to wonder about the definition of rape

[Justforlaughs]

Partly inspired by the thread about rape being common, I was wondering what people class as rape. Two examples, that I would be interested in your views on. Would either/ both of these class as rape or not.

1. Girl goes to stay at friends house, gets drunk. Friend goes to bed. Girl goes to bathroom, friends DP comes in and wants to have sex. Girl doesn't want to but being very drunk doesn't want to wake her friend up so doesn't scream or fight, just says no repeatedly. She does mean, no, but they have sex anyway.

2)Girl goes to a house party, gets drunk. Goes to bed with her boyfriend and passes out. Wakes up in the same bed, no sign of boyfriend but there are 3 other boys/ men in the bed with her. They say that they all had sex with her when she was out cold. She doesn't remember anything, but they say that she didn't protest.

So what does the mumsnet jury think?

I once drunkenly came home and left the patio open for the cats whilst I passed out quite comfortably on the sofa ,I woke up to an intruder who legged it when I confronted him.

The only reason I called the police to report it was that I had a really good look at him and thought there might have been a spate of break-ins or something that it might help with. I fully expected to be read the riot act and treated like a dickhead for leaving my house wide open over night.

That didn't happen at all - the police treated me 100% seriously and sniffer dogs (god knows what the neighbours thought!) and an ID line up later the guy was given a suspended sentence. I was shocked because I believed all those tales about leaving your door open meant anyone could enter - the policeman who dealt with me said it's completely untrue. Your insurance company can argue it, but the law won't.

My point is, that yes a lot of the above was my own fault and stupidity. There was a lot I could have done to prevent some randomer gaining access to my home - it doesn't mean that it's not still illegal to take advantage of my stupid/ill-advised decisions. It also means that preventative advice is still valid - but none of us are infallible and luckily most laws aren't dependent on us being perfect all of the time.

That's a very good point sparkly - this concept of 'degree of fault' is something that's sort of passed into our collective consciousness but it's wholly driven by the insurance companies! The police or justice system don't take burglary less seriously because you didn't dead bolt the door and fit an alarm - only an insurer will have an opinion on whether that affects the claim. A crime is still a crime.

Also when talking about tape there's a lot of 'magical thinking' that goes on. 'if I always take a cab I'll be safe' 'if I never get drunk I'll be safe' etc. then when something goes wrong and we are not safe, we internalise those messages and blame ourselves for not being smart enough/strong enough to protect ourselves.

A bottle of Jack Daniels doesn't put its penis inside you without consent. Only a rapist does that.

Actually yes, everyone is right about the theft.

I really think you should find a decent counsellor to help you see things for what they are. You really seem to be adamant that you are partially to blame, when you aren't at all.

I understand the comparisons with theft etc and I think to a point they're valid. BUT I would argue that by comparing rape with theft you subtly imply that your bodily integrity, or even your body itself, is a possession that can be taken from you and used if you don't guard it carefully enough. If you think that way then it makes sense to say "You shouldn't walk in the dark on your own," or "you shouldn't get drunk at parties" because if the woman's body is a possession that men covet then it's up to her to keep that possession safe by not putting it on display. In that way you also subtly imply that if your possessions (ie your body, or your sunglasses) are on display then it's only to be expected that they'll be robbed or abused in some way.

Do we really want to live in a society like that? That tells women that their bodies are merely fuck vessels for men and rather than going out and living life they must hide themselves away for fear that those vessels get "stolen" and "abused"? A person who rapes is not just taking something from the woman, the way a thief takes a purse, he is violating her dignity, her sense of safety, her very integrity as a person. He is saying that she is not a human, she is not someone deserving of respect and safety, she is merely there to be used, and if she doesn't realise that and behave with enough fear then she deserves what she gets.

Justforlaughs - nothing you did contributed to your rape. You were not to blame. You had the bad luck to be in the presence of rapists. They are utter utter shits who deserve the worst of life to hit them full force between the eyes. Please don't transfer any of their massive guilt onto yourself - let them carry it, it belongs to them. Let go of it and leave yourself free to carry the good things in life, the things you really deserve.

I had a female friend at uni who used to go to parties, get paralytic and be all over blokes she fancied at parties-it was quite gratuitous to watch. They didn't always know her, so didn't know how drunk she was or what she was like normally. She'd then go back to their rooms and they'd go to bed together. She would frequently say afterwards that she couldn't remember what happened at all-ie would wake up in someone else's bed and have no recollection of how she got there. Is that rape?

I don't mean to be controversial but I was just wondering what people's thoughts were on this.

I believed all those tales about leaving your door open meant anyone could enter... ...Your insurance company can argue it, but the law won't.

Where did you get that idea?

It totally depends Redlocks. If she started out the night thinking "I'm going to hook up with someone" and behaved the way she did in order to get a shag, and was ok with not really remembering it afterwards then it wasn't rape. It's just a method of picking people up and she's entitled to behave that way if that's what she wants.

In fact her behaviour sounds very much like the behaviour that a lot of abuse victims engage in as they get older - they become promiscuous and invite dodgy sexual situations for various complicated psychological reasons (which I can go into if you like).

Now, if at any stage they got back the guy's room and she gave any indication that she'd changed her mind, or if she passed out and the guy continued to have sex with her while she was unconscious then yes that was rape regardless of her motivations for being there in the first place. What matters is consent. Consent can be withdrawn at any point in the encounter and if the man ignores that then he is raping the woman.

this concept of 'degree of fault' is something that's sort of passed into our collective consciousness but it's wholly driven by the insurance companies!

