Why can't women be charged with rape?

[Ourlovelyson]

My son attempted to take his life last year. Turns out his partner has been abusive and she was drugging him with Viagra being him aroused and sitting on top of him he kept telling her no but she did what she wanted to do. But rape is defined by the penetrating male, my son is not the person he once was.
I have been on Google for weeks and I can't find anything to help him. He obviously isn't the only one.
Why is this?

They’re not necessarily punished less.

Yes but you cant get pregnant and condoms significantly reduce the chance of STIs. So if a man anally rapes an infertile woman with a condom, it should be "mild rape", right? By your estimation on how bad each type is?

No our law isnt as silly as that but it seems like that is what you are proposing when you try and decide what type of forced sex is worse

The law needs to distinguish that this is a crime committed with a penis for the above reasons. The seriousness of the sexual assault will absolutely be taken into account during sentencing.

But what if those reasons are not relevant. Does the defence team get to try and mitigate the sentence with these facts?

"Yes we know that he did force sex upon the victim in this case, but as he used a condom and minimised the risks of std transmission and pregnancy, she is barely a victim and it was barely rape."

The crime is still in its own category though. I hate to be graphic but penises penetrate. Vaginas and anuses receive. Men can absolutely be raped. But by a penis.

There are loads of reasons for sentencing. I’m not sure I get your point? If someone is tortured during a sexual assault, they will have a greater sentence. The STI/ pregnancy thing, it doesn’t have to happen, but the potential is there, so that is why it’s rape.

it’s a definition. Like robbery or fraud.

I disagree that is what I’m doing.

So if I used a dildo or strap on to penetrate you against your will, would you feel assaulted but not raped?

Or if my daughter had a trans male boyfriend who treated her like any abusive man would and used their "dick" to penetrate her, then it would be seen as lesser trauma? Even though the mindset of toxic masculinity and misogyny are as to blame as they would be with a man.

You know we are one of the only countries who sees the world this way and it is to minimise the sexual offences of female perpetrators.

The reasoning you provide of why it matters more when it is a penis suggests that when those factors are factually irrelevant, such as in the case of someone infertile or where measures were taken to minimise risk, the perpetrator should receive less punishment. I dont want to live in that world, do you?

So if the potential isn't there, so for example, a man who targets older women, then the sentence should be reduced as the potential for pregnancy isnt there? Or if he has had a vasectomy? Or if he wears a condom or has a freshly negative side panel?

Yes you are saying rape is only rape because it holds these risks: pregnancy and std transmission. Therefore, only forced sexual contact that holds those risks should be classed as rape. That means that if I can prove that the man did not pose those risks, it won't be rape. Or will be very "mild rape".

There have been a couple of cases of women posing as men and duping other women into having sex with them using blindfolds and sex toys/strap ons. Both were found guilty of sexual assault and sentenced to 8-10 years. Tbh I think that forcible penetration with anything should be classed as rape.

Absolutely. What has happened here is a crime and will be punished as such. But legal definitions are important. No penis, no rape.

For info though, a reconstructed penis is still considered a penis legally.

Of course!

For this crime anyway. I can’t claim to know about all of the others.

I am talking about a strap on rather than a surgically made one.

Maybe you could look into the original scenario being outlined as its own specific offence if you feel very strongly about it. But the law is clear that rape must be with a penis.

I dont want to be part of minimising the sexual offences of people purely because they are female and therefore their crimes are considered to be lesser. I understand how it is, but I challenge that as I am here. I don't agree that risk of pregnancy and STDs are what matters most and I dont think that someone slapping on the bum and someone forcibly penetrating me with a dildo should be charged with the same offence.

Yes to minimise the actions of female perpetrators and deny justice to their victims

It’s not minimising though is it? It’s a dreadful scenario and the perpetrator will receive an appropriate sentence. But what has happened wont be prosecuted as rape because it wasn’t committed with a penis. If the ex partner was male and had a penis then it would be. Nothing is being taken away from the victim of a very serious crime, it’s just that the ex partner isn’t capable of committing that specific crime.

Ah, I think you reveal yourself here.

Most countries have changed this archaic law because it doesnt make sense to victims. And yes, it does minimise the crime. They arent a rapist, they assaulted you. Just like a man who touched your bum in a nightclub.

Yes that is why the whole "penis" thing exists, so women could not be classed as rapists even if they did force sex upon others. It both covered up same sex abuse and meant that men werent able to claim victimhood.

The penalty his attacker would get if convicted is likely as serious as it would be if the sexes were reversed.

In fact, due to the fact the woman is the attacker, and the unusual statistical perspective of that, potentially he is more likely to see justice.

Good luck to you and him.