Is date rape less wrong than stranger rape?

Great Debates
1

In this thread the topic of stranger rape vs. date rape came up, when one poster thought that perhaps a date rapist would be less likely to be a bad father than stranger rapist.

This exchange came up:

The rape by a stranger with a knife is, as Cat Fight points out, fairly rare. Most rapes are done by an acquaintance. I think a lot of people like to think that the stereotypical bad seed rapes because it’s easier than living with the idea that the teacher down the street or the fine upstanding well liked next door neighbor are sex offenders, too.

But is it genuinely worse, if you don’t know the person well? I suppose you could argue they’re more afraid for their life–but let’s assume neither person is using a gun or knife, that it’s just brute force.

Let’s take a woman who goes on a date and goes back to a guy’s place and says that she doesn’t want to have sex but is forced to (not with a weapon, just the guy physically using his body). Is what happened to her less bad than if she were accosted walking home and forced to have sex? The stranger has no weapon but he does force her.

If the first act is worse, why? Do we see it as less violent? Let’s assume the same amount of violence and force. If so, is there still a difference? I don’t think there is, but I’m afraid that the reasoning goes that the date rapist is somehow entitled.

I also think that another reason we think it’s “less bad” is that it happens so often and goes very under reported, and maybe on some level it’s considered normal. I see so many threads where people seem to perform all kinds of mental gymnastics trying to show that rape is so often just a “misunderstanding.” Or every time a rape thread comes up, it’s only a few posts before, “Well maybe she was seventeen and it was a statutory rape case so it doesn’t count” or “What if she said yes and then said no when he was inside and he pulled out five seconds too late and now he’s a sex offender for life” gets trotted out. Like on some level, there’s two rapes. “Real” rape and “he said/she said rape” where the guy is a potential victim of some wacky woman getting the wires crossed and reporting him for rape when nothing really happened.

2

Oh god - I sincerley hope nobody I know ever reads this.

I remember my first experience (who doesn’t?)
FWIW - I am not American, this did not happen in America, when I did happen I was circa 20, legal age of consent is 16, legal age to buy alcohol I think was 18, and the girl was circa “my age”.

During the party, the girl got drunk, but was fully lucid, up and walking around, not vomiting etc etc. I was drinking but only a little - so would have considered myself sober (at least sober enough to drive)

She came onto me, pulled me into my room and whatever ensued, people started banging on the door halfway through, so no conclusion was reached, but not for lack of early stroking. Before anything went anywhere near inside anywhere I did ask if she was sure.

Soon after, she was crying to her friends and feeling all sorts of awful.

By the definitions of many people in some of the threads on this board, they would consider me a rapist.

Naturally I have a somewhat biased opinion, but to me, rape is the last thing that I would ever ever do (yeah - and all rapists say that right?). If the girl was showing any hesitancy I would decline.

In this situation the lady was somewhat agressive (I am naturally very shy) and seemed to be fully aware of what she was doing and what she wanted. To this day I guess my opinions are somewhat coloured by this.

Had she had taken me to court (in the US), from what I have read on these boards, I have no doubt that some posters would have no compunction at all in finding me guilty of rape.

Not that I think this neccessarily adds a lot to the question from the ladies perspective, but to share my own experience.

And now I guess there will be some people that are forever going to label me “that bastard rapist”

3

At the risk of re-hashing some things already said in that other thread…it really depends on the definitions being used and what that means for a particular case.

First of all rape is wrong. No two ways about, wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong.

The problem is that we must now consider degrees of rape, and the degrees of date rape. So here is my personal opinion all broken down categorically:

Forcible Rape of a Stranger with physical violence (other than the rape itself): the worst- very wrong; very criminal

Forcible Rape of a Stranger without violence (other than the rape itself): very very wrong; very criminal
Date Rape with Violence (ie the same act as a stranger rape, but happens on a date): very wrong; very criminal; no different than forcible rape.

Date Rape that is “rape” because one party began the sex act then said no, and the other did not stop as quickly as they might have: wrong if the offending party did not stop as soon as humanly possible after hearing the word “no”; not criminal.

Date Rape that is “rape” because one party is slightly drunk and therefore unable to “legally consent” but that party did consent: not wrong; not rape; not criminal.

Date Rape that is “rape” because one party is passed out drunk, and cannot consent: wrong, no different than forcible rape; criminal.

I think that covers most of it at least, but I will probably think of a hundred more categories or variations after hitting the submit button. :wink:

I don’t think that any of the attitudes or thoughts on “wrongness” have anything at all to do with the frequency of the happenings nor of who it is committing the rape. An acquaintance is just as capable (and it is the same crime) of being responsible for a forcible rape as is a stranger. Forcible rape is different (legally too) even if happens on a date. The differentiation has nothing to do who the rapists is to the victim it has to do with the type of rape committed.