Not entirely - courts can reduce compensation awards due to contributory negligence, e.g. tripping over something when you were drunk is likely to result in a lower payout if it could be reasonably expected that a sober person would not have tripped.

It usually doesn't go down well in the context of rape but a woman can be negligent and "it could have happened to anyone" isn't true in some cases. If you get bladdered and go to a hotel with a bunch of premiership footballers and don't want a spit roast that is negligent, much as the men are still fully to blame if any rape occurs. In the rush to absolve victims of this negligence in some quarters I wonder if it sends out the wrong message in terms of taking sensible steps to reduce risk to yourself.

I disagree Congo. I don't want my daughter to grow up in a society where rather than being a human being who can do as she likes, she is the keeper of a body that men will inevitably violate if she is "negligent." No matter how bladdered a woman is, where she goes or what she does, she is still ENTIRELY entitled to bodily integrity, at all times. Nothing she does will ever change that. No one can say "well what did she expect?" because in no situation should it be "expected" that a man, premiership footballer or not, will violate her.

Dana actually I agree with the specific comments you've made there, however if your daughter made a habit of getting paralytic and hanging out with lairy men of dubious character would you not advise her that she is exposing herself to danger? Or would you let her carry on without passing comment because she has the right not to violated?

CailinDana Sat 10-Aug-13 16:22:54

I disagree Congo. I don't want my daughter to grow up in a society where rather than being a human being who can do as she likes, she is the keeper of a body that men will inevitably violate if she is "negligent."

I don't think Congo is suggesting that it's inevitable.

No matter how bladdered a woman is, where she goes or what she does, she is still ENTIRELY entitled to bodily integrity, at all times. Nothing she does will ever change that. No one can say "well what did she expect?" because in no situation should it be "expected" that a man, premiership footballer or not, will violate her.

I don't think Congo is suggesting that rape is 'expected' either.

Congo's talking about mitigation of risk, in the same way that a man who didn't want to be assaulted would avoid certain pubs on a weekend. Men still get assaulted by drunken thugs in town centres, for no reason at all, but it's possible to mitigate the risk.

So what should women avoid in order to mitigate the risk?

Thing is, in the OPs case, first time she was at her friends house and second time she had gone to bed with her boyfriend. It isn't like she had gone off with footballers or what have you.

Talking like that on her thread when she already blames herself, is only going to lead to her blaming herself even more so. Surely she should of been safe having a drink at her friends house?

StraightJacket

Thing is, in the OPs case, first time she was at her friends house and second time she had gone to bed with her boyfriend. It isn't like she had gone off with footballers or what have you.

Talking like that on her thread when she already blames herself, is only going to lead to her blaming herself even more so.

Talking like what? I'm clarifying a point made by one poster which was misunderstood by another.

Surely she should of been safe having a drink at her friends house?

She should absolutely have been safe. The men who committed the crime have no excuse. But you seem to be assuming that I'm talking about all situations and being able to avoid all risk, and I'm not. To use the 'men outside the pub' analogy, even if you avoid the pub on a Friday night it doesn't mean you aren't going to be punched walking to the shops.

So flatpack, in your opinion, what should women avoid in order to reduce the risk of rape?

Also I'm not being picky, I honestly want to point out to you that you said "The men who committed the crime have no excuse." Is there a situation in which they would have an excuse?

I'm lurking with interest (just got here), and it's not really my thread, I just started it. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I've lived with mine for a long time now. Thanks again.

CailinDana

So flatpack, in your opinion, what should women avoid in order to reduce the risk of rape?

Do you honestly need me to tell you that? Because ISTM that you're basically looking for a fight and trying to pick holes in anyone who you think is suggesting that women aren't the victim here. Nobody's said that, nobody's trying to say that.

Also I'm not being picky, I honestly want to point out to you that you said "The men who committed the crime have no excuse." Is there a situation in which they would have an excuse?

You really ARE being picky. Really, really, really.

I'm honestly not flatpack. I am interested in your opinion and I'm asking you to expand upon it. You talk about mitigating risk, which is a practical suggestion and I wanted you to give more detail - how does a woman mitigate the risk of rape, day to day, in real terms?

I thought you were going to come up with a scenario that could arguably have been a grey area. I am seeing no grey in either of these examples at all. They are both rape.

"So what should women avoid in order to mitigate the risk?"

I'm also interested in the answer to this.

Similarly, if I left a young child in a hotel room while I had a drink and someone broke in and attacked them/ abducted them, you would all feel that I had failed as a parent, despite the fact that it was the perpetrator who was really in the wrong

In this case you are legally responsible for the child and you did not take reasonable care.

If you had been in the room, someone broke in, knocked you unconscious and abducted the child you would not be responsible.

Talks of going off with footballers etc I meant .

I personally thought that maybe the OP didn't need a debate on where andwhen women could lower the risksof being raped when she hherself already blames herself partially for her own rapes wrongly. I felt she could do with support to understand how in fact she wasn't at all at fault.

But maybe I was wrong to assume, especially since seeing her latest post.

Just hope you are ok OP

No matter how bladdered a woman is, where she goes or what she does, she is still ENTIRELY entitled to bodily integrity, at all times.

I'm "entitled" to not get murdered. It doesn't mean someone may not take away that entitlement on their own whim.

It wouldn't absolve them of any wrongdoing, but it would still be a bit late for me.