# Is This Rape? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 18, 2012, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218 "2012-02-18T02:36:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/1 "2012-02-18T02:36:11Z")
[http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/) As a pro-lifer while I support having at the least requiring women to have ultrasounds and counseling before undertaking an abortion, I am opposed to the particular Virginia measure in question due to the invasive nature of the procedure. However is it really appropriate to call this rape? I mean by this logic medical exams that involve examination of the reproductive organs and the anus can be termed rape. And the comments section of that article were so full of left-wing nut paranoia that it was laughable. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/2 "2012-02-18T02:38:11Z")
I didn’t read the article, but this requirement is clearly meant as an obstruction of the Supreme Court decision. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/3 "2012-02-18T02:47:37Z")
Of course it’s not rape, that’s a ridiculous idea. This procedure would be both consensual and non-sexual, so that pretty much contradicts the two defining elements of rape. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/4 "2012-02-18T02:51:44Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > [http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/) > > As a pro-lifer while I support having at the least requiring women to have ultrasounds and counseling before undertaking an abortion, I am opposed to the particular Virginia measure in question due to the invasive nature of the procedure. > > However is it really appropriate to call this rape? I mean by this logic medical exams that involve examination of the reproductive organs and the anus can be termed rape. And the comments section of that article were so full of left-wing nut paranoia that it was laughable. I like that you’ve set a line in as to which medically unnecessary procedures are OK. I consider requiring a women to go through an ultra-sound test she doesn’t wish to have done in order to make personal medical decisions to be way outside the real of what government should be doing. Is forcing people to go through medically unnecessary probing rape? I don’t think so, rape to me involves forced sexual activity. It is still an extreme personal invasion, but not rape. Regardless of how you want to categorize it, it isn’t right ---
**Author:** ![Sierra\_Indigo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f0a364/32.png) [@Sierra\_Indigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sierra_Indigo)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/5 "2012-02-18T02:54:47Z")
It may not be rape, but in my opinion “consensual” is pushing it, because there’s definitely duress there - undergo this unnecessary procedure or we will refuse to allow you to terminate this pregnancy. So while women may say yes to it, it is still under duress. ---
**Author:** ![PandaBear77](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@PandaBear77](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PandaBear77)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/6 "2012-02-18T02:56:27Z")
Hmm, odd. I had ultrasounds well before the 12 week mark and they were regular ultrasounds, not transvaginal … and that was 11 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/7 "2012-02-18T02:58:53Z")
I don’t get it. Isn’t poking around inside the vagina kind of an inherent part of any abortion procedure? ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/8 "2012-02-18T03:02:01Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I don’t get it. Isn’t poking around inside the vagina kind of an inherent part of any abortion procedure? I don’t believe it’s a routine part of a medical (chemical) abortion, no. Surgical abortion, sure. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/9 "2012-02-18T03:03:00Z")
> [@PandaBear77](#): > > Hmm, odd. I had ultrasounds well before the 12 week mark and they were regular ultrasounds, not transvaginal … and that was 11 years ago. Interesting. Why doesn’t that article point that out-that is certain to solidify and gain opposition to it? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/10 "2012-02-18T03:03:16Z")
Consensual? So women can decline the procedure and still exercise a right recognized by the Supreme Court? Not sexual? Insertion of objects into one’s sexual organs does indeed count as something sexual, even though sexual pleasure is not a component of the act. Howzabout we require an anal probing if someone wants to attend a political rally? Seriously, I find the idea that a state would consider such a thing to be sickening and offensive. Shame on the Virginia legislature. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/11 "2012-02-18T03:05:26Z")
