Why are some rape stories allowed, some arent?

[angela146]

None of us felt that it was clearly a crime, then. Not in the sense that the legal system would think so, at least; and I believe we were quite right to feel that way.

We universally saw it as an asshole bullying women, a crime in that sense. But we all knew the courts would toss the case and never even decide to prosecute. Not just on its merits, legally, either, but because of the same reasons he thought so. This was 1968. She was wearing a miniskirt the first time they were current. Times have changed.

Wow! Times really have changed. That's about seven years before I was born so I don't remember the era.

If someone had done that to me in high school (early 1990s), I probably would have sunk my teeth into him. But then again, I was on the other side of the "status" thing.

 

[KarenAM]

It's usually the other way around. Society views sex as evil, therefore the good characters in a story have to be non-sexual.

Either way, that has nothing to do with the kind of erotic rape fantasies I'm talking about. This is more along the lines of Laurel K. Hamilton's "A Kiss of Shadows" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0345423402 The main character is a woman who has a couple of eight foot tall magic wielding men in her entourage.

Although I like the idea of the main characters being sexual, the "heroine saving the hero" thing would be a turn-off. This would be great for a woman who fantasizes about wielding power but I get enough of that in real life.

It was interesting to do; usually my heroines rescue themselves and don't make the sacrifice this heroine made. And they ususally save themselves by accepting themselves as women and as human beings. The women I write about who are submissive find it lliberating to accept this part of themselves, but those stories aren't rape stories. The slave-girl stories address the collision of libido with self-image and how all human beings have to reconcile the two.

I've had to do this with my own fantasies about force and sex. I tried the shame/denial route for many years and it nearly drove me to a nervous breakdown. Now I accept that these are fantasies, and keep them in my head where they do no harm. I've never tried or really wanted to act any of them out.

 

[Tanuki]

Back to my original metaphor: imagine yourself on a rollercoaster. At every turn and every sudden drop, you are scared shitless about what's going to happen next. It sure looks and feels like you're going to die. But you know you aren't going to die (probably).

That thrill is an element of some rape fantasies. [/B]

I hadn't thought of it that way. A rollercoaster that might kill you ceases to be exciting and becomes terrifying. That's how a rape fantasy can be exciting, while a real rape would be terrifying. Criticizing rape fantasies is a bit like criticizing sky divers for enjoying a free fall that would be horrible to someone without a parachute.

I can't think of any crazier analogy than the sky divers.

 

[cantdog]

Well. I realized the error of my ways, and I truly do repent, my dear Tanuke.

I know my lack of parachute has left me with certain limitations. But I read one of Angela's stories. It was all right, but the male figure was so uncompromisingly swinelike masterful that it repulsed me.

Other elements were delicious and very hot. But when my father beat me, you know, he was three times my age at least, and thrice my mass besides. With every right in law to do it. A child has very few more rights than a piece of the furniture, you know, except that they cannot be sold or intentionally put at risk.

I simply get no charge from a figure in a story of either gender who has a superhuman undeniability and a desire to cause pain. As well be tortured, for me. How erotic is that? And yet, I have come to see why it can be so, and I have no desire now to criticize. Mine is the weakness which obviates this.

cantdog

 

[Tanuki]

Well. I realized the error of my ways, and I truly do repent, my dear Tanuke.

can'tdog, I've since finished reading the thread, and I'm pretty impressed by your openness, and your courage! I have to agree, rape fantasies have to be well divorced from reality for me to enjoy them - any scent of a real-life crime and it becomes a turnoff.

 

[Guest]

I about 90% agree with you about rape being just violence. Sometimes what is called "date rape" does not involve any violence. The guy just goes ahead, even though she is saying something like "Oh, we shouldn't be doing this," while she offers no resistance and even cooperates by doing things like lifting her ass off the bed to let him pull her panties down. Later on, if she complains to the law, her mild protestation will be construed as "saying no", even though, as any woman can tell you if she is honest, what a woman says is a lot less important than how she says it, and her actions. We have some other threads about women communicating and the women on those threads tend to agree that this is so.

No. Rape is violence. Violence and a lust for power.

Date rape is real. And I am certain it happens many more times than it is reported.

Situation: Man asks woman for a first date. She accepts, he picks her up, buys her an expensive dinner, they see a terrific show, have a great time, and then they go back to his place for drinks.

