If the other person in the sexual equation says "no" or pushes the partner away or something in that realm, and the pursuer of the sexual act:

a. badgers/talks them into going through with it;
b. threatens them into it somehow;
c. shames them;
d. all of the above or something verbal that I haven't thought of;

Do you consider that to be rape?

I was surprised at the amount of guys (18-45) who were totally appalled that it was considered as sexual assault. I was also pretty taken aback about how proud of themselves they were when talking about how awesome they were when they "broke down" the wills of these "weak women" and got some ass from them. That's the way that they see it. (and btw, the "aggressor" could be a girl, and a "victim" could be a man)

In fact, one guy likened the thing to being a great negotiator for a toaster or blender. Just cuz the chick is so shitty at negotiating is HER problem, not HIS!

I'm wondering how people here see this:

Is this rape, sexual assault, or just sour grapes over a contract dispute?

a and c - no not really because you can continue saying no and walk away.
If someone is threatening you - yes, I think that's rape. I don't think you should be afraid to walk away from sex.
I don't agree with a and c but I can't see it as rape as much as I see b as.

Do you know a lot of people who think the way the above-described guys do? Like they got one over on the girls they "broke down," so-to-speak?

No. I don't know anyone who has ever said anything like that to me. If they had, I think I would lose all respect for them.

I think there is definitely such a thing as rape by coercion. That is why NO is supposed to mean NO.

And I guess that I think that 'a' and 'c' could be made to feel like 'b,' even if there was no direct verbal threat made. I very much believe there is a kind of psychological violence that can be and is employed.

If a person in the equation doesn't want sex at all and has it imposed upon them by the other person, I definitely think of it as "rape by coercion", because if it isn't consensual the other person is being "violated", they aren't partaking willingly.

Isn't this similar to that syndrome where people who are abducted start to identify with their kidnappers? This sounds like the psychological/sexual equivalent of it. Patty Hearst, if I'm not mistaken, was coerced into having sex with her captors and over time convinced herself that the rape wasn't actually "rape" because in time she empathised with her kidnappers.

__________________

*Huggy Ragnarsson Is My Co-Pilot*

"coming up on kittyradio, an erotic thriller featuring Shannon Tweed..."

if the person has said no and was made to feel pressured yes, its rape.

if the person is drunk or on drugs and doesnt say no but wakes up and feels she (or he!)was raped, she was, as you are not legally allowed to have sex with someone if they are mentally or physiologically impaired.

__________________
the cave mouth shines
by pure force of will
i look down on the world
from the top of this lonesome hill
and you can run, and run some more
from here all the way to singapore
but i will carry you home in my teeth
-mountain goats

california legal definition of sexual assault

Reasonable Belief in Consent

Even where the accused uses force, the intercourse may not constitute rape. If, under the circumstances, the accused could reasonably have believed the victim was consenting, there is no forcible rape. This is unlikely when any significant force is used.

It is possible to have a case where the victim submits from fear, but the accused believes the victim consented. This can occur where the parties read "the signals" quite differently. Whether there is rape depends on whether the jury finds that a person in the accused's circumstances could "reasonably" have believed the other party consented. (e.g., Wm. Kennedy Smith trial)
Attempted Rape or Assault with Intent to Rape

When there is no sexual penetration, there is no rape; but there may be attempted rape or an assault with an intent to rape. Unlike rape, attempt or assault with intent are what the law calls "specific intent" crimes. This means that in order to find an accused guilty, the prosecutor must show the accused intended to have intercourse by force or threat of injury and against the will of the victim. Even if the accused unreasonably believes the victim is consenting, the accused does not have the intent necessary for the crime.
Statutory Definitions

Rape is an act of sexual intercourse carried out:

1. "against a person's will by means of force, violence, duress, menace, or fear of immediate and unlawful bodily injury on the person or another."
2. where the victim is unable to resist because of an intoxicating, narcotic, or anesthetic substance that the accused has responsibility for administering.
3. where the victim is unconscious of the nature of the act and the perpetrator knows it.
4. where the victim believes, due to the perpetrator's intentional deceptive acts, that the perpetrator is her spouse.
5. where the perpetrator threatens to retaliate against the victim or any other person, and there is a reasonable possibility the perpetrator will execute the threat -- "threatens to retaliate" means threatens to kidnap, imprison, inflict extreme pain, serious bodily injury, or death.
6. where the victim is incapable of giving consent, and the perpetrator reasonably should know this.
7. where the perpetrator threatens to use public authority to imprison, arrest, or deport the victim or another, and the victim reasonably believes the perpetrator is a public official.

