North Carolina's Shocking Legal Rape Law

reply to post by Brood

Even if it's not the case, does this kid deserve to be locked up for up to 15 years? The sex was consensual, he did not deny the woman her right to choose her sexual partner, she already decided it was okay to have sex with him. When she experienced the pain of the "first time", she told him "No, no, no!" Now, this kid's sexual experience is most likely limitted to online porn, what does it mean in porn when they say "No, no, no!"? This could be very confusing for this teen, and its unfortunate that he's facing such serious charges and being compared to people who snatch women off of the street and have their way with them before beating them and throwing them on the curb.

This case makes a mockery of the term "rape"; real victims of rape should be ashamed of the way people to respond to this incidence as rape, because they have had to deal with infinitely more than this girl.

What kind of tripe is this? "Even if it's not the case does this kid deserve etc" My answer would be yes, he does deserve to be locked up. The ability to reason is the only thing that separates us from animals.

If someone says NO....Then it means just that! NO!

As far as "real victims of rape should be ashamed of how this incident could be compared to a "real" rape.
Speaking as a survivor of rape, I can tell you there is NO shame in anyone saying NO! There is no little rape!!
Rape is rape! It is not about porn or a fantasy or wild passionate rough sex. Rape is about violence!! There is nothing more terrifying than having no control over your own body. It is a situation where one is made to feel absolutely powerless and at the mercer of the attacker.

To say that the entire experience wouldn't leave one severely traumatized is an understatement. I was 24 when I was attacked in my own bedroom. To think this child is only 17 and will have to deal with this for the rest of her life sickens and saddens me. The layers of emotion that a person must work through to comprehend how another human being could violate someone, in such a inhuman way is something you work on for the rest of your life. Rape is a game changer! You never get over it, it changes who you are but you learn over time to get through it.

I pray she has the support she needs.

Pax

reply to post by hotbakedtater


I think that even if consent was given the first place, if the woman (or man) became uncomfortable further into it, and asked to stop, that that should be respected. If someone kept going without considering the other person's feelings, and that they didn't want to be having sex anymore, I think that that should still be considered a violation, and therefore rape. Like, why can't the guy just get over it for a second and actually respect the person he's with? Someone with good intentions wouldn't keep going, after their partner told them that they were in pain/didn't want to have sex anymore. So I think that it should be considered rape, cause it shouldn't happen, anyway, so why pardon it?

As a man, if I started having sex with a woman and then I started to experience extreme pain in my genital region I would want to stop immediately. I would consider it rape if the woman wrapped her legs around me and forced me to continue.

It's just like the sort of thing where you tare with your child or little cousin or other small child (not like that!) and you play 'airplane' and pick the child up and start spinning them around. They might be ok with it at first, but you've got to put them down once they feel nauseous or start getting scared.

Originally posted by mnemeth1
I'm not sure if this has been covered already but there are good reasons for this law.

1. Unless there is a witness present (which obviously is unlikely), consensual physical penetration negates any physical evidence that can be brought forth by the prosecution.

There's quite a significant difference actually and there are things that can be taken into account physically. If a woman stops giving consent, there can be quite a bit of tell tale bruising from non-consensual sex.

2. Consenting to be penetrated automatically puts the case into a "he said, she said" neutral state with neither side being able to present any compelling evidence to the contrary.

Well, in this case there is a contest over whether or not she consented in the first place as well. However, there

While I obviously think that a woman has the right to withdraw consent at any moment, what must be considered is what can be PROVEN in a court.

Consensual penetration removes the ability of the prosecutor to prove anything.

-vaginal tearing
-broken hymen
-presence of semen
-bruising

would all be expected - and obviously there would be no torn clothing and any other DNA obtained could be expected to be there.

I'm sorry, but there is actually a significant way to judge the presence of struggle in intercourse.
And then all a date rapist would need to say is "She said she wanted it and wanted it rough"
There are plenty of instances of date rape where a woman consents to some form of sexual practice and is then forced into vaginal penetration. In that case the 'he said she said' gets pushed back to 'did she consent' because you can always claim the victim consented even if she claims she didn't.

There's no way to prove that the entire episode wasn't consensual other than some video/audio tape or witness saying otherwise.

The problem is that it's impossible to tell either way, as the majority of rape cases go unreported because the victims feel like they'd be thrown into a 'he said, she said' discussion.

I agree that it is a very complicated issue and this does complicate things further, but there will always be a level of 'he said she said' in issues of rape.

This is a very tough issue and raises the question of what constitutes rape. Personally I can see both sides. I mean a woman has a right to stop at any time, but on the other hand some men perhaps aren't capable of stopping halfway through the act.

"Sorry ma'am, youre not allowed to stop having sex unless the guy wants to".

Originally posted by gladtobehere
"Sorry ma'am, youre not allowed to stop having sex unless the guy wants to".

You mean, "Sorry, Sir, your daughter's alleged rape can never be proven in a court of law when there is no evidence to support that the rape was not consensual and the defendant claims that she never withdrew consent. Lying to your father to protect your portrayal of your sexual innocence is most definitely a reasonable doubt, and the court will not be bullied by society's idea that everything with a penis is a potential rapist; this State Law denies this witch hunt, get over it. I now release this issue to an online conspiracy forum where the members can demonize the young man involved in this and uphold the young woman as a martyr with no evidence".

Penis? Guilty. The modern witch hunt condemns 50% of the population, what say you?

reply to post by hotbakedtater

Sorry but what part of 'NO' doesn't the man understand?

Oh I KNOW! Because it isn't happening to HIM!

So let's do it this way.

She wants to use a strap on device.
He's thinking, ya know, kind of erotic when all's said and done.
After a few brewskys he agrees.
Half way through penetration he's screaming NO! STOP! IT HURTS!
She, overcome (no pun intended) is within a second of 'completing her mission' and rams it home for her three screamer 'finish'.

Has he been raped?

You bet he has.

Now turn it around.

No more gray area.

peace

I have been to numerous womens' self-defense seminars. One of the things they teach you is that it is the woman's choice, if she feels threatened with physical harm, to fight back or to comply. In other words, she can comply peacefully with the rapist's demands in order to survive/avoid being bashed to bits, if she feels like that is the best way out of the situation. In such a case, she might even appear to give "consent", since she chose not to fight. Does that mean it's not rape?

This pisses me off.