They begin to kiss, make out, it becomes heavy petting, they go to his bed with full intentions of having sex. They are completely naked, he is about to penetrate her: And she says "Stop! I don't want to do this! No!"

He can call her a bitch and she certainly is a cocktease, but if he decides to force the issue and fuck her it is considered rape. Period. Sex isn't anything the woman "owes" to the man because he bought her dinner and took her to a show. (Proving it in court is another matter.)

I am always amazed at the number of intelligent adult men and women who do not understand that simple equation. Going on a date does not mean you have to have sex unless both partners are willing.

 

[Guest]

cant -

I also have fantasies about losing control. But not rape - never that - more of a feeling of absolute security knowing I can let myself fall and I know I'll be caught. It's knowing that I don't have to be strong 100% of the time.

I have a great deal of responsibility in my career; I tend to be very focused, determined, and I don't put up with a lot of bullshit.

It is wonderful sometimes to be able to trust my partner with everything. He allows me to regroup and to feel safe when I do.

Small aside for him - We play naughty D/s games (let your imagination roam here) but at one point not very long ago I was squirming away from him because of the lovely teasing touches and spanks he was giving me. He told me later that it really bothered him. He loves the squirms but not me moving away from him because he doesn't want to feel as if he is forcing me to have sex.

So my own version of a knight loves to assert his strength on my ass cheeks but doesn't want to force his damsel in distress.

He's a great guy.



And cant? Your bravery for that girl was incredible, the actions of a true man. I'm so sorry it resulted in your personal harm. I just wanted to say that you can be my knight anytime.

 

[Tanuki]

No. Rape is violence. Violence and a lust for power.

Date rape is real. And I am certain it happens many more times than it is reported.

I am always amazed at the number of intelligent adult men and women who do not understand that simple equation. Going on a date does not mean you have to have sex unless both partners are willing.

sweetsubsarah, I think you're misinterpreting boxlicker's post - I don't think anyone in the thread denied that date rape is real or is indeed rape. Of course there are still people (outside this thread and forum) who will deny date rape is real.

Does anyone else have trouble writing "boxlicker"?

 

[angela146]

But I read one of Angela's stories. It was all right, but the male figure was so uncompromisingly swinelike masterful that it repulsed me.

Other elements were delicious and very hot. But when my father beat me, you know, he was three times my age at least, and thrice my mass besides. With every right in law to do it. A child has very few more rights than a piece of the furniture, you know, except that they cannot be sold or intentionally put at risk.

I simply get no charge from a figure in a story of either gender who has a superhuman undeniability and a desire to cause pain.

Which story did you read?

I suspect you are referring to "Michelle's Last Spanking". If so, please be aware that it wasn't a fantasy. Unlike most of my other stories, that particular story was intended to be stark realism.

The parents were my dragon, not my knight. They are not the kind of "rapist" that I dream of. They are the monster that my knight rescues me from and the terror I need to escape.

If "Michelle..." was disturbing because of a mixture of eroticism and abuse, then it had the right effect. It was intended to take you inside the disturbing reality that is left behind by child abuse.

I haven't actually posted any of my rape fantasies yet. They are so personal that I having a hard time sharing them.

The closest would be "Exhausted by Hubby".

 

[Guest]

I think it was the wording -

The wording caught my attention.

It was the way in which it was stated about date rapes not involving violence. (I believe the act of rape itself is violent.)

But I realize what Boxlicker was saying. A bit of miscommunication on a date; the guy wants to get laid, she gives him a token protest, he pushes the issue, so she has sex (even though maybe she wouldn't have otherwise).

After? She feels slightly embarassed and angry that the sex happened. And a bit humiliated that she wasn't able to stop it, that she didn't try hard enough. And she feels shame.

And the guy? He may have no clue any of this is even happening. The date was fun, the sex was good, he may call the girl - who knows? I know he should be aware that things weren't exactly right during the act, but something happens to men when they are aroused.

(Isn't that terrible? I don't want to man-bash but honestly! An erection tends to lessen the blood flow to the brain!)

If people would wait until they knew each other a little better before they had sex many of these miscommunication issues would probably disappear.

 

[Guest]

Does anyone else have trouble writing "boxlicker"?

 

[angela146]

I hadn't thought of it that way. A rollercoaster that might kill you ceases to be exciting and becomes terrifying. That's how a rape fantasy can be exciting, while a real rape would be terrifying. Criticizing rape fantasies is a bit like criticizing sky divers for enjoying a free fall that would be horrible to someone without a parachute.

