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 not understand why people don't understand men cannot be raped by a woman?

535 replies

TurquoiseChevrotain · 13/10/2017 11:51

I've read a lot whenever this comes up on here or elsewhere, that it's 'terrible' and such an outdated view. Why is it? Why can't people understand what rape is? Men can be sexually assaulted by women, but not raped.

OP posts:
HornyTortoise · 13/10/2017 21:58

sunshine I am very sorry that happened to you Flowers

I don't remember who it was that said that, but someone definitely did earlier in the thread, and its been insinuated by others too.

Rufustherenegadereindeer1 · 13/10/2017 21:59

I dont think youve upset anyone sunshine Thanks

sunshineintheclouds · 13/10/2017 22:05

horny
Sorry thought you we're implying I had said it. I really shouldn't comment on threads like this I always get far too defensive Blush

It's OK regarding my own situation it was a very long time ago and I now can talk about it for help to others who have/are going through similar times. Which I believe has bought out some good in evil.
Wine

Havingahorridtime · 13/10/2017 23:03

The only time we ever seem to hear of women forcing themselves on men, is in relation to cases of males attacking. When it is made out to be very common, even in this thread it has been insinuated that females sexually assault as often as males do it. Which is simply not true at all.

I can't see anybody insinuating that it is as common for women to commit sexual crimes as it is hit men to do so. It wouldn't matter to me if 99.99% of sex crimes are committed by men I still think that the legal definition of rape should be changed. I think we all know that the vast majority of sex crimes are committed by men.

Datun · 14/10/2017 00:17

The reason for changing the term rape was so that the crime of sexual assault, involving penetration with an object, didn't look as though it was just 'diluted rape'.

Which is a very fair point.

But changing the word rape so that is not sex specific would be a mistake. That's not the reason people want it changed, but that would be the outcome.

suzy2b · 14/10/2017 00:17

TurquoiseChevrotain
i can assure you she was done for rape it was quite a big case at the time in all the papers we were saying at the time how can she rape him because surely if he didn't want sex he wouldn't have been able to get it up i am talking about 25ys ago or even longer

Original poster
TurquoiseChevrotain · 14/10/2017 00:23

Can I just say, I think it's such a ridiculous argument... An erection doesn't mean it isn't rape, it's a body's response. If a women produces vaginal lubrication, does that mean she really wanted it? Ridiculous.

OP posts:
Original poster
TurquoiseChevrotain · 14/10/2017 00:24

Or sexual assault if a woman was assaulting a man.

OP posts:
Original poster
TurquoiseChevrotain · 14/10/2017 00:26

I have no idea what case people are on about, but it really makes no sense. A woman cannot rape? Confused how can she be done for it? It's like a 9 year old being prosecuted for a crime. A 9 year old cannot, by law, commit a crime.

OP posts:
CherryChasingDotMuncher · 14/10/2017 00:29

I can’t remember when the rape definition became ‘with a penis’, before this it’s reasonable to expect a woman could be charged with rape

silentsigh · 14/10/2017 00:50

"because surely if he didn't want sex he wouldn't have been able to get it up"

That is an absolutely disgusting thing to say. And rubbish as well

lettersAndNumbersOnly · 14/10/2017 02:54

@TurquoiseChevrotain

It's been asked but you haven't answered.

Would you deny that a woman in 1990 could have been raped by their husband?

Toadinthehole · 14/10/2017 03:12

I have no idea what case people are on about, but it really makes no sense. A woman cannot rape? confused how can she be done for it? It's like a 9 year old being prosecuted for a crime. A 9 year old cannot, by law, commit a crime.

I can't quite work out if you're for real. This is one of the most bizarre threads I've ever read on Mumsnet. Now you're suggesting that a matter of legal terminology applicable in the UK (and perhaps some other countries depending on their laws) is equivalent to the principle that children aren't sufficiently responsible to be liable for prosecution.

It's preposterous.

CaretakerToNuns · 14/10/2017 03:26

Males simply cannot be raped by women. End of story, case closed.

And besides, why on Earth are we all assuming that women sexually assaulting males is a regular occurrence? It hardly ever happens, it's near enough a non-issue.

Original poster
TurquoiseChevrotain · 14/10/2017 03:27

@Toadinthehole well each country has a different age for legal responsibility, so....

OP posts:
Original poster
TurquoiseChevrotain · 14/10/2017 03:29

Of course not @lettersAndNumbersOnly but that's because that was rape. I personally don't think the law should change. It's just acknowledging that a penis is different. They hold the same sentencing.

OP posts:
Original poster
TurquoiseChevrotain · 14/10/2017 03:31

I also wouldn't deny that all the children who were physically abused in the past were abused, before that law came in either. Or the children in schools who were beaten, etc. Confused

OP posts:
DrKrogersfavouritepatient · 14/10/2017 03:49

Fucking hell mothertruck
Thanks [no thanks] for the "imaginary scenario"

DrKrogersfavouritepatient · 14/10/2017 04:07

And I agree with hornytortoise

lettersAndNumbersOnly · 14/10/2017 04:50

@TurquoiseChevrotain

No it wasn't. There was nothing wrong with it (legally, not my personal opinion, of course).

I'm not sure if you want to keep rape as only happening to women so that you can talk about how many rapes occur without sullying the water talking about both sexes or if you're keeping legal and lay definitions separate.

Do you think that sexual assault sounds better than rape? I do and I think the emotive power of the word should be used for all victims, male and female.

I don't think it's your intention to minimise male victims but having read all your posts, I still don't understand why you're so intent on keeping the distinction either legally or in common parlance. Why are you?

worridmum · 14/10/2017 05:16

None consented sex should be rape no if no buts.

For example we could brand murder as only involving a knife and all other causes of death (maybe also include death by dangerous driving and manslaughter too so its as broad as sexaul assault) be termed unlawful killing both carry the same sentence guidelines.

Can you not see the problem with the above? Manslaughter and death by dangerous driving are no were near as bad as murder and we rightly diffenatate between them but with sexaul assult we lump a quick grop of a breast or bum with brutal multi person none consentaul sex.

That is my issue and why its seen as less bad because it bloody covers such a large spectrum.

And its my belief none consentaul sex should not be in the same law term as unwanted kissing or groping...

Didntcomeheretofuckspiders · 14/10/2017 05:55

The problem is that sexual assault covers everything from an unwanted pat on the bum to someone putting their fingers/an object inside of you non-consentually. That is a huge range and does make the term sexual assault seem less serious. For a man who has been subject to this, I can definitely see why emotionally the term rape feels more appropriate.

Also, doesn't it come down to your definition of sex (if you take the legal definition out of the equation)? Saying a man can't get raped by a woman is a bit like say lesbians can't lose their virginity.

sashh · 14/10/2017 06:35

Because the idea is still one party forcing sex- why is it less serious Because the victim is a male?

Someone mentioned rape in marriage only becoming illegal in 1990(ish) at that time a man who forced anal sex on a woman could get a max sentence of 2 years, if he did it to a man then it was 10 years.

It was called 'indecent assault'.

I don't see anything wrong with the legal definition of rape and 'penetration with object' and the fact both can lead to life.

ButchyRestingFace · 14/10/2017 08:01

It’s like a 9 year old being prosecuted for a crime. A 9 year old cannot, by law, commit a crime.

Presumably you live in England or Wales?

I live just a little north of you and guess what?.

BertrandRussell · 14/10/2017 08:09

Two things.

Men can be raped. And are. By men.

And I am made very uncomfortable by the people on here insisting that women frequently rape/sexually assault men. What is their agenda?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.

Swipe left for the next trending thread