Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

New Anti-Rape device - RapeAxe

1…89101113

Comments

  • #362
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    I agree with pretty much everything you have said and you are the first poster that doesn't agree with me that didn't accuse me of having opinions that I do not.
    whatever99 wrote: »
    I don't know, maybe you have an example of a time where a victim used brute force against their attacker, and killed them? I'm genuinely interested if you do.

    Of all the cases I know of, the force was more than well justified, for example this one where a man broke into a woman's apartment:

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1346&dat=19830522&id=rJIsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ifsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4793,1810779

    This all started over this device which has the potential to kill men who force themselves sexually on women in Africa.

    People stated that they felt ALL men who try to rape a woman deserve to die.

    I simply don't agree that all men who try to rape women deserve to be killed.

    Some, of course - just not all and I have given many examples at this stage of each.


  • #363
    Jumpy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,606 ✭✭✭Jumpy


    Anti wrote: »
    Great idea and all, and i'm no rapist..But surely when you have a look down and see what resembles the sand monster from star wars ep three haning out of the vag you might reconsider where you about to put it. I'm just sayin!

    ITS A SARLACC YOU GODDAMN HEATHEN.

    Sand monster *shakes head* some people.


  • #364
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1346&dat=19830522&id=rJIsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=ifsDAAAAIBAJ&pg=4793,1810779
    .

    If that rapist had died, would you feel sorry for him?


  • #365
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    If that rapist had died, would you feel sorry for him?

    I just said "the force was more than well justified".

    I provided the link ffs.

    Stop trying to provoke a response.

    Why would I feel sorry for a bastard who broke into woman's house, making her fear for her life and who then raped her??


  • #366
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Stop trying to provoke a response.

    Why would I feel sorry for a bastard who broke into woman's house, making her fear for her life and who then raped her??

    I'm honestly not trying to provoke you.
    I just don't see why you'd feel sorry for anybody who rapes someone, or attempts to. I just don't get this distinction between good and bad rapists, or rapes. Why is it ok to kill one rapist, but not another? It's the same scummy s'hitty crime.


  • Advertisement
  • #367
    whatever99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 138 ✭✭whatever99


    OutlawPete wrote: »

    People stated that they felt ALL men who try to rape a woman deserve to die.

    I simply don't agree that all men who try to rape women deserve to be killed.

    Some, of course - just not all and I have given many examples at this stage of each.

    I think when people talk about rape, they always think of the kind where a stranger drags a woman down an alleyway, or breaks into her house as in the example you posted. Maybe you think that they are the only kind of situations where a victim killing their attacker is justified?

    I think rape is rape, and if a victim ends up killing her attacker and stopping a rape, then I think it's understandable. Tough luck for the rapist. I know that's harsh, but they shouldn't have tried to rape someone in the first place.

    No matter how you meant it to be taken up, when you said that rape is just a penis going in and out of a vagina - what reaction did you expect?!


  • #368
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    whatever99 wrote: »
    Maybe you think that they are the only kind of situations where a victim killing their attacker is justified?

    This is unbelievable, read the thread.

    Don't come back saying you have either, as you would not make such a comment like that if you had.


  • #369
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    I've read the thread, i know you've stated that most rapists are known to their attacker. What i don't understand is how you think that makes a difference.

    What difference does it make if someone is raped by their boyfriend, by a friend, someone they met in a club that night or someone who just beamed of a god damn flying saucer! The important thing is what was done, not who done it. Someone date raped by their boyfriend is no less a victim than someone dragged into bushes by a stranger.

    Why, therefore, should it be acceptable for one to use whatever means neccesary to escape, but not the other?


  • #370
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    I've read the thread..

    Then why did you ask that idiotic question abut feeling sorry for a rapist to broke into woman's home?

    I clearly stated many times that 'fear for life' was enough reason to use ANY force and if you read the thread as you stated, you would know that.
    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    What difference does it make if someone is raped by their boyfriend, by a friend, someone they met in a club that night..

    I'll ignore the trite "flying saucer" comment.

    There is massive difference to a woman being dragged into bushes and to what happened Ulrika Johnson.

    I do not feel that Ulrika would have been justified in shooting that man in the head and killing him.

    If you can't see the difference, fine - but stop asking me the same questions over and over as the answers will not change.


  • #371
    Hrududu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,712 ✭✭✭Hrududu


    whatever99 wrote: »
    I think when people talk about rape, they always think of the kind where a stranger drags a woman down an alleyway, or breaks into her house as in the example you posted. Maybe you think that they are the only kind of situations where a victim killing their attacker is justified?
    Yeah, that post reminded me of the "Good AIDS, Bad AIDS" bit from Brass Eye.