I can't think of any crazier analogy than the sky divers.

It's a wonderful analogy.

Whenever an experienced skydiver jumps out of a plane or a rollercoaster rider gets on a ride, they both know that occasionally someone really does get killed or injured doing this. But it proably won't happen today to them.

Once the ride (or jump) begins, the rider has no option to change his/her mind. The only thing they have is their trust in people who designed and maintain the ride (or the person who constructed and packed the parachute).

When my husband uses real force on me, I have to trust that he won't go too far. I am physically unable to push him off of me once he has me pinned down.

And, God help me, I really want to *know* that I'm going to be fucked even if I say "no"; even if I use my safe-phrase.

In a story, or a "close my eyes and daydream" fantasy, it can go even farther. I can imagine the rapist beating me or stabbing or hurting me more than I would ever want to be hurt.

I can do it because it's imaginary. I can wave my mental magic wand and the pain is gone (or the rapist turns into a toad or something).

 

[Boxlicker101]

Re: I think it was the wording -

The wording caught my attention.

It was the way in which it was stated about date rapes not involving violence. (I believe the act of rape itself is violent.)

But I realize what Boxlicker was saying. A bit of miscommunication on a date; the guy wants to get laid, she gives him a token protest, he pushes the issue, so she has sex (even though maybe she wouldn't have otherwise).

After? She feels slightly embarassed and angry that the sex happened. And a bit humiliated that she wasn't able to stop it, that she didn't try hard enough. And she feels shame.

And the guy? He may have no clue any of this is even happening. The date was fun, the sex was good, he may call the girl - who knows? I know he should be aware that things weren't exactly right during the act, but something happens to men when they are aroused.

(Isn't that terrible? I don't want to man-bash but honestly! An erection tends to lessen the blood flow to the brain!)

If people would wait until they knew each other a little better before they had sex many of these miscommunication issues would probably disappear.

I think my post was misunderstood. There is rape and there is date rape and, legally, they are the same thing. However, there are differences. First, to make a scenario: a man and a woman have been out together, and she wants to say goodnight at her door and he wants to come in for sex. He punches her several times, knocks her unconcious, drags her into the house, rips off her clothes and rapes her. That is not date rape; it is rape.

However, the scenario that SSS describes is not rape at all. If she goes along, even though she is not really interested, but passively lets him do what he wants, that would not be rape. The scenario that I described earlier probably shouldn't be considered rape either, but it probably would result in a conviction if she swore out a complaint. The problem is that women so often say one thing and, because of coyness or game-playing or some other unfathomable womanly thing, mean another. This is described by women in another thread entitled "A Poll for Men and Women" or something like that.

To be considered rape, I think there should be either violence or the threat of violence. There should be evidence of violence such as bruises, torn clothing or the like. A threat would involve a weapon, which could include fists, but there would have to be a spoken threat. "If you don't do what I want, I will bust up your pretty face" or something like that.

I have never been on a jury but if I ever were, and a man were accused of date rape and he claimed she was willing and there was no physical evidence, I would probably vote for acquittal on the grounds that guilt had not been proven. I sayd "probasbly" because it would depend on circumstances.

If you think "boxlicker" is hard to write, you should see my email address.

 

[Marsipanne]

Mental note to self:

I will never, ever, ever, do an unfathomably womanly thing. I don't think I do anyway, but I will never, ever, purposefully mislead somebody that way.

 

[RavenSpirit2k4]

Re: Re: Why are some rape stories allowed, some arent?

The distinction has always been rape fantasies are permitted, but Rapist fantasies are not.

There is a bit more to it than the "victim has to enjoy it" -- the rapist has to intend that the victim enjoy it. But even that explanation falls short of predicting the subjective judgement of the editor.

Uh, I don't mean to be a tattletale, but there's one story in the BDSM category that is a pure rapist fantasy. In it, two men rape a woman literally to death and she doesn't enjoy one second of it, nor do they indend for her to. She is tied down and raped and dies, with the rapists reaction being "well we broker her". It was actually quite revolting.

I think it slipped past because the author labeled it BDSM, but as a BDSM practitioner, I can assure you it's not BDSM at all, not even a BDSM fantasy. The "victims" in a BDSM fantasy at least survive.

