margin is a freaking lunatic.

[villa]

@FinnAgain

Those are two separate issues. Rape would be the use of force, or the threat of force to obtain anal, oral or vaginal penetration. Or that penetration with someone who can not consent for various reasons, or who does not consent to you and is tricked into such as identical twins ‘sharing’ a partner, or what have you.

This isn’t the legal definition of rape, by the way. The traditional definition from the common law required both force and absence of consent. That’s still the definition used in many states, though New Jersey has made a pretty radical shift away from it, by eliminating the force element. That’s a slight simplification, as the statute still includes the term, but New Jersey courts (and I believe now Wisconsin courts, though I am not certain on that one) have defined the act of sexual penetration as being sufficient to meet the force element, in effect removing it in situations of non-consent.

[FinnAgain]

@villa

There’s a movement away from defining rape as a separate offense, and towards including it as a gradation of sexual assault. This affects how statistics are gathered.

Yes, listing rape on a ‘gradation’ on the same spectrum as non-violent embracing serves to clarify things and get betterstatistics. Especially if folks will argue that everything from non-violent embracing to rape evinces the frequency of rape.

Just saw your new post after I posted this, I’ll respond to the rest of your errors in a moment.

[FinnAgain]

@villa

This isn’t the legal definition of rape, by the way.

That is a legal definition of rape, by the way.
Definitions vary depending on which states we’re talking about but I was using that one, as I pointed out in the post you’re cherry-picking that from. (Weren’t you the one who went into a fit of hysterical shrieking because I responded to your comments but didn’t quote the entire posts?)

Let’s take NY’s penal code, for an example.
[

§ 130.35 Rape in the first degree.
A person is guilty of rape in the first degree when he or she engages
in sexual intercourse with another person:
1. By forcible compulsion; or
2. Who is incapable of consent by reason of being physically helpless;
or
3. Who is less than eleven years old; or
4. Who is less than thirteen years old and the actor is eighteen years
old or more.

](New York Penal Law Section 130.35 - Rape in the first degree. - New York Attorney Resources - New York Laws)

And California’s:

[

(a)Rape is an act of sexual intercourse accomplished with a person not the spouse of the perpetrator, under any of the following circumstances:

(1)Where a person is incapable, because of a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability, of giving legal consent, and this is known or reasonably should be known to the person committing the act. Notwithstanding the existence of a conservatorship pursuant to the provisions of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act (Part 1 (commencing with Section 5000) of Division 5 of the Welfare and Institutions Code), the prosecuting attorney shall prove, as an element of the crime, that a mental disorder or developmental or physical disability rendered the alleged victim incapable of giving consent.

(2)Where it is accomplished against a person’s will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another.

(3)Where a person is prevented from resisting by any intoxicating or anesthetic substance, or any controlled substance, and this condition was known, or reasonably should have been known by the accused.

(4)Where a person is at the time unconscious of the nature of the act, and this is known to the accused. As used in this paragraph, “unconscious of the nature of the act” means incapable of resisting because the victim meets one of the following conditions:

(A)Was unconscious or asleep.

(B)Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant that the act occurred.

(C)Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator’s fraud in fact.

(D)Was not aware, knowing, perceiving, or cognizant of the essential characteristics of the act due to the perpetrator’s fraudulent representation that the sexual penetration served a professional purpose when it served no professional purpose.

(5)Where a person submits under the belief that the person committing the act is the victim’s spouse, and this belief is induced by any artifice, pretense, or concealment practiced by the accused, with intent to induce the belief.

(6)Where the act is accomplished against the victim’s will by threatening to retaliate in the future against the victim or any other person, and there is a reasonable possibility that the perpetrator will execute the threat. As used in this paragraph, “threatening to retaliate” means a threat to kidnap or falsely imprison, or to inflict extreme pain, serious bodily injury, or death.

(7)Where the act is accomplished against the victim’s will by threatening to use the authority of a public official to incarcerate, arrest, or deport the victim or another, and the victim has a reasonable belief that the perpetrator is a public official. As used in this paragraph, “public official” means a person employed by a governmental agency who has the authority, as part of that position, to incarcerate, arrest, or deport another. The perpetrator does not actually have to be a public official.

(b)As used in this section, “duress” means a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, or retribution sufficient to coerce a reasonable person of ordinary susceptibilities to perform an act which otherwise would not have been performed, or acquiesce in an act to which one otherwise would not have submitted. The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, and his or her relationship to the defendant, are factors to consider in appraising the existence of duress.

(c)As used in this section, “menace” means any threat, declaration, or act which shows an intention to inflict an injury upon another.

](http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/PEN/3/1/9/1/s261)

Now, as I (correctly) stated, statutes vary by state. Your blanket error of “that’s not what the legal definition is” is some rather obvious nonsense designed to sell, well, I’m not sure. But I can wager that some hysteria is soon to follow.

