• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Caitlin Moran: Men, let's talk about rape

I apologize i had to delete some of your post to be under the character limit.



Any able bodied person anywhere can rape someone else. It is within our capacity as humans to do it. All it requires is sex without consent.

Most people understand already that rape is wrong even people who commit the act. So the education is complete. Where we need to focus what causes people to do it regardless of knowing is wrong. Let's treat it just like any other crime of violence.

Take for example murder if you commit murder but you don't think it's wrong you're mentally ill. I would say the same thing about raping women children or even other men.

If you know it's wrong but do it anyway, that expresses intent. Are people committing rape because it's wrong? Or has the desire simply exceeded the point where you care about laws?

I find this article and your position to be an assumption that male sexuality is the problem. I disagree it isn't a 99% of men. It is either the lack of self-control or is the idea of doing something wrong is titillated.

But absolutely all able-bodied people are capable of rape.

The problem with rape as a category of crime is that by definition it requires evidence that the complainant did not consent.

In general, if someone otherwise gets physically assaulted or even murdered then it is a reasonable assumption that they did not formally or informally consent to that so the premise of the charge against the criminal is accepted and we do not even question if someone who was kicked in the face in the street, for example, consented to that. In the case of some of the more out there sexual practices I have heard of, I could see that where a death does occur from an act that may well have been consented to but, it cannot be shown to have been given, then it could get more difficult. It is an assumption in all instances but, in the case of rape it has to be established that consent or lack of is a reasonable assumption and therein lies the problem. As I see it, some, maybe many, women appear to want a lack of consent to be presumed in an instance where consent is the crux of the crime. It simply is not reasonable to try to remove nuance from the criminal proceedings in this kind of case and turn it into the antithesis of our normal legal system where innocence is presumed.

What I believe that Caitlin is trying to do is to make a case for that legal presumption by making unjustified claims that characterise all men as potential rapists that are just waiting for their opportunity. It is also a fallacious distortion of the general perception of male sexual promiscuity being extended to an illogical conclusion along the lines of, 'men are always up for it and trying to initiate it' which is sexist in itself since the general basis of this is that women cannot be sexual entities without a man. No matter what rhetoric they come out with, this fundamental legal problem will remain; cranking that rhetoric up and making the system more sympathetic to dealing with such cases must not change this.

This is where I will once again get lambasted for victim blaming but, while there is no excuse for rape, there are ways for both men and women to be socially defensive. It will kill traditional notions of romance but, in my opinion that is a good thing, I dislike that stupid game for many reasons anyway.
 
I seriously doubt consequences are on the mind of the perpetrators in the moment they decided to act. If it was this would be an excellent argument for the death penalty.

Deterrence would never be my main argument against the DP, but I see your point. Then again, we are talking about rape, I think applying the DP for rape is not common.
 
Deterrence would never be my main argument against the DP, but I see your point. Then again, we are talking about rape, I think applying the DP for rape is not common.

Well I'd say getting caught is never a deterrent. All that really does is keep honest people honest.
 
Back
Top Bottom