What is Rape?

[Individuality-ness]

And this makes having sex with an unconscious person not rape because...

Because the absence of consent isn't what matters, it is again the assault occurring and continuing in direct opposition to the victims expressed wishes.

... and the victim wishes to be sexually assaulted while they're unconscious because...?

[Ifreann]

And this makes having sex with an unconscious person not rape because...

Because the absence of consent isn't what matters, it is again the assault occurring and continuing in direct opposition to the victims expressed wishes.

It's nice that you think so. Why should we think so, though?

[Neo Art]

As Neo Art frequently points out, being punched on the nose may not be as bad as having your leg broken by someone else, but both fall under assault.

I mean, yeah, kinda. I get the argument, I suppose, that rape by physical violence or threat of violence is perhaps somewhat more mentally and emotionally traumatic than rape you can't remember, and weren't aware of. I can see that as sort of a general point. I guess my response to that is "so?"

I mean, I guess an argument can be made that we shouldn't call them "the same crime" because that seems to imply "the same severity" and "the same appropriate punishment" and perhaps we SHOULD punsih "violent rape" with "unconcious rape" more severely BECAUSE it may well be a more traumatic and emotionally crippling event. To remember it, and the fear of violence and death, versus being aware that you were raped, but having no recollection of the event. Perhaps that SHOULD be something "more" and if THAT is rape (the violent, forceful event) then calling the non forceful act done that you can't remember equally rape implies that they're "the same thing". Does calling non consensual sex that the victim can't remember the same thing we call violent, forceful, under threat of death intercourse, weaken the severity of the presumably more heinous act.

The answer, of course, is "no" since we already have these distinctions. The law already accounts for these when we use terms like "aggrevated" or "in the first degree"

Jesus fucking christ, why is it that in refuting an argument, I end up doing a better job actually articulating what the argument IS than the person supposedly making it?

pathetic.

[Des-Bal]

... and the victim wishes to be sexually assaulted while they're unconscious because...?

Their wishes are not expressed.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And this makes having sex with an unconscious person not rape because...

Because the absence of consent isn't what matters, it is again the assault occurring and continuing in direct opposition to the victims expressed wishes.

No, it is the lack of absence EXACTLY what matters, or somehow the manipulation of the person to get consent (as in getting drugged or drunk or incapacitated or whatever).

The assault occurring comes as a result of the lack of gaining consent and the logical assumption that you wouldn't get sex anyways even if you asked but you want it anyways. The cause is what drives the effect, simple causality should tell you that having sex with an absence of consent is rape.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Bottle, as a member of the member-having portion of humanity, and as recognition to your decades of glorious service to the member-having portion of humanity, I am willing to upgrade it to a Demi-Rape.

Sign here please.

Hmm, does this mean I'm entitled to only half the amount of criticism of my personal choices and sex life to which most rape victims are subjected? Because I wouldn't want to miss out on any of that. I mean, that's most of the reason we womenfolks get ourselves raped, after all...the great attention that one enjoys as a rape victim!

I tell you what, we'll upgrade you to a Demi-Rape, with Honors. The Honors will allow you to continue to enjoy all the slut-shaming and whore-naming of your current plan, with only a fraction of the actual responsibility for those (obviously) slutty choices you made.

Can I get a signature here too?

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

And this makes having sex with an unconscious person not rape because...

Because the absence of consent isn't what matters, it is again the assault occurring and continuing in direct opposition to the victims expressed wishes.

That's like saying that if you're in a coma and you get stabbed 75 times, causing you to die, then it isn't murder because you didn't express a wish not to be murdered while it was happening.

[Bottle]

As Neo Art frequently points out, being punched on the nose may not be as bad as having your leg broken by someone else, but both fall under assault.

I mean, yeah, kinda. I get the argument, I suppose, that rape by physical violence or threat of violence is perhaps somewhat more mentally and emotionally traumatic than rape you can't remember, and weren't aware of. I can see that as sort of a general point. I guess my response to that is "so?"

I mean, I guess an argument can be made that we shouldn't call them "the same crime" because that seems to imply "the same severity" and "the same appropriate punishment" and perhaps we SHOULD punsih "violent rape" with "unconcious rape" more severely BECAUSE it may well be a more traumatic and emotionally crippling event. To remember it, and the fear of violence and death, versus being aware that you were raped, but having no recollection of the event. Perhaps that SHOULD be something "more" and if THAT is rape (the violent, forceful event) then calling the non forceful act done that you can't remember equally rape implies that they're "the same thing". Does calling non consensual sex that the victim can't remember the same thing we call violent, forceful, under threat of death intercourse, weaken the severity of the presumably more heinous act.

