Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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:
AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 01:47

If a man put a foreign body in my vagina without my consent, I thought that was rape..

No. It's sexual assault. Rape is defined as 'penetration with a penis without consent.'

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 01:49

user1477 if you held a man like you described its sexual assault, not rape. And thanks, the whole trial was a farce tbh.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 01:50

Why do people have to twist people's words and move the goalposts to make a point? Don't you think your argument stands on its own merits? This was not about female/female forced penetration with objects, this was about whether rape (which involves a penis) is about the act of having sex either way or if it is about being penetrated without consent. I respect and understand feelings to the contrary of the current legal position but I don't agree.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 01:51

Twisting my words to make it look like I said something I hadn't is what makes you goady, Beagle.

HTH

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 01:51

And likewise if a man held her down and stuck a dildo in her anus or vagina then that would also be sexual assault and not rape.

FloraFox · 08/02/2017 01:51

Beagle you haven't made an argument why it is a good thing to lump in every type of sexual assault together, just that you think it's correct. In English law there are distinctions between rape, sexual assault by penetration and sexual assaults. The first two have the same tariff. Loup it's appalling those two men received a lighter sentence. I'm sorry that happened to you.

worridmum · 08/02/2017 01:51

My point isnt about men but simply that No means No and lack of consent should all be treated the same, because as it currently stands there sadly is a percivered heiracrhy in what is considered serious

and currently as it stands the English law definations are currently not fit for purpose as Sexaul assult covers anything from unwanted kissing / grouping too full blown penteravtie sexaul intercouse (if you are male or your perpotratour happened not to be male) with the different levels of violence assoicated with it.

(i repeat again i am not minizing people who have suffered unwanted kissing / touching i was just using it as example of just how broad it is)

I would be happy if they defined the most serious sexual assults differently then the far more minor in comparison.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 01:53

It's a specific offence of sexual assault with an object, I think. It can carry the same sentence as rape and it should do in cases like Loup's, IMO. I'm sorry it didn't.

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 01:54

Thanks Flora it was a long time ago and I've long since made peace with it, still an emotive topic for me though.

SuperBeagle · 08/02/2017 01:54

you haven't made an argument why it is a good thing to lump in every type of sexual assault together, just that you think it's correct.

I have. I spoke about it in the first couple of pages in this thread. I have a Law degree and work in the field.

DJBaggySmalls · 08/02/2017 01:54

Argue as much as you like. You dont know how to phrase legislation to get what you want.

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 01:54

This was not about female/female forced penetration with objects, this was about whether rape (which involves a penis) is about the act of having sex either way or if it is about being penetrated without consent.

YY to this.

However when I continue discussing the law and legal definitions then I'm apparently marginalizing victims of female on female sexual assault and claiming that other people can't self identify as rape victims/survivors...apparently Confused

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 01:54

Thanks Venus

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 01:56

Oh and I think someone penetrating someone else with an object should get the same sentence as someone penetrating someone else with a penis.

SuperBeagle · 08/02/2017 01:57

Argue as much as you like. You dont know how to phrase legislation to get what you want.

Oh, so you do, do you?

I thought all law makers were male.

FloraFox · 08/02/2017 01:58

Beagle you didn't make an argument. You said it was a good thing not to distinguish and it removes the "grey area" (whatever that is). You didn't say why it is a good thing.

Worridmum is saying she doesn't want non consensual sex lumped in with groping. What's your argument with that?

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 01:58

The thing is, regardless of what sentence various acts are supposed to carry, all too often when it comes to trial things get minimised.

worridmum · 08/02/2017 01:58

I know how the UK system works but why does Rape actulyl need the defination of Penis in it? why not use what alot of the western world uses (basically the same but removes the word penis).

Why cannot sexaul assult with penteration be considered Rape why does having a penis involved in the crime make it different then using a dildo?

Its like defining murder as a crime that can only be commited with a knife and all other instances of murder be classed as causing unlawful death by other means (this is a made up example but its good for highlighting what i mean)

AVirginLitTheCandle · 08/02/2017 01:59

worridmum again you need to take those questions up with the (mostly male) law makers.

SuperBeagle · 08/02/2017 02:02

you didn't make an argument. You said it was a good thing not to distinguish and it removes the "grey area" (whatever that is). You didn't say why it is a good thing.

Go back further. I wrote about why it was changed here in Australia. It was considered that the law regarding the distinction between rape and non-rape sexual offences made the law convoluted, and led to the minimisation of crimes not considered rape. By not considering anal, oral or foreign object penetration "rape", it minimised these crimes by comparison. By removing the term "rape" and considering its current definition under the banner of sexual offences, along with every other form of sexual offence, they are all considered with equal weight prima facie and the confusion between terms is diminished.

And, again, it works here.

venusinscorpio · 08/02/2017 02:02

That happens with rape too though Loup. There are some shockingly low sentences even when you pass the high bar of getting the case as far as court and see your rapist convicted.

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 02:05

Yes Venus that's exactly what I meant.

The sentences my rapists received were the minimum for rape - it wasn't taken into account that I was twelve years old as apparently I looked over sixteen and it was an easy mistake to make. That's what I meant by all the minimisation.

DJBaggySmalls · 08/02/2017 02:05

You want to remove the word penis. Theres the agenda. You arent content with adding the word 'object' to the legislation, you dont want 'penis or object.'
That would be the simplest change, wouldnt it?

But no. you want to remove the word 'penis' and 'rape' from the legislation.

worridmum · 08/02/2017 02:07

I know I do its just that some people on the thread dont appear to understand why the defination needs to be changed.

Because if the crime is equally as bad why is there need for a defined term unless it is in fact suggesting it is a more serious then other sexaully assults and it is wrong on so many levels

Like my example if we redefined murder to it because death caused by a knife but all apprently equally serious murderers be branded with a different term but both treated equally seriously? why does it need such a speicafic defination of use of a penis

Why not simplfy it by making not consented sex = rape why does the word penis need to be the foundation for whats considered Rape?

LoupGarou · 08/02/2017 02:07

The only reason mine went to court was that they were interrupted in the act by two police officers. Without those two, who were amazing to me all the way through, I highly doubt it would get that far. It didn't get to court the second time I was raped.