To think the rape laws in the UK are sexist and should be changed?

[StuartAteMyStrawberries]

Only men can be charged with rape in the UK. Women can be charged with sexual assault but not rape.

AIBU to think this is outrageous and that anyone who has sex with another person is a rapist and should be charged as such?

It was legal for a man to rape his wife up until the 1990's and the law was rightly changed to make it a criminal offense. AIBU to think we should change the definition of rape so that women can be charged with it too?

I totally agree Loup. for you, I'm sorry about what happened to you.

Thanks Venus and the same to you, there are some real monsters out there

Of course the law should be changed. I cannot see one strong argument against it on the first 2 pages of the thread. I will scroll through the rest but

100% agree that "rape" should be expanded to include a person of any gender physically forcing another person of any gender into penetrative sex.
Be that a male on male, male on female, female on male or female on female.
Women ARE capable of forcing men to have sex, male arousal is a very physical thing, if she stimulates him and makes him erect (which does NOT require the man to be psychologically aroused, its a physical reaction they can't control) she can them force him inside of her. This can be done whether he's asleep, drunk, otherwise incapacitated, or fully alert but too scared to try to physically stop her for any reason.
Same way a woman can rape another woman using toys or inserting other objects.

The term "sexual assault" is typically seen as being a lesser crime, and can be something as "mild" as grabbing/slapping/pinching etc someones backside without permission, but commonly people see it as a blanket term for touching someone intimately without consent or up to forced oral sex, it is rarely used in cases of actual rape as they use "rape" instead.

If someone has been forced to have penetrative sex, be it a male/female being forcibly penetrated by a penis, toys or other objects, or someone forcing a male to penetrate them with their penis or either gender forced to penetrate someone with toys/objects, it ABSOLUTELY should be considered rape.
It doesn't affect men any less than it affects women to be forced into sex against your will, if anything it may affect males MORE if they're forced into sex by a woman as there's little public sympathy or support. People wrongly dismiss that it isn't possible, spouting rubbish like "he got an erection so he MUST have wanted it", or people making absurd comments about how they're "lucky" they got sex without having to ask for it.

The imposed prison sentences absolutely need making equal too. Regardless of the attackers and victims genders, the attacker should get the same sentence and there should be a bare minimum "base" sentence of at least X years, with extra time added based on number of times physically raped, if there was forced oral (giving or receiving) physical violence etc.

I happen to know a very lovely man who has been raped by both a male, and a female on separate occasions.
The male attacked him when he was 15, it happened once, and he was deeply affected.
The female was his former girlfriend (when he was 16-17), who would physically beat him if he did not give her oral or penetrative sex when she wanted it, and we're talking quite severe beating with black eyes, bruised ribs etc, one time she actually broke his nose. There were multiple occasions he had sex against his will to prevent domestic violence.

He did not report any of these assaults, and he has been far more psychologically affected by the assaults by the female, not just because it happened multiple times, but because it's considered a "lesser" crime, if a crime at all in most peoples eyes.

When they do, it is usually with a dominant male partner who will have form for domestic violence. - Do you have statistics for this or is it just victim blaming?

I haven't read the full thread yet but I don't believe it should be called rape, however I do completely understand why the term sexual assault doesn't seem to do justice for the horrific crimes that some women have committed against men.

Actually having now read the full thread I've changed my mind and I do think that rape should encompass any non-consensual penetration.
Also if the definition is that it includes a penis then does rape include men who rape other men or is it only penis in vagina?
FWIW to all of you who have been through any kind of rape/sexual assault.

I can now see arguments on bob sides of this one.

But I am incredibly frustrated by all those who are saying that non-consensual penetrative sex is classed as sexual assault. It isn't.

There are four, not three, classes of non-consensual offences:

Rape (section 1)

The elements of rape are:

(A) intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis;
(B) does not consent to the penetration, and
(A) does not reasonably believe that (B) consents

Assault by penetration (section 2)

The elements of assault by penetration are:

A person (A) intentionally penetrates the vagina or anus of another person (B) with a part of their body or anything else:
The penetration is sexual
(B) does not consent to the penetration, and
(A) does not reasonably believe that (B) consents.

Sexual Assault (section 3)

The elements of the offence of sexual assault are:

A person (A) intentionally touches another person (B)
the touching is sexual
(B) does not consent to the touching, and
(A) does not reasonably believe that (B) consents.

Causing sexual activity without consent (section 4)

The elements of this offence are:

A person (A) intentionally causes (B) to engage in activity
the activity is sexual
(B) does not consent to engaging in the activity
(A) does not reasonably believe that (B) consents.

Source: CPS

When points of law and how things are defined in law are being debated, it would be a good idea to be accurate about what the law says. Saying that non-consensual penetrative sex by a woman is classed as sexual assault is incorrect. The maximum tariffs for sections 1, 2 and 4 are life; the same does not hold true for section 3.

Having done the research, I would agree that saying section 2 and 4 activities are sexual assault does minimise. In the law they are not, and they attract the much higher penalties than sexual assault.

I hope there is a legal mind watching this post who may help me here, I was a police officer of six year, whilst serving I'm certain the rape law changed to include being penetrated vaginally or anally by any object, not just a penis, ie if offender used a bottle etc during the assault, now if I am correct you don't need to be male to do this, you could be in a female same sex relationship.
Many apologies in advance if I am wrong.

