Woman forces man to have sex with her at knife point, stabs him when he refuses - article does not mentionthe word "rape".

[drater]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2194240/Angelina-Jolie-lookalike-stabs-taxi-driver-refusing-sex-her.html

Utterly ridiculous and the police give her an excuse - she was on medication!
I am appalled!

seeker Wed 29-Aug-12 22:32:45
Well, on any thread about domestic violence, somebody alwqys says that domestic violence is nearly 50:50.

The only way that could even be approaching true is if you use the stupid Home Office definition of DV.

StewieGriffinsMom still hasn't apologised for telling malicious lies about me. Does rather make you think weather all her posts are lies or not.

OneMoreChap

"The only way that could even be approaching true is if you use the stupid Home Office definition of DV."

Not the only way

Lurking - legally there is a legal definition of rape. Legally other forced sexual activity is sexual assault. Of course being sexually forced to do anything, whatever it is legally called is awful.

In terms of this story, I think there is a lot more here that we simply dont know yet. So for example, medication - what medication? Is she mentally ill and given she was admitted to a psychiatric hospital, was she psychotic?

This really is one I prefer to withhold judgement on until we know more.

TiggyD SGM did announce out of the blue on the prisoners thread that she'd wait for my permission in future before responding to anything (or something like that).
At the time I thought it was a boorish little dig, but perhaps she was serious...
(In which case, permission granted this once, SGM.)

First of all, Eats I'd thought you'd left! SOOO thrilled you are here! You've guided me so much, I was so sad when I thought you'd left.

I understand what you're saying, but surely a man can be raped by a woman, even though it's extremely rare? I dunno, the laws just make me uncomfortable.

Good question on the medication Eats. Just as it would with a man, before anyone comments. I think it's important information in regards to her sentence. But it's the Daily Fail, they do tend to leave out the less 'dramatic' points, don't they?

Any elaboration on how law-changing could effect rape/sexual abuse/harassment/etc women? I genuinely want to know. Cannot form an informed opinion/position without all the opinions and info I can get!

LastMango, I don't think anyone can actually say 'do not reply to me, ever' on this forum. That's up to the mods, surely? There is no ignore button here, which I like. It's good to hear opinions that do not match your own. (Trolls excluded, obviously.) I've read 33 books on feminism from all different 'types' of feminists since posting here. I'd hate to be able to ignore those who disagree with me. On a few occasions (not necessarily this board either) I've been pulled up and learned a lot I wouldn't have if I ignored every poster I deemed annoying. There's only one poster I won't ever reply to, but that's my prerogative.

LurkingAndLearningLovesCats In the UK where I surmise may of the posters come from the current definition of rape requires a penis; a woman can be charged with helping in a rape;

A woman can commit sexual assault; she can commit assault by penetration.

They have the same sort of sentences and are [should be] treated as seriously.

Consent is the most important thing.

I've read very few books on feminism, but browse a lot of blogs.
I've had a couple of posts deleted for snippy comments, and been bollocked by some folk, I thought undesercedly. AnyFucker told me to grow a thicker skin, listen a bit, and leave issues in the threads they occurred, which seemed sensible advice.

There are some posters who I mentally killfile and don't respond to.

That's essentially the law here too, must be a form of penetration.

It just makes me think women who are abused over webcam etc are not deemed 'serious offences' when they often involves minors or children (minor minors) It seems wrong to me that that isn't taken more seriously. Do I think t should be called rape? of course not. But it still involves the issue of consent/vulnerability and there are so many sites where men flash young girls regularly.

Just for a non male example of consent.

I agree wholeheartedly re. importance (and generally, joy) of reading and interacting with posters with a range of opinions, Lurk (and was joking with 'permission granted', btw).

TBH I'm usually more bothered when (my) questions go answered than I am by snide comments, views I disagree with, etc.

My understanding is that of course women can be charged with sexual offences under SOA 2003, and can of course also be charged as accessories, aiding and abetting, etc.

LastMangoInParis Thu 30-Aug-12 16:57:47
I agree wholeheartedly re. importance (and generally, joy) of reading and interacting with posters with a range of opinions

I reserve judgement.
Oddly, I think, I seem to get into more trouble in Relationships than I do on FWR.

Possibly because while I'm a "cheater", I do actually read a bit about feminism and am interested in the topics here.

Not sure I get general gist of your last post, Chap.

I like reading and posting; it's not always a joy if I f*$k up and get a bollocking.

It happens more on Relationships, because I'm open I had an affair before first marriage ended.

On Feminism, I'm interested and occasionally ask the odd interesting question (well, to me anyway)

Nobody's forcing you to fess up, ask those questions, read those responses, One. There's gotta be something in it for you, however much denial you like to wallow in...

Lurking - Thanks! I had left, but popped back today - but I didnt think anyone would have noticed, so thanks for the welcome.

Legally in the UK a man can not be raped. But even though incredibly rare, I think most people would accept a man can be raped and would call it rape.

Yes other coerced and forced sexual activity can be just as traumatic and damaging as rape. And yes this is not always treated seriously enough.

But it is because rape is based on the idea that "real" sex involves a woman being penetrated by a penis - although in the UK, after much lobbying from feminists and women's organisations, the law was changed to include penetration by an object. Thus rape is "real" forced sex. Because other sexual acts are seen as foreplay and so not real sex, they get called sexual assault.

So the whole idea of what is called rape and thus deemed most serious, is a patriarchial construction.

Legally, in the UK, a man cannot be raped.

Oh, yes he can. See Sexual Offences Act s1. This definition of rape is still intentional penetration of vagina, mouth or anus with a penis.

Male rape has, apparently, been recognised in English law since 1994, though.

And a woman can be charged with rape as a secondary party under SOA 2003.

Legally, a man can be raped. But not by a woman.

Eats men can be raped, and regularly are, albeit by other men. Where did you get that notion from?

Have also just noticed the 'incredibly rare' comment, Eats - really? Where on earth does that come from?

without wishing to be too controversial, is this another example of 'femsplaining'?

'femsplaining'

I don't think so, unhombre. I think it's just misunderstanding of basic law. IME that's not a 'gendered' shortcoming.

Doh!

Well, if clearly understanding and outlining the law of the land is femsplaining, then yes it probably is.

I think unhombre was talking about the comments he refers to in his posts of 22:27-22:40, seeker.

Well, seeker, Eats (who is normally good at this sort of thing ime) doesn't understand the basic law of the land here, and went on to comment on the incidence of male rape, nonetheless. And sort of contributed to a 'rape myth' albeit inadvertently. So 'femsplaining'? Almost a dictionary definition!.