Dear Piper,

You're absolutely correct.

The Crimes Act clarifies the concept of consent
and reaffirms the fundamental right of a person
to elect not to engage in sexual activity.

The Law says that unlawful sexual penetration
(i.e. rape) occurs when someone does not agree
to any penetration of the vagina, mouth, or anus...

Assault is in a totally different category.

And, you make an excellent point about the victim.
What victim would really care about what the motive
was for the crime committed against them. The fact
remains, sexual penetration did take place without
their permisssion, and this is against the law.
De-sexualizing a sex crime?
To whose advantage? Certainly not the victims!

Foxy:"To whose advantage? Certainly not the victims!"

What advantage do they gain by having it sexualised?

Foxy:”The Crimes Act clarifies the concept of consent
and reaffirms the fundamental right of a person
to elect not to engage in sexual activity.”

So the law is really clear about force being used. Are laws in general about the effect on a victim in the case of rape? Or are laws more about what constitutes a crime rather than what causes more damage or more hurt?

Foxy:”What victim would really care about what the motive
was for the crime committed against them. The fact
remains, sexual penetration did take place without
their permisssion, and this is against the law.
De-sexualizing a sex crime?
To whose advantage? Certainly not the victims!”

I know little about victims compensation but I would say given that an impact statement is made then it makes me guess that the effect more than the motivation does have more meaning in a courtroom.

It’s actually a confusing topic and seems really similar to Exams other thread that I have only just had a read of.

I may be reaching a little there, I understand the other one is about incest which to me seems more like interfamily rape. And again more about using sex in conjunction with power and wishing to dominate by degradation.

OLO seems rife with threads on sex crimes at the moment. I could see you weren’t very happy in the other thread Foxy and I’m hardly having many happy thoughts lately with such a prevalent theme going at the moment.

On this thread I’d have to say no – rape is about sex and it can’t be watered down by saying the offenders incentive should be considered.

The law should not sexualize a crime that involves sex.

Exterminator.

a. Most Criminologists, psychologists, generally believe that for the rapist it's nearly always about Power not the sex.

I'll deal with (a) first. "It's always about the power." We need to have a look at the history of this statement.

At the very first Womens Conference in Lima, in the 70s, The groups of women were given different tasks to examin. One set of wonen had the task of examining rape. They took old Court Records and perused them. They found a common theme. Almost all of the rape victims said, "I felt powerless/ I had no control over what was happening to me, etc." Notice. The women said "I". This group of women then deduced that Men wanted to take away the womens power & control them. This report was tabled & rejected. "And that's when the fight started." If anyone remembers the Lima conference broke up after 4000 women got into a barny in the Great Hall. They were thrown out of Peru & just about every country they have had a Conference in since Lima. China was very notable. The fight started on the first day & the Chinese through them out of the Country after a week. (my old next door neighbour attended it.)

A female British Psychologist ran a study in British jails. She interviewd every rapest in jail with a very comprehensive set of tests. Her conclusion was, "It was not about Power or Control these men just wanted to have sex, it could have been anyone who was unlucky enough to be in the area at the time." British feminist groups were outraged by her report, so much so that they lobbied to have her struck off. ---->

<---
An American Psychologist & Reporter reported from several warring African Nations where she asked the rapist there the Question, Was it about "Control & Power" They all said NO it was about the need to release the Adrenaline rush after the battle. I saw the initial report. Later reports had that bit missing from them.

There are many reports that have rebuffed the Power & Control therory, but sadly they have all been suppresses or ignored. It is eaiser to go with an established, well advertized Myth.

b. For the victim it isn't about intercourse but denial of power, violence and a sense of violation.

Exactly. As I have stated above. It is the Victim who feels Powerless & not in Control & at having been violated. It was not the intent of the rapist to take away the victims Power or Control. The rapist was not thinking of the feeling of the victim at any time. The rapists motifs were entirely selfish. He was only thinking of his own gratification.

I know this will upset the feminists, but the truth always hurts.

What is the punishment for a man who rapes?

Many years on jail, where he is likely to be anally raped many many times by his fellow male prisoners.

Not so much an eye-for-an-eye... but an eye-for-an-penny. Men are massively over-punished.

But a women (say a school teacher) who rapes a child (she is also a pedophime) is unlikely to serve jail time.

Fair?

PartTimeParent@pobox.com