Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

316 replies

StuartAteMyStrawberries · 07/02/2017 23:43

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?

OP posts:
katand2kits · 08/02/2017 21:43

95+% of sex offenses are committed by men. Probably better to work on that issue than on the definition of rape.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 21:47

The maximum tariff is life, like the offence of rape
And? what use is that when its not considered as big a deal?

95+% of sex offenses are committed by men
So just let the other 5% rot in hell because equality is only for some people?

SuperBeagle · 08/02/2017 21:52

95+% of sex offenses are committed by men. Probably better to work on that issue than on the definition of rape.

Yes. But that doesn't mean you can just ignore the other 5%. Funnily enough, you work on several things at once.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 21:59

They're not being ignored, as has been pointed out. The law is in place to deal with them.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 21:59

Actually the number of men raped is twelve and a half percent, twelve thousand a year. Even the news describes the men as having been raped.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 22:02

They're not being ignored, as has been pointed out
But society does not treat them equally. And to start changing that perception we first need equality under the law.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 22:05

You do have equality under the law. You just don't like the way rape is defined.

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 22:06

And? what use is that when its not considered as big a deal?

I'm not trying to be difficult - but is there evidence that it's not considered as big a deal within the justice system?

DoWop2 · 08/02/2017 22:06

I haven't been able to read the whole thread but there has been a conviction of a woman for rape in the UK. I know of one from 2001.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 22:09

That has to be joint enterprise. It's not possible under English law as the legal definition of rape involves a penis, rightly or wrongly.

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 22:09

Actually the number of men raped is twelve and a half percent, twelve thousand a year. Even the news describes the men as having been raped.

Doesn't this contradict the idea that society doesn't take sexual violence against men seriously - if eg news outlets are using the term rape? As I've said, I can see both sides of this one but I'm simply not sure that changing the legal definition would achieve very much.

Even using the strict legal definition, men can of course be raped, though only by men.

JigglyTuff · 08/02/2017 22:10

If men want to get the law changed, then they can campaign for it. Who do you think fought to have rape within marriage recognised? Hint - it wasn't men.

Why do men always, always insist that women's very hard won rights should be extended to them? If you want change, you organise, you campaign, you lobby. You don't insist that a marginalised oppressed group move over to make room for you.

ShoutOutToMyEx · 08/02/2017 22:11

Yes, of all the issues around how sexual assault cases are treated in the criminal justice system, this is the fucking outrage. Of course.

This times a billion

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 22:59

You do have equality under the law Confused One is rape, one is sexual assault. How is that the same thing? If its the same thing then call it the same thing!

is there evidence that it's not considered as big a deal within the justice system? I see you have confined your question to the justice system. Does that mean you agree its not considered the same in society? Because the two are connected.

Doesn't this contradict the idea that society doesn't take sexual violence against men seriously - if eg news outlets are using the term rape? So why not call it the same under the law? Because if you have been affected by this, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

Why do men always, always insist that women's very hard won rights should be extended to them? Because we are human beings as well, and its not men verses women. eg. Looking at the Trump protests I see as many men protesting as women. A lot of men have fought for woman's rights, gay rights, trans rights, children's rights, migrants rights.....

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 23:06

It is equal under the law. Rape is a crime of penetration. As I said the offence you are talking about is not just generic sexual assault. It doesn't have to be called exactly the same thing to be taken seriously. It potentially carries the same sentence. The problem is in the perception of it. That can be worked on without changing the definition of rape.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 23:21

The problem is in the perception of it

And the legal definition affects perception. And there is a problem with perception because its not the same thing under the law. The exact same act of rape is only rape if the woman hasn't consented. The people doing the exact same act has (for historical reasons) been decided that if the man hasn't given consent them its not the same thing.

But Its exactly the same ACT. WTF This is Trump logic

JigglyTuff · 08/02/2017 23:23

No. It isn't the same act. But like I said, if you want the law changed, organise, campaign with grassroots men's organisations. I have my own fights to be getting on with.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 23:27

No. It isn't the same act How not, 2 people having sex, one has consented? Its the same act! Why different?

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 23:37

Well you have your opinion and I have mine. There's not much more that can be said. You are of course free to campaign for a change in the law, so that might prove fruitful.

And it's not the same act. The man is not penetrated by the woman. It is about penetration. It is not about the act of having sexual intercourse. You fundamentally misunderstand the way rape is defined in English law, and IMO the main element of it, being penetrated without consent. Obviously here we disagree. But I think I'm done here as we're just going to go round and round in circles. I'm sorry for what happened to you. Take care.

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 23:37

I see you have confined your question to the justice system. Does that mean you agree its not considered the same in society? Because the two are connected.

No, I think the first thing to understand is whether the different categories have different outcomes. Does using different words actually make a difference. Is rape actually taken more seriously? It is actually unequal?

The four categories of sexual offences are gender-neutral when it comes to the victims. The only gender-specific offence is rape, when it comes to the perpetrator.

So why not call it the same under the law? Because if you have been affected by this, IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

I can understand this. But a change in the legal definitions to broaden 'rape' to encompass section 2 and qualifying section 4 offences does require thinking about whether it would have an impact, and whether there is evidence that rape is actually taken more seriously.

I can see how this is really important to you, and I get that, and that it feels to you that the word 'rape' is taken more seriously. That's not necessarily my experience, and the high-level stats I've seen don't really back it up, which is why I'm asking if there's a better evidence base.

Laws don't get changed without an evidence base, particularly when there would be no change in outcome. So it's a question of whether there's evidence to change the law - or whether efforts would be better spent at raising awareness and acceptance at the idea of male victims and female perpetrators of other classes of sexual offences, as we are starting (very slowly) to gain acceptance of the idea that a victim doesn't need to fight back, or for there to be physics violece, for a sexual offence to have occurred.

Funnyfarmer · 08/02/2017 23:39

I am shock at the comments on here about 'I fail to see how a woman can force sex on a man if he doesn't want it at least a bit'. Absolutely appalling. I assume people are referring to the fact that a man would need to have an erection. It's a while since I did biology, but unless things have changed since I was in school, an erection is a physical response to stimuli and in no way indicates consent.

So by your definition if a woman is aroused she must be gagging for it? Even if she has said "no"? A man is also entitled to change his mind. Plus erectile disfunction isn't just about men who can't get an erection, for some men it mean involatry errections. Also there are plenty of drugs on the market that could get a man errected against his will. No means no no matter the gender of the person saying it!

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 23:39

And the legal definition affects perception.

Given the total ignorance by most people on this thread (including myself for a while) of the legal definitions, I'm not sure that's the case.

SpongeBobJudgeyPants · 08/02/2017 23:41

Stuart and Anon. Really? Hmm

roseshippy · 08/02/2017 23:43

"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."

This is misleading. Few criminals get the maximum tariff. The sentencing guidelines are, to be clear, completely different from one offence to another.

Rape carries a minimum sentence of 4 years, but sexual assault and assault by penetration both start at 'community order'.

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 23:53

Roses, I wasn't aware of that but have just read the sentencing guidelines. That is a horrible anomaly.

Swipe left for the next trending thread