If you're gunning to make rape a meaningless word, you're on the right track. However you missed a little detail here, which is that a victim is someone who has been harmed. Homeboy came to no harm here whatsoever. In any case, when you get in bed with a girl and rub your dick on her, if that's not consent then consent isn't real and the distinction doesn't matter. I don't care if he wasn't aware he was doing it. She didn't put his soul in her vagina, and she's not responsible for whatever disconnect a man might have going on between his mind and his body. Another human was in her bed being sexual with her and she responded correctly. If that's rape, mark me down as an enthusiastic supporter.
So is date rape not rape, then? I mean, the person isn't -harmed- by it. The only thing they're actually harmed by is the drugging, not the rape itself. So, by your logic of "a victim must be harmed", then date rape is not rape.
If you're really talking about children, that's not statutory rape, it's actual rape. Children cannot consent to sex, and those who say they do are shown to have experienced psychological harm. If we are talking about consenting sex between sexually mature teenagers then no, obviously that is not rape.
"Sexual intercourse with a person who has not yet reached the age of consent (determined by state law), whether or not the sexual act is against that person's will." That is the definition of statutory rape. Whether adult to child, or child to child, it still applies. What if it's an underage horny teenager who had sex with their step-guardian and the whole thing was the teenager's decision? In this case, the teenager was not harmed, but instead had a great time.
I let my friend sleepwalk plow me
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
If you're gunning to make rape a meaningless word, you're on the right track. However you missed a little detail here, which is that a victim is someone who has been harmed. Homeboy came to no harm here whatsoever. In any case, when you get in bed with a girl and rub your dick on her, if that's not consent then consent isn't real and the distinction doesn't matter. I don't care if he wasn't aware he was doing it. She didn't put his soul in her vagina, and she's not responsible for whatever disconnect a man might have going on between his mind and his body. Another human was in her bed being sexual with her and she responded correctly. If that's rape, mark me down as an enthusiastic supporter.
--
Clunk42
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
Clunk42
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
-1
-1
So is date rape not rape, then? I mean, the person isn't -harmed- by it. The only thing they're actually harmed by is the drugging, not the rape itself. So, by your logic of "a victim must be harmed", then date rape is not rape.
--
einexile
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Maybe you should ask someone who has been date raped if they have been harmed or not.
--
Clunk42
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Or what about in one of the statutory rape cases in which the child has fun? Is that not rape then because the child wasn't harmed?
--
einexile
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If you're really talking about children, that's not statutory rape, it's actual rape. Children cannot consent to sex, and those who say they do are shown to have experienced psychological harm. If we are talking about consenting sex between sexually mature teenagers then no, obviously that is not rape.
--
Clunk42
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
"Sexual intercourse with a person who has not yet reached the age of consent (determined by state law), whether or not the sexual act is against that person's will." That is the definition of statutory rape. Whether adult to child, or child to child, it still applies. What if it's an underage horny teenager who had sex with their step-guardian and the whole thing was the teenager's decision? In this case, the teenager was not harmed, but instead had a great time.
So the Department of Justice is trying to make rape a meaningless word? Yeah, right.
--
einexile
3 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, you are by deliberately ignoring the meaning of the word victim.