Belfast rape trial - all 4 found not guilty Mod Note post one

DavidLyons_ · 09-04-2018 02:37PM

Faugheen wrote: »

Just like a lot of people here seems to have an unhealthy opposition against the idea of telling men not to rape.

Oh, and having no legitimate answer when challenged.

I bid you all good day.

Hahaha. Yeah, good man. You sure showed everyone and had the last word.

ShowMeTheCash · 09-04-2018 02:40PM

Faugheen wrote: »

Just like a lot of people here seems to have an unhealthy opposition against the idea of telling men not to rape.

Oh, and having no legitimate answer when challenged.

I bid you all good day.

The challenged? :rolleyes:

In order to challenge let me ask you to explain what you mean?

When or how will men be told "not to rape" explain the roll out of this concept? When will this happen? What would the implementation of this look like?

To challenge an argument you first need to have an argument.....

ProfessorPlum · 09-04-2018 02:48PM

Faugheen wrote: »

Because there's a number of men who just don't get it.

The majority of rape cases involve women who were raped by men known to them. Most rape cases don't involve some deranged fool just targeting a random woman for the sake of it.

I'm not labouring a moot point. If you think there's something wrong with the idea of telling men not to rape then that's your problem. Just because the likes of you or me get it doesn't mean everyone does.

This thread - and the case in question - has turned into a car crash of pitting the sexes against each other. All that can come of it is pushing the people on either extreme of the argument further into their corners - and that does nobody any good.

Interesting statistics in this article. I think there’s a lot more gray in the ‘rape by someone you know’ cases than we might think.

http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/

How could that be? After all, very few men in the CDC study were classified as victims of rape: 1.7 percent in their lifetime, and too few for a reliable estimate in the past year. But these numbers refer only to men who have been forced into anal sex or made to perform oral sex on another male. Nearly 7 percent of men, however, reported that at some point in their lives, they were “made to penetrate” another person—usually in reference to vaginal intercourse, receiving oral sex, or performing oral sex on a woman. This was not classified as rape, but as “other sexual violence.”

And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).

In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape—and why shouldn’t it be?—then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.

BoatMad · 09-04-2018 02:52PM

I think the notion of telling men not to rape is rather farcical, Every ordinary man knows that rape is not acceptable, a minority that dont are hardly going to listen to such a message, so in reality its preaching to the converted

Consent is an enormously complicated topic, primarily because relationships are not progressed by way of legal agreement

Maxpfizer · 09-04-2018 02:59PM

Faugheen wrote: »

Just like a lot of people here seems to have an unhealthy opposition against the idea of telling men not to rape.

Oh, and having no legitimate answer when challenged.

I bid you all good day.

I am not opposed to it at all. I am curious about how it would all work though.

I need legitimate answers myself.

How do you reaffirm this commitment to not rape people? Are you constantly reminding yourself to not do it or is it like a New Years resolution or something?

How zealously should men like you pursue this idea of telling other men not to rape?

Do you say it to every man you see or just some men or what? How often should I tell a man not to rape, in your opinion?

You'd be kind of wasting my time by telling me not to rape. I already would never do that. Are you saying it's not a waste of time?

Actually, it's such an obviously terrible thing to do I'd feel like you were being a bit patronising if you told me not to do it. How would you respond to that?

goz83 · 09-04-2018 03:07PM

BBDBB wrote: »

Where will it all end?

Can someone help me create the following App

Swipe left for "yes", right for "no" and "down" if you wish to download a legal indemnity form for you to complete if you think you might get lucky on a first date.
Copies will be sent to you, your potential partner and her legal representation.
Please note copies will also be sent to your local Gards and your local TD for their views and may be retained on file as evidence in any future prosecution.

I got there before ya with the "iConsent" App I mentioned in the thread. Maybe we can work together?

jm08 · 09-04-2018 03:08PM

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

This thread - and the case in question - has turned into a car crash of pitting the sexes against each other. All that can come of it is pushing the people on either extreme of the argument further into their corners - and that does nobody any good.

