nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

New laws on Consent are deeply-flawed

spontindeed

Proposed laws requiring the accused to prove consent are deeply flawed and a breach of the EU Rule of Law and the EU Treaties.

How is an accused supposed to know the wider knowledge of the accuser of all potential criminal engagement attributable to any particular aspect of their relationship? It seems that the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' is also under attack by this proposed law.

Since 2017, the accused can no longer cross-examine the accuser in a Court of Law and soon the accused will no longer have the right to examine the accusers psychiatric and/or counselling records. How come the European Union isn't raising the red flag about this?

Will it lead to a rise in false accusations and is there even a deterrent against the wrongful accuser due to a fall-off in prosecutions?

P. S. I'm not trying to offend anyone, I will add: read also the rules of the site. This is no place for political battles and personal insults.

Find more posts tagged with

rape

consent

Quick Links

Comments

Beasty

You have started a similar thread in Legal Discussion

Pick one place and stick to it

Closed

Silentcorner

Essentially men need to treat grown adult women like they are children.

There is no way to prove consent, even if you could you could be accused of coercing her into consent...more often than not we are talking about two intoxicated people.

This was introduced across US campuses by Obama in 2014...it has been a disaster there it will be here!

We are dealing with a cultlure of man hating especially amongst young women, who, are also the most depressed generation of young women this country has ever witnessed, and if the US is anything to go by, it's gonna get a lot worse! Put that into a casual sex scene laced in drugs!!

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119397524#Comment_119397524

How can you prove you asked

The same way you currently "prove" you had consent. When these things get to court it is often a case of believability of the accused vs the witness.

From what I can see the new law does not fundamentally change anything in terms of presumption of innocence or guilt. It merely removes the possibility of a complete sociopath who thinks all women want him from using his "genuine belief" that all women want him as a defence for his actions because it is not an objectively reasonable belief.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398611#Comment_119398611

The only fireproof protection with this, would be for couples to sign consent forms either physically or digitally on some app before engaging. How realistic is that and is that how we see the future

Consent is ongoing, so that wouldn't work.

moceri

It cuts both ways. I remember working with a French/Portuguese waiter in the 1990's . I must admit he was exceptionally charming and good looking. He was targeted by a female co-worker who plied him with alcohol at a staff party and dragged him to her bed. Needless to say.. she was barking up the wrong tree.. He had a Mexican Boyfriend. I remember talking to him afterwards and he was very angry and upset about this.

Furze99

The principle of consent regarding sexual acts is fine and should be widely encouraged. But and it's a very big BUT

Almost impossible to legislate for when you've just got two people and their varying accounts and recollections.

At present, the accused is protected when there is doubt. This proposed legislation would give the benefit of doubt overall to the accuser.

I'm amazed that any justice system would go down this road.

The only fireproof protection with this, would be for couples to sign consent forms either physically or digitally on some app before engaging. How realistic is that and is that how we see the future.

Helen McEntee has gone waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay down in my estimation.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398427#Comment_119398427

They are always other males. It is not possible under Irish law for a woman to commit rape on a man (only penetration of the vagina with an object counts as rape, not the anus).

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398540#Comment_119398540

Ive had two incidents were women have pushed themselves around my penis without a condom

I assume you asked them to leave immediately or you left yourself?

lawred2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398075#Comment_119398075

That has an inherent assumption that one party is in full control of their senses. The reality is quite often a long way from that.

lawred2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119397914#Comment_119397914

Or start with both and work from there!

combat14

the principle of consent is fine .. there are also many men who are drunk and taken advantage of in the bedroom by women too..

however all anyone has to claim is "i 100% asked for his/her consent.." and "they 100% said yes and consented"

straightaway its back to he said / she said

unless there is a written contract or audio/video recording of consent being provided by both parties its he said/she said

in millions of years of human existence there never has been a need for audio/video recording of consent perhaps the closest thing to written consent is the old fashioned concept of marriage witnessed by the community however that is now gone..

moceri

A charter for Misandrists.

newport2

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398506#Comment_119398506

I agree it's more relevant to sexual assault.

