Man in UK jailed for "rape" for poking hole in condom - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Crime and prevention thereof. Loopholes, grey areas and the letter of the law.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15128725
I agree that this is rape.
Rape is not about the physical violence. Objectively a rape victim might end up with far less "physical damage" than someone that got beaten up... In some cases the actual physical damage is minimal (and no.. I'm not minimizing the seriousness of rape I happen to see rape as unfavorably as murder in many cases). I see it as the main issue being akin psychological torture. Not only the feeling of hopelessness and lack of control during the act itself, but in almost all cases the effects far outlast the initial insult.
Society has a special place for sexual acts. Do I think there is an objective reason why this should be the case? Not really.
I think for millenia, humans have used rape to "damage the goods" (the good beings, wives and daughters of those fallen in conquest) and obviously considering women as "goods" is barbaric, but that does not mean that the stigma of being raped is not real or that the act itself is not about control.
I do realize that consensual sex in which 1 person sneaks a hole in the condom might not carry the same visceral reaction in many of us but it is a very similar act to violent rape.
#15128755
I think "rape" requires sexual violation.
What happened here was not really sexual violation, but reproductive violation.

Or maybe if you want to say bodily violation. Even though it was "sexual" in nature, it cannot be sexual violation because she consented to the sex component of it.


The condom could have failed on its own, and then what? The woman did know she was assuming some risk when she entered into the arrangement.
#15128759
Puffer Fish wrote:I think "rape" requires sexual violation.
What happened here was not really sexual violation, but reproductive violation.

It quite literally was a sexual violation. Sex occurs at a cellular level.

The condom could have failed on its own, and then what? The woman did know she was assuming some risk when she entered into the arrangement.

Too bad for the guy. Maybe he should just have tried really hard to "unintentionally" break it by natural means :lol: .
The charges (and punishment) for running someone with your car on purpose (murder) are not the same as if you are just careless (manslaugther) or a complete accident (you might walk free with/without fine).
I don't see why the same would not apply in here... The real question is whether you can prove if breaking the condom was intentional.
Besides... what kind of fucking asshole tries to impregnate a woman that does not want a child with him? I feel zero sympathies for this guy. :knife:
#15128761
Unthinking Majority wrote:Poking holes in condoms is rape or sexual assault, and so is lying to your guy saying you took the pill but didn't.

Well that is an interesting point.
I think this is wrong as well, although I don't know to what degree as compared to the oposite. The consequences for the man are not nearly the same as for a woman who at the very least would be staring at some sort of abortion vs delivery of unwanted child.

To what degree do you own your genetic material? Clearly only a miniscule (in the order of 1 in a trillion or less!) amount of that genetic material ever gets used, so as a general rule the vast majority of what you produce is just waste. Is it stealing if you are "stealing" someone else's "garbage"?
On the other hand this can lead to the same kind of violation of trust that we saw on the previous case... so it is clearly a serious matter, I am just uncertain is given the degree of difference between the consequences for a male vs a female if this situation should be on par.
#15128913
XogGyux wrote:Well that is an interesting point.
I think this is wrong as well, although I don't know to what degree as compared to the oposite. The consequences for the man are not nearly the same as for a woman who at the very least would be staring at some sort of abortion vs delivery of unwanted child.

To what degree do you own your genetic material? Clearly only a miniscule (in the order of 1 in a trillion or less!) amount of that genetic material ever gets used, so as a general rule the vast majority of what you produce is just waste. Is it stealing if you are "stealing" someone else's "garbage"?
On the other hand this can lead to the same kind of violation of trust that we saw on the previous case... so it is clearly a serious matter, I am just uncertain is given the degree of difference between the consequences for a male vs a female if this situation should be on par.


Obviously the woman pays a much bigger price, but it's still wrong and both should be illegal

I know the big five, the factor model of personal[…]

Election 2020

@ingliz I find these clips in black and white of[…]

November 26, Wednesday President Lincoln goes d[…]

I did say that he governed like a 4chan troll once[…]