Ken Clarke differentiates date rape from 'serious rape'

[NotFromConcentrate]

AIBU to think it's time he went?

He should be thrown out!

Non-violent rape doesn't exist as hairylegs puts it, The act of forcing a penis into a womans vagina, when the woman doesn't want it there IS an extremely violent act.

Yellowstone, if you start defining date rape as OK, or not really serious, you are giving any man the green light to go ahead and force himself on someone who has just gone out for a drink. Or any friend or colleague or ex-girlfriend. Or current girlfriend who doesn't actually want to have sex right now, thanks very much.

Do you really think of yourself as constantly sexually available to any man in your social circle?

hmm, not sure. obviously yes as he's a tory but not for this. think he was simply inept. my only point about rape is the difference we have in uk from usa where they have 'statutory rape' i think, eg where 16 yr old boy/girl has sex with boy/girlfriend who is below age of consent legally but did actually consent. we don't have that, its still rape even where it is consensual. we were discussing this at dinner with teens and they think that is the only opt out possible, all other instances they should get really high sentences.

MissMelo - EXACTLY

My dp asked me what date-rape was today. I explained and he said he thought that was the case, but that what this twunt had said made him think that date rape was having sex with somebody underage. Which is of course actually statuatory rape, still a serious crime of course, but not date rape!

Date rape is completely non-consential. In some cases of underage sex, there may have been "consent" given, but it is seen, quite rightly, that the person is too young to give proper consent. ANY case where anyone is forced or coerced into having sex is a VERY serious crime!

Right. I was raped by a man I knew and considered a friend, As a result, my partner and I had to have a (not Jeremy Kyle style) DNA test on said child when born. It is horrific. MY rapist seved a prison setence. Many don't.And he probably did because my parents and my partner's parents paid good money for good lawyers - disclaimer - obviously eveyone gets the same rights! Not.

I should tell you - the fact I said "Hi" and allowed him to buy me a drink was evidence of me provoking him.

Sorry just read the previous posts about statutory rape - I stand corrected. My point was, date rape is not underage sex!

Seems people are not reading the thread:

I know this has been said by kungfupanda and others time and time again, but just for clarity:

Over 13 and under 16 and it is consensual sex, the offence is "sexual activity with a child". If there is no consent, then it is rape. Under 13 - consent is off the legal table as in it doesn't matter whether a girl consents or not, it is still rape.

We do not have the term "statutory rape" in this country, although that is what the "Under 13" element is, in effect. And if two people in the 13-16 age bracket have consensual sex, the offence is "sexual activity with a child" and is rarely prosecuted. It's all here

I swear I'll keep copying and pasting that every time I see the confusion popping up. I'm not around tomorrow, so if anyone else wants to do the same. It is vital that we have clarity on this because rape is not a complicated crime. It is penetration with a penis of the vagina, anus or mouth without consent.

All of you who have bravely shared your stories, I am sorry they did those things to you. And I am sorry you are doing it in the face of extreme insensitivity.

I was 22. It was still rape. Yet my assailant was convicted of ABH (he phyically injured me) and aggravated sexual assault. Not rape. I knew him, see.

I will never forget having to describe the assault and also justifying myself whilst 7 months pregnant.

I was wearing "provocative clothing!"

Yes AyeRobot you're right. I was just so annoyed that after listening to the hoo-ha on the news my dp thought that date rape was under-age sex!

Try court at 22 and pregnant. Not, actually, a laugh.

When a barrister says: Please describe in detail, what happened. Well a little bit dies inside.

cps guidelines

IKeepThemInACage Yes most definitely in answer to someone I knew but no not by a stranger. And I think I probably am therefore able to say that the latter would be unimaginably and infinitely worse.

How could anyone sensible say otherwise?

That view in no way condones rape between people already aquainted, not in the least, it just recognises degrees of severity, that's all.

edam where precisely did I say 'date rape' was OK. I said Ken Clarke didn't say it was OK. How that translates into me saying I think it's OK I really don't know.

Instead of the refrain that 'rape is rape', perhaps someone could explain how a very violent assault by a complete stranger can be viewed in the same degree as unwelcome sex by a previous partner or husband which lacks any additional aggravation (in the legal sense).

Murder is murder but we all know that some murders are inherently more sickening than others. That's not to condone any murder.

Yellowstone - sorry but it's almost worse if it's a man you know who rapes you. Afterwards you find it hard to trust any male friends, colleagues or family members ever, which is deeply sad because most men are decent.
You think that if they look at you it's in a sexual way and it's hard to stop worrying that they are planning to attack you.
You will wonder why the rapist chose you - you feel such a fool, and so ashamed. Rape by a male acquaintance is evil because it is often planned - the rapist can manipulate the situation because they know you - they will have chosen a 'soft' victim who is less likely to resist, and afterwards they will say sorry and make you feel guilty for 'leading them on'.
They know you're unlikely to report them which means they will attack other women too.

Samjam That just sounds so horrific.

It's time he went.

I dont think his position is tenable. He should go.

Having now heard what KC said - I wonder how the people here who are adamant that all rape is "evil" (for lack of a better word), would feel if their 16 year old son were sentenced to 12 years for having sex with their 15 + 9 months old gf. Things are not so black and white.

AlpinePony, as people have repeatedly posted in this thread that is NOT rape and said 16 year old boy would NOT be charged with rape unless the girl said he raped her OR if she was under 13. He would more than likely not be charged at all, but even if he was the charge would be sexual activity with a child. AyeRobot re-posted this about 10 posts up the thread.

sigh

I'll do it for you AyeRobot .......

"I know this has been said by kungfupanda and others time and time again, but just for clarity:

Over 13 and under 16 and it is consensual sex, the offence is "sexual activity with a child". If there is no consent, then it is rape. Under 13 - consent is off the legal table as in it doesn't matter whether a girl consents or not, it is still rape.

We do not have the term "statutory rape" in this country, although that is what the "Under 13" element is, in effect. And if two people in the 13-16 age bracket have consensual sex, the offence is "sexual activity with a child" and is rarely prosecuted.