A man and woman wake up naked together after a drunken one might stand. If the woman regrets it, she has been taken advantage of and is a victim of sexual assault. If the man regrets it, then he should know better than to drink that much and go home with someone. I think that's the way society views it.

When it comes to sex, I think it's different. As a man I have to engage in it. I might regret it the following day, but if I didn't want it to happen at the time I could have stopped it. Whereas that's not always the case for women.

manonboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398506#Comment_119398506

You know what, you might be right. Im emotional about this topic. Its a scary topic to me after some things i've seen happened to close ones. Ive had two incidents were women have pushed themselves around my penis without a condom, and it bothers me personally that it would be ridiculed in society for me to ask for it to be considered.

Ill take a step back incase my emotions are blocking me from being reasonable. Cheers for your patience.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398482#Comment_119398482

You need to stop using the word rape. It's a separate thing to sexual assault as I already explained to you.

Now if you are going to make claims that concern you, these claims need to based on something tangible and presented to facilitate the debate you are after.

Now if you can do those things I will gladly engage, but all you are doing at the moment is incoherent ranting and raving about the huge disparity of male rapes being unreported without providing a shred of citation.

manonboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398444#Comment_119398444

Stop it. If you are in any way suggesting that males are likely to report a woman for rape because they had drunken sex and he feels he was unable to give consent... thats nonsense arguing.

How many cases are you even aware of that a man said he was quite drunk and she shouldnt of taken his yes as a yes? Next to zero in comparison im sure.

It doesnt happen, we would be ridiculed.

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398436#Comment_119398436

What stats have you on non male on male rapes that has led you to be concerned about a "huge disparity"?

manonboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398427#Comment_119398427

Yes generally they are, its the non male on male rapes i have concern about the huge disparity.

Mad_maxx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398404#Comment_119398404

Which shows the kind of professional charlatan she is, she knows that even this never goes anywhere, it will play extremely well with media and that's tremendous career equity in terms of her future run for higher office ,she has form in this regard

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398399#Comment_119398399

We do prosecute male rape though. These are generally other males though.

jetz2003

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119397874#Comment_119397874

You can't make laws if they breach EU law. This proposed law breaches EU law and it is illegal.

Helen McEntee knows that.

Rothko

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119397914#Comment_119397914

Why not both?

manonboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398370#Comment_119398370

I think that's my point though, there wont be any cases charged/or going to court of a woman having sex with a drunken man. Even with both of them were drunk.

It will always been the opposite cases we will see. Even though both people did the exact same things together.

We have such conditioning that men are never even self seen as victims when the same actions are done to them. We barely even have it in our words to describe rape being done to a man without penetrating HIS body. If a woman pushes her vagina on to a mans penis, we should view it the same as a man pushing into a woman. We don't though, we don't view it as invasive. There will be zero men reporting crimes like this even if the actions were same by both genders.

Of course, i completely agree that if someone forces a person to do something they don't want to, then that's absolutely reprehensible.

osarusan

The isse of consent is being changed from whether the defendant had an honest, even if mistaken, subjective belief that the other person had consented, to an objectively reasonable belief as to whether the other person had consented. The UK, for example, has been using the word 'reasonable' rather than 'honest' for a good while.

The issue here is it was useless (and impossible really) to decide whether the defendent was being honest about what they said. If a defendant says that they honestly believed that the person who was virutally unconscious with alcohol but who managed a to slur out a 'Yes' to the question of whether they wanted a shag was granting informed consent, what should a judge or jury do in this situaton? And in fact, sometimes when judges were instructing juries about such cases, they have been more or less saying that a story has to be reaonable for the belief to be honest.

I'd be more concerned about this:

"The bill would also include the provision that self-induced intoxication would not be a defence to a charge of rape in relation to an accused's capacity to understand if he did have consent."

Consider a scenario where 2 gay men wake up in a hotel bed together. They bothe have foggy, broken memories of the night before. One man knows he was absolutely pissed drunk and in no way able to grant informed consent, so he reports what happened as rape. Polic investigate, and the hotel footage does indeed show the complainant reeling about the place drunk...but it also shows the accused, reeling about the place equally drunk, or maybe even more so.