Interesting statistics in this article. I think there’s a lot more gray in the ‘rape by someone you know’ cases than we might think.

http://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/

How could that be? After all, very few men in the CDC study were classified as victims of rape: 1.7 percent in their lifetime, and too few for a reliable estimate in the past year. But these numbers refer only to men who have been forced into anal sex or made to perform oral sex on another male. Nearly 7 percent of men, however, reported that at some point in their lives, they were “made to penetrate” another person—usually in reference to vaginal intercourse, receiving oral sex, or performing oral sex on a woman. This was not classified as rape, but as “other sexual violence.”

And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).

In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape—and why shouldn’t it be?—then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.

If you read the article fully they explain that ''physical coercian of women is more prevalent' whereas ''due to intoxication' was more prevalent for men.

On the other hand, most of us would agree that to equate a victim of violent rape and a man who engages in a drunken sexual act he wouldn’t have chosen when sober is to trivialize a terrible crime. It is safe to assume that the vast majority of the CDC’s male respondents who were “made to penetrate” someone would not call themselves rape victims—and with good reason.

The article goes on to say:

We must either start treating sexual assault as a gender-neutral issue or stop using the CDC’s inflated statistics. Few would deny that sex crimes in America are a real, serious, and tragic problem. But studies of sexual violence should use accurate and clear definitions of rape and sexual assault, rather than lump these criminal acts together with a wide range of unsavory but non-criminal scenarios of men—and women—behaving badly.

Grayson · 09-04-2018 03:10PM

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

Why shouldn't we tell men not to rape?? You claim you are a man, did you need to be told not to do it? If so I think you should seek professional help.

It is amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit. That is universally accepted.

What the bloody hell are you on about? You are labouring an absolute moot point.

Universally accepted? Where do you get that from? Marital rape wasn't a crime until recently and there's still many that feel a man has a right to sex in a marriage. There's politicians that talk about "legitimate rape". It's been used as a weapon of war in every country on the planet and is still being used in some.
In the bible it's condoned under many circumstances.

Really, where do you get universally from?

DavidLyons_ · 09-04-2018 03:33PM

Grayson wrote: »

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

Why shouldn't we tell men not to rape?? You claim you are a man, did you need to be told not to do it? If so I think you should seek professional help.

It is amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit. That is universally accepted.

What the bloody hell are you on about? You are labouring an absolute moot point.

Universally accepted? Where do you get that from? Marital rape wasn't a crime until recently and there's still many that feel a man has a right to sex in a marriage. There's politicians that talk about "legitimate rape". It's been used as a weapon of war in every country on the planet and is still being used in some.
In the bible it's condoned under many circumstances.

Really, where do you get universally from?

Hahaha. Yeah, okay.

It is universally accepted that "it is amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit". Is it not??

By Jaysus, I have been misinformed my entire life.

I'd have thought that would also be a reason why it might also have been used as a "weapon of war".

As for the bible comment. Oh dear.

But yeah. I bow to your obvious superior knowledge. It is not universally accepted that rape is "amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit".:rolleyes:

blanch152 · 09-04-2018 03:39PM

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

Hahaha. Yeah, okay.

It is universally accepted that "it is amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit". Is it not??

By Jaysus, I have been misinformed my entire life.

I'd have thought that would also be a reason why it might also have been used as a "weapon of war".

As for the bible comment. Oh dear.

But yeah. I bow to your obvious superior knowledge. It is not universally accepted that rape is "amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit".:rolleyes:

His point was correct. One of the problems is that rape hasn't been universally viewed as among the most reviled and disgusting crimes. If it had, we wouldn't have a situation where some (in my opinion, mistakenly) believe we live in a "rape culture".

Grayson · 09-04-2018 03:46PM

tretorn wrote: »

The wrong end was picked.

A man who was in a committed relationship said he sometime tries his luck early in the morning.

His partner either says yes or no, if its no she turns away and growls, he doesnt force the issue and both parties are happy. Maybe the wife hates sex so much she would prefer to be comatose and as long as Husband is happy he doesnt care whether she is awake or asleep either.

Faugheen thinks he should have a say in this and in fact the Gardai should be notified because this is a CRIME. The poor man who mentioned he tries his luck was harassed on this thread, faugheen got so worked up about someone elses love life he practically said this man was a rapist.

