What is Rape?

[Samuraikoku]

[
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.

So you are downplaying them.

And in turn that makes you a rape apologist.

[Neo Art]

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.

I mean, it takes a special level of intellectual dishonesty to claim you're against minimizing the trauma of rape, therefore you're going out of your way to claim that rape victims weren't actually raped.

"All of this 'identifying rape victims' really trivializes rape I tell ya!"

[Neo Art]

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

...

I know, right?

[Bottle]

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.

Yeah, speaking personally, the application of the death penalty would make me even less likely to report a crime that carried that sentence, because I don't trust my government with that kind of power.

Of course, I already would never report being raped. Primarily because of the unfailing totally-not-marginalization of people like Des-Bal. But you know, let's not talk about that, because really what we need to focus on is changing the definition of rape and the sentencing laws so that our already-woefully-low conviction rate can be pushed ever lower.

[The Emerald Dawn]

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.

No, it's still a very related issue to everything you're saying.

You don't seem to understand how actual rape victims think, and instead are constructing this mythical point-by-point plan around how Television says it works.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

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.

Ever heard of the "Stockholm Syndrome"? Apparently not, otherwise you wouldn't be arguing on this insignificant point.

[Des-Bal]

I mean, it takes a special level of intellectual dishonesty to claim you're against minimizing the trauma of rape, therefore you're going out of your way to claim that rape victims weren't actually raped.

"All of this 'identifying rape victims' really trivializes rape I tell ya!"

Like how everyone was so eager to minimize parking lot guy's trauma by pointing out that stabbing isn't rape?

[Nadkor]

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

So you are downplaying them.

And in turn that makes you a rape apologist.

I was calling him a rape apologist 10 days ago in this very thread and he vehemently denied it.

Sometimes it's disappointing to be proven right.

[Des-Bal]

[
Ever heard of the "Stockholm Syndrome"? Apparently not, otherwise you wouldn't be arguing on this insignificant point.

"Victims don't always want their attackers to face justice." If we never punished anybody more people would come forward.

[Neo Art]

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

Yeah, speaking personally, the application of the death penalty would make me even less likely to report a crime that carried that sentence, because I don't trust my government with that kind of power.

I mean, sure, there's that. There's also the other consideration, from purely practical considerations. If you're already the kind of person who would violently rape someone, and in so doing, faced the maximum penalty allowable by law, such that nothing else you could possibly do could in any way make it worse for you....what incentive do you have to let your victim live?

[The Emerald Dawn]

So you are downplaying them.

And in turn that makes you a rape apologist.

I was calling him a rape apologist 10 days ago in this very thread and he vehemently denied it.

Sometimes it's disappointing to be proven right.

I'm not sure we're supposed to be happy when we say "Huh, that guy's parachute just detached from him. That's about five thousand feet.... We should clear this area, because we're going to need a squeegee and a fire hose to clean that impact site."

[Samuraikoku]

I was calling him a rape apologist 10 days ago in this very thread and he vehemently denied it.

Sometimes it's disappointing to be proven right.

Let's see if my simple-minded answer can get another reaction.

Not likely, though.

[Norstal]

[
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.

But...they don't give consent in either situation...

[Bottle]

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

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

Source?

I hear lots of people claim this, but I honestly don't buy it. After all, most rapes aren't even reported, and the overwhelming majority of those which are reported never even lead to an arrest, let alone see the inside of a courtroom, let alone get a conviction.

Murders, on the other hand, tend to at least get investigated. I think rapists would still be quite content to leave their victims alive, seeing as how they have an entire world full of people like Des-Bal who will helpfully define away their crime for them so they have no risk of any penalty at all.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

I mean, it takes a special level of intellectual dishonesty to claim you're against minimizing the trauma of rape, therefore you're going out of your way to claim that rape victims weren't actually raped.

"All of this 'identifying rape victims' really trivializes rape I tell ya!"

Like how everyone was so eager to minimize parking lot guy's trauma by pointing out that stabbing isn't rape?

I tried to find the coherent argument in here.

I don't think there is one.

[Bottle]

Yeah, speaking personally, the application of the death penalty would make me even less likely to report a crime that carried that sentence, because I don't trust my government with that kind of power.

I mean, sure, there's that. There's also the other consideration, from purely practical considerations. If you're already the kind of person who would violently rape someone, and in so doing, faced the maximum penalty allowable by law, such that nothing else you could possibly do could in any way make it worse for you....what incentive do you have to let your victim live?

As I already replied, you'd have the incentive that rape is seldom reported and almost never leads to any conviction. Murder is far more likely to get you caught.

[Samuraikoku]

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

But...they don't give consent in either situation...

The concept of "consent", to Des-Bal, is irrelevant.

[Des-Bal]

I tried to find the coherent argument in here.

I don't think there is one.

Parking lot guy got stabbed, was he raped? Do you think he was raped? No, because you don't believe the elements that constitute rape were present. Does that make you a rape apologist? No.

That's what I'm saying.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

[
Ever heard of the "Stockholm Syndrome"? Apparently not, otherwise you wouldn't be arguing on this insignificant point.

"Victims don't always want their attackers to face justice." If we never punished anybody more people would come forward.

"Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes 'strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other.'"

[Neo Art]

I mean, sure, there's that. There's also the other consideration, from purely practical considerations. If you're already the kind of person who would violently rape someone, and in so doing, faced the maximum penalty allowable by law, such that nothing else you could possibly do could in any way make it worse for you....what incentive do you have to let your victim live?

As I already replied, you'd have the incentive that rape is seldom reported and almost never leads to any conviction. Murder is far more likely to get you caught.

But are we talking the broad spectrum of rape as it actually exists, or the very narrowly defined event that is the only thing that des-bal deigns worthy of acknowledgement?

[Des-Bal]

But...they don't give consent in either situation...

If you're confused about my position I've laid it out in previous posts.

[Nadkor]

I mean, it takes a special level of intellectual dishonesty to claim you're against minimizing the trauma of rape, therefore you're going out of your way to claim that rape victims weren't actually raped.

"All of this 'identifying rape victims' really trivializes rape I tell ya!"

Like how everyone was so eager to minimize parking lot guy's trauma by pointing out that stabbing isn't rape?

Well here's the thing, rape apologist...stabbing isn't rape.

[Bottle]

I tried to find the coherent argument in here.

I don't think there is one.

Parking lot guy got stabbed, was he raped? Do you think he was raped? No, because you don't believe the elements that constitute rape were present. Does that make you a rape apologist? No.

That's what I'm saying.

When confronted by this kind of, er, "reasoning," one is forced to wonder whether the poster is able to tell the difference between cutting a steak and having sex.

[Des-Bal]

"Victims don't always want their attackers to face justice." If we never punished anybody more people would come forward.

"Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes 'strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other.'"

"Victims don't always want their attackers to face justice."

[Bottle]

As I already replied, you'd have the incentive that rape is seldom reported and almost never leads to any conviction. Murder is far more likely to get you caught.

But are we talking the broad spectrum of rape as it actually exists, or the very narrowly defined event that is the only thing that des-bal deigns worthy of acknowledgement?

Both. Granted, violent stranger rapes are more likely to be investigated and more likely to lead to convictions, but they are still far, far, far less likely to lead to either one than a murder would be.