The answer, of course, is "no" since we already have these distinctions. The law already accounts for these when we use terms like "aggrevated" or "in the first degree"

Jesus fucking christ, why is it that in refuting an argument, I end up doing a better job actually articulating what the argument IS than the person supposedly making it?

pathetic.

It also rather falls apart when you have people like me, who think that all rape and sexual assault should carry a mandatory minimum life sentence, so the quibbles about "how bad" a rape was really don't matter from any practical standpoint.

[Neo Art]

It also rather falls apart when you have people like me, who think that all rape and sexual assault should carry a mandatory minimum life sentence, so the quibbles about "how bad" a rape was really don't matter from any practical standpoint.

I mean, yeah, sure, admittedly you tend to wreck the curve a bit on the discussion on sentence and severity gradations between "violent" and "non violent" rape (which I think is at least a better distinction than "legitimate", or, god forbid "real" rape)

[Bottle]

Hmm, does this mean I'm entitled to only half the amount of criticism of my personal choices and sex life to which most rape victims are subjected? Because I wouldn't want to miss out on any of that. I mean, that's most of the reason we womenfolks get ourselves raped, after all...the great attention that one enjoys as a rape victim!

I tell you what, we'll upgrade you to a Demi-Rape, with Honors. The Honors will allow you to continue to enjoy all the slut-shaming and whore-naming of your current plan, with only a fraction of the actual responsibility for those (obviously) slutty choices you made.

Can I get a signature here too?

Oh good, whew. I was worried that I might have to pass up on having random strangers tell me how I ought to feel! Thank heavens we sorted that out.

*johnhancock*

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I tell you what, we'll upgrade you to a Demi-Rape, with Honors. The Honors will allow you to continue to enjoy all the slut-shaming and whore-naming of your current plan, with only a fraction of the actual responsibility for those (obviously) slutty choices you made.

Can I get a signature here too?

what a nice plan there!

[The Emerald Dawn]

I tell you what, we'll upgrade you to a Demi-Rape, with Honors. The Honors will allow you to continue to enjoy all the slut-shaming and whore-naming of your current plan, with only a fraction of the actual responsibility for those (obviously) slutty choices you made.

Can I get a signature here too?

Oh good, whew. I was worried that I might have to pass up on having random strangers tell me how I ought to feel! Thank heavens we sorted that out.

*johnhancock*

Fantastic *pins a service medal to your breast* I am proud to be the first person to call you a whore, and wish you happy slutting in the future.

[Bottle]

It also rather falls apart when you have people like me, who think that all rape and sexual assault should carry a mandatory minimum life sentence, so the quibbles about "how bad" a rape was really don't matter from any practical standpoint.

I mean, yeah, sure, admittedly you tend to wreck the curve a bit on the discussion on sentence and severity gradations between "violent" and "non violent" rape (which I think is at least a better distinction than "legitimate", or, god forbid "real" rape)

To me it's rather like arguing that it wasn't really VIOLENT murder when you killed that guy, because you used a really sharp knife so he hardly felt a thing.

[Neo Art]

I tell you what, we'll upgrade you to a Demi-Rape, with Honors. The Honors will allow you to continue to enjoy all the slut-shaming and whore-naming of your current plan, with only a fraction of the actual responsibility for those (obviously) slutty choices you made.

Can I get a signature here too?

Oh good, whew. I was worried that I might have to pass up on having random strangers tell me how I ought to feel! Thank heavens we sorted that out.

*johnhancock*

obligatory

[Des-Bal]

I mean, yeah, kinda. I get the argument, I suppose, that rape by physical violence or threat of violence is perhaps somewhat more mentally and emotionally traumatic than rape you can't remember, and weren't aware of. I can see that as sort of a general point. I guess my response to that is "so?"

I mean, I guess an argument can be made that we shouldn't call them "the same crime" because that seems to imply "the same severity" and "the same appropriate punishment" and perhaps we SHOULD punsih "violent rape" with "unconcious rape" more severely BECAUSE it may well be a more traumatic and emotionally crippling event. To remember it, and the fear of violence and death, versus being aware that you were raped, but having no recollection of the event. Perhaps that SHOULD be something "more" and if THAT is rape (the violent, forceful event) then calling the non forceful act done that you can't remember equally rape implies that they're "the same thing". Does calling non consensual sex that the victim can't remember the same thing we call violent, forceful, under threat of death intercourse, weaken the severity of the presumably more heinous act.