[Shodan]

@Zeriel

So you bore the brunt of a week of infant-related severe insomnia, solely because you were there and to my sleep-addled brain, rageworthy. For that I apologize. I could blame the four-month-old, but that wouldn’t be sporting (and realistically, her teeth growing isn’t her fault either).

What the heck is it with people like you and Jimmy Chitwood being all reasonable and adult?

You’re spoiling my Pit thread, you kitten molesters!

Regards,
Shodan

[Attack_from_the_3rd_dimension]

@Shodan

What the heck is it with people like you and Jimmy Chitwood being all reasonable and adult?

You’re spoiling my Pit thread, you kitten molesters!

Regards,
Shodan

Kitten igniters, c’mon, keep the terms straight.

[Shodan]

Kitten-molester-apologist!

Regards,
Shodan

[Lynn_Bodoni]

@FinnAgain

That is a legal definition of rape, by the way.
Definitions vary depending on which states we’re talking about but I was using that one, as I pointed out in the post you’re cherry-picking that from. (Weren’t you the one who went into a fit of hysterical shrieking because I responded to your comments but didn’t quote the entire posts?)

…

Now, as I (correctly) stated, statutes vary by state. Your blanket error of “that’s not what the legal definition is” is some rather obvious nonsense designed to sell, well, I’m not sure. But I can wager that some hysteria is soon to follow.

And yet, when I say that various states define rape differently, you say

No Lynn, you are simply wrong. Not only on the state-to-state legal aspect

At any rate, I’m not going to have much internet access for the following week, so I’m not going to go through the thread. But it would help if you’d make your mind up as to whether or not various states define rape differently.

[billfish678]

@villa

There’s a movement away from defining rape as a separate offense, and towards including it as a gradation of sexual assault. This affects how statistics are gathered.

No shit. And thats what some are complaining about.

But why? And why is this a good idea?

Yeah, its part of a spectrum. That what us pro rape culture people have been saying all along. If you’ve got a spectrum, by definition some things are worse than others. But saying that gets all the rape is rape is rape people’s knickers in a twist.

To me it looks more like an attempt to make a butt slap look like a full blown rape rather than recognize there is a wide spectrum.

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

@FinnAgain

Just so you know, when someone attempts to handwave away an argument as meaningless, when it’s well cited, fully elaborated and cogently reasoned, it’s not a rebuttal. It’s actually a pretty good indicator that person has no rebuttal, and has resorted to the Argument From Nuhn Unnh!!!
But that’s your call I guess.

Just so you know, the fact that your arguments are constantly getting dismissed around here for similar reasons even though you think they’re well cited, fully elaborated and cogently reasoned is either an indication that you’re as surrounded by idiots as you’ve always suspected, or that you’re grading yourself on a bit of a curve. You’re free to bet on either outcome.

In this case, you’ve just been going on and on about a distinction that Zeriel and villa conceded a long damn time ago because it wasn’t essential to the point they were making. You ignored that because it allowed you to string together a few more boring Mad Libs retard jokes.

Which you might as well; by now you’re invested in not getting anybody else’s actual point. Because otherwise you just wrote 25,000 words about literally god-damned nothing, because villa included rape and sexual assault in the original post to which you responded “how about you provide some statistics.” But you forgot about that, and it’s not hard to see why. I imagine looking up different ways to call everyone else deranged eats up a lot of the time you might otherwise devote to understanding their points.

Now you’re arguing with villa about what rape is. Now why would villa have any idea how to define rape? It’s not like they sent him to a special school, where you learn about the law, or anything.

@billfish678

To me it looks more like an attempt to make a butt slap look like a full blown rape rather than recognize there is a wide spectrum.

When you say “it looks like,” what are you referring to exactly?

[billfish678]

@Jimmy_Chitwood

When you say “it looks like,” what are you referring to exactly?

Us pro rape culture folks generally don’t deny there is a spectrum. Thats actually our point. Yet we catch shit for it on a regular basis

But the more shrill rape is rape is rape folks claim its all equal. Giving it all the same label makes their claim easier. They officially make it part of spectrum because it really is, then they conveniently ignore or forget what the hell spectrum actually means.

And IMO a spectrum approach is all well and good as far as it goes, but its not like some intellectual breakthrough of epic proportion. Everythings a damn spectrum.

Not that this any particularly new tactic. Plenty of groups with plenty of causes do this X is bad, and X is X is X business.

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

You’re saying that somebody has claimed that all sexual assault of any degree is rape? I’m just not sure whether you’re taking exception to an argument, or some statistics, or what.

[Zeriel]

@Shodan

What the heck is it with people like you and Jimmy Chitwood being all reasonable and adult?

You’re spoiling my Pit thread, you kitten molesters!

