To not see why people are so annoyed...?

[curiousgeorgie]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2709730/Richard-Dawkins-sparks-outrage-Twitter-debate-saying-date-rape-bad-stranger-rape-worse.html

Sorry for the daily mail link, I know some don't like that.

I think I agree with him and I don't think it takes anything away from victims.... Am I wrong?

Thank you mostwicked

RE 'Mild' paedophilia.

When my abuser abused me it was probably what was called mild but what if it's persistent mild paedophilic abuse? I know for a fact that I was one of many that he abused.

I was seven.
I don't feel traumatised now (Although I do wonder how it shaped me given that I kept it a secret for so long) but I sure as hell think he shouldn't have done it over and over to several girls.

You see "mild" might mean all sorts of things; happened once, no touching, no penetration, no threats to kill.......
It's such an uncomfortable area for discussion, which suits the paedophiles I guess.
I think everyone would agree that "mild" is not an appropriate word in this context.

It was a teacher at his school, TheRealAmandaClarke.

Why isn't the word mild used for other types of crime? Don't think I've ever read of someome being mildly assaulted or mildly burgled.
Mild is a comparative term, and other offences do have different levels.
Common assault, ABH & GBH are different types of assault where common assault is mild in comparison to GBH.
Burglary has a wide range of factors that would make some offences mild in comparison to others. Someone stealing a lawnmower from a shed when the owner was out, is a milder offence, than breaking into someone's house when they are in bed, threatening them with violence, trashing the house and stealing the family jewels.
Images of child abuse are defined by a level 1-5 where 1 is the mildest and 5 is the most serious. No-one is suggesting that level 1 is no big deal. It is still a crime and is still a serious offence, but it is nowhere near as serious as level 5.

He's essentially minimising rape and abuse just for the sake of maintaining his own cognitive dissonance.
Or he genuinely feels no lasting affects from his experience. Are you saying he is wrong to feel that, and he should be traumatised?
Both Phaedra and I described experiences that other people would consider rape, but we feel indifferent about them. I certainly don't have any conflicting feelings about my exh, I wouldn't piss on him if he was fire, and I had no difficulty in getting him arrested and charged when he hit me. It didn't even cross my mind to add the non-consensual sex to my statement.

How someone feels about their own personal experience, does not diminish the feelings of someone else who feels different, and it doesn't minimise the offence either. It is a free personal choice whether someone chooses to pursue a legal prosecution or not, and one person choosing not to, doesn't mean that they think that other people shouldn't.

I see oxford

It's very subjective, yes.
I imagine it might be "worse" for an 8 yo to have her own father "talk dirty" to her than for the same person, as a 17 yo to be groped by a stranger.
But who knows? It's not clear cut is it?
Bloody men. What's wrong with them?

he needs to keep telling himself that it wasn't so bad in order to not address what a man whom he liked, admired, and was dependent on, chose to do to him

He has described the single, extremely brief experience:
"He pulled me onto his knee and put his hand inside my shorts. He did no more than have a little feel, but it was extremely disagreeable (the cremasteric reflex is not painful, but in a skin-crawling, creepy way it is almost worse than painful) as well as embarrassing."

The teacher later killed himself. He's not minimising abuse, he recognises how horrific it is, but his experience lasted a matter of seconds and he just doesn't see it anywhere near as bad as many other people have suffered.
I know someone who was repeatedly raped by his teacher at boarding school. What RD experienced was mild by comparison, but it was still wrong and disgusting.

but for him he claims (not disputing this at all) it has not had a lasting impact on his life

others will have experienced something similar and it has had a lasting impact on them

this is why rape and sexual abuse should not be categorised like RH did. the person who has abused/raped has made the choice that their victim has no choice in, its violation of a person and that person has to live with that for the rest of their lives, some suffer greatly others less so and no one knows (and the perpetrator certainly does not care) how the victim may deal with what has happened

Sickening.

He cannot extrapolate his own experience to everyone else.

Thought he is meant to be intelligent.

Legal and sentencing aspects is a different argument.

this is why rape and sexual abuse should not be categorised like RH did

So the repeated sexual violation of a child is exactly the same as a brief grope?
And all images of child abuse should have an equal grading?

are you talking about how it is dealt with in the courts again

should I/you/intellectual atheist twat decide someone's experience as not life changing just because it is not as brutal as another's or was not by a family member so not so much trust has been broken

should rape/abuse be graded so victims know how much they can claim they have suffered or not suffered

yes repeated abuse may have less a less detrimental effect on a person that what you describe as a grope which very 70's language. That is apparently all that Rolf Harris and all those other creepy men did now in 2014 we see it for what it truly is and that is sexual abuse and no one knows how the victim will deal with what has happened to them

He cannot extrapolate his own experience to everyone else.
He doesn't, he describes:
"the traumatising effect that pedophile abuse can have on children, sometimes scarring them psychologically for life"

but he cannot put his own experience in the same league as:
"adults whose childhood was blighted by an uncle perhaps, or even a parent, who would day after day, week after week, year after year, sexually abuse a vulnerable child"

I cannot understand how anyone can seriously argue that this example is equally as bad as his experience. Regardless of how the victim reacted to the abuse, the offences themselves are very different. One is clearly more severe than the other.

