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

[TurquoiseChevrotain]

I've read a lot whenever this comes up on here or elsewhere, that it's 'terrible' and such an outdated view.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.

Oh and if a man fathers a child when not consenting to sex (aka they were a victim of sexaul assault and my colleague has been involved in such a case the mother was convicted and sent to prison but the victim had to pay child maintenance to the parents of his perpetrator) they are also forced by law to pay child maintenance as their is no framework to legally absolve a man currently (only through adoption)

"How the hell is it not rape if a man or a woman is subjected to a forced penetration? It might legally be defined by sexual assault by penetration but I believe it should be defined as rape."

Yes, a lot of people agree. I think I'm still on the side of wanting there to be a specific named crime for forced penetration with a penis. I think there is something unique about that particular crime. Sentencing for sexual assault of all kinds certainly needs to be reviewed.

Worridmum those arnt the sentencing ranges for sexual assault as a whole but specifically assault with penetration.

That 19 months minimum isn't for anything like bum pinching. The sentencing range for crimes such as those is much lower.

The problem with using different terminology is that then different guidelines for sentencing are followed and with th range starting much lower it is up to a judge to use their own judgement when sentencing they are effectively saying it isn't as serious to be violated with anything as it is with a penis.

Bertrand Russell I can see what you mean about it being a specific crime and in honesty it's not calling it something different that I think is the problem it's that it's seen as a more serious crime if it involves a penis than for example a broken bottle. Is sentencing ranges were equal and equally applied it wouldn't be a problem.

The only time a penis should she seen as a more serious crime is if the perpetrator is knowingly possible infecting a victim with a life changing infection such as HIV.

Is sentencing ranges were equal and equally applied it wouldn't be a problem.

So its about sentencing, which I agree is fucking dire in most cases. I don't think I have ever heard of anyone get the maximum sentence for rape. Infact, in most cases I imagine penetration with (as in your example) a broken bottle, would be much MORE likely to get a larger sentence, as when its with a penis its even harder to prove as the rapists just claim there as consent, where if its forced penetration with something else...its harder to get people to believe that it was consensual.

@NewDaddie

"Rape will only cease to be a hate crime by us against women..."

Utter cringe at this , and devaluing the topic.
By "us" you're putting all men in one group. Attention seeking cosying up nonsense

It really isn't about 'the menz' though. I want to see a definitive charge for Women who have been forcibly penetrated with objects too (and men are by far most likely to be the offender).
Somebody upthread suggested:
Rape by penis
Rape by object
Rape by vagina
I think those charges would be a sensible compromise which take nothing away from the current definition of rape but acknowledge other types of forced penetration without lumping it together with other forms of sexual assault (which is currently very wide ranging).
I wouldn't want to see a classification of sexual Assaults system as that would be wide open to negotiation from Defence lawyers in the courtroom.

Attention seeking cosying up nonsense

shhhh! You got me, in fact I'm always agreeing with everyone on this site and I'm the darling of MN. But if you reveal my secret they'll all stop liking me and validating me.

MomToWedThorFriday please come back and join in the discussion.

By "us" you're putting all men in one group.

Yes.

And AFAIK the law is about more than individual crimes. It's also about public order. DJ explained really well the context/history above and IMO the numbers of rapes (by penis) is still enough of a problem for society and men 'as a class' that it warrants increased penalties as a deterrent.

And I say 'us' because I'm the proud owner of a magnificent penis a man too

it's that it's seen as a more serious crime if it involves a penis than for example a broken bottle

I think the opposite is true actually. I think the rape of women is often not treated very seriously because PIV is seen by many as what the V is for so it is minimised, not seen as brutal or violent in it's own right unless there is other violence alongside. Whereas the anal rape of a man is viewed horrifically and as more of a violation because it isn't considered that most men would ever want a penis up there, likewise with penetration by objects such as bottles.

I’ve been thinking about this since 2002 (?) when current act was a shiny new white paper, even then I wanted the terminology to change - so ‘rape’ no longer so completely rooted in idea of theft against whichever male owner (father, husband) and something much clearer and less problematic than consent. We keep trying to work with and upon a system which is flawed from its patriarchal outset. We need to start again but how?

I read this in the paper the other day

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/04/woman-shot-vagina-sex-game-gone-wrong/

Cos thats what every woman likes

Maybe just one graded in severity of offence of sexual assault by penetration but with aggravating features such as ‘hate crime’ ie perpetrated by males against females?

Attention seeking cosying up nonsense

Personally I find it refreshing for this site to have a man on who isn’t NAMALTy about rape. Is it so hard to believe a man can actually think of women as humans or victims?

Maybe just one graded in severity of offence of sexual assault by penetration but with aggravating features such as ‘hate crime’ ie perpetrated by males against females?
I like that idea but also just know that before long someone will argue that the hypothetical woman with the grabby vagina is also committing a hate crime because rape by a man and rape by a woman are identical dontcha know.

The people in that case rufus we're both high on drink and drugs. The man behaved appallingly by fleeing the scene and leaving her for dead to save his own skin but I can't say for certain that she wasn't a willing participant in a Dec game gone badly wrong because people high on drugs engage willingly in all kinds of bizarre and dangerous behaviour. She booked and paid for the room and I don't think she denied at any point that she consented to sex or the dangers of the loaded gun being placed - I could be wrong though,

We could call that coercive —engulfment— intercourse or something, just because it is a teeny tiny fragment of the sexual violence problem as a whole shouldn’t mean victims can’t access justice.

I don’t know how to replace consent, something like affirmative consent but stronger?

"hate crime’ ie perpetrated by males against women"

I would like misogynist attacks to be classed as a hate crime. But what about a man raping a gay man in a homophobic attack? That's a hate crime too.
And "rape by vagina?" Seriously?

I don't know what kind of people you personally know cherry but among the men I know personally most of them see women as humans and victims (when they are a victim of something). The men I know who have no respect for women I have gone no contact with and that includes some family members.

Thats the thing having

Its all reported as sex game gone wrong...he was charged with attempted murder. All the headlines say sex game, but nothing about the court case

Like that 80 year old who was killed in a sex game gone wrong with a virtual stranger and the lady the other day...all sex games gone wrong in the headlines...but in the last two at least, murder

Then when the court case comes round it seems that it was

I like that idea why

But quentin is probably right

What's wrong with rape by vagina bettrand?
I doubt it will be used more than once every few years but does that mean it isn't worth having for that lone victim?

This annoys me to. Even if you say rape should be having sex without the other persons consent (which I don't agree with because penetration is more invasive), the mechanics of it make it practically impossible. A woman has to pin him down, force him into getting an erection and then jump on top. At any point he could just push her off. I doubt that ever happens so the debate is academic.

I think the word rape has to go, in its place something which more accurately describes the violence of the act and the social/sexual inequality it reflects. So a woman coercing a man into penetrating her would fall foul of some law or other but it couldn’t be a hate crime without the wider systemic backing that violence against women and girls has?