I am not sure what would happen under the existing law, but under the new law, certainly, there is no such defence as 'I was too drunk to recognise that the other person as too drunk to consent'. It seems to me that either man could equally accuse the other of rape.

But perhaps that's no different to how it is now anyway.

Mad_maxx

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398005#Comment_119398005

Yes because those who draft law have never been influenced by political activists

Boggles

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398306#Comment_119398306

Also, I think a large conversation goes silent in society that men almost never feel like they were raped, even though the same actions were taken to them. A woman can have sex with a guy who has been drinking (even if the woman is drinking too), and there's almost no societal backing that a guy could be the victim there due to intoxication

That's generally not how rape works.

If he was anally penetrated against his will, that's rape. If he was tied to the bed and the woman had her wicked way with him as in forced him to have vaginal intercourse that's sexual assault.

I'm not aware of any cases of that TBH.

jetz2003

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058256463/new-laws-on-consent-are-deeply-flawed

I made a submission to the European Commission about this law a short while ago. The EU Commission told me they are constantly monitoring the rule of law in Ireland and have received several complaints about this. I encourage more men to also report this proposed Government law to European Commission over its implications. I say men because this law will undoubtedly impact men a lot more.

It's amazing how women remain so silent when it comes to denying men their rights yet they shriek and cry foul when men dare to defend their right to innocence. Dozens of life-long husbands and partners may leave their wifes because of the chilling effect of this proposed law and its prejudice. It's like something a first year law student would propose on their first week of college.

The Justice Minister seems hell-bent on railroading this illegitimate and illegal law onto the statute books. Just because other common law countries have this law doesn't mean we should jump on the bandwagon - those other common law countries are outside the EU. We aren't.

manonboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398007#Comment_119398007

I want to say that i really agree with your last paragraph. I think overall, its a step in the right direction, and is likely something at least providing a good set of tools to start with. I'm only fearful of the mis-allegations or a reasonable situation/mistake being interpreted as predatory which I've seen happen before so it scares me a bit.

If the law was just going to be used to target predators, absolutely 100% support it with my full heart. However, I've met some crazy people who would ruin a persons life so easily for the most fecked up of reasons. Replaying abuse dynamics, a coping mechanism, crazy trauma controlling them, vile personal accountability avoidance and some societally encourage victim roles.

I've had a friend who was charged with Rape. It was eventually thrown out of court, but SOOO much damage was done to his life because of the accusation. The girl turned out to be nut-job with wildly different stories, tampering with evidence (deleting messages and thinking the phone is only record lol). It really scared me how vulnerable a person is to the word rape.

Ive also had a couple friends who were raped, and its awful seeing they had no justice and were terrified of even going down that horrible path in courts. One victim though found out the rapist was put in prison 10 years later for a similar much more sadistic gang rape.

hynesie08

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398289#Comment_119398289

Realistically? It wouldn't get past the interview stage. If one party claimed it later on as a revenge plot, it would probably not end well for them.

manonboard

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119398075#Comment_119398075

but isnt the issue with these laws, that even if the person is giving consent. If they've had alcohol, then legally they arent able to give consent? and how do you know its too much alcohol? Like ive had a few drunken fumbles in my time (not many, maybe 4 times, i prefer sex in serious relationships), and there was 2 occasions were we were both very very drunk. We both enjoyed it, but by the standards now, i think it was VERY risky if one of us decided the NEXT day that we are not ok with it.

Also, I think a large conversation goes silent in society that men almost never feel like they were raped, even though the same actions were taken to them. A woman can have sex with a guy who has been drinking (even if the woman is drinking too), and there's almost no societal backing that a guy could be the victim there due to intoxication. The same actions would occur, but because of our conditioning, we dont feel the same way the next day about it. I think thats very wrong then because the same laws wont be applied to both genders even though the actions were the same, all because we've been conditioned differently which brings it back to feelings guiding things.

I completely agree with that its a No unless you are 100% sure its a yes, but the law only activates AFTER the night of sex. That leads to a huge broad reinterpretation of events, and people are huge offenders of dodging personal responsibility. Its in our nature to protect ourselves by blaming others. A flaw in our characters sure, but a very persistent one.