Woman forces man to have sex with her at knife point, stabs him when he refuses - article does not mentionthe word "rape".

Nah. I'm definitely man, and nothing to apologise for.

I think this was a stirring post; I think it also revealed some shocking ignorance about the way consent works.

"I have never seen MRA used to mean "male rape apologist" - but if the cap fits......

should be doesn't mention the words sexual assault.

With regard to the article

It doesn't mention sexual assault either.

'It does feel a bit like a what about the menz post.'

Sweet. But stop it, really. You'll be apologizing for being male next. Not good.

It does feel a bit like a what about the menz post.

Still useful if it's broadened understanding of sexual assault.

I have never seen MRA used to mean "male rape apologist" - in fact I have never seen that term used in a gendered way at all.

I agree with Morris' post at 7:33, the DM and the OP clearly both have an agenda to push, neither of them being to further the cause of support for male victims of sexual abuse.

Since when has MRA meant 'Male Rape Apologist" [out of touch emoticon]

Ah, the benefit of the two-tone TLA :o

Whatmeworry Wed 29-Aug-12 10:18:36
And IMO throwing the term "Male Rape Apologist" at anyone who disagrees with you is crass.

in this context I suspect MRA is Men's Right Activists.

Women can't technically rape men. As has been explained on this thread

....and has been pointed out patiently over and over to you and your crowd, that's a definition technicaility - the crime is just as bad.

And IMO throwing the term "Male Rape Apologist" at anyone who disagrees with you is crass.

It's your age Hully. Have you tried a zimmer frame?

I...I....I...

I didn't say they had.

I did say nobody on this thread is regardingbit as a bit of a laugh.

No they can't rape men, but as explained on here it will bloody well feel like rape to the victim. Change that sentence to "sexually assaulting men and sexually assaulting men" if you want.

A bit of a laugh? Read the comments at the end of the article.
"Taxi!!!!!"
"At least this woman is far hotter than the original."
And there'll be loads more comments like that in pubs and offices up and down the country.

"Many people associate feminism with equality and don't like the inequality of men raping women being bad, but women raping men not technically being rape and being a bit of a laugh."

Women can't technically rape men. As has been explained on this thread.

And nobodynon here has said anything about it being a "bit of a laugh"

Saying that 'violence against women in society is bad' as opposed to 'violence against people/vulnerable people in society is bad' does rather imply that 'violence against men in society isn't bad'.
Many people associate feminism with equality and don't like the inequality of men raping women being bad, but women raping men not technically being rape and being a bit of a laugh.

I don't thing any sane person struggles with the idea that men can be sexually assaulted. Or that consent is a two way street- no should mean no regardless of gender or sexuality. Some people may not know that men's errections are not necessarily connected with arousal or desire, but having read this thread, they do now. And of course a man who has been sexually assaulted should have the right recourse, without the silly sniggering"wish I had your problems mate" response that any case made public seems to get.

What I think some of us are struggling with is the idea implicit in some posts on here, the agenda of MRA and some reporting inn the press that "look, women can be rapists too" which is inteded to move the spotlight away from men, who are, incidents like this notwithstanding, th perpetrators in the vast mqjrotuiybofnrape and sexual assault cases.

It says he phoned 999 - I didn't think that would work in Romania.

Why are you even posting this? Just to goad feminists

The only feminists here being " goaded" are those who struggle* with the idea that sex crimes are sex crimes irrespective of which sex is being the criminal

*sadly, very predictable

Ok so I failed. I clicked the dreaded link.

The article is illustrated with pictures of the accused, showing her face only.

There is also a photo of angelina jolie, so we can compare their looks. The jolie picture is full length and shows her naked leg.

I think its fair to say the dm are not trying to open a serious debate about the law on sexual attacks on men.

I only glanced at the comments but one was 'she looks nothing like angelina'.

It isn't about the title.
It's just like, when there's a tidal wave of rape, rape myths and undermining of women, as soon as there is a drop of violence against men, people come on here as if it is proof of something. As if it undermines the feminist concern with the problem of violence against women in society.

I'm not saying it isn't important, IMO it isn't appropriate that it is in the feminist section.

The law on rape is so wrong. How do we expect men to report when in these scenarios, they have no chance at justice?

An erection can be involuntary. Women can become aroused and orgasm during rape. Doesn't mean it's not rape.

No means no. The law should reflect that for men as well, however rare female on male rape is. The law should protect EVERYBODY from rape.

I don't understand why people are assuming the OP posted to goad? I would have posted here too because it is a serious equality issue and I believe it needs to be discussed and laws need to protect everybody.