I’m absolutely disgusted at some of the various newspaper readers’ comments in regards to the justice secretary’s words on rape and reform ideas. More so then at the justice secretary himself! Though i’ll be doing a separate post about that.
There’s one little gem in the Guardian, who has made him/herself judge and juror and goes on to give a verdict on what they believe constitutes rape. On every single example, a rape is only deemed a rape when ‘no’ is loudly given. If there’s no, or a quiet no, they call it as ‘not rape’ or ‘minor rape’. And they use the lovely term ‘rape rape’ because a lack on consent clearly has other names.
I’m absolutely furious. What gives this person the right to say ‘no means no, otherwise it’s not rape?’ I hope they are just ignorant and don’t live the way they talk. How would they like it if I knocked them out or intimidated them into keeping quiet, drugged them or suddenly just decided to beat the living shit out of them? Would it then be ‘minor assault’ or ‘not-assault’ despite the fact that I’ve committed the same crime? And that they are still a victim, regardless of circumstance?
I get that rape debate gets a lot of people het up, which it rightly should but why do you get one of two sets of idiots? Idiot set 1 that believe all rape accusations, or most, are false and go on about it in every post regarding rape rather than making it a separate debate? Why not talk about the issue at hand reasonably? Likewise idiot set 2, that believe men can’t be raped and insist men are not also victims of crime such as rape and domestic abuse?
Some crimes are worse than others in terms of the medias ‘belief’ in it and in terms of trauma to the citim, of course someone being gangraped will get a higherprofile then an individual case but judging and saying ‘well she’s been raped by 6 men and she by only 1’ doesn’t mean the crime is any less serious for the one raped by one alone. The trauma to the victim may well be different, but that will change person to person circumstance to circumstance, however the crime of rape will still have been commited. It may just be in case A, there’s violence and assault to add to the prosecuting and in case B, the vctim may have been unconcious and so assault cannot be charged. Doesn’t mean the charge of rape is any the less.
Yes means yes, if you don’t have a loud, resounding, willingly given yes then whether you are male, female, young, old, straight, gay, rich, poor, guess what? You’re a rapist.*
*Please no pathetic derailing with whining over ‘but my partner wakes me up with surprise sex all the time and it’s not rape’ you have that understanding, then that’s great. But guess what? You’ve given consent. And not everyone would so don’t assume everyone is the same as you and would consent. You make an ass out of yourself.