  • Advertisement
  • #372
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Hrududu wrote: »
    Yeah, that post reminded me of the "Good AIDS, Bad AIDS" bit from Brass Eye.

    So you don't see a difference between a women being dragged off at knife point and raped - and Ulrika Johnson's rape?

    You think if Ulrika's only way of stopping what happened to her was to kill her date in that hotel room, that that would have been an reasonable action on her part?


  • #373
    It wasn't me!
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,034 ✭✭✭✭It wasn't me!


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    You think if Ulrika's only way of stopping what happened to her was to kill her date in that hotel room, that that would have been an reasonable action on her part?

    Yes. That's the key point! There's no obligation on the victim, nor should there ever be, to endure the assault if the price is the life of the attacker.


  • #374
    sbsquarepants
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,812 ✭✭✭✭sbsquarepants


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    Then why did you ask that idiotic question abut feeling sorry for a rapist to broke into woman's home?

    I clearly stated many times that 'fear for life' was enough reason to use ANY force and if you read the thread as you stated, you would know that.



    I'll ignore the trite "flying saucer" comment.

    There is massive difference to a woman being dragged into bushes and to what happened Ulrika Johnson.

    I do not feel that Ulrika would have been justified in shooting that man in the head and killing him.

    If you can't see the difference, fine - but stop asking me the same questions over and over as the answers will not change.

    Given some of your posts, the question seems valid enough to me.

    I've repeatedly stated that it's reasonable to assume any woman being raped is in fear for her life, after all if she suspected someone wanted to rape her, she would hardly go anywhere near them now would she!

    I can't comment for ulrika and as i've said, i haven't seen the video yet. But i'd be fairly certain any rape victim would be insulted by any type of suggestion that what happened to them wasn't as bad as happened some other rape victim?

    I'm giving up on this thread, i've told you already your opinion disgusts me and after trying to clarify and understand your opinion all day, i'm still totally disgusted by it i'm afraid.

    Also, i'm sorry if you think i was being personal, that was never my intention.


  • #375
    Hrududu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,712 ✭✭✭Hrududu


    OutlawPete wrote: »
    So you don't see a difference between a women being dragged off at knife point and raped - and Ulrika Johnson's rape?
    No. Rape is rape.
    You think if Ulrika's only way of stopping what happened to her was to kill her date in that hotel room, that that would have been an reasonable action on her part?
    Where did I mention anything about killing anyone? I just thought that the post below draws a distinction between "Good Rape" and "Bad Rape" given that you think some but not all rapists deserve to die.
    I simply don't agree that all men who try to rape women deserve to be killed.

    Some, of course - just not all and I have given many examples at this stage of each.

    To be honest how can any of us say we know what we'd do? How can a woman in a hotel room be absolutely sure that her rapist won't kill her afterwards? Its easy to come at it logically from the outside with reasons. But in the moment I don't think you would be thinking logically. I just think some of the posts are almost saying "Ah sure it was only a rape by someone she knew, sure that's not as bad."


  • #376
    --LOS--
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,028 ✭✭✭✭--LOS--


    It wasn't me! wrote: »
    Yes. That's the key point! There's no obligation on the victim, nor should there ever be, to endure the assault if the price is the life of the attacker.

    nobody's life was at risk there imo.


  • #377
    --LOS--
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,028 ✭✭✭✭--LOS--


    Hrududu wrote: »
    No. Rape is rape.

    It aint black n white, have you even watched the video?
    Hrududu wrote: »
    To be honest how can any of us say we know what we'd do? How can a woman in a hotel room be absolutely sure that her rapist won't kill her afterwards?

    I'm amazed how you can't see the difference between an incident like this and being dragged down a dark alley. It's unbelievable the power of the word "rape", everyone immediately jumps on the bandwagon once that allegation's thrown out there.


  • #378
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    Given some of your posts, the question seems valid enough to me.

    Cop out.

    Quote posts from me where it would suggest that I would have "sympathy" with someone breaking into a woman's home and raping them.
    sbsquarepants wrote: »
    I've repeatedly stated that it's reasonable to assume any woman being raped is in fear for her life..

    Well, if that is true, then you should have ZERO problems with my views.

    As, I have stated numerous times:

    If a rape victim is in fear of their life, ANY response is appropriate.

    You say 'all rape victims fear for their life', I say 'any response is appropriate' in such cases.