For all we know faugheen may have reported the "CRIME" to the authorities and someone in the vice unit is monitoring this thread.

I may have to take on the Florence in nightingale role in order to prevent arrests.

You do realise that you don't need to penetrate a woman to try your luck? And you're making it sound like his civil rights are being infringed because he should confirm before penetration. Like it's his God given right to shove it in whenever he wants.
It doesn't matter if he's married to her or not, penetrating a woman without her permission is rape. That's the very definition of rape. And it's a crime.
It's up to the woman to report him but if she does then he should go to jail. If she feels that it's acceptable behaviour and she's not going to report him then it's her decision. Also she could have said beforehand that she finds it acceptable in which case he has already been given consent.

However, should she have told him before that the behaviour is unacceptable or should be assume it is without confirming first then the word rape can be used.

Edit: and to add, even without penetration it could be sexual assault if the woman has said beforehand that it's not acceptable.

Grayson · 09-04-2018 03:49PM

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

Hahaha. Yeah, okay.

It is universally accepted that "it is amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit". Is it not??

By Jaysus, I have been misinformed my entire life.

I'd have thought that would also be a reason why it might also have been used as a "weapon of war".

As for the bible comment. Oh dear.

But yeah. I bow to your obvious superior knowledge. It is not universally accepted that rape is "amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit".:rolleyes:

try and answer my question. How is it universally accepted? Universally accepted implies that in all cultures, in all times, that rape has been reviled.

The fact is that it has been considered perfectly acceptable by many cultures at various times.

Remember, you're the one that said it's a universally accepted fact. That's about as broad and sweeping statement as is possible to make. I'm asking you to back it up.

DavidLyons_ · 09-04-2018 03:57PM

Grayson wrote: »

DavidLyons_ wrote: »

Hahaha. Yeah, okay.

It is universally accepted that "it is amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit". Is it not??

By Jaysus, I have been misinformed my entire life.

I'd have thought that would also be a reason why it might also have been used as a "weapon of war".

As for the bible comment. Oh dear.

But yeah. I bow to your obvious superior knowledge. It is not universally accepted that rape is "amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit".:rolleyes:

try and answer my question. How is it universally accepted? Universally accepted implies that in all cultures, in all times, that rape has been reviled.

The fact is that it has been considered perfectly acceptable by many cultures at various times.

Remember, you're the one that said it's a universally accepted fact. That's about as broad and sweeping statement as is possible to make. I'm asking you to back it up.

Deary me. In context, my reply was to a poster stubbornly insisting that all Irish men need to be told not to rape. My point, as if it's not clear to you, is that it is universally accepted (and for clarity) in Irish society that rape is "amongst the most reviled and disgusting crimes a person can commit", so no need for such measures. Context, dear boy.

You're struggling to understand and trying way too hard to be contrarian. I won't be explaining it to you again.

Of course you're perfectly entitled to believe it isn't that serious a crime if you so wish. I would just disagree with that.

tritium · 09-04-2018 04:02PM

jm08 wrote: »

If you read the article fully they explain that ''physical coercian of women is more prevalent' whereas ''due to intoxication' was more prevalent for men.

The article goes on to say:

I’ve read that article quite thoroughly - I actually linked to the same article earlier in this thread. You’re correct that there are different mechanisms by which women and men usually carry out what might be termed ‘rapey acts’. However at present there is no distinction that one is rape and the other isn’t between the two mechanisms. The way we choose to address that goes to the heart of how we consider and prosecute this crime.

Certainly the cdc approach of renaming it and hiding it in the appendices isn’t ideal. The us college approach of assuming the male is to blame even when they’re the one who was taken advantage of/ the female party initiated activity is also clearly not ideal.

I see two extremes of choices. Either we accept that all such acts are rape and therefore change our mindset as to what a rapist looks like to something that’s not exclusively male. In that case the incidence of rape effectively doubles and the single most failed group of rape victims become males where the perpetrator is female, who have effectively been ignored to now

Or

We make a distinction between cases where it’s physical violent rape and at least a number of other things that are included at present right now. In that case situations like the Ched Evans trial (and probably the Belfast trial) likely never happen and we place more stock on individuals own personal responsibility around drinking and communication. The conviction rate inevitably goes up since the grey area cases disappear from consideration.