[As this editorial makes clearer](http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2012/02/virginia_ultrasound_law_women_who_want_an_abortion_will_be_forcibly_penetrated_for_no_medical_reason.single.html), the point is that because the ultrasound is an unwanted physical intrusion, it’s not that different from sexual assault. As a figure of speech, I think it’s apt. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/12 "2012-02-18T03:07:34Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > I don’t get it. Isn’t poking around inside the vagina kind of an inherent part of any abortion procedure? But not _all_ penetrative acts are inherent parts of abortion procedures. A woman who consents to an abortion doesn’t thereby consent to any and all penetrative acts. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/13 "2012-02-18T03:18:45Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Consensual? So women can decline the procedure and still exercise a right recognized by the Supreme Court? I doubt the Supreme Court explicitly said you can get an abortion with no strings attached. I assume someone has to pay for the abortion. If it’s rape because you can’t decline the procedure and still get an abortion then it’s also stealing to require payment or go without. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Not sexual? Insertion of objects into one’s sexual organs does indeed count as something sexual, even though sexual pleasure is not a component of the act. Then by the same logic a visit to the gynaecologist is sexual. Better hope that’s free too or you’ll be soliciting sexual services! > [@Ravenman](#): > > Howzabout we require an anal probing if someone wants to attend a political rally? That would certainly be the next logical step. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Seriously, I find the idea that a state would consider such a thing to be sickening and offensive. Shame on the Virginia legislature. I should point out that I don’t necessarily agree with the whole idea of forcing women to have this procedure. I have no idea if there’s medical justification for it, all I see is one story saying there’s none. Chances are it’s over the top, but to call it rape is kind of also over the top. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/14 "2012-02-18T03:31:35Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > I doubt the Supreme Court explicitly said you can get an abortion with no strings attached. I assume someone has to pay for the abortion. If it’s rape because you can’t decline the procedure and still get an abortion then it’s also stealing to require payment or go without. So you think it is okay to require arbitrary things to be done before a right can be exercised? Would you defend a law that requires someone to take a literacy test before they vote? That has been tried before, you know. > [@](#): > > Then by the same logic a visit to the gynaecologist is sexual. Better hope that’s free too or you’ll be soliciting sexual services! In that visiting a gynocologist is a reasonable procedure to maintain the health of sexual organs, yes, there is a sexual aspect to it. Again, sexual does not always mean for purposes of sexual gratification. Prostitution is clearly for sexual pleasure, so your argument is very poorly thought out. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/15 "2012-02-18T03:47:44Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > So you think it is okay to require arbitrary things to be done before a right can be exercised? Would you defend a law that requires someone to take a literacy test before they vote? That has been tried before, you know. > In that visiting a gynocologist is a reasonable procedure to maintain the health of sexual organs, yes, there is a sexual aspect to it. Again, sexual does not always mean for purposes of sexual gratification. Prostitution is clearly for sexual pleasure, so your argument is very poorly thought out. The definition of the word “sexual” [here](http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/sexual?q=sexual) doesn’t include your definition: > [@](#): > > ``` > 1. relating to the instincts, physiological processes, and activities connected with physical attraction or intimate physical contact between individuals: she had felt the thrill of a sexual attraction > > 2. relating to the two sexes or to gender: sensitivity about sexual stereotypes > of or characteristic of one sex or the other: the hormones which control the secondary sexual characteristics > > 3. Biology (of reproduction) involving the fusion of gametes. > being of one sex or the other; capable of sexual reproduction: the asexual winged forms lay the eggs which hatch into the sexual form > > ``` The definition of the word rape is clearly based on meaning 1 given above. You can’t just define “sexual” to mean anything relating to sexual organs and then extend the definition of rape accordingly, especially since it is clearly not non-consensual in any real sense. The point of the thread is **“Is it rape?”** not “Is this right?”. We can disagree entirely with the law without resorting to sensationalism and exaggeration. ---
**Author:** ![psychobunny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/54ee81/32.png) [@psychobunny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psychobunny)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/16 "2012-02-18T03:52:16Z")
If anybody doubts that this is a totally inappropriate violation then please tell me why [this](http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-house-set-to-enact-mandatory-invasive-ultrasound-probe-for-women-who-seek-abortions/2012/02/13/gIQA56vnBR_story.html)amendment was voted down. > [@](#): > > An amendment by Del. David Englin, D-Alexandria, would have allowed medical professionals to determine whether images can be obtained without being penetrated by equipment used in the ultrasound. > > Women would have to give written consent to such a probe under Englin’s amendments, but not to sonograms that are not invasive. The amendment failed on 64-34 vote, setting the bill up for final House passage. That’s right, not only did they veto an amendment asking that women consent to the procedure but they also vetoed standard ultrasounds, even if the physician determines that he/she can get a good image without intravaginal ultrasound. Funny also how the Virginia lesislature who cares so much about informed consent vetoed [this](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/30/mandatory-ultrasound-bill-virginia-anti-abortion_n_1242627.html)amendment. > [@](#): > > To protest a bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound before having an abortion, Virginia State Sen. Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) on Monday attached an amendment that would require men to have a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/17 "2012-02-18T03:52:56Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > [http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/02/17/427778/virginia-poised-to-enact-state-sponsored-rape-law-forcing-women-to-be-vaginally-probed-before-abortions/) > > As a pro-lifer while I support having at the least requiring women to have ultrasounds and counseling before undertaking an abortion, I am opposed to the particular Virginia measure in question due to the invasive nature of the procedure. > > However is it really appropriate to call this rape? I mean by this logic medical exams that involve examination of the reproductive organs and the anus can be termed rape. And the comments section of that article were so full of left-wing nut paranoia that it was laughable. Ultrasounds and counseling are not medically required for abortions. The only reason for requiring them is to exert pressure on a woman seeking abortion. At least some rapists rape not because of sexual needs, but because they want to feel power over their victims…and that’s the same reason ultrasounds and counseling are advocated, in order to exert power over a woman who wants an abortion. I’d say that the motives of people who want to require ultrasounds and counseling are the same as the motives of at least some rapists. The ultrasounds and counseling are not for the benefit of the woman who wants an abortion, they are to dissuade her from getting an abortion, and to make providing abortions more burdensome. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/18 "2012-02-18T03:54:44Z")
And, of course, let’s see who wants this legislation…oh look, it’s the party that claims it wants smaller government, and wants to get government out of people’s business! Unless, of course, the GOP can do a little social engineering for its own agenda… ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/19 "2012-02-18T03:58:35Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > Ultrasounds and counseling are not medically required for abortions. The only reason for requiring them is to exert pressure on a woman seeking abortion. At least some rapists rape not because of sexual needs, but because they want to feel power over their victims…and that’s the same reason ultrasounds and counseling are advocated, in order to exert power over a woman who wants an abortion. > > I’d say that the motives of people who want to require ultrasounds and counseling are the same as the motives of at least some rapists. The ultrasounds and counseling are not for the benefit of the woman who wants an abortion, they are to dissuade her from getting an abortion, and to make providing abortions more burdensome. You’re partially right. These measures are to stem the number of abortions and perhaps dissaude at least a few from having their fetuses butchered. But is not to “exert power” over women but to protect the lives of the fetuses. > [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > And, of course, let’s see who wants this legislation…oh look, it’s the party that claims it wants smaller government, and wants to get government out of people’s business! Unless, of course, the GOP can do a little social engineering for its own agenda… Maybe because protecting the life of people is a fundamental function of government? > [@psychobunny](#): > > If anybody doubts that this is a totally inappropriate violation then please tell me why [this](http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/va-house-set-to-enact-mandatory-invasive-ultrasound-probe-for-women-who-seek-abortions/2012/02/13/gIQA56vnBR_story.html)amendment was voted down. > > That’s right, not only did they veto an amendment asking that women consent to the procedure but they also vetoed standard ultrasounds, even if the physician determines that he/she can get a good image without intravaginal ultrasound. > > Funny also how the Virginia lesislature who cares so much about informed consent vetoed [this](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/30/mandatory-ultrasound-bill-virginia-anti-abortion_n_1242627.html)amendment. Hence why I’m opposed to this measure. I’m not sure what the Virginia legislature is thinking of. ---
**Author:** ![boytyperanma](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/4491bb/32.png) [@boytyperanma](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/boytyperanma)\ **Post date:** [February 18, 2012, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/20 "2012-02-18T03:59:28Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > And, of course, let’s see who wants this legislation…oh look, it’s the party that claims it wants smaller government, and wants to get government out of people’s business! Unless, of course, the GOP can do a little social engineering for its own agenda… Well they need it to be smaller so it can fit in more women’s uterus’s. Imagine how hard it would be on women if big government was doing this! [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218.md?page=2)