed out, then yes, it's rape. Hence the date-rape drug. She's not only unable to say no, she won't even be able to remember whether or not she was raped.

Guess that's okay though, because she agreed to have a drink and there's no physical evidence (for Sava).

[Sava]

Go ask COAR, if it still exists at DePaul. More than 90% of all rape cases end in dismissal (or did at the time the statistic was taken, in the early 90s).

I haven't been going to DePaul for nearly a year now.

And that stat, even if it's true, really isn't relevant unless it's compared against actual cases of rape. It's possible that 90% of cases don't have sufficient evidence to prove rape.

*Sava Commences sex*

Girl: "No I--"

*Girl looks over, Sava is asleep*

nah, it's more like 30 minutes of foreplay/oral; then about another 30 minutes of her riding me. The key to great sex (for men) is satisfying your woman first... then letting her do you.

If after the first phase or so, the girl I was with said "no", I would stop... talk... but if she just didn't want to have sex for no important reason, I'd tell her to get lost. If there was some other issue, I'd definitely talk and work it out. For me, having sex with someone who wants me as much as I want them is a turn-on. If the interest isn't there, I don't want any part of it.

[mrmitchell]

Consent.

Before the ****ing, the woman says "Let's ****" or "Yeah, we can ****" or the similar. This is an example of consent. Without consent, it is illegal to continue to the actual ****ing.

During the ****ing, it's an opt-out thing, obviously. Should the woman changer her mind mid-****, the man should pull out reasonably soon. What is reasonably? No one knows. This is why the law should not be there--more attention to the consequences of the **** should be given BEFORE the ****, not during it.

After the ****ing, although some parties doubt this, the woman is within her legal rights to break up, claim the **** a rape, and get a hefty legal settlement. This precedent has not been tested against in a court of law; why would you not trust the little innocent thing?

[Sava]

Guess that's okay though, because she agreed to have a drink and there's no physical evidence (for Sava).

At least you aren't totally daft.

[Japher]

Vel

I would say that time frame of "stopping" would have to consider whether or not the person wanting to "stop" is be restrained.

Personally, I feel the restraining part is wrong and worthy of charges (kidnapping, etc. I am sure there is a law about holding someone against their will)... Also, sexual assualt should be brought up. Yet, calling it rape brings up big issues that I think this law blurs.

--

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by mrmitchell
During the ****ing, it's an opt-out thing, obviously. Should the woman changer her mind mid-****, the man should pull out reasonably soon. What is reasonably? No one knows. This is why the law should not be there--more attention to the consequences of the **** should be given BEFORE the ****, not during it.

IIRC, the definition of manslaughter is when someone kills another person accidentally, but in a method that they should have reasonably known would cause death.

So you would say that manslaugher should not be a crime?

[Japher]

We are saying that Rape requires "no" consent at all.

Yet, in these cases consent was given, thus these events are more along the lines of manslaughter and rape is akin to murder.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Velociryx
(bruising, torn articles of clothing, semen)

I'm sorry your honor, but she likes it rough. Torn clothing and semen are not evidence of rape in and of themselves. Semen is evidence of sex, not rape.

Statistics aside, you still haven't addressed the point I brought up earlier, that being....a couple are having sex....in the midst of the act, the woman "changes her mind." Per your definition, at that INSTANT, it's rape.

If she says stop, you stop. You don't keep going and then stop. What is so hard to understand about this?

Can you now admit that this new law opens the door for a whole new field of abuse? Sure, it might catch a couple more rapists. It might also send a lot of men to jail just cos "she said."

But that's okay, isn't it?

-=Vel=-

No, I can't admit it because I don't believe it to be the case. Your argument is exactly the same as those put forward by those who argued against the very notion of date rape and spousal rape. I do not believe that this is going to lead to a rash of men getting tossed into jail for not stopping soon enough.

The divide is between men who think women are human beings and those who think women are jizz jars. If you have respect for your partner, then this law won't be a problem fo you. If you simply use women to masturbate into, then maybe you'll find out what rape is like from the other end.

[Sava]

Tingkai, that's totally irrelevant.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Sava

nah, it's more like 30 minutes of foreplay/oral; then about another 30 minutes of her riding me. The key to great sex (for men) is satisfying your woman first... then letting her do you.

First, TMI

Second, if sex only lasts a total of an hour for you, with foreplay, I don't think I will be taking any lessons in the art from you, thanks.

[Sava]

Second, if sex only lasts a total of an hour for you, with foreplay, I don't think I will be taking any lessons in the art from you, thanks.

That's on average... and plus, this is just what would be considered sexual relations. It doesn't take into account the entire encounter. Since my GF and I live about 90 minutes apart now, we don't have the time to spend a whole day or night ****ing. And plus, as fun as it is, sex isnt' the be all end all of a relationship. I feel sorry for you if sex is all you have.

Sorry about the TMI, but you opened the door to the specifics, I felt it necessary to set the record straight

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher
We are saying that Rape requires "no" consent at all.

Yet, in these cases consent was given, thus these events are more along the lines of manslaughter and rape is akin to murder.

And yet Manslaughter is a very serious crime which can land you in prison for as much as 25 years, same as 2nd degree murder.

So you just don't want us to call it rape and you'll be happy with it? Well, in Illinois the law outlaws sexual assault, not rape.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Sava
That's on average... and plus, this is just what would be considered sexual relations. It doesn't take into account the entire encounter. Since my GF and I live about 90 minutes apart now, we don't have the time to spend a whole day or night ****ing. And plus, as fun as it is, sex isnt' the be all end all of a relationship. I feel sorry for you if sex is all you have.

Excuses, excuses.

Yes, because I like to spend more than the length of an ER episode enjoying sex, OBVIOUSLY I must sacrifice the other aspects of a relationship.

Sorry about the TMI, but you opened the door to the specifics, I felt it necessary to set the record straight

Nothing I posted required a factual account of your sex life (if you must call that sex!), so it's still T-M-I!