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?

I have to disagree with you here in that you seem to be saying men can’t be raped. They absolutely can. And when they are it is called exactly that.

He can. Look up the story of Joyce McKinney, 12 years for the "rape" of a man.

I hope he can get his life back on track.

What i am saying is that if anyone penetrates you forcibly with a dildo or their penis, you still feel raped. Therefore the law should not distinguish between what the perpetrator used to put inside you like it doesnt in other countries.

What a lot of posters seem to be saying here is that it is only rape when stds and/or pregnancy were a risk.

Both sexual assault and rape are serious offences. Rape however is defined as inserting a penis into a vagina, mouth or anus with permission. It can also cover one party agreeing to a certain act with a proviso, for example using a condom. Not using the condom and continuing might be rape.
Sexual assault does not involve inserting a penis into an unwilling participant, but might be other serious offences. The likely sentence might not be as long, I agree.

But there is nobody on the other side of that dildo moving it as part of their body and experiencing pleasant genital feelings from your body. It’s a different crime by nature of it, surely you can understand that.

What about if they have a strap on? Are you now saying its rape because of how they move? Or are you saying its because they can get direct physical pleasure from their penis but not a dildo? Is that what makes the difference for you?

So if a man has a desensitised penis or he uses a numbing cream, then milder rape?

I cant believe what I am reading here.

Is a strap on a sexual organ? I wouldn’t say so, would you?

I think that’s your agenda speaking.

So you sre saying that if a man used a strap on instead of his own penis, then it should not be rape but SA? And then of course that follows that anyone who uses a strap on instead of a penis would not be a rapist.

This reminds me of that 24hrs in PC where a man was let off for flashing because the penis he flashed was flaccid and fake.

Rape includes the risk of pregnancy and the options of either termination which some see as murder or a life changing child who you might not want

it’s a specific type of sexual assault

I don’t see what is gained by widening the definition - however it might muddy the waters on collection of data around prosecution success rates to the detriment of women. Because attacks on men I suspect have higher conviction rates.

what matters is that this crime is properly prosecuted and the maximum possible sentance does not diminish the offence

No i think it is the fact that people are openly admitting that they dont think it is rape if there is limited chance of pregnancy or stds and the rapists pleasure is absent

So if you have a vasectomy and forcibly penetrate a woman with your penis while knowing you dont have any STDs, it should be SA, right? Because you are saying for it to be rape, the chance of pregnancy and stds has to be present..

Yes that’s exactly what I’m saying. That’s how it would be charged.

And the reson you agree with that is because the victim cant get pregnant or get stds so she was assaulted and not raped?

Yes, exactly that! The tv programme is a reflection of this scenario in a less serious case. Penises can’t be dildos or hands or anything else but penises so that is why a specific offence is needed.

He didnt get charged with any offence.

I would rethink what I am arguing for here.

Yes, because it wasn’t a penis, it was some kind of prosthetic if I remember rightly. I’m fully aware of my argument thank you.

Right so you are ok with him flashing that at unsuspecting women and it not being illegal because he isnt getting pleasure and it isnt real, right?

I’m ok with the law which for sexual exposure states it must be genitalia being exposed. The police could potentially have gone with a lesser public order offence instead which they probably would have proved but genitals is its own crime. Just as penises are for rape.

I think that rape is currently an almost majority male crime and the figures are pretty overwhelming. It’s interesting that you don’t seem to want to establish a specific crime for female perpetrators of a certain type of sexual assault, you want to lump them in with those numbers despite it being a different offence. I wonder why that might be.

No

Because that’s not how the law works. At all. Rape is too serious to make variations more favourable for perpetrators.

The same way that if someone punches a person and they die because their victim had an egg shell skull, they don’t get let off with just GBH because they didn’t know.

I have to say on a forum for women it’s very disappointing to watch people tie themselves in knots to think of ways to make life easier for rapsists

I think you’re misunderstanding the argument here. Perhaps purposely. 😀

But he knew. And for example, if he had a vasectomy, he could argue that pregnancy was not a risk and he knew that and that is why he did it.