I’m not advocating for either way btw, just putting the two extreme scenarios out there. Both extremes raise rather uncomfortable societal questions that require a sea change in education for pretty much everyone. Any middle ground between them is likely to also require considerable change. Unfortunately there’s been a lot of resistance to reframing this over the years which I suspect has contributed to the current mess.

meeeeh · 09-04-2018 04:11PM

tritium wrote: »

I see two extremes of choices. Either we accept that all such acts are rape and therefore change our mindset as to what a rapist looks like to something that’s not exclusively male. In that case the incidence of rape effectively doubles and the single most failed group of rape victims become males where the perpetrator is female, who have effectively been ignored to now

Or

We make a distinction between cases where it’s physical violent rape and at least a number of other things that are included at present right now. In that case situations like the Ched Evans trial (and probably the Belfast trial) likely never happen and we place more stock on individuals own personal responsibility around drinking and communication. The conviction rate inevitably goes up since the grey area cases disappear from consideration.

Very much the first. And when men go through the same process as women and are asked how much they drank and what wore and how long they looked at someone, then maybe they will understand how hard the whole process is for women. I guarantee you there will be suddenly huge pressure to change the attitude to alleged victims in court.

tritium · 09-04-2018 04:28PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Very much the first. And when men go through the same process as women and are asked how much they drank and what wore and how long they looked at someone, then maybe they will understand how hard the whole process is for women. I guarantee you there will be suddenly huge pressure to change the attitude to alleged victims in court.

Do you really think so? Consider for a moment that this would also involve parading women in court (and in the media in the UK) as rapists and arguing that coming on to a guy sexually while the guy was too drunk to consent makes them a rapist. In some cases the state would have to do this even if the male victim had no recollection of the events. Don’t assume that there’s only an upside for female victims

ShowMeTheCash · 09-04-2018 04:44PM

Grayson wrote: »

try and answer my question. How is it universally accepted? Universally accepted implies that in all cultures, in all times, that rape has been reviled.

The fact is that it has been considered perfectly acceptable by many cultures at various times.

Remember, you're the one that said it's a universally accepted fact. That's about as broad and sweeping statement as is possible to make. I'm asking you to back it up.

Best strawman I have seen in a while!
Universally does not mean "in all times"!
Why do people go to these lengths to make idiotic statements?
You want to try and make an argument about cultures of the past?
Maybe you want to talk about cavemen while you are at it and and pretend that it is relevant?

Name one culture in society today where rape is acceptable?

meeeeh · 09-04-2018 04:55PM

tritium wrote: »

Do you really think so? Consider for a moment that this would also involve parading women in court (and in the media in the UK) as rapists and arguing that coming on to a guy sexually while the guy was too drunk to consent makes them a rapist. In some cases the state would have to do this even if the male victim had no recollection of the events. Don’t assume that there’s only an upside for female victims

Are you arguing that rape shouldn't be prosecuted? If someone feels they have been raped (woman or man) they should be listened to and then the decision should be made if there is chance of conviction and case brought to the courts. I don't know what is so hard to understand, sex without consent is wrong.

And btw most cases don't go to court for various reasons, there is nothing that state would have to do.

BoatMad · 09-04-2018 04:57PM

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Best strawman I have seen in a while!
Universally does not mean "in all times"!
Why do people go to these lengths to make idiotic statements?
You want to try and make an argument about cultures of the past?
Maybe you want to talk about cavemen while you are at it and and pretend that it is relevant?

Name one culture in society today where rape is acceptable?

Rape is a criminal definition , generally what is defined as Rape is not acceptable anywhere

however the definition of Rape has changed considerably over the last 100 years

BoatMad · 09-04-2018 05:01PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Are you arguing that rape shouldn't be prosecuted? If someone feels they have been raped (woman or man) they should be listened to and then the decision should be made if there is chance of conviction and case brought to the courts. I don't know what is so hard to understand, sex without consent is wrong.

