Right you pesky feminists, which sort of rape is *worse* <Dawkins related>

ethelb I'm not sure I understand your post.

Rape and aggravated rape are not different crimes in UK law (unlike US) it is the same offence but with aggravating features. If you accept that you can have different levels of aggravation (as you can mitigation under UK law) then I'm not sure I see the distinction between a "categorization of aggravation" and a spectrum of offending behavior.

Dawkins is an utter knob. He is so patronising and mansplainy when how could he actually ever know anything about rape.

His comment about its like stealing £1 or life savings is bollocks as well. It's not comparable to rape and you can't put a different value on different "types" of rape.

This clarifies that there is categorisation of aggravation. As I said previously this is a fairly non-debatable point in UK law. Rape is rape and aggravated rape is aggravated rape. So it is odd that so many old rich white men choose to mull over it as though it is theoretical. It isn't. There are laws that cover this and personally I feel they are fairly adequate and being reviewed all the time to check they remain adequate. Obviously trial/conviction rates are not adequate.

www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual_offences/sentencing/
Starting Points

Single offence of rape by single offender: 5 years custody - victim 16 or over
8 years custody - victim 13 or over but under 16
10 years custody - victim under 13
Rape accompanied by aggravating factor: 8 years custody - victim 16 or over
10 years custody- victim aged 13 or over but under 16
13 years custody - victim under 13
Repeated Rape of same victim by single offender or rape involving multiple victims:
15 years custody

Aggravating factors

Abduction or detention
Offender aware that he is suffering from a sexually transmitted infection
More than one offender acting together
Abuse of trust
Offence motivated by prejudice
Sustained attack
Pregnancy or infection results
Offender ejaculated or caused victim to ejaculate
Background of intimidation or coercion
Use of drugs, alcohol or other substance to facilitate the offence

In AG's Reference No 73, 75 and 03 of 2010 R v Michael Anigbugu, Hyung-Woo Pyo and Mark Stuart McGee [2011] EWCA 633 the Court of Appeal considered two cases of women being seriously sexually assaulted at night when asleep in their own homes; and a third of a woman similarly assaulted whilst caring for a fragile elderly man whose home was burgled. Finding that unduly lenient sentences had been imposed in relation to all three defendants, the Court provided useful guidance on sentencing. This included: where rape is committed after or in the course of a burglary in a home, even in the absence of additional features beyond the rape and burglary, the starting point will rarely be less than 12 years imprisonment. They also identified further aggravating features including the taking of photographs of the victim which they described as ''a serious aggravating feature''.

As I say I agree it was a wrong example. However I think it opened up a broader discussion on the "categorization" of rape.

I realise it is not a popular view but I think there are a whole range of aggravating features that can make one rape worse than another both as related to the victim (age, vulnerability, health) of the victim and to the offending behaviour (length of attack etc - don't really want to go I to details).

The important concept is that in saying that something is worse you are not negating the experiences of those whose experiences fell elsewhere on the spectrum.

@Petula exactly!

I honestly don't know if I would find being raped by a partner better or worse than being raped by a stranger. That is why it is an odd, to the point of actually being a wrong, example for Dawkins to use.

Later on he sneered that people 'on Twitter' didn't realise that the scenario was the same as saying stealing a pound is not as bad as stealing someone's life savings, but that neither was something he condoned.

Why on earth didn't he use that example in the first place?!

the problem is that you're talking about individuals' experiences, so categorising and measuring is impossible except in the broadest terms (and even then...)

so a particular sexual assault may be more traumatic to that individual victim than a particular case of rape to another particular victim due to the nature/circumstances etc. but that's not to minimise either

"Mild rape" is a bizarre and unpleasant comment and I agree that "date rape" is aggravated by virtue of the fact that their is an appalling betrayal of trust, however I do believe their is a spectrum in relation to everything in this world.

My rape was hideous. But if my young DD was raped that would be a million times worse. That does not detract from my experience, it is just a acknowledgment of a fact.

"But ‘stranger rape’ is more likely to be reported in the news. As a result, an impression is created that these rapes are ‘more serious’ because they are more newsworthy. These stories fit our narrative of what rape looks like: a man with a knife hiding behind a bush. It’s familiar, and – importantly – it allows us to label the rapist as a freak or monster, someone who is not like anyone we know. It distances us from the fact that most rapists aren’t lone monsters roaming the streets terrorising women. They are husbands, boyfriends, fathers, brothers, colleagues and friends."

I like her response but I feel this bit is incorrect and as a journalist she should know better. Non-stranger rape is frequently not reported as if the reporter/newspaper identify the relationship of the defendant with the victim could compromise the anonymity of the rape victim. Which is against reporting restrictions in the vast majority of cases.

sorry crotchmaven i've pretty much repeated what you said in your final sentence

i've said it already, but why oh why in these bullshitty dick-swinging theoretical type discussions is the analogy of rape used so frequently and so lightly? i assume it's because for these men the concept of rape is just that - a conceptual and intellectual problem that doesn't touch them

Well, there's another man with whom women should make sure they are never alone. And hope is never on a jury in a case involving consent.

Oh, to have the luxury of the whole concept being pretty much theoretical.

i would like to know how he knows.

i have an analogy:

twatty know it all rent-a-gob professional atheists are bad,twatty know it all rent-a-gob professional atheists who are richard dawkins are worse

If they weren't 100% sure you were consenting, then yes, they were rapists. I say this as a fellow expert in self blame.

This is a really good response: www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/richard-dawkins-is-wrong-to-suggest-that-there-can-be-varying-degrees-of-severity-involved-in-rape-9635662.html

I think he's a self-satisfied arsehole, personally.

Thank you Petula.

Yes Catkisser. I see that. But also I'm thinking about times I didn't really want to. I didn't do anything to really indicate that I didn't want to (beyond a general lack of participation, but then we're not all Hollywood types are we?), but it still happened. I'm retrospectively trying to classify this. I usually kind of blamed myself for getting into that situation. Ok, I know... we could talk about that. But from the man's perspective - were they rapists?

Actually I've changed my mind. he did. I only read the first tweet, note I've read all of them. nobber. ffs.

i have a horrible feeling that "mild" rape falls within the same category as "blurred lines"

What the actual fuck is a "mild" rape