Regards,
Shodan

Would it help if I told you to eat a bag of dicks?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

There is no “spectrum.” Rape is rape is rape. It always sounds like some people are working really hard to find loopholes. There aren’t any loopholes.

[Zeriel]

@FinnAgain

That’s a large part of the problem with the NCVS’s reporting methodology. If unwelcome non-violent embracing, slapping someone on the ass, groping someone, whatever, is in the same statistic as rape, then we have a muddled statistic. It also doesn’t identify many of the relevant issues of an actual rape. While someone slapping you on the ass is demeaning, perhaps even threatening, it doesn’t carry with it the risk of STD’s and pregnancy, for example.

At some point, the idea of a “sexual abuse spectrum” rather than “rape”, “sexual abuse”, etc. is centered on whether the emotional harm from sexual abuse in general or the physical harm from penetrative rape is of greater concern. It seems to me (and this is admittedly an uncited impression) that a fair number of people on this board who talk about their experiences with sexual assault of whatever type are of the opinion that the emotional harm is the greater part. This goes out to billfish678 too.

Except then we’ve even further diluted the issue. A boss offers his secretary a raise if she provides sexual favors, but he certainly doesn’t use force or remove her ability to consent.

Whether this is a dilution or not depends entirely on what aspects of “rape” make it “rape”. If you ask me, the defining element of a rape is coercive force–not necessarily violence, as I think you’d agree, since drugs or selecting a too-drunk-to-consent partner are also indicators that rape has occurred.

I am of the opinion that coercive force doesn’t need to be violent, there just has to be a credible threat–and not necessarily of bodily harm, which is the federal distinction between “aggravated” and “non-aggravated” sexual assault. “Have sex with me or I fire you”, as in your upthread example, is a credible threat from a boss. “Have sex with me or I fail you” is a credible threat from a teacher. “Have sex with me or I break up with you”, now I could start seeing a grey area. “Have sex with me and I’ll promote you/improve your grade” as your current example isn’t a threat and I wouldn’t think it falls under the purview of rape.

All of the above is, naturally, not to say that non-rape sexual abuse is less important or less deserving of punishment, but it’s an attempt to find if there’s a subcategory line here similar to the lines between murder and manslaughter, or between grand larceny and theft.

[Zeriel]

@Diogenes_the_Cynic

There is no “spectrum.” Rape is rape is rape. It always sounds like some people are working really hard to find loopholes. There aren’t any loopholes.

Question: In looking at the federal statutes of “Aggravated Sexual Assault”, “Sexual Assault”, and “Abusive Sexual Contact”, which of that set ought be considered rape? Should there be a separate category for gropings and the like, or is any undesired sexual contact “rape”?

[villa]

@Jimmy_Chitwood

Now you’re arguing with villa about what rape is. Now why would villa have any idea how to define rape? It’s not like they sent him to a special school, where you learn about the law, or anything.

I think it is amusing that in answer to my common law definition of rape as requiring the elements force and absence of consent, he cites to a New York law that states Rape in the First Degree as sex “by means of forcible compulsion.”

Which to me would indicate two elements, forcible (i.e. the presence of force) and compulsion (i.e. the absence of consent).

And completely ignoring my main issues with his definition were him (a) ingoring the absence of consent element; and (b) ignoring that in at least one important jurisdiction, if not two (and my excuse is that the second jurisdiction had the case after I wrote an article on this), the force element has been effectively eliminated.

It’s always amusing to see people think that a statute book without any knowledge of the case law surrounding it gives them an adequate understanding of the law.

[Bricker]

A perennial favorite, which seemed relevant to the discussion.

[Shodan]

@Zeriel

Would it help if I told you to eat a bag of dicks?

Not a lot, but I appreciate the effort.

I hope Jr. is thru with teething. I remember those nights, and not fondly.

Regards,
Shodan

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Zeriel

Question: In looking at the federal statutes of “Aggravated Sexual Assault”, “Sexual Assault”, and “Abusive Sexual Contact”, which of that set ought be considered rape? Should there be a separate category for gropings and the like, or is any undesired sexual contact “rape”?

I didn’t say all sexual assault was rape, I said all rape was rape.

[billfish678]

@Zeriel

At some point, the idea of a “sexual abuse spectrum” rather than “rape”, “sexual abuse”, etc. is centered on whether the emotional harm from sexual abuse in general or the physical harm from penetrative rape is of greater concern. It seems to me (and this is admittedly an uncited impression) that a fair number of people on this board who talk about their experiences with sexual assault of whatever type are of the opinion that the emotional harm is the greater part. This goes out to billfish678 too.

.

Oh I don’t doubt that emotional harm rather than physical harm IS the greater issue for some folks and maybe even in general. But there is still going to wide range emotional harm.

Or at least IMO they should be. IMO if your as emotionally harmed because your boss made an indecent proposal as you are because some strange guy threatened to beat the crap out of you, your just being irrational.