Consent

advertisement

- Non-consented sexual intercourse is not necessarily rape in California. Where the victim is capable of consenting, but does not consent, and the perpetrator does not use force, violence, duress, menace, or induce in the victim a fear of "immediate and unlawful bodily injury," the intercourse does not constitute rape.

- Consent is a defense to a charge of forcible rape. In sex crime cases, California defines consent as "positive cooperation in act or attitude pursuant to an exercise of free will. "

- An accused's reasonable belief that the victim was consenting to an act of sexual intercourse is a defense to a charge of forcible rape.

- A person can commit forcible rape negligently. If the accused did not, but should have, realized that the victim was not consenting, but was submitting because of a perception of force or threat of injury, the accused is guilty of rape.

Resistance and Consent

- At common law, there was a requirement that to establish rape, the prosecution had to show that the victim resisted. California has abolished the resistance requirement as it placed victims in danger.

- While the law does not require proof of resistance, the lack of resistance is a fact that a jury can take into account in deciding whether the accused reasonably believed the intercourse was consensual.

- In most cases, where the accused uses force, violence, etc., or threat of immediate bodily injury, lack of resistance will not matter. Where there is no force, etc., or threat of injury, it may matter.
UNLAWFUL INTERCOURSE

Where a perpetrator, intending to induce a victim into fearing physical injury or death for herself or a relative, obtains consent through a false or fraudulent representation, he commits the crime of unlawful sexual intercourse. The representation must be such as would cause a reasonable person in like circumstances to consent.
EVIDENTIARY AND OTHER RULES

* Corroboration rule abolished.
* Cautionary instructions abolished.
* Psychiatric examinations of complaining witness not generally allowed.
* In general evidence of the complaining witness's prior sexual conduct is not admissible.

Exceptions:

* prior sexual contact with the defendant
* as rebuttal evidence if the prosecutor introduces such evidence
* where relevant to attack the credibility of the complaining witness (strict procedure, hearing out of presence of the jury, special findings required) -- prior sexual conduct generally is not relevant to the issue of whether the witness is to be believed, but in certain special cases it may be, e.g.., where the defense makes a creditable showing she has a reason to lie and that reason relates to her prior sexual conduct.

__________________
the cave mouth shines
by pure force of will
i look down on the world
from the top of this lonesome hill
and you can run, and run some more
from here all the way to singapore
but i will carry you home in my teeth
-mountain goats

i was almost roofied tonight. it was bad. i almost forgot the NEVER DRINK DRINKS FROM STRANGERS rule.

wait aren't you the lawyer? why are you asking us?

fkn boring thread

because I couldn't fkn believe how many people thought that talking someone into it just meant that the other party was just "weak" or that the one getting laid was just a better negotiator, it depressed me to hear how many girls and boys believed that, so I wanted to ask people here.

I know the answer, but it was more of a faith in human nature thing.

and dude...whether you were serious or not...NEVER EVER TAKE DRINKS FROM STRANGERS!! (or extremely creepy acquaintances)

My old lady words of wisdom for the week. Seriously. You kids have to be careful out there!! Even you Tigz...I don't want you to get hurt like THAT.

for real.

It only took DECADES for the law to recognize that if someone is intoxicated, they cannot give consent to have sex with anyone. It's pretty sickening that less than 20 years ago, the victim got blamed for getting intoxicated in the first place. Like drinking/getting high was an engraved invitation to be assaulted.

CONSENT is always the standard between sex and rape.

that was a serious thing. SUPER UBER creepy dude came with his friend "leroy" i'm not shitting you. & was like "heyyyy dranks?" i told him to get me a redbull. he came back with a vodka and redbull. which idk maybe he misheard me. but i took one sip and realized that probably isn't a good idea. well and that it was vodka and redbull and not just redbull. the water he got my friend also got thrown out. it was probably a mixture of too many beers & the shitty band playing but i felt really weird after that. and we were in Sparks which is just asking for bad news. i saw him later taking another lady home, so i think she needs to invest in a rape whistle.

WHAT?

TOOOT TOOOOT.

Ugh, I hate guys who say shit like that. It makes me want to gouge their eyes out.