Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Relationships, Discrimination, and Jealousy' started by dad4you, Jan 6, 2012.
U.S. broadens archaic definition of rape - CNN.com
I read about that a few weeks ago. It's about time.
Here's another article on it:
FBI Finally Changes Terrifyingly Narrow Definition of Rape
US scraps 8-decade-old FBI definition of rape, to count more people as victims, including men - The Washington Post
It really is about time. Courts have been recognizing more than that technical, narrow definition on a discretionary basis for decades, but it was FAR overdue to be put on the books officially.
[Petite refered to non women--can i just say that is a very offensive term
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.
I didn't write the article. I just quoted it because I thought that people would appreciate the information.
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 think the number for male victims is probably below or more than one in ten, may be even close to the quoted number for women. You would just need a more subtle definition.
I concur with Drifterwood. One in 71 sounds way low. I've been in a couple of sexual situations myself where I told the guy I wasn't interested or comfortable getting fucked and he was on such a rut that I literally had to push and beat him off of me after he persisted (and succeeded).
I suspect it happens a lot.
Hopefully the new definition also does away with the sexist, antiquated notion that a man cannot rape his wife.
And vice versa. I have a close friend whose ex wife used to force him to have sex and would then verbally and physically abuse him if he couldn't. It takes balls to admit that, which leads me to suspect that most guys would never confess it.
That's my guess. Still, "non-women" is nothing I would ever call a trans person. That sounds pretty fucking offensive to me.
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.)
Anyway, I'm very happy to see that definition has been rendered more realistic, and I hope it helps to affect positive change in the US.
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.
is stealing cum from the condom to get pregant....is that rape???
As an aside, I happily recommend Mike Lew's "Victims No Longer" and malesurvivor - the latter particularly for looking for resources. Victims No Longer can be challenging to read, but the messages is sends (particularly for me, that I was just a little boy who did the best I could with the hand I was dealt) are enormously helpful.
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.
And also that men can be considered rape victims.
And those statistics that are used to allocate funds will result in more resources being available for all victims of rape.