Rape committed by women.

Great Debates
1

In this article here, a women is in trial for attacking another women, ripping off her blouse, then holding her down while 2 other males proceed to gang rape her while others stand by, watch and cheer on the rapists.

What I want to know is how is justice accomplished with women rapists? Do the sentences apply the same to women as it does men or is it considered differently? What about after the sentence is met, what steps would or could be taken to prevent such an attack again?

Now, this is the general questions that I am curious about for the facts, but as to a debate, are women more capable of rape then society believes? And also, are they more capable of not being caught or sentenced harshly?

Give me some input folks.

2

Given the facts in the article, there is nothing unusual at all about this conviction. In some jurisdictions, Ms. Marsh would have been charged with conspiracy or aiding and abetting, but since the punishment’s (usually) the same, it’s a distinction without a difference.

BTW, women can commit rape all by themselves, either with an object or straightforward non-consensual sex with a male victim (yes, men get erections at the most inconvenient times.)
As for women’s “capability” for rape, I don’t quite understand the question. Rape shouldn’t be considered as different than other crimes. As is quite obvious in this case, rape is about violence and power, not sex. Overall, there are stereotypes of women as weak, non-criminal, “good”, etc. As with most stereotypes, they are mostly untrue. On average, women do commit less crimes than men.

Sua

3

yep, what Sua said. THere wouldn’t be (shouldn’t be, couldn’t constitutionally be) different penalties for women committing the crime.

In addition to his examples of women raping, let’s not forget the MK Latourneau example - women can (and have been) convicted of rape when the other person was a minor, not able to legally consent.

4

Not capable as in physical means, but mentally and/or emotionally. Most rape is committed by men, and it is true that women do commit less crimes then men.

But what I am wanting to know is, are women more capable of commiting such an act to feel powerful over others, the same as a male does, than society believes. “Power is a fruit that is edible to all” and women can want power just as much as a man does, so in this case would women commit rape to feel that form of power.?

5

IIRC (and IANAL) in English Law, Rape is defined as penile intercourse without consent. Other sexual crimes (such as non-penile insertions) would be dealt with under other laws (indecent assault, assault etc.)

The woman was convicted under ‘common purpose’ provisions of the English common law. This has led to perverse findings in other cases (for instance, a man was hanged for the killing of a policeman whilst he was in police custody and handcuffed- his partner in crime killed the man, was too young for the death penalty and served about fifteen years, the man in custody was over eighteen and so hanged- happened in the fifties. Seceral very disturbing cases using common pourpose provisions happend in Apartheid South Africa leading to multiple death penalties for all involved in assaults which led to murder- of course, all the accused were black. If whites engaged in mass attacks on blacks, their actions were not generally seen as criminal.

6

IANAL, either, but I have read the appropriate state statutes in my home state (MI), and the phrase is penetration, but does not define what object is penetrated, it could be a finger, a penis, a broom handle, a pink unicorn.

I’d be very surprised that any jurisdiction still has laws specifically defining rape as insertion of a penis into an orifice, and not allow for other options.

7

So if a women raped a man with a dildo, then that would be considered rape, but if the woman raped him by tying him down and then inserted his penis into him, it would not be considered rape since the woman consented, it would be just an indecent sexual crime? That is pretty warped to me.

I was always under the assumption that ANY unwanted sexual act through force to be rape. Interesting.

8

You will have to take what I have to say about this with a grain of salt, since I only know about the laws and penalties in one state: Illinois. I have some information about that because I dealt with sexual assault/rape/domestic violence crime victims as a volunteer for many years.

In THAT state, there are different “degrees” of rape, which ended up making me FURIOUS. First of all, it’s true…only penetration is considered literally rape. But non-consensual touching falls under “sexual assault” of various types. There is also the category “attempted rape.” This creates a problem over deciding whether a particular dirtbag deserves an assault charge or an attempted rape charge. If he finds himself impotent at the last minute, is he still worthy of the higher sentence deserved by attempted rapists, or was it “just” sexual assault?

Now, back to the different types of rape. Illinois has a higher penalty for people convincted of rape when the victim was not otherwise physically harmed. For example, commit a rape and hit the victim in the face a few times, get a higher sentence than if you DON’T hit him/her. Use a weapon to threaten him/her? Higher still.

I understand some of the point behind this. I mean, you can’t just lump ALL unwanted sexual contact into one category. An unwanted pinch on the ass is not the same as unwanted sex.

However, just for the sake of illustration, let’s say you’re being attacked. You assess your situation and determine that the best course of action for you to take is to go along with your attacker, do what he/she says, and therefore, save yourself a couple of black eyes. This is a fine decision to make. Perhaps, it keeps him from pointing the weapon he brought in your face.

However, when you get to COURT you can now be raped again. Your decision to act in your own best interest and not provoke your attacker further can be used to lower his sentence or make him look like less of a criminal. Similarly, if you were successful in fighting him off you can be “penalized” by having his charge reduced from attempted rape to some sort of bogus assault crapola.

I have only dealt with a very few male victims. But I assure you, sexual assault upon a MAN is every bit as emotionally tortuous as it is upon a woman. And in my (admittedly limited) experience with these men, they end up getting completely raked over the coals in court. “How come you didn’t defend yourself, how come you didn’t want it, how come you were wearing a short skirt…” Okay, maybe not that last one. But you get the point. They’re forced to endure all sorts of pigeon-holing regarding how men are supposed to behave and what they’re supposed to want. This all ends up making the sentences for the crimes against them lesser…shorter sentences, fewer charges, and less likelihood that the next sex crimes victim will bother going through the court system. Double ALL of this if the victim was a gay man, assaulted by another man.

