Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Was Bristol Palin raped?

943 replies

darleneoconnor · 20/06/2011 11:16

according to this bristol palin was so drunk when she conceived her son that she doesn't remember having sex.

Sounds like rape to me.

Then she was basically 'forced' to marry her rapist? WTF! Sometimes America sounds more like the middle east!

Quite a few forums are discussing this, with some

disgusting rape myths on this forum

OP posts:
Macaroona · 25/06/2011 10:52

Dittany - I think it's worth looking at the political situation Bristol found herself in. The pressure on her was immense. As feminists, we should examine why every possible scenario - consensual sex, rape, pressure, alcohol - holds implications for how women and girls are judged and in Bristol's case, become political tools.

It's not as simple as claiming she has lied - it's looking at the politics of sex, particularly from an extreme US right-wing pov. It's a lose-lose situation for Bristol, as SGM pointed out.

edam · 25/06/2011 10:48

Macaroona - Bristol or Sarah?

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 25/06/2011 10:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Macaroona · 25/06/2011 10:45

Alice - I'm obviously selecting parts that back up what I'm saying - what's your issue with that? If you want to quote from the article to enter a discussion about its points, please do. I'm not trying to misrepresent the thrust of the article Confused

Dittany - thanks for your reply. I understand your pov.

AliceWhirled · 25/06/2011 10:44

That means you win, doesn't it? Wink

dittany · 25/06/2011 10:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

dittany · 25/06/2011 10:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

AliceWhirled · 25/06/2011 10:40

Macaroona - again selective. Hmm

Macaroona · 25/06/2011 10:38

Edam - she's releasing an autobiography, and gave quotes to the press for the purpose of starting public discussion.

dittany · 25/06/2011 10:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

edam · 25/06/2011 10:36

poor girl. Not only does her whole situation sound miserable, she's now got complete strangers all over the net discussing her most personal details. Details that should be no-one's business but hers and the other person involved.

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 25/06/2011 10:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Macaroona · 25/06/2011 10:31

Dittany - can I turn your question around? Why is it so important to you to call Levi a rapist? And does innocent before proven guilty not hold importance to you in cases of rape?

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 25/06/2011 10:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Macaroona · 25/06/2011 10:30

Dittany - please start discussing with people instead of constantly questioning posters' feminist credentials!

dittany · 25/06/2011 10:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 25/06/2011 10:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

dittany · 25/06/2011 10:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Macaroona · 25/06/2011 10:26

Alice - it is an interesting article. Judges have looked into the possibility of bringing in limits for alcohol before sex and found it to be unworkable. They found that the existing legislation is sufficient.

"Yesterday, Sir Igor Judge, president of the Queen's bench division of the high court, said the court's view was that the Sexual Offences Act 2003 "sufficiently addresses the issue of consent in the context of voluntary consumption of alcohol by the complainant".

He said problems did not arise from the legal principles, but "lie with infinite circumstances of human behaviour, usually taking place in private without independent evidence, and the consequent difficulties of proving this very serious offence." "

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 25/06/2011 10:26

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

StewieGriffinsMom · 25/06/2011 10:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Hullygully · 25/06/2011 10:25

I have given up engaging with you, I am deeply saddened that you see being sent love as a personal attack, but it all fits the profile. Sad.

AliceWhirled · 25/06/2011 10:23

Riven - here from rape crisis website. Consent bit right down the bottom. Apols for the long post others, feel free to scroll on by it is just a c&p for Riven.

What is the current definition of rape in law?

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 (the Act) came into force on the 1 May 2004. It repealed almost all of the existing statute law in relation to sexual offences. The purpose of the Act is to strengthen and modernise the law on sexual offences, whilst improving preventative measures and the protection of individuals from sexual offenders.

Under section 1(1) SOA 2003 a defendant, A, is guilty of rape if:

_ A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of B (the complainant) with his penis;

_ B does not consent to the penetration; and,

_ A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

The new offence of rape in section 1(1) SOA 2003 includes oral and anal penetration with a penis. This is a change from the previous law which was only concerned with vaginal penetration and used other offences to criminalise these forms of sexual violence (such as indecent assault). The person who commits the offence of rape must be a man (as the penetration has to be with a penis). However, both women and men may experience rape. If the penetration is with something other than a penis then the offence is assault by penetration

For the offence of rape to have been committed the defendant must have penetrated you without your consent, or continued to penetrate you after you withdrew your consent, and the defendant must not have reasonably believed that you were consenting.

It is not relevant what relationship, if any, a defendant has or had with you. Nor is it relevant if the act complained of occurred within a relationship. If the defendant intentionally penetrates with his penis the vagina, anus or mouth of the complainant without her consent where he does not reasonably believe in her consent the defendant has committed rape.

N.B. The wording regarding the law on our website uses the terminology that is commonly used in Law and legal proceedings. The offence of Rape (Sec 1(1) SOA 2003) can only be committed by a man; however, a woman can be charged with, or convicted of rape as a secondary party. For example, a woman may be convicted of rape where she facilitated (helped) a man who has raped another person.

The main provisions of the Act include the following:

* Rape is widened to include oral penetration
* Significant changes to the issue of consent and the abolition of the Morgan defence
* Specific offences relating to children under 13, 16 and 18
* Offences to protect vulnerable persons with a mental disorder
* Other miscellaneous offences
* Strengthening the notification requirements and providing new civil preventative orders

What is the definition of consent?

The Act has three important provisions relating to consent. They are:

* A statutory definition of consent
* The test of reasonable belief in consent
* The evidential and conclusive presumptions about consent and the defendant's belief in consent

Section 74 defines consent as "if she agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice" . In the offences of rape, assault by penetration, sexual assault and causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent, a person (A) is guilty of an offence if (s)he:

* Acts intentionally;
* (B) does not consent to the act; and
* does not reasonably believe that B consents.

Deciding whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents (subsection (2) of sections 1-4). It is likely that this will include a defendant's attributes, such as disability or extreme youth. This is a major change in the law and the Act abolishes the Morgan defence of a genuine though unreasonably mistaken belief as to the consent of the complainant. It means that the defendant (A) has the responsibility to ensure that (B) consents to the sexual activity at the time in question. It will be important for the police to ask the offender in interview what steps he took to satisfy him that the complainant consented.

dittany · 25/06/2011 10:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HRHMJOFMAGICJAMALAND · 25/06/2011 10:21

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn