(December 10, 2013 at 10:51 am)davidMC1982 Wrote: And therein lies a perfect example of oversimplification of an issue. You've essentially said that it is only rape if she's incapacitated or said no. I think there are many cases outside of this that could be - and perhaps are - considered rape.Of course there are, but those cases probably wouldn't be difficult to determine consent on. For instance, if you threaten to kill me, I probably won't say no.
Quote:Does it consider where a woman (since everyone seems to be talking about women) puts herself in a situation she doesn't know how to get out of? Where things escalate and she feels powerless to object? Those cases may or may not be rape if it could be reasonably expected that a man could have recognised this.I've been in this situation. I have trouble with your language- of putting myself in a situation like that. It takes two people to get in a bad situation. I'll put the specifics of my situation on the table:
I willingly went home with a guy I met at a party, with the absolute intention of having sex. Once we got going, he became really aggressive and it was really not cool. I tried to slow him down- he was even hurting me a little (he bit me), but no dice, and I started to want to get the fuck out. I realized that if I DID say no at this point, there was a high probability that he would have forced me. So I just let him. It wasn't rape because I consented. But the only reason I consented was because I was pretty sure he would rape me if I didn't. So it WAS rape. Or wasn't it? I said "no" to several behaviors, and was ignored.
Did I put myself in the situation? Yes- but he was the one who was a fucking asshole who altered the situation from a consensual one to a nonconsensual one. I'm absolutely positive that he was not overlooking my fear- he liked it.