The answer, of course, is "no" since we already have these distinctions. The law already accounts for these when we use terms like "aggrevated" or "in the first degree"

Jesus fucking christ, why is it that in refuting an argument, I end up doing a better job actually articulating what the argument IS than the person supposedly making it?

pathetic.

I can appreciate that distinctions exist but I feel that deeming any act in the absence of consent to be rape downplays the seriousness of forcible rape. They should be reclassified and rape should be made a capital crime.

[Samuraikoku]

I can appreciate that distinctions exist but I feel that deeming any act in the absence of consent to be rape downplays the seriousness of forcible rape. They should be reclassified and rape should be made a capital crime.

MORE BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!

[The Emerald Dawn]

I mean, yeah, kinda. I get the argument, I suppose, that rape by physical violence or threat of violence is perhaps somewhat more mentally and emotionally traumatic than rape you can't remember, and weren't aware of. I can see that as sort of a general point. I guess my response to that is "so?"

I mean, I guess an argument can be made that we shouldn't call them "the same crime" because that seems to imply "the same severity" and "the same appropriate punishment" and perhaps we SHOULD punsih "violent rape" with "unconcious rape" more severely BECAUSE it may well be a more traumatic and emotionally crippling event. To remember it, and the fear of violence and death, versus being aware that you were raped, but having no recollection of the event. Perhaps that SHOULD be something "more" and if THAT is rape (the violent, forceful event) then calling the non forceful act done that you can't remember equally rape implies that they're "the same thing". Does calling non consensual sex that the victim can't remember the same thing we call violent, forceful, under threat of death intercourse, weaken the severity of the presumably more heinous act.

The answer, of course, is "no" since we already have these distinctions. The law already accounts for these when we use terms like "aggrevated" or "in the first degree"

Jesus fucking christ, why is it that in refuting an argument, I end up doing a better job actually articulating what the argument IS than the person supposedly making it?

pathetic.

I can appreciate that distinctions exist but I feel that deeming any act in the absence of consent to be rape downplays the seriousness of forcible rape. They should be reclassified and rape should be made a capital crime.

Because nothing raises report rates like knowing that you're sending Daddy up the river to visit Uncle Sparky.

[Des-Bal]

Because nothing raises report rates like knowing that you're sending Daddy up the river to visit Uncle Sparky.

That's a separate issue.

[The Emerald Dawn]

Because nothing raises report rates like knowing that you're sending Daddy up the river to visit Uncle Sparky.

That's a separate issue.

No, actually, it isn't.

[Neo Art]

They should be reclassified and rape should be made a capital crime.

That's generally a horrible idea unless you like dead rape victims.

[Nadkor]

I can appreciate that distinctions exist but I feel that deeming any act in the absence of consent to be rape downplays the seriousness of forcible rape. They should be reclassified and rape should be made a capital crime.

You're actually saying this with a straight face? You're saying you're worried about downplaying the seriousness of one kind of rape and so you're...actively downplaying the seriousness of several kinds of rape?

Whatever, rape apologist.

[Samuraikoku]

Because nothing raises report rates like knowing that you're sending Daddy up the river to visit Uncle Sparky.

That's a separate issue.

In no way. The amount of penalty doesn't have to do with report rate as much as the possibility of the perpetrator getting actually convicted. Not to mention going through the actual process, for both them and the victim themselves.

[Des-Bal]

No, actually, it isn't.

Yes it actually is. Victims don't always want their attackers to face justice. Maybe if we reduced the sentence for rape to community service more people would come forward, that doesn't make it a good idea.

[Des-Bal]

[
You're actually saying this with a straight face? You're saying you're worried about downplaying the seriousness of one kind of rape and so you're...actively downplaying the seriousness of several kinds of rape?

Whatever, rape apologist.

I'm not downplaying them I'm saying their not rape.

[Nadkor]

[
You're actually saying this with a straight face? You're saying you're worried about downplaying the seriousness of one kind of rape and so you're...actively downplaying the seriousness of several kinds of rape?

Whatever, rape apologist.

I'm not downplaying them I'm saying their not rape.

...