    So why are you arguing with me?


  • #379
    Little Acorn
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,531 ✭✭✭Little Acorn


    OutlawPete wrote: »

    I simply don't agree that all men who try to rape women deserve to be killed.

    Some, of course - just not all and I have given many examples at this stage of each.

    If I'm following this thread correctly, the "some" you are referring to who deserve to die, are only the rapists who explicitly tell the victims they are going to kill them, or make it very obvious that it's a high possibility-like for example holding a knife or gun to the victim, or beating them really badly.

    I think it's the way you are describing other variations of rape that is really pissing people off. So far you have described them as "non violent" rapes, a boyfriend who wants to "get frisky", and worst of all the this post:
    As far as "shoving his penis in and out of her", that's what rape is, worst that can happen is the women gets pregnant by the bastard.

    If the guy beats her, ties her up, breaks her jaw etc etc etc, we have other laws for these crimes and murder is acceptable under those circumstances.

    But we are discussing Rape here on it's own merits and a penis being stuck in you as you are held down is what happens.

    In these circumstances, MURDER is NOT justified.

    It's disgusting to think that any man or woman should be murdered for committing the act of rape.
    So, to say or imply that ALL rape victims are in fear of there lives is rubbish. The vast majority know they are being raped and that is all.

    If they then kill that person raping them, it is to stop a rape and nothing more.

    This is why I believe that MURDER is not a proportionate response to a non-violent rape.

    If your on a date and your bf get's frisky and you say no and he says yes and forces himself on you, the proportion of violence that is appropriate in each circumstance is going to be quite different.

    Whether you intend to or not (and I really don't think that you do intend them to), but these posts come off as really cold, clinical ways of describing a rape. You don't once mention the word "just", but the impression you're giving from these posts is that you may as well be saying it's just a "non-violent rape", a boyfriend who just wants to "get frisky" and forces himself on his girlfriend, he's just "shoving his penis in and out" and getting pregnant is "the worst that could happen.", or "But we are discussing Rape here on it's own merits and a penis being stuck in you as you are held down is just what happens.".
    You acknowledge the long term effects of rape, but don't seem to acknowledge the effects that may be happening right there and now during the rape. Terror, anger, violation, heart ripping misery?
    Again, I don't believe for a second that you mean to sound like you're trivializing these types of rape, but that is how it comes across to many people, and I think that is why people are getting really cross.

    Yesterday, I was really mad after first reading you're posts, and I probably would have gotten banned if I'd posted yesterday, but after thinking for a while I've tried to understand your way of thinking even if I may not agree with it myself.

    I think it mainly boils down to a personal opinion on which crime is morally worse? You acknowledge that rape is a horrendous crime, but as long as the victim hasn't been beaten, or had life directly threatened, then you believe it is morally worse for a rape victim to actually kill the attacker intentionally.

    End of a human life, or a rape victim's life tainted forever by the rape and possibly a life destroyed depending how badly it affects the individual person?
    Which is worse?
    Maybe it should be simple, but tbh I find it hard to choose.
    I would not for a second think badly of any person who actually did kill their attacker, intentionally or not. The same way as I would never think badly of someone who killed a person they found abusing their child, whether they killed intentionally or not. I find human anger and revenge in these 2 cases understandable.

    People in this thread differentiated between self defense and just plain vengeance, and how one is fine and the other is wrong.
    I'm going to be honest even if it makes me a bad person:
    If someone raped me I would want them dead-actually I would want them tortured for many months and then dead.
    Now I'm not even going to try and pretend that I could or would do these things myself. I don't think I could ever actually commit the intentional act of murder, because I know it is morally wrong, and I would feel guilt for the person's family, but if I heard that a person who raped me or someone I love, was murdered it would make me happy. I would feel no sympathy, except for their family.

    You and others may find my thoughts on this very morally wrong, but I can't help the way I feel on the matter.
    I have tried to understand your view on this issue and I think that I do.
    I think you're perfectly entitled to your believe that murder of an attacker(who's not directly life threatning),versus a rape is worse. It goes against the majority of people's views here, but so do my views on actual vengeance rather than self defense.
    <snip> , you just have a different opinion on what is a worse crime, and you're getting "attacked" (for want of a better word) because of it
    -but again I think it's mainly due to the clinical tones of your posts rather than you're actual opinion.


  • #380
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Hrududu wrote: »
    I just thought that the post below draws a distinction between "Good Rape" and "Bad Rape" given that you think some but not all rapists deserve to die.

