Rapists

[Stelly]

My misses told me about this book called 'The Secret' and that everything that happens to you happens because you will it to happen if you realise or not... that includes rape... I promptly told her that I did not believe in that rubbish... weird what some people are okay believing...

Stelly

 

[Edrof]

Scary to think this guy owns guns.

 

[Woden]

Quite a taboo subject but does anyone think it's weird there doesn't seem to be more gay rapists? Whenever you read on the news about someone getting raped it's ALWAYS a woman, but with the number of gays about nowdays you'd think at least 20% would be gay rapes with male victims. Do the victims just not report them? Are men too difficult to overpower? One would imagine with the culture of binge drinking there would be plenty of opportunities for sexual predators to gayrape impaired men.

One theory I have is it seems to be extremely easy for the gays to get access to willing partners, just go to a public toilet or whatever like George Michael, so they don't resort to raping like a frustrated heterosexual would do. That might explain the disparity.

You are showing a lack of understanding of both rape and homosexuality here. There aren't more gays now than before, just more openly gay men. Gay men also don't just pop to a pubic loo whenever they fancy a quicky any more (or less) than straight people do. The only reason you know George did it is because he is famous.

And then rape itself. Most violent rapists are doing it for the sense of power, not just to get off. The sexual aspect of it is a biproduct, not the aim. Men are much less likely to report being raped by another man. Not only are we less likely to admit to being overpowered, or submissive, but most are still overly worried about being labeled as gay themselves, despite the lack of consent.
Non-violent rape is massively under-reported for any gender.

Under British law a man cannot be raped so what you are looking for is cases of Sexual Assault.

It sadly happens all the time.

A man can be raped in UK law, but a woman cannot rape someone:
Under section 1(1) SOA 2003 a defendant, A, is guilty of rape if:

• A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of B (the complainant) with his penis;
• B does not consent to the penetration; and,
• A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

 

[BD10NNF]

LOL this thread. I doubt many men would report it if they got raped.

 

[Jambo]

Your last theory is flawed with homophobia. Why would gay people have access to any more or less willing partners ?

The cases aren't reported. It's as simple as that.

How is the suggestion that homosexual people are generally more promiscuous homophobic?

 

[Admiral Huddy]

Good post Woden

How is the suggestion that homosexual people are generally more promiscuous homophobic?

??I didn't?? I think there's a mis-understanding here somewhere. I'm saying exactly what woden said, although he put it far better.

 

[Dan J]

My misses told me about this book called 'The Secret' and that everything that happens to you happens because you will it to happen if you realise or not... that includes rape... I promptly told her that I did not believe in that rubbish... weird what some people are okay believing...

Stelly

Oh god I hate that book. Been working as someones psychotherapist who believes in all that ****. Working with someone who is utterly convinced that it represents some kind of truth is practically impossible. She keeps coming to therapy though so .....

 

[GhostlyPea]

That's not true. A woman cannot rape people, but as long as there is penile penetration, it does not matter whether the victim is a man or a woman.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/42/section/1

I'm sure I'm going to regret asking this as Law is definitely not a strong subject of mine... but why can a woman not be convicted of rape? Sure it may be harder (hurr hurr) for it to happen, but I'm sure it's not impossible. Is there a comparative law?

- GP

 

[Woden]

I'm sure I'm going to regret asking this as Law is definitely not a strong subject of mine... but why can a woman not be convicted of rape? Sure it may be harder (hurr hurr) for it to happen, but I'm sure it's not impossible. Is there a comparative law?

- GP

I dunno about the girls you have been with, but none of the ones I have (admittedly only 3) have penises.

 

[4T5]

Kwerk

 

[~Dockie]

I'm sure I'm going to regret asking this as Law is definitely not a strong subject of mine... but why can a woman not be convicted of rape? Sure it may be harder (hurr hurr) for it to happen, but I'm sure it's not impossible. Is there a comparative law?

- GP

My understanding is its only rape if the victim is penetrated. Women cant penetrate someone.

That said, (if this is pushing the line, then im sorry, its not intended) if a woman used a strapon to penetrate someone unwillingly, would that fall under rape or sexual assault?

