Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 12 13

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:

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 00:30

And not only overpower him in the first place but to be able to continue holding him down throughout the assault.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 00:32

There is still a widespread belief in society that women routinely lie about being raped despite no evidence to support this.

I agree and have spent a decade supporting women's groups in many ways (they are the majority of the victims). However women and men should be believed or not equally. Its very abusive to suggest only women should be believed.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 00:32

Rape used to be PIV in English law, but now it is forced oral or anal sex as well. I don't agree with changing it to include non penetrative offences.

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 00:32

Its very abusive to suggest only women should be believed.

Nobody has said that.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 00:33

Who has suggested that male rape victims shouldn't be believed?

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 00:34

Actually, Anon, I'm happy to say I was wrong. There is an offence that specifically deals with the situation I think you are describing - where the attacker causes the victim to engage in penetrative sex. It comes under the offence of causing sexual activity without consent and, like rape, carries a maximum tariff of life.

More details are in Section 4 here.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 00:34

Or male victims of sexual assault?

JassyRadlett · 08/02/2017 00:35

Its very abusive to suggest only women should be believed.

No one has said that. Really.

7SunshineSeven7 · 08/02/2017 00:35

Not RTFW but this: If the definition of rape was changed so that it was simply having sex with someone without their consent then women could be charged with rape too. Is problematic because the definition of sex is so broad, hence why there are specific sexual acts such as 'digital penetration' etc.

When a woman has sex with a man against his will it is not called rape as it does not fit the definition, it does get treated with the same seriousness and sentencing as rape though - its just not called that. I do think there should be a word which should be created separately to mean a woman forcing a man to have sex against his will (although it would have to very specific like the definition of rape i.e forcing a penis to be sheathed by a vagina or something like that) to stop confusion and arguments such as this.

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 00:36

Forcing someone to have sex against their will should obviously be considered rape imo.

This. I live in the US, here women can be charged with rape too. The definition of rape here is sexual penetration, not just penetration with a penis. I agree with this. I'm not sure how to word the next bit eloquently as its an emotive topic for me.

I have been raped twice, once gang raped, one by one man, both times in my early teens. Perhaps its just me but calling any kind of sexual penetration sexual assault seems to minimise it in a way, saying "I was sexually assaulted" doesn't seem to carry as much horror as saying "I was raped". Men can be raped, and they are. Sexual violence against men is underreported for a myriad of reasons.

In the past I have volunteered for a different country's version of Rape Crisis, it is heartbreaking the number of men who are raped who don't feel that they can call it rape, or feel that it isn't as serious as they aren't women.

I don't think it is any less horrific for a man to be raped than for a woman, and I think in all cases a judge and jury ought to look at the specifics of the case and use those to judge accordingly, regardless of whether the perpetrator(s) were male or female.

SuperBeagle · 08/02/2017 00:36

There's no reason not to do away with the term "rape" in the legal sense full stop. That removes the grey area.

finnmcool · 08/02/2017 00:38

stuart, I can't be arsed to read anymore of your comments beyond page one.
Let's sort out the multiple women being raped , who are too scared to report it. Let's sort out the ridiculously low conviction rates for male to female rape...
Then perhaps we can say 'what about the menz?'
Ffs! I give up!!!

GangstaRat · 08/02/2017 00:39

Gentle reminder that women can also be victims of female "rape"/sexual assault, and that woman on woman assault is one of the most marginalised out there.

Anon1234567890 · 08/02/2017 00:39

7SunshineSeven7, you are pretty close but your only thinking of the legal definitions. The societal implications of the words used to describe the abuse is ten times more important.

corythatwas · 08/02/2017 00:40

Good to have it confirmed that the law does actually take this equally seriously.

Sunshine's point about different sexual acts is a valid one; maybe a specific term would be the way to go, or at least a very clear definition along the lines she suggests.

FloraFox · 08/02/2017 00:40

But the act itself is irrelevant of penis in vagina or vagina in penis. They are both the same act and should both be legally called RAPE.

They are not the same. In one case the victim can get pregnant and in the other case, they can't.

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 00:40

99.9% of women would simply be unable to overpower a man in order to force sex on him in the first place.

That implies that physically overpowering someone is the only way to force them - its not. There are a raft of non physical ways abusers employ to force people to comply with them.

OopsDearyMe · 08/02/2017 00:41

There are many women who have been raped, whose perpetrators were charged with sexual assault or other such offences and not rape. Not all rapes are charged as such.

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 00:41

Gangsta yes, exactly.

corythatwas · 08/02/2017 00:42

Flora, that doesn't quite make sense: in that case, the rape of a post-menopausal woman wouldn't fall under the heading of rape.

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 00:43

Gentle reminder that women can also be victims of female "rape"/sexual assault

Has anybody on this thread denied that women can't be sexually assaulted by other women? Why do we need a "gentle reminder" that this happens when nobody has bloody denied it happens in the first place?

SuperBeagle · 08/02/2017 00:44

Flora, the definition of rape has fuck all to do with pregnancy.

finnmcool · 08/02/2017 00:44

Women fought hard for better help etc! Why don't men do the same?
Why is it expected that women sort out men's issues?
Believe me! I would never want anyone, man or woman to go through the awfulness of being in a position to have to be 'processed'.
However, talk to the men! Stop putting it on the women!

GangstaRat · 08/02/2017 00:45

In one case the victim can get pregnant and in the other case, they can't.

By your definition raping an infertile or post-menopausal woman is a lesser crime than raping a fertile one.

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 00:45

Bravo finnmcool. Couldn't have put it better myself.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 12 13

Swipe left for the next trending thread