    No, they are YOUR words, not mine.

    Stop implying that I think any rape is "good".
    Hrududu wrote: »
    To be honest how can any of us say we know what we'd do? How can a woman in a hotel room be absolutely sure that her rapist won't kill her afterwards?[/YOUTUBE]

    She can't and in such cases I understand and excuse them killing.

    However, I feel there are many many cases like Ulrika where they know fine well, the is forcing sex and sex alone.

    In these such cases I don't condone killing.

    We have a justice system to deal with these incidences.
    Hrududu wrote: »
    Its easy to come at it logically from the outside with reasons. But in the moment I don't think you would be thinking logically. I just think some of the posts are almost saying."

    I agree with this, I have no problem with what you are saying.

    People are adding content and weight to what I feel that don't belong there.
    Hrududu wrote: »
    "Ah sure it was only a rape by someone she knew, sure that's not as bad."

    I am not saying that and here again you are adding 'tone' and 'implying 'sympathy' which I DO NOT have.

    I hope the guy gets an appropriate sentence, but I feel death is a high price to pay in such cases.


  • #381
    --LOS--
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,028 ✭✭✭✭--LOS--


    Little Acorn wrote: »
    Whether you intend to or not (and I really don't think that you do intend them to), but these posts come off as really cold, clinical ways of describing a rape.

    Objective.....is the word ;)

    Some folks here getting too emotionally involved when rape is mentioned.

    You'd want to have some profound divine faith to be trivialising taking someone's life for attempted rape or worse, falsely accused attempted rape.


  • Advertisement
  • #382
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    --LOS-- wrote: »
    I think you have to look at the case I pointed out. This is a common thing too, there is a high rate of false rape accusations.

    And I'm not blaming a woman for getting "raped", I'm questioning whether she was raped.

    For the last time, can someone link to anything to back up this high rate of false rape bs? Seriously. I know crying rape happens but it is absolutely dwarfed by the amount of cases of rape, incest and sexual abuse which go unreported or in which the victim drops their case out of fear of their abuser/not being believed.


  • #383
    The Shtig
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 269 ✭✭The Shtig


    I voted no because there's bound to be a case where someone will use this device on spite and not for protection against rape. Say a girlfriend found out her boyfriend was cheating on her or the girl is just a psycho...

    I'm in full favour on the rapist getting his micky caught in it though just too much of risk that it would be misused...


  • #384
    OutlawPete
    Closed Accounts Posts: 17,689 ✭✭✭✭OutlawPete


    Little Acorn wrote: »
    I think it's the way you are describing other variations of rape that is really pissing people off. So far you have described them as "non violent" rapes, a boyfriend who wants to "get frisky", and worst of all the this post:

    You totally and utterly took my "get frisky" comment out of context.

    Here it is, in context where the "Frisky" was BEFORE the rape.
    OutlawPete wrote: »
    If your on a date and your bf get's frisky and you say no and he says yes and forces himself on you, the proportion of violence that is appropriate in each circumstance is going to be quite different.

    The rest of post doesn't seem to take my comments out of context, so I won't bite this time :p
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    Whether you intend to or not (and I really don't think that you do intend them to), but these posts come off as really cold, clinical ways of describing a rape. You don't once mention the word "just", but the impression you're giving from these posts is that you may as well be saying it's just a "non-violent rape", a boyfriend who just wants to "get frisky" and forces himself on his girlfriend, he's just "shoving his penis in and out" and getting pregnant is "the worst that could happen.", or "But we are discussing Rape here on it's own merits and a penis being stuck in you as you are held down is just what happens.".

    I appreciate you saying that you don't think I mean to be taking up as I am being, but why are you adding the word "just" here, putting it in everyone's mind that I do? I know you are trying to imply how I am coming across but it doesn't exactly help to have all these 'justs' before my comments.

    If people get that impression that I mean "just" when I DON'T say it, then that is there problem, my tone is reflective of how I am been spoken to.

    I have said many times that I understand the gravity of rape and the long term consequences, I can't keep saying it just because it is being ignored in fairness.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    You acknowledge the long term effects of rape, but don't seem to acknowledge the effects that may be happening right there and now during the rape. Terror, anger, violation, heart ripping misery?

    I have acknowledged these things sporadically throughout the thread.

    Particularly terror, in which case - I condone ANY response.

    Unfortunately, the violation, misery and other consequences of rape are things that can only really be dealt with by the courts. This may seem cold but I have no other way wording it.

