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?

I am wondering what extremely serious rape is

All rape is serious, some rape is more serious or extremely serious.

A man has a consensual sexual relationship with a woman but one she doesn't want to have sex. He ignores her and he rapes her.

A man stalks a 10yr old girl over a period of time, then grabs her and drags her into his house where he repeatedly rapes her at knifepoint.

Both serious offences. I would describe the second one as extremely serious and I don't believe that that makes the first one any less a crime.

Do you think that both crimes are equally serious?

Both are rape

Both I view as extremely serious

One is an act of paedophilia

That's not answering my question.

And since the reference to a child has clouded your thinking let's say the woman is 19; or let's say the she's my age but is being gang-raped by enemy soldiers.

Are they all equally serious?

Phaedra

I have not at any point said that I do not understand that you were unaffected by what he did. You weren't, OK. You are telling me that I have views that I do not.

In your example. In real life, the first case will never see a court, It is vanishingly rare for women to report in the situation you describe, and it would never get any further even if a woman did go to the police. They would record it as a complaint of one count of rape with no aggravating factors (or however police talk).

Your second case would be multiple counts of rape, kidnap, child trafficking, profiting from prostitution, profiting from the exploitation of a child, rape of a child under the age of 13 etc and so on.

You seem to be hell bent on saying that anyone would think the two situations are the same. Of course they are not. Is there a reason you want to paint other posters on here as unfeeling towards child victims of organised sexual slavery? It seems that way.

Anyway, cases 1 and two both involve rape. That is, penetration without consent as per the law in England and Wales. Case 2 includes multiple counts of rape with multiple aggravating factors and a host of other offences. Case 1 would be extremely unlikely to be reported to police. Case 2 may get to the police, it may get a conviction. If it did and the people who did it were found guilty on all charges then I imagine the sentence would be quite high (although you never know quite frankly).

I am failing to understand where people have a problem with the law as t stands. Rape is very clearly defined. If a person commits a rape, and it gets to court, the circumstances will be considered as aggravating or mitigating and additional crimes committed at the same time will be heard as well. This all works fine.

If people want to change the definition of rape to something other than penetration without consent, what do they want it changed to?

If they don't want it changed then they need to accept that rape is penetration without consent and that is what it is and that's the end of it and our police and court system are well equipped to look at the circumstances and additional crimes as necessary.

I also don't like the way that some people are bandying around what are potentially really triggering "hypothetical" situations on this thread.

We all know what people are talking about. There is no need to keep explicitly detailing things that are "bad" in order to make a point (badly). Upping the ante by describing ever more traumatising examples is crass. We all know what you mean FGS.

I feel no need to list what is more or less serious why would I as I see all rape and sexual abuse as is extremely serious

language as I have said before is very important, the difference in attitude partly comes from the language we use

I find it worrying that both of you are stepping up the hypothetical situations to prove to others that one is more serious than the other

all victims need to be believed this is what is important not put in boxes of serious and not so serious how does that help anyone especially those where the attack is viewed by some as not so serious

RD remark got him the attention he wanted and thankfully I am glad to see on here that the vast majority disagree with him this shows how we are moving on

It certainly wasn't clear to me that some posters could see past "rape is rape" as if all incidents are equally reprehensible and which as a statement means no more than "theft is theft" .

And I shall say again I have said nothing about changing the definition. You're putting your own spin on that.

No-one on this thread has said that phaedra.

Rape is rape, according to UK law. The situations surrounding it and any other crimes committed at the same time are taken into account by the courts. The system works just fine (in theory) and I would not wish to see the definition of rape changed because some people think there needs to be some kind of scale in there.

Further, the idea that rape is rape no matter the circumstances is what has enabled the law to be changed so that rape is no longer allowable in some situations. For example rape within marriage was made illegal in the UK as recently as 1991 (1991!).

At the moment we have clarity on what constitutes the act of rape. It is penetration without consent. This is clear and straightforward. Amending it in some way to have a scale of badness would serve to push back on people with things at the "low" end of the scale. Which is where we used to be. Because being raped by your husband, who you have had lots of consensual sex with before, well how bad can that be really? We really do not need to start heading back in that direction.

xpost. No-one has said on this thread that your hypothetical "mild" crimes are of the same level as your hypothetical "bad" crimes.

When people say "rape is rape" they are correct according to the law in the UK which you yourself say you would not wish to change.

To accuse other posters of being so utterly unfeeling as to say that every single crime ever that has included a rape is exactly the same is just really quite a nasty accusation and I wonder why on earth you would imagine that any of the women on here (many of whom have shared their own experiences) would think that way. That they are socopathic or something. Harsh.

Phaedra and I have both shared our personal experiences.
We have not criticised, disbelieved or diminished anyone else's experiences.
No one has described any other offence as mild.
No one has suggested a change in the law.
No one has suggested that rape is anything other than penetration without consent.

A poster asked what an extremely serious rape would be, we gave examples, and are then criticised for triggering, in a thread that is full of personal accounts.

A man rapes 2 women on the same night. The first is 30, the second is 90.
The second rape is the more serious offence, not because it is worse for the victim, but because of the vulnerability of the victim.

All of the circumstances have to be taken into consideration by the court and that is why some rapes are more serious than others, because rape is never just penetration without consent, it is always more than that. It is a whole group of circumstances that go to make up the severity of the crime.

No the circumstances surrounding the rape are different. The rape itself is a rape in each case. Penetration without consent as per the law.

If you have quibbles with the sexual offences act then take it up with the authorities. You keep saying you don't want to change the law and then in the same breath saying it says something it does not. It is very clear on what rape is, that is a simple unarguable fact.

The inarguable fact about the law is it DOES take all the circumstances of a rape into consideration in judging the severity of the offence. This includes the ages of the offender and victim.

Trying to separate the actual act of penetration from the whole offence, is absurd. It is impossible to separate the ages of the offender and victim, from the act of penetration. The penetration part may only last a few seconds, but the ordeal will last much longer. Rape is so much more than penetration.

No one has suggested that rape is anything other than penetration without consent.

Actually, what we've struggled with slightly on this thread is a conflict between the legal definition of rape (penetration without consent) and the more common definition (an act including penetration without consent) which is far broader.

Mostwicked take it up with the authorities then and lobby to get the sexual offences act rewritten.

That's all I can suggest.

I'm convinced you don't actually read my posts seven!
I don't want to see a change in the law, I have said that repeatedly. The current sentencing guidelines judge all of the circumstances to determine the severity of each rape.

I think MrsHathaway makes an excellent point.