# 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:** 9
**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 20, 2012, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/161 "2012-02-20T03:26:35Z")
> [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](#): > > According to some comments, similar laws are already in effect in several states including Texas, Florida, and Oklahoma. Are those laws being enforced and are the probes vaginal or not? Interesting. Do you know if any states that aren’t pretty staunchly pro-life also have such a law? If such a procedure helped improve the outcomes of abortions, one would think that states with records of being in favor of abortions that are safe and legal would also adopt such a legal requirement. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/162 "2012-02-20T20:50:31Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > It seems like you really aren’t concerned about actual legal definitions, though. If you are, there are several in this thread already that ought to have sufficed. Such as the one I posted, the one relating to US law, which is the relevant one. So I really don’t get your point. If the whole argument really depended on a distinction between rape and sexual assault (an applicable definition of which was like two lines below the definition of rape you offered, at [the link](http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/920) you did not include… [/quote] Here’s the quote you did not inclue: > [@](#): > > Aggravated Sexual Assault.— Any person subject to this chapter who— > (1) causes another person of any age to engage in a sexual act by— > (A) threatening or placing that other person in fear (other than by threatening or placing that other person in fear that any person will be subjected to death, grievous bodily harm, or kidnapping); or > (B) causing bodily harm; or > (2) engages in a sexual act with another person of any age if that other person is substantially incapacitated or substantially incapable of— > (A) appraising the nature of the sexual act; > (B) declining participation in the sexual act; or > (C) communicating unwillingness to engage in the sexual act; > is guilty of aggravated sexual assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct. So how does the ultrasound qualify as sexual assault? > [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > And lots of people have already said that. But you seem to be not all that concerned with that distinction, because you… …because I already made it clear I don’t consider it non-consensual. Neither would any court. > [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > People could take the time to answer all of the semantic questions you’ve raised about why aren’t taxes armed robbery and how is medical necessity relevant, and where coercion fits in with all of this, but do you actually care what they say? So far no one has offered an even remotely convincing argument to me. I admit I can be a bit stubborn but the “it’s rape” arguments have been weak and very repetitive. > [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > It seems to me that you just have an idea in your head about what sexual assault means, and that definition is what isn’t matching up, not the one on the books. In that case there’s not really an argument to be had. Well I just posted the definition according to your own link. The only part that I can imagine you think is relevant (apologies if I’m wrong) is this part: > [@](#): > > (A) threatening or placing that other person in fear I don’t believe this covers the situation. > [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > Editing to add: I literally care only for abortion. I’ve been left by like nine different women for it. They’re like “you don’t care about me. You only care about _abortion_.” And I’m like it’s a free country, baby. You evil leftie. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/163 "2012-02-20T21:09:58Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Congratulations, that’s very clever. > > **Lynn Bodoni** is quite clearly distinguishing between a respectable and defensible meaning of the word “requirement,” as in MEDICAL requirement, and a non-respectable and indefensible (in this context) meaning of “requirement,” as in LEGAL requirement. And here you are, conflating the two, just as though there is no distinction to be made between them; and as though she is not insisting on the distinction at all. > > So, again, my congratulations: _very_ cleve – waitaminute, I don’t mean “clever,” I mean the other thing – oh, that’s right: disingenuous. If you had read the whole exchange you would see that I first used the word required (in a perfectly reasonable sense). Lynn Bodoni decided to challenge my use of that word and then replace it with the same word. I think my reply was a perfectly reasonable response to a pointless challenge. I think I’ve added all I can to this thread. Almost everyone that disagrees with me is essentially using the argument that women will be forced to receive the ultrasound. Personally I don’t believe that they’re being forced in and real or legal sense and I see very little in the way of logical arguments, just circles going around and around. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/164 "2012-02-20T21:46:52Z")
You are welcome to your wildly inaccurate assumptions about what any court would do. One question, instead: if these women consented to getting these ultrasound scans, why would the legislature pass a law forcing them to do so? ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/165 "2012-02-20T21:50:04Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > You are welcome to your wildly inaccurate assumptions about what any court would do. > > One question, instead: if these women consented to getting these ultrasound scans, why would the legislature pass a law forcing them to do so? If people consented to [insert any legal requirement here], why would the legislature pass a law forcing them to do so? Yet another weak argument. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/166 "2012-02-20T22:06:27Z")