I think what is legally termed sexual assault covers too many offences.

Sorry the post above mine seems to have clarified it perfectly just as I was typing my post,

I think that it did change to treat penetrative offences in similar ways, without changing the legal definition of rape.

Thank you jassy!

Also, I think the op meant that a woman having Piv sex with a man when the man did not want to have sex should be rape.

I strongly disagree and think the law is correct that penetration (of any orifice) with either a penis or object is more serious an offence. Simply because it is very possible to cause serious physical damage to the victim as well as psychological.

Of course all sexual activity without consent is abhorrent and can be psychologically damaging to the victim.

I strongly disagree and think the law is correct that penetration (of any orifice) with either a penis or object is more serious an offence

Although the law doesn't say this? Section 4 offences carry the same maximum penalty as rape if penetration is involved, e.g. if the victim's penis is forced to cause penetration.

Sorry, it wasn't phrased very well (very conscious I could be digging a hole here)

I mean to say in practice, someone who rubs their penis on you (externally) without consent is likely to cause less physical damage than someone who forces it into you without consent.

Even if classified the same, the additional physical damage etc is likely to be an aggravating factor.

I totally acknowledge this can be possible if a woman forces sex on a man, however this is more likely to be an exception I would imagine.

Possibly phrased worse second time around. I'll stop now!

If a man forces his sex organ into a women that is rape. Likewise if a woman forces her sex organ onto a man that should be considered rape.

Here's a 'rape' in the news

www.cbsnews.com/news/paris-riots-black-teen-allegedly-sodomized-police-officer-baton/

"Police say rioters have again set fire to cars and garbage bins overnight in spreading violence in the suburbs of Paris over the alleged rape of a young black man with a police baton.

Police said Wednesday morning they made 17 arrests.

The violence in suburbs northeast of Paris, which has now spread to at least five towns, erupted after a young black man was allegedly sodomized with a police officer’s baton last week, during an identity check. One officer was charged Sunday with aggravated rape and three others were charged with aggravated assault."

According to many of the posters in this thread this was not in fact rape, even though the dynamics are that of rape according to those some posters. (man, position of power/authority).

AIBU to wonder if the same posters would have given the opposite answer if this example had been given, and that those insisting rape requires a penis to be used would be singing a different tune????

roses Presumably in France the laws are different. In the U.K. that wouldn't be rape, it would be assault by penetration. People stating the legal facts are in no way claiming it's a less serious crime.

Whatever the word rape means in law, when its used most people mean, sex took place and one of the participants didn't agree to it, whether a penis, dildo or anything else was used is irrelevant. No means NO. The law needs to be updated to reflect this because in society if its not rape its not as big of a deal. Words matter!

Pretending that women do it too diminishes the nature of rape and it's effect on all women
What a ridiculous thing to say, by that logic murder of a woman should be downgraded to a fatal assault because calling it murder diminishes the much more prevalent killings of men.

Women fought to get rape recognised as a serious crime. You dont get to take that away.
Another ridiculous things to say. Recognizing rape regardless of your gender, takes nothing away from the more common rape of women by men. That is like saying allowing gay men to marry takes marriage away from women.

Two wrongs dont make a right and men are as traumatized as women when they are raped, pretending it doesn't exist doubles the injustice, pain, trauma and suicides and that affects our whole society.

The legal definition of rape in the UK is penetration with a penis. So even men who rape women orally or with an object get the sexual assault/sexual assault with object charges. Doesn't make them lesser charges though - they are treated as seriously as a rape charge.

I'm sorry, I don't agree that's the common usage understanding of rape in this country anon. I think most people understand it as an act of penetration. When you hear the words "male rape" I think most people, rightly or wrongly would assume that the man had been anally penetrated.

"roses Presumably in France the laws are different. In the U.K. that wouldn't be rape, it would be assault by penetration. People stating the legal facts are in no way claiming it's a less serious crime."

They kind of are? The thread was specifically to change the rape laws.

Arguing that the law says X, therefore X is the correct definition is an obvious logical fallacy.

They kind of are? The thread was specifically to change the rape laws.

I don't think people are, at all - and I don't think the law treats them as lesser crimes, either.

I can see the cultural issues here, but there seems to be a large underlying assumption that either our culture or our legal system take rape very seriously. I'm not sure that's actually true.

So even men who rape women orally or with an object get the sexual assault/sexual assault with object charges. Doesn't make them lesser charges though - they are treated as seriously as a rape charge

It does, just ask the victims, they are the ones most affected/most invested and a charge of sexual assault does not get treated as seriously as rape. And in these cases surely its the victims that are most important? As this thread has demonstrated some people dont even believe a woman can rape a man. How is that for taking it as serious?

The first result on a google search, does not even mention gender or penis.

rape
See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun

1. Unlawful sexual intercourse or any other sexual penetration of the vagina, anus, or mouth of another person, with or without force, by a sex organ, other body part, or foreign object, without the consent of the victim.

As was pointed out by Jassy and others, it's not actually a charge of sexual assault under English law, it's "causing sexual activity without consent". The maximum tariff is life, like the offence of rape.