    If the rape was as a result of a break-in, or violence (NOT including the fact that Rape is inherently violent in nature) then hopefully the guy will be killed or locked up for life if not.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    Again, I don't believe for a second that you mean to sound like you're trivializing these types of rape, but that is how it comes across to many people, and I think that is why people are getting really cross.

    Thank you, I think the main reason people believe that I am trivializing rape is due to one or two posters that keep regurgitating the same nonsense and ignoring my replies.

    If you don't think I am trivializing based on reading the same thread, then why should they?
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    Yesterday, I was really mad after first reading you're posts..

    Understandably and I regret the way I worded some of my posts now.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    I've tried to understand your way of thinking even if I may not agree with it myself.

    Appreciated.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    I think it mainly boils down to a personal opinion on which crime is morally worse?

    Yes it does, my best friend was tortured and murdered when I was 22 and had a another young man murdered a few feet from me in 2006. Killing sickens me. People speak of killing another human in such a casual fashion as if it is not a big deal.

    I was recently nearly banned for complaining about someone posting a Motor racing accident where someone got decapitated. It was just a wind up, but I didn't know :o...

    Violent death disgusts me.

    I have spoke many times on the thread of the long and short term ramifications of rape. Not once has anyone spoke of what impact killing someone guilty of date rape would have for instance on them for the rest of their lives. I think killing someone when your life is was in danger would be far easier to live with imo.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    You acknowledge that rape is a horrendous crime, but as long as the victim hasn't been beaten, or had life directly threatened, then you believe it is morally worse for a rape victim to actually kill the attacker intentionally.

    Yes, I do.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    I would not for a second think badly of any person who actually did kill their attacker, intentionally or not. The same way as I would never think badly of someone who killed a person they found abusing their child, whether they killed intentionally or not. I find human anger and revenge in these 2 cases understandable.

    Nor would I.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    I have tried to understand your view on this issue and I think that I do.

    Thank you.
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    I don't think you should have been questioned about being a rapist-what was that about!?! , you just have a different opinion on what is a worse crime, and you're getting "attacked" (for want of a better word) because of it..

    I have no idea either :)

    Actually it was been asked if I had sympathy for the guy who broke into the woman's home and raped her that annoyed me far more, as I was the one that provided the link as an example of exactly where I felt someone had acted appropriately :)
    Little Acorn wrote: »
    but again I think it's mainly due to the clinical tones of your posts rather than you're actual opinion.

    In fairness, I think my tone was in response to some of the accusations earlier in the thread. I hope you don't consider this reply to be clinical.

    It's my last on the thread.


  • #385
    AckwelFoley
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,555 ✭✭✭✭AckwelFoley


    NO it's too harsh a punishment.
    Let me see if i unserstand outlawpete..

    If a woman is walking down the street and a guy jumps on her and drags her into a ditch and rapes her, its reasonable to use any force, and if death of the attacker is the result - all is good.

    If a woman is with a man on a first or second date, and later that night they are kissing, he instigates sex and she refuses and he rapes her, she cannot defend herself to the extent that death could be the outcome?

    In essance, its not as serious a rape if the rapist buys the woman dinner first.


  • #386
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Pete you know your argument isn't holding up when Snyper posts in a thread about rape and can't even bring himself to crack an inappropriate joke.


  • #387
    rowanh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 702 ✭✭✭rowanh


    Ill have to remember next time my gf comes home late and doesn't want to take no for an answer its justifiable for me to kill her!


  • #388
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    rowanh wrote: »
    Ill have to remember next time my gf comes home late and doesn't want to take no for an answer its justifiable for me to kill her!

    :confused:

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #389
    rowanh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 702 ✭✭✭rowanh


    K-9 wrote: »
    :confused:

    Just having read through this it seems like some people think that if someone says no then its rape and if its rape then you are 100% justified in killing the attacker.

    Also the rapeaxe thing, i think this is a moronic invention. Id say the ratio of murders or extreme violence in rape to "non violent" rapes would rise if a lot of women were using them.


  • #390
    whatever99
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 138 ✭✭whatever99


    rowanh wrote: »
    Just having read through this it seems like some people think that if someone says no then its rape and if its rape then you are 100% justified in killing the attacker.

    Eh, ya, of course...if someone says no, but the other person then forces them to have sex, I would think that's a pretty clear definition of rape!


  • Advertisement
  • #391
    rowanh
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 702 ✭✭✭rowanh


    I dont think its that clear, how much force is required for it to be rape? What if the victim is forced to submit but then does what they are told?


Advertisement