What’s the answer to the question? ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/167 "2012-02-20T22:13:12Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > Personally I don’t believe that they’re being forced in and real or legal sense and I see very little in the way of logical arguments, just circles going around and around. Can you please describe exactly what constitutes forcing someone to do something in your view? There are times when we force people to do things against their will, for instance, we put them in jail, or execute them. There are other times when we apply some gentle pressure to try to get them to do things against their will, for example via taxation or civil fines. And there are times when we don’t really care to force people one way or another and ask for information that they are not required to give. Of course there are more examples than these, I’m not trying to exhaust the sample space. So I see a broad spectrum of “force” and it is hard for me to understand why the issue is so very cut and dry for you. Probing someone’s body as a precondition for things is not, on its face, totally unreasonable. It’s a precondition for dentistry, surgery, biopsies, and other things. I think it would be a horrible equivocation to suggest that people are “forced” to undergo rectal probes for a colonoscopy. Clearly the relationship between these items is direct. What is the relationship between a vaginal ultrasound and abortion such that this doesn’t amount to “force”? ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/168 "2012-02-20T22:13:28Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > Personally I don’t believe that they’re being forced in and real or legal sense and I see very little in the way of logical arguments, just circles going around and around. You have seen (and responded to) logical arguments, you just don’t agree with them. I believe that the threat of forcing someone to go through with a full pregnancy and childbirth if they refuse to let you stick a large object inside them rises to the level of coercion and sexual assault. You disagree, believing that the threat of unwanted pregnancy and childbirth is quite mild, as though you threatened to tickle someone with a feather if they didn’t let you penetrate them. I could argue that pregnancy and childbirth are not without risks, including the possibility of death, and that in any case the ultimatum offers a “choice” only between two very invasive unwanted options. And I have argued that, as have many in this thread. You disagree. It happens. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/169 "2012-02-20T22:14:12Z")
The answer is that your question is flawed, since they’re only forced to do so if they want an abortion. I’ve given many examples where laws that require people do certain unpleasant things in order to do something else they want to do, such as airport searches as I mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/170 "2012-02-20T22:18:48Z")
So for a woman who wants to get an abortion, and whose pregnancy is in the first trimester, it seems like you agree that the procedure is non-consensual, then. “Forced to do so if they want an abortion.” Which, you know, forced to do something. This is why I said that maybe the disconnect here is with your notion of what sexual assault means. You’re stating outright that all the pieces of the puzzle are there to make up what we usually consider sexual assault. ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/171 "2012-02-20T22:23:41Z")
> [@erislover](#): > > Can you please describe exactly what constitutes forcing someone to do something in your view? Threatening someone else (including the person being forced) with violence, or using actual physical force to make them do something. Holding someone down and having sex with them when they say no is rape. Holding a gun to someone’s head and saying you’ll kill them if they resist, then having sex with them, is rape. If there is no threat or use of actual physical force or violence, it’s not rape (assuming you’re dealing with a person legally capable of giving consent). > [@Carmady](#): > > You have seen (and responded to) logical arguments, you just don’t agree with them I didn’t say there were no logical arguments, I said there were very few. > [@Carmady](#): > > You disagree, believing that the threat of unwanted pregnancy and childbirth is quite mild, as though you threatened to tickle someone with a feather if they didn’t let you penetrate them. Cite for this ridiculous claim please? ---
**Author:** ![Bozuit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/edb3f5/32.png) [@Bozuit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bozuit)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/172 "2012-02-20T22:30:18Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > So for a woman who wants to get an abortion, and whose pregnancy is in the first trimester, it seems like you agree that the procedure is non-consensual, then. “Forced to do so if they want an abortion.” > > Which, you know, forced to do something. This is why I said that maybe the disconnect here is with your notion of what sexual assault means. You’re stating outright that all the pieces of the puzzle are there to make up what we usually consider sexual assault. I can tell a woman she can’t decide what film we’re going to watch unless she has sex with me. She is forced to have sex with me if she wants to choose the film but it doesn’t make it rape. We can go over this again and again but we clearly just disagree with where the line between acceptable and unacceptable coercion lies. Personally I believe courts would agree with me considering the already existing and widespread precedent for “if you want x you must do y”, although I have no evidence to back that up. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/173 "2012-02-20T22:31:37Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > If there is no threat or use of actual physical force or violence, it’s not rape (assuming you’re dealing with a person legally capable of giving consent). I wasn’t trying to lay a trap for you. I was really trying to understand when something is “forced” and when it isn’t, in your mind, since the issue seems so clear to you. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/174 "2012-02-20T22:51:11Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > The answer is that your question is flawed, since they’re only forced to do so if they want an abortion. And by that logic, telling a woman “have sex with me or you’re fired” isn’t her being “forced”. You are using a twisted definition that has no purpose other than to justify the ritualized sexual assault of women. ---
**Author:** ![Carmady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f04885/32.png) [@Carmady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Carmady)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/175 "2012-02-20T23:05:48Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > Threatening someone else (including the person being forced) with violence So as long as your threat is not “violence”, you can threaten all you want? You could steal someone’s medication which they will die without, and tell them you won’t give it back unless they have sex with you? After all, it was theft, not violence. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/176 "2012-02-20T23:11:33Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > We can go over this again and again but we clearly just disagree with where the line between acceptable and unacceptable coercion lies. Personally I believe courts would agree with me considering the already existing and widespread precedent for “if you want x you must do y”, although I have no evidence to back that up. I have no problem with you believing that. What I’m trying to get across is that our major disagreement isn’t on that point, because it doesn’t make a difference how you feel about “acceptable coercion.” The reason we’re still going around in circles is that you are actually agreeing - in so many words - that these women do not consent to being probed for an ultrasound, and that they are being forced to do so in order to get an abortion, which they have the right to obtain. You just don’t agree with us about what that means. You are conceding the crux of the argument and not realizing it, and then saying nobody’s making logical arguments against you. I keep hoping that you’ll see that the paragraph above includes everything we need to determine, under ordinary circumstances, what sexual assault is. I’ve already posted a Virginia definition of sexual assault – the thing that says what the actual law is. And you acknowledge that the law would “force” a woman who wants an abortion to submit to 1. penetration of the labia majora 2. against her will, and that it’s not for a legitimate medical purpose. That’s normally described, per the definition, using the phrase sexual assault. But you object to people using the phrase to describe the act. ---
**Author:** ![ladyfoxfyre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ad7895/32.png) [@ladyfoxfyre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ladyfoxfyre)\ **Post date:** [February 20, 2012, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/177 "2012-02-20T23:14:14Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > We can go over this again and again but we clearly just disagree with where the line between acceptable and unacceptable coercion lies. Personally I believe courts would agree with me considering the already existing and widespread precedent for “if you want x you must do y”, although I have no evidence to back that up. So disallowing a woman access to a legal medical procedure, unless you perform an irrelevant and invasive procedure, and requiring her to go through with a pregnancy doesn’t fall into the unacceptable category on your continuum of coercion? And for those who are saying the transvaginal ultrasound isn’t in the text of the bill, the GOP is sure defending the use of transvaginal ultrasounds pretty strongly instead of saying that it’s not in the bill. ---
**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 20, 2012, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/178 "2012-02-20T23:18:47Z")
> [@Bozuit](#): > > Personally I believe courts would agree with me considering the already existing and widespread precedent for “if you want x you must do y”, although I have no evidence to back that up. [Oh really?](http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/10/26/court-blocks-ultrasound-requirement-in-nc-abortion-law/) ---
**Author:** ![kanicbird](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/5f8ce5/32.png) [@kanicbird](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kanicbird)\ **Post date:** [February 21, 2012, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/179 "2012-02-21T01:54:03Z")
Many have commented it is a unnecessary procedure, and to medically terminate the pregnancy it may very well be. But a case can be made on the basis of morality for the child/fetus to at least state his/her case to the best of his/her ability and a image of heir existence would seem to be the only way to do that in a way that is fair to the developing child/fetus. Which goes to what type of rape are we talking about in the OP. Is it the physical insertion of the ultrasound object, or the mental rape of showing the mother her child she is about to have terminated? Are we looking at the physical ‘rape’ but thinking about the mental ‘rape’. I woud think actually seeing your child you have condemned to death is much harder to bear then any inserting a medical object as part of a legal abortion procedure. The insertion of the probe = rape doesn’t seem the real issue, but the inserting of the concept that you are killing your own child into her mind by the ultrasound image burst any illusion she may have set up to help her cope with the abortion decision. Is that rape that you show a picture of what is inside you? ---
**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 21, 2012, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218/180 "2012-02-21T02:03:38Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > And by that logic, telling a woman “have sex with me or you’re fired” isn’t her being “forced”. You are using a twisted definition that has no purpose other than to justify the ritualized sexual assault of women. That circumstance falls under the legal definition of rape, in fact. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-this-rape/613218.md?page=10)