And btw most cases don't go to court for various reasons, there is nothing that state would have to do.

the charge of Rape is very serious, any such charge must be subject to the full judicial process and the defence must be capable of effective cross examination , including the accuser

its far more then " hey should be listened to and then the decision should be made if there is chance of conviction and case brought to the courts", that suggest that a "person " claiming rape has a virtual automatic right to force the prosecution service to proceed too a trail

sex without consent is wrong.

surely at this stage , such simplistic statements add nothing to the debate

the issue isnt " consent ", its determining whether consent has been given or withdrawn and what actually then happened

its simply not black and white , people dont engage in legal contracts before intercourse etc

ShowMeTheCash · 09-04-2018 05:02PM

BoatMad wrote: »

Rape is a criminal definition , generally what is defined as Rape is not acceptable anywhere

however the definition of Rape has changed considerably over the last 100 years

I agree....
Sexual assault is changing also.

It appears people are beginning to conflate being offended as being assaulted.

meeeeh · 09-04-2018 05:07PM

BoatMad wrote: »

the charge of Rape is very serious, any such charge must be subject to the full judicial process and the defence must be capable of effective cross examination , including the accuser

its far more then " hey should be listened to and then the decision should be made if there is chance of conviction and case brought to the courts", that suggest that a "person " claiming rape has a virtual automatic right to force the prosecution service to proceed too a trail

surely at this stage , such simplistic statements add nothing to the debate

the issue isnt " consent ", its determining whether consent has been given or withdrawn and what actually then happened

its simply not black and white , people dont engage in legal contracts before intercourse etc

No I said the victim has a right to report, prosecution has to decide if they want to proceed. What is so hard to understand there. Majority of cases don't end up in courts so stop with hysterical interpretation of what I didn't say.

And if the whole thing is so complicated then people should attend classes where they are told how not to rape.

tritium · 09-04-2018 05:19PM

meeeeh wrote: »

Are you arguing that rape shouldn't be prosecuted? If someone feels they have been raped (woman or man) they should be listened to and then the decision should be made if there is chance of conviction and case brought to the courts. I don't know what is so hard to understand, sex without consent is wrong.

And btw most cases don't go to court for various reasons, there is nothing that state would have to do.

As you’ll see in my earlier post, I’m not arguing either way, I just put the scenarios on either side out there. You are the one who suggested one over the other and, as I stated the consequence of that choice aren’t as simple or overwhelmingly positive as you might think. Its worth noting that men who are already victims of rape have to go through the same process as women already .

As to a significant number of cases not going to court, that’s certainly true. However the why there is far from simple. Our legal system doesn’t operate on the basis of #ibelieveher and lynch mobs. As many have noted in this particular case it’s perfectly plausible, especially where drink is involved, that all parties believe their accounts fully.

BoatMad · 09-04-2018 05:27PM

No I said the victim has a right to report, prosecution has to decide if they want to proceed. What is so hard to understand there

why are you restating the bleeding obvious, thats been the case for years and years

Majority of cases don't end up in courts

and quite rightly , because the standards of proof are quite high because its a criminal case and many victims are not convinced its worth the process of establishing guilt , many potential or alleged criminal actions dont end up in court

so-whats your point

And if the whole thing is so complicated then people should attend classes where they are told how not to rape.

consent is complicated because sex isnt like buying a house , many rape cases are not pre-determined rape, so clearly , men ( and its usually men) are having difficulty determining consent BUT I suggest that equally many cases the withdrawal of consent is not clear either

Add drink to one or both parties and the whole issue is a minefield . particulary since historically women have been " pursued " rather then equally engaging in active contribution , this has not helped the male perspective

the mind boggles at the concept of " consent " classes . just what would you teach ??!!

BoatMad · 09-04-2018 05:30PM

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I agree....
Sexual assault is changing also.

It appears people are beginning to conflate being offended as being assaulted.

yes it is extremely troubling to read various Journos , basically saying that bad decisions are the same as rape and convictions should be almost automatic

Roger Hassenforder · 09-04-2018 05:38PM

meeeeh wrote: »

No I said the victim has a right to report, prosecution has to decide if they want to proceed. What is so hard to understand there. Majority of cases don't end up in courts so stop with hysterical interpretation of what I didn't say.