Since I’m very jaded on the issue, I believe it is likely that the laws in most states create this same situation. Again, I do understand why we can’t lump ALL sex crimes together under one heading. But at the very least, we should recognize that rape is not less of a crime under certain circumstances. Including the gender of the victim.

-L

9

If a man gets tied down and then raped by having his own penis inserted into him, I’d think that ‘warping’ would be the least of his worries… :eek:

10

on a more serious note, sojourn the main issue is indeed consent. While other issues such as age, other felonies, orafices, which object etc. may determine the specific crime and/or punishment available, it generally is true that unconsensual sexual contact is illegal.

11

Yeah, sorry about the typo…meant her.

As to the debate, SexyWriter brings up some interesting points. Rape should not be lumped into one large crime, but I am sorry, if a man forces his penis into another man and a woman forces a man’s penis into her (got it right this time :wink: ), then that is rape. Period. The punishment should be the same as a man raping a woman and the victims given the same sympathy and regard as the women who was raped, regardless of gender or sexual orientation.

For one thing, a man should not be harassed due to sexist assumptions such as SexyWriter stated. A man can easily be raped if drugged and tied down or even unconscious. There are plenty of women out there who are also larger and stronger than men, and they can beat a man into just the same as a woman can get beaten by a man. It is just pure sexism to assume that a man cannot get beaten or taken advantage of physically by a woman.

As to a man being raped by another man, please. He is still a human being, whether he is gay or not and he should be given the same sympathy and care as any person who gets raped.

12

I would point out that under Georgia law a woman cannot rape a man, because rape is defined as “carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will”. (A woman could presumably be found guilty of conspiracy or aiding and abetting or whatever in a situation like that in the OP.) A woman could be found guilty of aggravated sodomy for acts committed against a man (note that the Georgia Supreme Court has struck down enforcement of the law against non-aggravated or consensual sodomy as a violation of the state constitution’s right to privacy); but if a woman forced a man to submit to vaginal intercourse, I’m not sure what she could be charged with. Aggravated sexual battery doesn’t seem to cover it, since that’s defined as “penetrat[ing] with a foreign object the sexual organ or anus of another person” (now I have this picture of a man being forcibly catheterized by a woman…ow, ow, ow, ow, ow!).

Hey, ladies–IANAL, but it appears that you could come down here to Georgia and make men have sex with you at gunpoint, and as long as you don’t make him get into any serious foreplay, you could get off scot-free!* I would advise you to do a more thorough search of the Georgia Code before you take any precipitate action.

[sub]*OK, and I guess you could be charged with aggravated assault for that part about “gunpoint”.[/sub]

13

In my state, a man forcing his penis into a woman’s vagina (or vice-versa) would be called “rape”, and a man forcing his penis into another man or a woman’s mouth or anus, or a woman forcing a man’s penis into an orifice other than her vagina would be called “sodomy” .Both crimes are the same level of felony and have the same punishment.

14

What about the ‘rape’ cases where the victim did not resist at all and even consented, but was so intoxicated at the time that they could not have given ‘informed consent’? Under that way of looking at it, I have been raped by women a couple of times.

15

If you feel you’ve been violated, call the police. This most certainly does count as rape if you did not consent.

You might also consider drinking less.

-L

16

LOL, even if I wanted to, I’m pretty sure the cops would laugh if I reported it. I just treated it the same way I imagine most women who had sex while drunk and later regretted it do…chalk it up as another mistake made while drunk.

17

actually under MI law, sexual contact (either penetration or contact alone) while the person is intoxicated or ‘otherwise incapacitated’, is punishable, under the same laws.

Two cases come to mind - one a MSU wrestling coach who took a coed (19) out to a bar, ordered “Long ISland Ice Teas” for her (several). Testimony was that she was not a drinker, did not know that 'Long Island Ice Tea" was an alcoholic drink, got drunk enough she was passed out in his car, he was convicted (IIRC), though didn’t get a whole lotta time off of it.

OTOH, the male nurses’ aide at a convelescent home who had contact with a woman in a coma did get a lot of time.

As for ‘would a male’ be protected? According to the letter of the law in MI - yes. All such laws are drawn up with gender neutral words. However, on a practical matter, I suspect that if a guy went in to complain that some woman had non consenual contact with him while he was intoxicated, it wouldn’t be treated as seriously. IMHO, that’s wrong.

18

This is going to fall into the area of “I can tell you about it, but I can’t back it up,” so take it for what its worth. I knew a woman who had been convicted of rape, sentenced to prison as a rapist, and forced to register when she got out of prison as a sex offender because she was in the same house as another woman who was raped and didn’t assist that woman. She happened to know the males involved and in no way participated in the rape itself, but because she failed to aid the victim (and didn’t report the rapists), she was also convicted AS a rapist, and not merely an accessory. This happened in Texas and the woman was of hispanic origin, so if you want to toss the issue of race into the matter, you could say that her punishment might have been influenced by that. I don’t know. I do know that a number of years ago, someone, somewhere, did a study on MALES that had been “date raped.” It turns out that it DOES happen to men (on a vastly smaller scale than women, of course) and that rather involving physical violence, the women blackmail the guy into sleeping with them (“I’ll tell all the other guys on the football team you’re gay” or something like that, one supposes.) Anyway you look at it, rape’s a bad thing, no matter who the victim is, or why the attacker committed the crime.