‘Gray Rape’: A New Form of Date Rape?

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by CrONoS
No; the case is if one is clearly drunk and teh other one is clearly sober.

That's not what the article is talking about:

But in the course of her reporting, Ms. Stepp said, she came across descriptions of “sexual encounters where usually both parties were very drunk and really didn’t know what they had said to each other the next morning.” In such cases, consent is uncertain. Such cases are more likely to emerge today, Ms. Stepp argued in the article, in an era when sexual boundaries and rules for women have loosened and when it has become socially acceptable for women to pursue casual sex.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


If you are super drunk you also lack the mental intent to committ rape.

If both are very drunk, then it is like two kids who have sex with eachother. Both should get 'mild' rape charges, like both kids getting 'mild' statuatory rape charges.

There should definitely be a difference between violent rape and non-violent rape.

So you'd arrest the "Johns" for rape, even if they didn't know the circumstances? After all, rape is illegal.

The fact that prostitution is very often rape is the reason I would make prostitution illegal. If prostitution was always or even almost always the 'I want a Jetta' type, then I would go for legal and regulated.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


I'm not entirely sure what you're saying in the first example. If you mean that the prostitute gives sex to the "black marketers" in return for them not killing her, I'd agree that's rape. But if you mean that her motivation for becoming a prostitute is to earn money to pay off said black marketers, then I would not agree that is rape.

There are many cases where women are forced into prostitution to pay those they owe. If they don't turn tricks, they are beat/etc.

Are you just unfamiliar with the reason most people have for prostitution being illegal?

JM

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
If both are very drunk, then it is like two kids who have sex with eachother. Both should get 'mild' rape charges, like both kids getting 'mild' statuatory rape charges.

When two minors of the same age have sex with each other, how often is it that either faces any charges? And I can't think of any circumstances in which BOTH would be charged.

Regardless, this statement is ludicrous. Beyond being virtually unenforceable, there is no such thing as a "mild" rape charge. In many states, if not most, a single charge lands someone forever on a sex offender list. Any employer who ran a background check would see a rape charge, mild or not. And all because both people were drunk when they had sex? What an awful idea.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
There are many cases where women are forced into prostitution to pay those they owe. If they don't turn tricks, they are beat/etc.

Are you just unfamiliar with the reason most people have for prostitution being illegal?

JM

If someone is forced to be a prostitute by someone else, that's already a crime. If someone is blackmailing someone, that's a crime.

But are you seriously suggesting that an unwitting john be charged with rape, if the prostitute happens to be one who is being blackmailed by someone else, unbeknownst to the john?

If you want to have a discussion about why prostitution should or shouldn't be legal (it should), that's a different issue and tangental to this thread.

[Jon Miller]

I am saying it was rape. I am not saying that the John should be charged with rape. For a lot of statutory rape, we just give a slap on the wrists. That would be fine in this case.

The sex offender list is in many cases ridiculous. It is because it groups rapists with someone who had sex with his 16 yearold girlfriend and her parents didn't want him to.

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
If both are very drunk, then it is like two kids who have sex with eachother. Both should get 'mild' rape charges, like both kids getting 'mild' statuatory rape charges.

There should definitely be a difference between violent rape and non-violent rape.

"mild" rape charge?! Any rape charge will get you on the sex offenders list. Furthermore, I don't think its rape AT ALL! If both are drunk, then it was just two people with similar level of consent/intent and no crime.

After all, the vast majority of crimes require a guilty intent.

The fact that prostitution is very often rape is the reason I would make prostitution illegal. If prostitution was always or even almost always the 'I want a Jetta' type, then I would go for legal and regulated.

That doesn't answer the question. Besides prostitution is already illegal. So what are you adding on top of that?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
For a lot of statutory rape, we just give a slap on the wrists. That would be fine in this case.

They are still charged with rape.

The sex offender list is in many cases ridiculous. It is because it groups rapists with someone who had sex with his 16 yearold girlfriend and her parents didn't want him to.

It still exists.

[Jon Miller]

I was giving the reason that most people give for prostitution being illegal as a further example of this consent/nonconsent issue.

And this doesn't address the issue of comparing two drunk people ****ing to two kids ****ing.

I agree that kids ****ing only gets the law involved if the parents want it to. But still....

JM

[Jon Miller]

We are talking about laws here. Bad ones like the sex offender list should be changed.

JM

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
I am saying it was rape. I am not saying that the John should be charged with rape. For a lot of statutory rape, we just give a slap on the wrists. That would be fine in this case.

How about just charging the john with the relevant crime, which would be solicitation of sex?

At some point, there is a personal responsibility for the prostitute here. While her options are limited, the notion that her engaging in illegal activity is exonerated by her circumstances is anathema to how I and I wager most people understand the law. People find themselves "forced" into unsavory positions by all kinds of circumstances.

It was said earlier that consent is consent. I agree with that, unless one of the parties involved with the actual sex act is coercing the other to give consent. Otherwise, especially in a paid transaction, the consent of the prostitute is obvious and real, however much she may loathe her circumstances.

The sex offender list is in many cases ridiculous. It is because it groups rapists with someone who had sex with his 16 yearold girlfriend and her parents didn't want him to.

JM

All the more reason not to add thousands to its rolls because they had drunken sex. Good lord, I can't believe anyone (other than Ben Kenobi perhaps) is actually arguing that two drunk people should be charged with a criminal offense for having sex with each other.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
We are talking about laws here. Bad ones like the sex offender list should be changed.

What's the likeihood they will be?

And this doesn't address the issue of comparing two drunk people ****ing to two kids ****ing.

Yeah, with two drunk people, I don't think you have rape at all.

[Jon Miller]

I argue that two drunk people should get charged (not put on sex offender lists or face prison time, community service is fine) for having sex with eachother.

Just like two kids.

Drunk people are incapable of giving consent. Just like kids. Or retarded people.

I agree that it takes a lot of drunk to get to that level (I have been there, I no longer get there, thankfully no one took advantage of me).

I am not saying that the state should go out looking for drunk people and charging both. It just isn't reasonable without a big invasion of privacy. However, if one person is charging another with rape, and they were both drunk. Then both should get the same response as if they statutory raped each other now. Similarly, if only one was drunk (the accuser), then the accused should get statutory rape charged.

And face it, ethically John's are responsible for the conditions the prostitue is in. If she is a sex slave then the John is party to that. If she is being forced, then the John is party to that, even if he didn't physically force her himself.

JM

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

And this doesn't address the issue of comparing two drunk people ****ing to two kids ****ing.

Yeah, with two drunk people, I don't think you have rape at all.

What's the differnece?

JM

[Imran Siddiqui]

I argue that two drunk people should get charged (not put on sex offender lists or face prison time, community service is fine) for having sex with eachother

And I don't think they should.

Just like two kids.

Two kids shouldn't get charged either (I assume both are under statutory limit)

Drunk people are incapable of giving consent. Just like kids. Or retarded people.

So two mentally retarded people who have sex should get charged for rape? How can two mentally retarded people ever get married in that case?

Drunk people may be incapable of given consent, they are also incapable of the mens rea (guilty intent) to commit the crime of rape.

However, if one person is charging another with rape, and they were both drunk. Then both should get the same response as if they statutory raped each other now.

I don't see why at all. He didn't have the intent to rape.

ethically John's are responsible for the conditions the prostitue is in. If she is a sex slave then the John is party to that. If she is being forced, then the John is party to that, even if he didn't physically force her himself.

No, John's aren't. That's like saying that drug users are responsible for the conditions the drug dealer is in.