|
Honsoku -> RE: Tennessee Senator "rape just isn’t what it used to be" .What a jerk! (2/17/2008 8:02:42 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan
Honsoku, I'm aware of how the male anatomy works, I've been intimate with quite a few prostates, and I do get your point.
I was fairly certain you knew about prostate stimulation, so I was a bit puzzled (really, I was thinking "No, she can't mean that"). I only brought that up as I wasn't sure what you meant by "penetrative sex". If that it wasn't penetrative sex because no sexual penetration occurred on the part of the male, or that a male was physically incapable of penetrating another against his will.
quote:
I'm referring specifically to the laws regarding what constitutes penetrative sex. It's interesting that the definitions of rape have been altered to allow for prosecutions in some states in the US. We (the public at large) know that women can be sexually aggressive and there are some cases where women have been convicted of unlawful sexual assault (rape in Oklahoma). I have yet to see a case (in the UK) where a woman was actually convicted of rape and I am unaware of any changes in rape laws in the UK.
Oklahoma is an exception, why do you think that the definition of rape (generally) has been so restrictive?
Oy, that's a subject and a half. I’m going to skim it a bit here and there.
The reason rape is generally defined so narrowly is because historically we have defined sex and gender roles very narrowly and the law is slow to catch up. There are two components to rape; sex and power.
For a long time, sex was just considered male-to-female vaginal intercourse. Anything else was considered "unnatural". Thusly, other acts weren't considered sex, but crimes against nature. These laws went on the books while countries were still beholden to various incarnations of the church and it’s followers, who were none too friendly towards any sexual act that couldn’t yield offspring. Since rape is forced sex, only what is defined as sex can be part of the definition of rape. This narrows the range of acts that would be considered rape if forced.
Until very recently, the gender roles in the western world was marked by two constant themes. Women had little power and perceived to have no sexuality.
Without power, there can't be a rape. So it was extremely difficult for a woman to even commit rape, because they lacked the physical and social power to do so. Not that it didn't happen. When it did happen, it was mostly through coercion, deceit, or aimed at UMs. This was largely ignored because all women were supposed to be sweet, innocent, motherly, and virginal (how's that for a contradiction). If a woman expressed sexual desire, something was wrong with her. So the concept of female crime, especially sexual crime, just didn't fit. Men were supposed to be the only sexual aggressors. Women were supposed to be passive and uninterested in sex. To acknowledge women could commit a sexual crime would be tantamount to acknowledging they had sexuality and power, which would challenge the social fabric of western culture.
The squelching of female sexuality was part of the effort to keep women without power. A person that does not understand or feels guilty about their own wants and needs, is easier to control. To be able to express wants and needs is a starting point for seeking power. So if a woman has no power and no sexuality, it is conceptually impossible for a woman to commit rape or have any complicity in a sexual encounter. This sets the tone for men caring the full burden when it comes to responsibility for sexual acts. Men now had the power to define the context of rape, so naturally it was defined in a manner most advantageous to their own wants and desires.
In short; our definitions of rape are so constrained because of gender and culture power plays taking as much power as possible from the others involved. Religion took as much sexuality as it could from men and women, (thus restricting what "sex" was) while men took as much power as possible from women (thus defining the context of rape). Our definition of rape still reflects that state to a large degree, as the law and cultural beliefs always lags behind changes in culture. As women have been gaining in social power, and wider definitions of sex are becoming more widespread and accepted, our concepts of what constitutes rape has been changing as well. As these shifts didn’t really start changing until fairly recently, there is still a lot of cultural and legal inertia to overcome. A lot of the friction from that lag has been seen on this thread.
|
|
|
|