Any confusion or misunderstanding or even those reading it as excusing one type of rape or another are doing so because they cannot get past the word “rape” and want to believe that rape is always rape and that there is or should be no differentiation between the drunk college kids and the stranger (or acquaintance) with a knife.

And even though I have repeated this sentence ad nauseum in the other thread, I think this is why each case should be judged on its merits, without blanket statements or blanket policies.

4

Not me. Seems like she initiated the whole thing. And feeling guilty about it afterwards and crying about it afterwards doesn’t make it rape.

As to the OP, I think date rape and stranger rape are both equally evil. I would guess - and a guess is all it is - that being raped by a stranger would be more traumatic and have worse after-effects than being raped by someone you know. But I really can’t say, as it hasn’t happened to me or anyone I know.

5

I would think that getting raped by an acquaintance might be worse because you have to deal with the fact that you may be seeing this person without being able to do anything about reporting them. And the fact that now potentially any guy can do this to you–it’s not about protecting yourself from the guy in the alley. ANY man you’re alone with has the potential to do this thing to you again.

6

Well naturally I also think she initiated. The point to be made though, is that she ratehr obviously felt bad about it afterwards.

What if, in her own mind she decided that I had raped her? Or if a few of her friends (that may, or may not have been there that night) had decided to tell her that what I had done was rape because I took advantage of the situation?

Fortunately the situation never came up, but when I read that “rape is always rape” and doesn’t differentiate at all I always think “what if”.

Now rape is wrong, it’s always wrong, whether it’s done by a stranger, by force, by threat or by anything else. My very sincere belief though is that there are degrees of rape. And rather than brushing this under the carpet, it is better that the matter is discussed openly and honestly - without a guy fearing being labelled misogynist to suggest that what the lady considered rape, he considered consensual sex.

7

You are absolutely right! But being raped by an acquaintance does not make it “date rape” nor does it make it a different crime. It is a forcible rape, period, end of story no matter who is doing it. People will use “stranger” rape as a short-cut to not have to describe exact difference between being forced violently (or through the threat of violence) and being raped, and being a bit too tipsy to consent to sex (for example…there are other versions of date-rape).

It is not the relationship of the rapist (as an acquaintance, friend, date or whatever) that makes it a date-rape. What you describe is “forcible stranger rape” done by someone you know, not date-rape.

8

I guess that depends on what we mean by date-rape. Why are you using “forcible stranger rape” done by someone you know to describe a scenario? I think you’re assuming that date rape has the element of “Well, it wasn’t really rape because she was just tipsy.” Date rape can be a guy who thinks that thinks he’s entitled to sex and shoves you down at the end of the night and forces you to have sex and thinks that that’s “Maybe we got a little out of hand.” Why would you call something like that “Forcible stranger rape done by someone you know” and not date rape?

9

But did she?

Of the women I’ve known who have been ‘date raped’ (and I have to say, I have a bit of a problem with the term itself. It seems a bit euphemistic, like ‘Well they went to the soda shop then dinner and probably drank and she was willing to make out and he just went too far’ when really it’s used to describe everything from ongoing domestic abuse to finding someone passed out at a house party and fucking every orifice), not a one came forward. I can’t read their minds, but for those who talked about it it was clear that they didn’t think their mutual friends would believe them, that they didn’t want their own reputations and lives to go through the wringer with a legal battle (one was actually in law school at the time) and that they didn’t want to ruin some guy’s life. Kind of crazy, considering they also went for AIDS tests, some were drugged and some had some pretty screwed up relationships and trust issues afterwards, but I think that even they had absorbed the rapist cliché. If a rapist is an evil man with a knife in a dark alley, I can avoid rape by avoiding dark alleys, and I can’t be raped. If a real guy in a band I like who’s friends with my cousin and has a funny blog held his hand over my face while I asked him to get off me, that can’t be rape. It was just bad sex.

I can’t imagine being raped by an acquaintance or friend is always better or worse than a stranger. Same goes for molestation. There will always be people who have been raped or molested who get through life relatively unscathed. There will always be people whose lives are never the same (see: any episode of Intervention with a female addict).

Rather than editing what I wrote earlier about my dislike for the term date rape – considering the numbers, it makes more sense for ‘acquaintance rape’ to be the standard, and for ‘stranger rape’ to be noted.

ETA I think ‘assault with a blunt object’ is a great description of rape that cuts through a lot of the bull about ‘Did she or didn’t she?’ I mentioned this in another thread, but if everyone assumed women’s vaginas were private property 'til they consented otherwise, the same way straight men seem to feel about their assholes, a lot of confusion could be avoided.

10

No not at all. Here is what I mean , if I can explain…I know I am not that good at it. :wink:

The guy who thinks he is entitled to sex and shoves you down at the end of the night and forces you to have sex, is NOT “date-rape”. That is forcible rape (or assault if you prefer). It doesn’t matter if you were on a date at the time, it doesn’t matter if you know him or not…it is forcible rape (that same as if he were a stranger).

Date-Rape IS “she was too drunk to consent” or “I initially consented and he didn’t stop” or even “he talked me into it even though I kept saying “no” and it was easier to let him than to fight”.

The difference again, is in the degree of rape not in who the rapist is. “Date” in “date-rape” modifies the rape, not the rapist.

11

+1 - we have all heard or read about the cases where the girl says “he was big and intimidating” or “it was easier to give in than to have an arguement” or “i was drunk and don’t remember consenting”

While not wanting to neccessarily classify these as consensual sex, I do think a distinction needs to be drawn between these cases and violent rapes where physical force is used.

12

I’ve always just heard date rape to mean rape when you agreed to go out with the person. Could be forcible, could be drugged–but it was always rape. It just seems like you’re trying to make it seem like date rape is all these watered down, not so bad, it was only technically non consensual scenarios.

I have also heard the term gray rape, but frankly most of the situations that fall under gray rape seem equally unambiguous to me. Stuff like, “He forced me but I was too drunk to fight him off” is often classified as gray rape, for ex.

13

Research shows “date rape” is very often planned out well in advance.

Date rapists are quite often serial date rapists. They have chosen a method of rape which is easier to accomplish and less likely to get them convicted.

The reason it is looked at differently is mostly the he-said, she-said factor. There is nothing a stranger rapist can say to defend himself. With date rape, perception of the crime is tempered by lack of certainty over what happened.

14

Since it is not a legal term there apparently is a lack of agreement somewhere along the lines about the strict definition of the term. I have always heard it used as I defined above and never (although it technically could be ) used to mean a forcible rape by someone who happened to be on a date (the word for that is “rape”). By definition (as I defined it above) date-rape is not as bad as forcible rape. Criminally it is also a different degree and “not as bad” as in it is a lesser crime than “sexual assault” or “violent sexual assault”.

I have never heard “gray rape” ever. I have used “grayer areas of rape” on that other thread to differentiate between “real” rape (which would be forcible rape done by anyone at all) and some kinds of date-rape (like when the guy didn’t pull out quite fast enough to please the woman so she decides it was rape) and some statutory rapes (consensual, close to the age of consent).

15

There is a certain part of me that believes that a lady can so no when-ever, however and can expect that to be respected. THis part of me says that rape is rape, and there is no need to classify.

There is another part of me that says that there should be some evidence of struggle on the part of the lady.

What do I mean?

Well, I am sure this is apocryphal (sp?) but what about the case of the the two teenagers parked at lovers lane, the guy says “put out or get out” is this rape?

Or the two classmates out on a date - he tells the girl - put out or I will spread the rumour that you took it up the butt and enjoyed it. Is this rape?

Both cases involve threats, in both cases, were it to be my own daughter involved I would hope that she would have the strength of character to tell the guy to shove it. And while having sympathy for the situation, and being very angry, and wanting to see the guy punished for “something”, I don’t quite feel it is rape.

To me, I think anybody needs to take firm and positive action for themselves - and I must admit, although I am a not a fighter (and in fact shy away from confrontation) I am not easily intimidated.

ETA - not to say that the above situations shouldn’t be punishable, I just don’t think they rise (raise?) to the level of rape

16

I speak as a man with some experience (professional, not personal) of the issue.

Nothing I say is meant to minimise at any point the seriousness of any rape, nor to dictate to women how they “should” respond to its occurrence, nor to stereotype responses to this offence. I am not trying to speak for women in this regard. I also recognise that men can be raped.

Our legal system is stuck with the fact that there is only a linear scale available to punish rape - the number of years imprisonment imposed. But that fact should not impose straitjackets on thinking about the comparative seriousness of different ways in which the offence might be committed. The idea that there is a linear scale of seriousness of rape to match the linear scale of punishment is flawed.

One can’t start with the idea that the rape becomes “worse” as one goes up through the scale of violence involved, or as one goes across the spectrum from close affinity to stranger.
There are just too many variables, among the most important of which is the reaction of the complainant herself to what occurred.

To some women, the stranger rape is more serious because they have no idea of the boundaries to violence the rapist has about the event, and no idea if they are even going to survive.

On the other hand, some women see the violation of trust and sense of betrayal involved in an affinity rape as much more damaging than a stranger rape.

In a stranger rape, a woman might (I emphasise might) be able to recognise that it is not her fault - some random thug just dragged her off and violated her, and that recognition might assist her to some degree in coming to terms with the event. On the other hand, a woman subjected to an affinity rape may well go through agonies of self-doubt and self-blame which are crippling.

There is also the issue of a woman’s sense of betrayal by her own body as a result of her biological response to penetration, which can occur no matter what the external circumstances of the rape were.

In a stranger rape, it might be thought more likely that the offender will resort to violence more readily than in an affinity rape, leading to injury. That assumption may not hold in every case - brutal boyfriends/family members/etc have injured their own relatives or partners in the past. But beliefs about this held by the victim may well colour her reaction to the events.

Since (fortunately) very few women are in a position to compare different types of rape to tell us which is “worse” (again, assuming there is even a linear scale for these things), it is impossible to be definitive.

Generally, the level of violence used, the presence and use of weapons and the degree of physical injury caused to the victim are used in sentencing as imperfect heuristic measures of the terror inflicted on the victim, and her suffering as a consequence.

Similarly, the degree of capacity of the victim to react is treated as an imperfect heuristic measure of the sense of violation and exploitation - was the victim a 9 year old? Wheel-chair bound? Elderly? Vision impaired? None of this means that a rape of a healthy 24 year old might not be utterly devastating.

Questions about the consequences to the victim tend to be raised - has she needed professional help to work through the issues? Has she attempted suicide?

Also, betrayers of trust (particularly fathers) are treated much more severely than more remote acquaintances.

If the offender lived in the same house as the victim (as in the case of the father) the sense of entrapment and lack of capacity to escape can be appalling. Similarly, if a stranger commits the offence by breaking into the victim’s own house, the sense of loss of safety and confidence , and fear that the offender might return (even if that fear is irrational, where the offender is imprisoned) that fact can be more significant than any difference about whether the victim was slapped as opposed to punched.

Shortly put, the OP’s question cannot be answered in the form in which it is asked. It overlooks too many variables and too many other axes upon which one can consider the question of “seriousness”. The OP assumes that there must be an “in general” answer to such a question when in truth the circumstances of any individual case can overwhelm the distinctions drawn in the OP.

17

In my experience, females who like sex but dont want the picture of being ‘easy’ and drink alcohol, are always crying about it and claiming rape. Well, that seems to be the case in my town.

18

It’s not less wrong, but a situation described as date rape can have more of a grey area.

That is to say there is no doubt that a woman was raped when it was a stranger with a knife scenario, but with date rape it can be more difficult to actually prove it was rape. There are situations where a woman cries rape, and there are situations where they were both drunk, but the woman gets the benefit of the doubt.

But if there was a 100% sure way of telling that it was rape, there is no moral difference to me between violent rape and date rape.

19

I have started a thread in the past (but can’t remember if it was here) that positied,

What if, we could have a brain scanner, that with absolute certainty could determine what both the man and the lady were thinking at the time of the rape.
The man, based on the “reasonable person” standard believed he had consent. He was not being deliberatly threatening, or intimidating, or overstepping the markers of normal social behaviour.

If this could be determined WITH CERTAINTY, and was something that most “reasonable people” would agree with - has a rape occured?

Now I know that it is a bit of a ridiculous scenario, and is not likely to happen - but is part of the test of criminality the “intent” to commit the crime? If there was no intent to rape, has a rape been committed? (and yes - I also know that for certain laws, intent is irrelevant, but can we not go there please?)
ETA - In the situation I described above, some people would consider a rape to have occured based on the fact that she was intoxicated and thus incapable of giving consent - regardless of the fact that I had no intent whatsoever to do anything that she didn’t want done.

20

There are three basic defenses to an accusation of rape:

[ol]
[li]It never happened.[/li][li]It happened, but she consented.[/li][li]It happened, but some other dude did it.[/li][/ol]

(Number 3 was often known as the “SODDI” defense in my day.)

It’s obviously much harder for the stranger rapist to sell number 2 than it is for the date rapist. And the more physical injury that’s done, the harder it is for anyone to sell number 2. Number 3 is viable if there’s no physical evidence tying the rapist to the scene; if there is, then the usual answer is to switch back to number 2 and argue “rough sex” to explain injuries, if any.