I like when people get more mad about false rape accusations (don't happen very often) than they do about rape (happens every day). It says a lot about them.
True accusations of rape should be punished with what? Just interested to know the kind of punishment you would like meted out to ACTUAL rapists. Something on a par with death or something harsher / stronger?
I heard that in France, if the woman is found to have made a false accusation, she gets the same punishment the man would have. I think this is fair.
There was also a case in Colorado. Neither the man or the woman disagreed with the facts and under the law he was guilty. Women who are drunk are not responsible for their actions but a man who is drunk is. The young man spent a couple of years in prison but now will be a registered violent sex offender for the rest of his life.
Of course, you don't get it. Define rape. If you think it involves force or coercion you're seriously out of date. Would you say it's having sex with a woman who doesn't want to have sex with you? Okay, so the woman asked you to have sex with her and the next morning changes her mind. Is it getting clearer now?
Most of the time they are both drunk, the sex is consentual under the influence of alcohol, then next morning the woman changes her mind. This puts the man in jail and trial, even if not into prison. And this will ruin all his future job applications everywhere where employers do backdround checks, which is all jobs that are not just grunt work. I have never been in this situation, but I can easily imagine that this would happen to me if I was drunk and a drunk girl picked me up. Happens to people every day. Have you seen the movie "One night stand"?
Isn't the only closure for a real rape victim the verifyable death of her rapist? So it would be logical then that a proven rape crime carries the death penulty. Conversely though, if it is proven that the woman just made it up, then she should get a life sentence, because she ruined the life of an average joe. The difficulty with rape though is that it is hard to prove one way or the other and a lot of times women who were really raped change their minds to free the criminal. And then there is the fuzzy math of domestic rape, and the many women who were not raped but invented it. I think the current legislation is flawd, because even I as an average joe who doesn't hit women am afraid of women's mouths. I wonder what a just solution against rape would be from a woman's point of view.
As a guy, I can't imagine what my demages would be if I was raped. What are the demages of a raped woman?
If she's drunk, her consent cannot be clearly established; her capacity of choice is impaired, and for a man to take advantage of that is rape. The other two comments you made are common for those who blame women for their victimization. Hold on there... the onus in a rape case is properly on the rapist's conditions and actions, not on the victim's; and just to note... the rapist is usually far more likely to be drunk than the victim in such cases. Again... the onus is not on the victim; just as wearing short skirts doesn't shift blame onto the victim, neither do these conditions.
Even if she initiates it and the man is the one drunk? What would you do about those (many) women who purposefully get their man drunk, to whatever they are planning to do with him? (Usually older women with younger men.)
It's the same, rape. Go to the court. To pretend that there is something more sinister in the courts and legal system is idiotic.
Just love your double standard, Ian. If the girl is too drunk, that's a crime. If the guy is too drunk, he's just lucky. Do you feel the same about staturatory rape? If an older man has sex with an underage girl is it statuatory rape? If an older woman has sex with an underage boy, is he just lucky?
You keep saying the same think over and over. If they are both drunk, neither could have legally consented so there could have been no rape.
That's like saying if two people shoot each other to death; there is no murder... there's two murders. If either one were to pursue court action, though, it'd make for an interesting case.
What if we look at it from the human side, and then the statistics prove that no man ever calls a woman a rapist whether he consented or not. The only time a man would speak out is if the woman got pregnant on purpose after she got him drunk and into sex on purpose. But then there is not even one legislation that would allow him to force the woman who raped him into abortion. And then, will he be legally freed from under child support, ever? Of course not. In my humble opinion, the legal system is then inherently sinister, even if you don't consider the lasting demage the trial alone would cause to his career/life, even if "acquitted".
Then whose fault is that? Then men for not reporting/filing. And if he speaks out, and the jury finds it so, I highly doubt he'd have to pay child support. I don't think these things happen that you fear..
Yeah, cause that TOTALLY outweighs the damage women incur from the rape onward, whether or not it goes to trial.
It outweighs it because a woman does not get raped by a man's words only, however a man goes to trial for nothing more than a woman's words (after sex).