Right you pesky feminists, which sort of rape is *worse* <Dawkins related>

[ladyblablah]

So Dawkins (self proclaimed ironic prophet) has decided that date rape is not as bad as a rape with a knife at your throat.

I have a question - what if the date rape includes a knife at the throat - what then - who wins at being the worst?

Is there a rule that date rape doesn't include knives? Do us feminists not know this rule for rapists?

For Christ's sake - who knows what kind of depraved, agonizing things a "date rapist" might commit knowing they've got more chance of their defense of "it was consensual" holding up in court?

It's an impossible choice and IMO the reason we should treat all rape as equally abhorrent.

But he wasn't saying one was worse. He chose bad examples, yes.

I don't know. I was raped by someone I knew; it was a massive violation of trust, apart from anything else. It makes you not trust any men you know. Is that better than being raped by a stranger who fits the rapist box? I don't know and I hope I never find out. But given that rape is perpetrated by men, it is more than crass for a man in a position of some intellectual power to pronounce judgement on it.

He did say one was worse:
"Mild date rape is bad. Violent date rape is worse"
What exactly is "mild" rape?

I was asleep, so definitely not asking for it, unless by virtue of being female and having a vagina.

And rape IS an act of violence. It may be aggravated by assault, but it is in itself violence.

He did say one was worse. The awful thing about it is he was making a point about saying if one thing is worse than another, then to say so does not endorse the 'less worse' thing but because he's a massive tool he decided to throw in a few 'edgy' references to sexual assault, just for fun and not giving a shit how traumatising it is for the people who have been told that their rape wasn't that bad.

Ugh.

Never liked him anyway.

And he has loads of followers, plenty of whom will be men, many of whom will have seen 'date rape is not that bad' and seen it as an endorsement. I wonder how many people when they say date rape isn't as bad as stranger rape are really saying 'the kind of rape I do is not as bad as the kind of rape they do'

^^
Not an accusation
(already had one deletion today for being 'mean' about Nick Clegg.)

On reflection, I don't think it answers the question; my choice would really be based on attendant circumstances rather than the actual act of rape. For instance, I wouldn't want to be tied up in the boot of a car on my way to a forest; I'd be worried about what would happen. The aftermath. Horrible horrible...

But that's the kidnap element, it's the circumstances surrounding the act... so I'm not sure where that counts so far as this discussion goes. Would that element be counted within a conviction? Would it be an aggravating factor? Is that how it works - as JTRB suggests?

Whatever the circumstances, Monty, whether you've been tied up and thrust in a boot, or whether you were sleeping next to the person 5 minutes previously...when you have an unwanted hand/penis/object invading your vagina and you can do fuck all about it, there is NO "better or worse."

under uk law kidnap is an aggravating factor

sorry, england and wales

So you can't answer it then Monty? It is more complicated than his pathetic 'logic' implies.
Logic here has offered a valid argument (not IMHO but in his) but not a truth.

I don't get how you would 'mildly' rape someone. Would it go something like 'Oh, I'm sorry, excuse me, my penis seems to have slipped into your vagina. Awful bad show, I know, can't think how that would have happened. BAD Dawkins BAD Dawkins. Gosh, I really am most mortified. What a pickle I've got myself into, ah? Please don't take this the wrong way. I don't understand how this could have happened. Golly, this is a bit rum, eh? Anyway, what's on telly?'

What the actual fuck is a "mild" rape

i have a horrible feeling that "mild" rape falls within the same category as "blurred lines"

Actually I've changed my mind. he did. I only read the first tweet, note I've read all of them. nobber. ffs.

Thank you Petula.

Yes Catkisser. I see that. But also I'm thinking about times I didn't really want to. I didn't do anything to really indicate that I didn't want to (beyond a general lack of participation, but then we're not all Hollywood types are we?), but it still happened. I'm retrospectively trying to classify this. I usually kind of blamed myself for getting into that situation. Ok, I know... we could talk about that. But from the man's perspective - were they rapists?

This is a really good response: www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/richard-dawkins-is-wrong-to-suggest-that-there-can-be-varying-degrees-of-severity-involved-in-rape-9635662.html

I think he's a self-satisfied arsehole, personally.

If they weren't 100% sure you were consenting, then yes, they were rapists. I say this as a fellow expert in self blame.

i would like to know how he knows.

i have an analogy:

twatty know it all rent-a-gob professional atheists are bad,twatty know it all rent-a-gob professional atheists who are richard dawkins are worse