- Joined
- Jun 17, 2009
- Posts
- 834
- Media
- 0
- Likes
- 156
- Points
- 113
- Location
- Boise, Idaho
- Sexuality
- 100% Gay, 0% Straight
- Gender
- Male
Yesterday, the Obama administration announced that the definition of rape will finally be updated to include shit you already probably thought should've been in there. This is important because crime rates as reported by the FBI are used to determine how much money is allotted to anti-rape initiatives and victims' services.
The old definition of forcible rape, a rusty old antique from 1929, was " the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will." This is immediately problematic in that it excludes men and women coerced to have sex by non-forcible means, as well as those too young to legally consent to sex. Sorry, protagonists in every single Lifetime movie about wayward teens. If you were drugged at a bar and woke up the next morning with no recollection of what you did the previous night, you weren't technically "raped."
After a lengthy campaign led by Ms. magazine and change.org, a panel of FBI officials agreed that the old definition would be hilarious if it wasn't so awful and wrote a new definition for "forcible rape" that includes non-women and doesn't require that the victim physically resist the attack.
Even though this is great news, there's still this: about one in five women and one in every seventy-one men are rape victims. There's still a long way to go.
i am still disappointed. they haven't included the ears as a possible areas of rape. now, ill never be able to bring nickleback to court for what they did to me. the horror."penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim,"
[Petite refered to non women--can i just say that is a very offensive term
Hopefully the new definition also does away with the sexist, antiquated notion that a man cannot rape his wife.
I thought that was weird, too. Why not just say "men"? Perhaps the author didn't want to exclude intersex and transsexuals?
I got nothin.:shrug:
I've had the same experience, and you are right on the money. Everyone sympathises with women and understands how hard it is for them to come forward. But a man who finds the strength to come forward after being raped (either by a woman or another man) usually just finds people rolling their eyes, if he finds anything at all.Ironically, as a man who has been raped, I often feel like a non-woman. Almost all the supports I've been able to find are for women. I'm ecstatic those supports are there, but they're not accessible to me - and I have been told to access them in lieu of supports for men. (Obviously, they didn't mean attending groups or anything, rather in terms of looking for information or individual counselling.)
I've had the same experience, and you are right on the money. Everyone sympathises with women and understands how hard it is for them to come forward. But a man who finds the strength to come forward after being raped (either by a woman or another man) usually just finds people rolling their eyes, if he finds anything at all.
Let's be clear here: All that has happened is that the Dept. of Justice has broadened the definition it uses for reporting crime statistics. All of the states have much broader definitions. This change will probably result in a doubling of the number of events which count as "rape" for statistical purposes because of the elimination of the requirement that force be used.