 

[Jambo]

??I didn't?? I think there's a mis-understanding here somewhere. I'm saying exactly what woden said, although he put it far better.

One theory I have is it seems to be extremely easy for the gays to get access to willing partners, just go to a public toilet or whatever like George Michael, so they don't resort to raping like a frustrated heterosexual would do. That might explain the disparity.

Your last theory is flawed with homophobia. Why would gay people have access to any more or less willing partners ?

The cases aren't reported. It's as simple as that.

I thought you were referring to what kwerk said above being homophobic.

I think men (whether homosexual or heterosexual) are generally more promiscuous so it's logical to think incidences of gay NSA encounters are more common. Might not be true but it seems a sensible hypothesis.

 

[Woden]

My understanding is its only rape if the victim is penetrated. Women cant penetrate someone.

That said, (if this is pushing the line, then im sorry, its not intended) if a woman used a strapon to penetrate someone unwillingly, would that fall under rape or sexual assault?

The actual wording of the law is "his penis"

 

[Spook187]

Kwerk post and runs threads again.

 

[GhostlyPea]

I dunno about the girls you have been with, but none of the ones I have (admittedly only 3) have penises.

Congratulations on missing the point entirely.

My understanding is its only rape if the victim is penetrated. Women cant penetrate someone.

That said, (if this is pushing the line, then im sorry, its not intended) if a woman used a strapon to penetrate someone unwillingly, would that fall under rape or sexual assault?

This is where I really don't get it and it seems out-dated. Surely rape is where by, in essence, somebody is sexually assaulted to a point whereby there is genital contact or penetration. Therefore what happens if a woman rapes a man by getting him into a state where this is possible and then causing penetration?

That legislation seems to indicate that it is impossible for a woman to rape a man, even though the same actual act occurs. I don't see why it defines rape as "forcebly penetrating somebody" as opposed to "some body forcing the penetration" which would make more sense.

- GP

 

[djxput]

remember reading about a 'younger' person recently being raped in Birmingham or somewhere up north at a mall.
Jeffery Dahmer - Wisconsin serial killer, that raped guys and did other things (even worse).

 

[Woden]

Congratulations on missing the point entirely.

No, I didn't. Though it seems you didn't bother reading the thread? You asked why a woman can't be convicted of rape, and I told you, she doesn't have a penis.
If you read the thread, your second question had already been answered, it is sexual assault.

 

[~Dockie]

That legislation seems to indicate that it is impossible for a woman to rape a man, even though the same actual act occurs. I don't see why it defines rape as "forcebly penetrating somebody" as opposed to "some body forcing the penetration" which would make more sense.

I agree entirely. I dont know if the sentences are the same for rape vs sexual assault, but it seems pretty one sided against the man.

 

[manic111]

I'm sure I'm going to regret asking this as Law is definitely not a strong subject of mine... but why can a woman not be convicted of rape? Sure it may be harder (hurr hurr) for it to happen, but I'm sure it's not impossible. Is there a comparative law?

- GP

Simply because the law of rape refers to penile penetration by the perpetrator on the victim. Women lack penises, and therefore cannot commit the crime.

They can be convicted of assault by penetration, which is penetration of the anus or vagina with a part of the body or something else, and has the same possible sentences as rape.

So realistically, the difference is only semantic. Women can't be convicted of rape, but can serve the same sentence for assault by penetration.

 

[GhostlyPea]

No, I didn't. Though it seems you didn't bother reading the thread? You asked why a woman can't be convicted of rape, and I told you, she doesn't have a penis.
If you read the thread, your second question had already been answered, it is sexual assault.

Yes, you did but I won't enter into an argument.

I agree entirely. I dont know if the sentences are the same for rape vs sexual assault, but it seems pretty one sided against the man.

This is pretty much what I'm querying. The legislation dictates it's by a man penetrating somebody - no argument there as it's clear, but it seems a bit off.

Oddly enough I remember THIS from a while back whereby she was convicted, although by the wording of the legislation indicates it shouldn't be possible? Obviously in this case its more conviction due to being part of the rape, rather than actively doing it

- GP