I agree with mostwicked

The reason the penalties for some crimes are more severe than others (usually not severe enough in the case of sexual offencesI would add) is surely becasue the "damage" to the victim can be, I don't know, consider by most/ a reasonable person to be differ depending on the type of assault/ associated factors/ aggravating circumstances or whatever.

The assault rd describes is serious and sickening. I think its an horrific thing to have done, to have gone through. It was/ is harmful not only potentially to RD and whoever else was assaulted by that teacher (if they were) but also as an indicator of the possible escalation of risk to other children in the future.
Of course another victim of the same assault might be affected differently, but it will be a cold day in hell before I can concede that it could be as horrific as a gang rape, filmed and posted on the internet (very extreme examplle, sorry) for example.
Sorry, I don't really feel able to give more examples because it's all so dreadfully upsetting.
But really wtf is wrong with these people? It's like an epidemic!

And being groped as an adult is unpleasant. and an assault
Being groped by a stranger on a train would be less traumatic for me (I think) than being groped by my own father.
Disclaimer:my DF has never groped me. He is lovely, it was a hypothetical statement.

should I/you/intellectual atheist twat decide someone's experience as not life changing just because it is not as brutal as another's or was not by a family member so not so much trust has been broken

I have said it numerous times before. Comparing crimes is about comparing the severity of the crime, not the effect on the victim.
Acknowledging that one offence was more serious than another, does not tell the victim how much they can claim they have suffered.

I was burgled once. I was asleep on my own upstairs. The burglars broke into several houses on my street that night, and stole easy to carry stuff like money, handbags, CDs etc. I was very upset but had no difficulty in sleeping in the same house on my own the following night. My neighbour was distraught. She left her house and couldn't return to it for weeks. We both experienced an identical crime but our responses were very different. There is no right and wrong with that. Had I been threatened during my burglary, then that would have been a worse offence, even if my neighbours reaction to her lesser offence, was still worse than mine.

I think it is very likely that an assault or abusive event can be life changing, even if it is comparatively less "serious" than another.

This subject is surely intrinsically subjective and hence it is totally pointless in upsetting each other disagreeing with meaningless hypotheticals? Legally rape is a crime and clearly it has a devastating effect on the victim. All I know is that if someone did that to my DD I could not rest until I had eliminated him from this world - I am continually amazed by what parents accept. If he was acquitted so much the better - though it would be best if it was not reported at all and hence no link was evident.

do you not realise that until very recently what you call groping I call sexual assault was very very rarely reported because of this exact attitude one is worse than the other

the impact can not be known and the abuser does not care this is why grading how bad they are is very very damaging and what is the need in the last few years we have come so far in changing attitudes

I hear more about sexual abuse than I ever ever believed I would (I am a therapist) especially after what is happening in the news it has allowed people to feel they are open to discuss what has happened to them many have little confidence in doing because of the lasting impact of the abuse

We believe you is a great campaign

that is all many many women (and men and of course children) need to hear but is being drowned out once again by playing down sexual attacks and grading them into still bad but this is worse ......

"groping" was probably not a good choice of words by me.

I am entirely in support of the "I believe you" campaign. I have convince in the model that suggests children do not lie about these things. There is way too much abuse in our world, most of undetected and it has every damaging consequences. I think that any kind of abuse (and in ts case sexual abuse) can be extremely damaging. The effects are much underestimated IMO.

I don't agree that accepting one incident as more severe than another minimises the "other" though. I think it's quite wrong to not see that one incident would more horrific than another.

"grading" does not diminish sexual assault or rape.
Suggesting that sexual assault or rape is not serious does that. recognising that years of being subjected to rape could be considered more horrific than one incident of someone feeling inside your underwear does not say that the latter is not abhorrent or damaging. The latter is abhorrent. It just suggests that repeated, frequent rape over the course of 10 years or so is worse.
It is worse.

Anyway. I will leave the thread now. It is a dreadful subject really.
I'm sorry to anyone who has had to deal with this and I apologise if anything I have said has caused offence.

Have skipped from about 2/3 of the way through as getting annoyed about some poster's misinformed use of "the law" to justify a "hierarchy of rape".

The crime of rape in England and Wales (that's the one I know and I don't want to upset the scots by saying UK as that is inaccurate!) is very straightforward. It does not include a "hierarchy", it baldy defines the crime thus:

"Rape
(1)A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b)B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
(2)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.
(3)Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section.
(4)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life."

See? Not complicated, not graduated. Very straightforward. And oh look, it even says, the sentence. Life.

There are often circumstances surrounding the rape, which are taken as mitigating, or aggravating. Quite rightly. The rape itself however, is a rape, as defined above, and that is that.

Now I will catch up with the rest of the posts

link to sexual offences act 2003 some on here might benefit from reading it. Also Mr Dawkins.