Suseonline, "We still have a long way to go before rape is taken as seriously as it should be, and until that time, the laws will allow rapists out of jail to rape again"

That is as insulting to women as it is to men, and it is absolute rot!

You are cheap alright OTB...

As for the rubbish you just spouted, any bloke who rants and raves about everything in their lives being affected by 'feminists' must be throw backs from the 60's, never mind the 80's.

Still wearing the flares and the peace-sign shirts old boy?

Dear Suse,

In rape as in other aspects of human behaviour, the
conduct of the individual is influenced by the norms
of the surrounding society.

You've brought up some valid points.
In our modern society the sexual
relations of the sexes is marked one major cultural
feature relevant to rape: the tendency by
some men to view women as actual
or potential sexual property - that is, as sex objects.

A classic example of this tendency is the barrage of
whistles, catcalls, and obscene suggestions that often
assails a young woman walking past a group of male
construction workers. Since the likelihood that a woman
will respond favourably to this kind of attention is
approximately zero, the behaviour clearly serves some
other purposes. What it actually does is to allow
these men to bolster their own egos, to demonstrate their
"masculinity" to their peers, and to reassert the view
that the role of women is to gratify men. The woman's
feelings here are not at issue.

Then we have -defense lawyers who try to shift
the burden of guilt from the
accused to the victim. They may try to show that the
woman is "loose," implying that if she has consented to any
man before, she must have been willing on this occassion
also. Or, utilising the myth that women somehow enjoy
being raped, they may claim that the victim consciously
or subconsciously encouraged the assault. They may even
argue that she was provocatively dressed and was therefore
at fault - another example of the way in which responsibility
for the control of male advances is shifted to the female.

Such a line of defense is unique to the crime of rape -
a well-dressed man stepping from an expensive limo would
never be accused of thereby tempting someone to mug him.
Even this aspect of the act and its aftermath can be fully
understood only in terms of the overall patterns of
sexual inter-action in the society.

This is a complex issue and worthy of serious discussion.

Yes, that is exactly how it is Foxy, but you explain it so much better.

I didn't think I would ever lower myself to address OTB again, but I do feel strongly about this subject and get angry at some mindless morons on this forum.

I don't want to hear about the relatively few women who make up rape allegations, when the bulk of rapes against women are never even reported because of what they would go through during the trials, and the number of convictions are too low.

Do we have to wait until we have a 'serial rapist' before something is done?

It is a disgrace that women have to prove their innocence of the 'crime' of having ever had sex before in their lives prior to the rape, but that any previous sex crimes of the rapist are not allowed?

The laws need to change.

Now Suze, let's not get carried away with thoughts that accusation should be sufficient to condemn. Rape is an horrendous crime, and in my view treated far too leniently, and second only to murder (by a small margin); but to be incorrectly convicted of either charge would also be horrific - creating another form of severely traumatized victim.

It must be sorely hard on any rape victim (and perhaps particularly so for a female rape victim) to have to prove not only the crime and their own innocence of any 'provocation' or complicity, but also to be able to quite positively identify the actual perpetrator, by, in part at least, having to recount in detail the circumstances of the incident. (And I mean no demeaning of the crime by use of the term 'incident'.) However, the law must be just, or anyone can too easily become an unintended victim. I wish there were 100% reliable 'truth drugs' and/or lie detection mechanisms which could be utilised to streamline our legal system and reduce the onus and added burden on victims (and to 'speak' for murder victims), but unfortunately we only have 'trial', with all that this entails.

My assessment, and one reflected by many of the male posters on this thread, is that any decent man would consider rape to be totally outrageous and warranting the harshest of penalties. However, there are unfortunately (or actually disgustingly) still some men (and possibly women) who enjoy dog fights or the infliction of pain on any innocent, animal or human, and those who perpetrate 'date rape' - which appears far too common (and perhaps considered 'sport' by such demented deviants).
Would we could be easily rid of all 'vermin', but all we can really do is to be vigilant and endeavour to root out evil wherever it may be found by the best means at our disposal. A way to go? Yes. But undue haste may beget undue consequences.

Foxy, good on you.

OTB, I can't figure you out. Take a chill pill please.

Glad others find OTB so.
I actually know a still serving police officer.
A man of true kindness understanding and feeling, he told me about the offenders in two well know rape cases, their crime was a hate crime.
Last night news program gave an insight in to a victim and offender, that, clearly was a hate crime.
Those hate crimes against women shout a hate that is stunning.
Even I in posting this line and what follows feel I should not compare Catholic Child rape with this threads intended paths.
Why would I or most of us think like that?
Not a lessor crime maybe however in my question, to myself and you, I uncover a smelly and dirty truth.
Even normal people separate the crime of rape and find , WRONGLY some a lessor crime than others.
All rape, all release of dangerous criminals who offend or are likely to, is a crime against humanity.