And if the whole thing is so complicated then people should attend classes where they are told how not to rape.

"Hysterical"?

goz83 · 09-04-2018 05:46PM

Grayson wrote: »

try and answer my question. How is it universally accepted? Universally accepted implies that in all cultures, in all times, that rape has been reviled.

The fact is that it has been considered perfectly acceptable by many cultures at various times.

Remember, you're the one that said it's a universally accepted fact. That's about as broad and sweeping statement as is possible to make. I'm asking you to back it up.

:eek::eek::eek:

Does that mean the Universal Social Charge applies to all people, in all cultures, of all time?

Damn the gubbermint!

carolmon · 09-04-2018 05:53PM

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Best strawman I have seen in a while!
Universally does not mean "in all times"!
Why do people go to these lengths to make idiotic statements?
You want to try and make an argument about cultures of the past?
Maybe you want to talk about cavemen while you are at it and and pretend that it is relevant?

Name one culture in society today where rape is acceptable?

universally
juːnɪˈvəːsəli/
adverb
adverb: universally
by everyone; in every case.
synonyms:
invariably, always, without exception, in all instances, in all cases, in every case, in every instance;

http://www.revelist.com/world/countries-marital-rape-legal/7073/allowing-for-spousal-rape-the-report-points-out-makes-sexual-violence-as-a-whole-seem-less-serious/2

countries where marital rape is legal
"The women’s rights organization surveyed the laws of each of the 82 countries between 2014 and 2015. They found laws expressly allowing for spousal rape in Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Lesotho, Nigeria, Oman, Singapore, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. In four of these countries, it is permitted even when the victim is a child."

Rapes ordered by village courts as punishments
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-rape/indian-woman-says-gang-raped-on-orders-of-village-court-idUSBREA0M0VH20140123

https://newsin.asia/pakistani-village-court-orders-gang-rape-revenge/

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jun/03/mukhtar-mai-pakistani-woman-gang-rape-punishment-hope-belated-justice

I truly wish rape was universally viewed as the abhorrent crime it is, unfortunately that's not true

BoatMad · 09-04-2018 05:56PM

carolmon wrote: »

universally
juːnɪˈvəːsəli/
adverb
adverb: universally
by everyone; in every case.
synonyms:
invariably, always, without exception, in all instances, in all cases, in every case, in every instance;

http://www.revelist.com/world/countries-marital-rape-legal/7073/allowing-for-spousal-rape-the-report-points-out-makes-sexual-violence-as-a-whole-seem-less-serious/2

countries where marital rape is legal
"The women’s rights organization surveyed the laws of each of the 82 countries between 2014 and 2015. They found laws expressly allowing for spousal rape in Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Lesotho, Nigeria, Oman, Singapore, Sri Lanka, and Tanzania. In four of these countries, it is permitted even when the victim is a child."

Rapes ordered by village courts as punishments
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-india-rape/indian-woman-says-gang-raped-on-orders-of-village-court-idUSBREA0M0VH20140123

https://newsin.asia/pakistani-village-court-orders-gang-rape-revenge/

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jun/03/mukhtar-mai-pakistani-woman-gang-rape-punishment-hope-belated-justice

I truly wish rape was universally viewed as the abhorrent crime it is, unfortunately that's not true

These are more correctly defined as non-consenuasl sexual activity , depending on the laws, this may be rape or it may not be. Marital intercourse in ireland could have been in the past non-consensual but that did not make it rape, after a change in laws it was then determined to be rape .

carolmon · 09-04-2018 06:02PM

BoatMad wrote: »

These are more correctly defined as non-consenuasl sexual activity , depending on the laws, this may be rape or it may not be. Marital intercourse in ireland could have been in the past non-consensual but that did not make it rape, after a change in laws it was then determined to be rape .

that's my point......the laws in some countries still don't classify non consensual sex in marriage as rape

Ireland only changed the law to recognise this as rape in 1990

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1990/act/32/section/5/enacted/en/html

Belfast rape trial - all 4 found not guilty Mod Note post one

Comments