[Cipher]

Note: This discussion does not concern statutory rape at all. Statutory rape isn't "rape". As Maxim Litvinov discerned this thread is about non-consensual sex.

[PBVBROOK]

Note: This discussion does not concern statutory rape at all. Statutory rape isn't "rape". As Maxim Litvinov discerned this thread is about non-consensual sex.

Don't tell me that tell the others who were throwing around silly statistics.

For your information, statutory rape is considered non-consensual sex. The law is predicated on the notion that some people are unable to give consent. A person who is intoxicated is presumed to be unable to give consent. Likewise drugged or suffering from mental problems. All assumed to non-consensual.

If you wish to discuss only the men who were overpowered by a women (or more than one woman) and raped you are looking for the proverbial needle in a hay stack. It is a vanishingly rare occurance. In my many years as a reporter, reading the police blotters frequently if not daily, I have never seen a case.

I am afraid you are chasing a phantom. Though there are cases on the books they really don't warrent mentioning. For all practical purposes, the idea of a woman abducting a man and forcing him to have sex is a practical absurdity.

[hannu]

"For all practical purposes, the idea of a woman abducting a man and forcing him to have sex is a practical absurdity. "

Can't say fairer than that.

I'm struggling to understand how any man could be forced to obtain & maintain an erection whilst being forced to have intercourse with a female rapist?

[Decky]

Why shouldn't the rape centres already existing also cater to men? You don't need a whole new centre just for men.

Most of those centers are full of women who will feel edgy about staying with strange men.

[Cipher]

Well sure Decky but they could have separate areas. I don't know, Anyway.

PBVBROOK

Alright I wasn't aiming it at you. I'm just trying to keep the discussion on-topic.

Also I'm not talking about what "The Law" decides. I'm talking about when somebody actually says "No, stop I don't want to have sex.". Not when the law says a 15 year old can't decide for themselves.

[Zyx]

If a drunk woman tells you to 'fuck her' while she's drunk, and you do, is this really rape?

In my youth, my mother told her children not to ask her for anything while she sleeped. I hope this answers your question.

Couldn't someone less than smart claim to have been 'raped' because his-her partner was intellectually stronger than them?

Of course not QatzelOK; why do not I just purchase a 14 year old girl, raise her as my daughter until she is 18 and sex her day and night according to the training I designed her to. Sir, taking advantage of people, excercising power over others, this is rape! It is a fool who would reason that this behavior is "willing."

My, my; did you know that Slaves would debate one another that their "masters" were better than another's? Would you sit there and tell us that Slavery was justified on the opinions of these Slaves? Get real!

Perhaps it is just the modern Americans desire to belong to a group of victims and to at the same time avoid personal responsibility.

PBRVBROOK you are a kinder person than this I am sure. If you disapprove of women having "fun" publically non-sexually than I do not see you can approve of women being a people. Tell me this, if a man managed to sex you while you were inebriated would you shut up and respect the outcome? I do not drink, but even I would protect your right to not be raped because you are drunk!

Kumato. I dispute the figure 20% of rapes are perpetrated by women. The notion is absurd.

You did a poor job considering that you did not put forward any evidence; but, you are right . . . women account for 2-3% according to this website:

[url=http://www.aest.org.uk/survivors/male/myths_about_male_rape.htm[/url]

According to a "government forwarded study" 14% (small test case--I only searched the word "female" on this page and read the surrounding statements--not really THAT interested.)

[url=http://www.azrapeprevention.org/summaries/male_rape.html[/url]

I do not apologize for the mistaken percentage mostly because I come across statistics a lot and well could not remember it; my mention of the statistics were atleast to not have a discussion "out the ass." The first link provides some interesting reality and myths . . . I would advise someone who reads through it to copy and paste . . . I have the time now . . . but would rather people looked at the link than be the only person to glance at it.

Also PBVBROOK the statistics you put forward were not eye openers . . . I am sort of a feminist. :-p

Why shouldn't the rape centres already existing also cater to men? You don't need a whole new centre just for men.

It is a secret center; secret locations and what not for the protection of victims . . . remember that these people flee!

Nonsense. Actually most rapes are consensual. Perhaps there is a difference in our national laws. The majority of prosecuted rapes are betweeen an underage girl who consents to sex and a man over the age of consent.

The majority of "prosecuted" rapes, that you mean, does not shed light on the majority of "rapes."

Note: This discussion does not concern statutory rape at all. Statutory rape isn't "rape". As Maxim Litvinov discerned this thread is about non-consensual sex.

. . . huh?

---

It turns out that I am not allowed to copy and paste from the .org website; even so, women can use vibrators on men!

[PBVBROOK]

Also I'm not talking about what "The Law" decides. I'm talking about when somebody actually says "No, stop I don't want to have sex.". Not when the law says a 15 year old can't decide for themselves.

Well that makes it even more rare. Look at the situation you propose. A man is with a woman. He says "No. stop I don't want to have sex." What happens then? Does the woman press for sex and the guy finally agree? That is not rape in any form. Does the guy resist and the woman physically force him to perform sex? That, my friend, is a scenario that is so rare that it can just almost be said not to exist. You see what I mean here?

I think that we can almost say that the concept of male forcible rape by a female is a feminist myth. It it not unknown but in the real world it could be said, for all practical purposes, not to exist.

So what do you want to discuss? Give us a scenario in which a woman could expect to be able to rape a man. A scenario that does not fall in one of the definitions of a status offense. You said you are deliberately trying to avoid these legal distinctions. Give us your scentario? WHat is the situation that you imagine?

[Cipher]

. . . huh?

Kumatto I thought that was fairly straight-forward

PBVBROOK

Well I doubt in the case of a male being raped by a female that he would have chosen to get into an intimate situation. Unlike a man raping a woman could be a partner forcing her to go further than she planned. However I think perhaps the case of an ex or perhaps a woman whom has been humiliated by the male. As rape is generally not based on sexual gratification.

Of course that does theoretically leave the possibility of a rejected woman. Not that I think that is likely either.

However while a woman physically forcing a man to perform sex is indeed rare, I said in my OP that cases of intoxication also are to be included. I think it is likely in this rape that either a sedative drug or some form or restraint would likely be necessary.

This wasn't meant to get so involved in the practicality of a woman raping a man. But over the laws and punishments given for non-statutory female-on-male rape. Assuming Wikipedia isn't completely off (and yes sometimes that is a pretty big assumption):

"Nor is there any national standard in the US for defining and reporting male-male or female-perpetrated rapes. More than half the states use traditional sex-specific rape law, limited to male perpetration against females."

As well as

"In addition, many states define sexual crimes other than male-on-female penetration as sexual assault rather than rape. There are no national standards for defining and reporting male-on-male, female-on-female or female-on-male offenses, so such crimes are generally not included in rape statistics unless these statistics are compiled using information from states which count them as rape."

This was also my understanding of the situation.

I suppose I should of just said that the male wouldn't of consented, since looking back it does seem like I meant that they were already being consensually intimate.