Should the UK law on rape be changed?

[prashad]

I anticipate some flack for this post, but please hear me out and hopefully we can have an interesting discussion about this.

UK law current states that rape is necessarily committed by a man; that the perpetrator has to insert their penis into the victim. Of course, this means men can rape women, and men can rape men, but women cannot rape anyone.

However, many people would define rape as 'forcing someone to have intercourse against their will'. In the dictionary, rape is defined as;

"1.
the unlawful compelling of a person through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2.
any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person."

It is my view that according to this dictionary definition, a woman can rape a man. Typical objections include the issue of erection when not aroused, but we all know that men can have involuntary erections when not aroused.

In light of the feminist aim of equality, should be campaign to change the law so that men who have been raped by women can have justice?

I know men who have woken up with a woman on top of them, or who have drunkenly had sex with a sober woman that they otherwise would not have slept with. Perhaps it occurs more frequently than we may think but men don't report it?

I am well aware that the above mentioned hypothetical assaults are against the law in the UK, but called sexual assault, and that the maximum sentences are the same, but why not brand such women 'rapists'?

Conversely, how would you feel if the rape of women by men was just called 'sexual assault' instead and the term 'rape' abolished from our lexicon?

Some men that I have spoken to about this are frustrated and unsupportive of feminism because of the perception that it seeks to increase the rights of women, rather than seeking to promote gender equality... and they site the lack of campaigning by feminists on issues where men are disadvantaged. Do you think that campaign for equality in rape law would be good for feminism because it would show a concern for equality in an issue where men are disadvantaged?

I'd also note that other countries (such as the United States) have updated their rape laws so that women can be convicted of raping men.

Thanks for reading.

Clearer to the perpetrators I mean not to other people.

Buffy, almondcakes...

I don't buy it.

Maybe in war the rape of men is considered and charged as torture, but it a British man walked into a police station today and said that he woke up to find his wife on top of him, I doubt the police would be rushing to charge her with torture.

I wouldn't consider myself to have a particularly good knowledge about rape. I do however think that when we are talking about legal issues with very serious consequences (whether that be racial discrimination, rape, murder or any other such subject), we should always try to stay as close as possible to international definitions.

The two main reasons for that are that the international community has far greater expertise than one country alone and because we all need to work together to resolve these issues, not have one country taking a unilateral approach.

And while there has been rumbling and moaning on here about academic approaches recently, with something like rape and the law you do actually have to take an academic approach. Who else other than academics and workers in the field are going to have sat down, recorded and analysed the utterly harrowing accounts of rape and sexual violence given in courts and tried to put together an analysis on the nature of those crimes, how that testimony is dealt with and what the legal and humanitarian response to that should be.

While I appreciate that the most unspeakable war crimes and waking up to non consensual sex from a spouse are both forms of sexual assault, I don't like the implication that rape in this country, when reported by women, involves wives walking into police stations to say they woke up to find their husbands on top of them, and the police taking that forward to the CPS as a rape case. There are many rapes in this country of both men and women which involve acts and scenarios as extreme as war crimes and acts of torture. I know people these things have happened to. I know people whose partners have put them through such acts of rape. There are also people who, while the individual act may not have been the most horrific possible, are raped as part of an ongoing campaign of abuse against them by a partner, of which the police are often able to collate evidence. So I don't think there is some huge divide between rapes in this country and rapes in times of war.

And while I know nothing of your intentions OP, my general experience of the MRA inspired (and to be fair also the SJW end of feminism) campaigns is that it isn't actually based on knowledge, experience or concern for what is already happening in those areas. If somebody genuinely wants to make a case for what should happen to male victims of sexual violence, go through the case law, through the testimony, listen to the survivors and those who advocate for them, and make a case based on that. Because if you don't, then feminists will go dealing with sexual violence against men within the context of all sexual violence, and do the best they can, from all their work in the area, because nobody else can be bothered to really look at it, or maybe it is too harrowing for others to decide to look at. But don't criticise feminism for doing a poor job with no help. Offer real help.

But all this people just waking up with their spouse on top of them, that's what rape claims are all about in the UK is just, I don't know... missing the point and wasting your time and our own. Read all the testimony of men who have been raped and sexually assaulted, how those assaults happen and in what context, and how people think the law can respond to that.

Clearer to the perpetrators I mean not to other people.

I think people who are committing rape know perfectly well what they're doing, actually.

Yes.
"I wouldn't have hung around outside her school, bribed her with takeaways and tricked her into being passed around loads of men for use as a sex toy if I'd known sex with minors was illegal."
Said no child sex abuser, ever.

Very cogent post above, almond. Thanks for all your contributions. I've learned quite a bit.

Just wanted to pipe up with a thanks almond you've helped solidify some thoughts in my mind. Namely that I think/feel that rape is the penetrative sexual act rather then just penis based, I understand they are separate in UK law but I think the international definition is clear and right.

The person who probably knows a lot more about how these laws have developed and how feminists have changed the status of rape in international law would perhaps be Beachcomber, who may not be around at the moment.

"Some men that I have spoken to about this are frustrated and unsupportive of feminism because of the perception that it seeks to increase the rights of women, rather than seeking to promote gender equality"

Er, increasing the rights of women IS seeking to promote gender equality.

Too late to say anything else at present.