 

[bridgeburner]

Boxlicker,

Date Rape is not a term reserved to define what actions take place during a rape. It is a term used to define the difference between being raped by a stranger and being raped by someone you know that isn't related to you which would be Incestuous Rape. The better and more accurate term to use is Aquaintence Rape.

There are gray areas in sex and there are women who don't say what they mean but it is not a good legal defense to expect a judge to believe you're a mind reader and knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that even though she was saying "No, I don't want to" she really meant "Yeah, come on and do me."

I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that women are liars and cockteases and that unless you punch her then it's not rape, but that's how your post comes across.

To be considered rape, I think there should be either violence or the threat of violence. There should be evidence of violence such as bruises, torn clothing or the like. A threat would involve a weapon, which could include fists, but there would have to be a spoken threat. "If you don't do what I want, I will bust up your pretty face" or something like that.

How scary do you think a guy needs to be before a woman can honestly be in fear of physical violence? Most adult women have the upper body strength of a 12yo boy. They can be wrestled and held down without too much effort and if she believes that by laying there and taking it she may avoid being beaten on top of being raped then you can't really blame a girl for making that choice.

I haven't noticed that people always make a threat or a verbal announcement that they're about to punch you in the face or slap you or anything else. "Fucking whore" doesn't really convey the exact message "I'm now going to pummel you". Regardless, you can't prove a warning was or wasn't given unless there were witnesses.

Perhaps it's not something that someone who hasn't been there can understand, but you don't have to actually hit someone to put them in fear that you might do so.


-B

 

[angela146]

To be considered rape, I think there should be either violence or the threat of violence. There should be evidence of violence such as bruises, torn clothing or the like. A threat would involve a weapon, which could include fists, but there would have to be a spoken threat.

The distinction of force versus not forced is, at least in some legal circles, what consitutes the difference between first degree, second degree and third degree rape.

As an example, see: http://www.wsu.edu/~wrc/Advocacy/definitions.html

Let's take another scenario to illustrate the point:

Man and woman in bed together. She says explicity that she wants oral sex and maybe a hand job but doesn't want intercourse.

Later, he gets her off really good and she is laying there enjoying the afterglow. He then turns silent, pins her wrists to the bed, opens her legs with his and fucks her.

The whole time, she stays "stop", "quit", "no", "get off me" etc. But because of his superior strength (and the fact that he happens to be on top at the moment). She can't fight him off.

Not only that but his hands aren't leaving any bruises on her wrists.

To me, holding her down when she says "no" is violence and I think it would meet your informal standard, although it might not leave enough evidence to be provable.

So, let's actually divide the up into categories:

A. Direct Threat of deadly force (knife at throat etc.)
B. Physical violence (battery etc.)
C. force that overcomes resistance (holding down, handcuffs etc.)
D. implied threats
E. Not capable of consent (under age, Mental incapacity etc.)
F. threats to a third party (i.e. "I'll kill your son...")

Items A and B (under the rules cited in the above link) would be First Degree. Items C, D, E and F would be Second Degree.

Washington State also adds a third degree which includes "... lack of consent ... clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct", which I would guess means saying "no".

I'm guessing that you would say that third degree rape (by this definition) isn't rape?

What say you to the various forms of Second Degree Rape (again, according to this definition)?

BTW: In the cited in the link above, it says that Third Degree Rape applies to "... sexual intercourse with another person, not married to the perpetrator".

That seems to say that Third Degree Rape cannot be committed on a wife (or husband). Only First and Second Degree rapes can be committed on a spouse.

So, if I read this correctly, consent is not an issue between spouses. It isn't rape unless the husband uses force, threat of force, implied threat etc. A wife can't just say "no" she has to resist (or be threatened) in order for it to be rape.

 

[angela146]

Another BTW:

I think I like the distinction between spouses. If I interpret this correctly, it means that I can say "no" to hubby and he doesn't have to take "no" for an answer.

*But* if I try to get up off the bed and he holds me down, *then* it become rape.

Having said that, I still want to be able to waive the "forcible compulsion" and incapacitation issues. In other words, as a married couple, I want us to be able to give consent (and later be able to withdraw consent) to the use of force if we wish to do so.

I realize that many married couples (perhaps even most) would not want to do that but hubby and I like it that way.

 

[sweetnpetite]

What book is this and is it available on lit?

I'm interested

This is the classic "damsel-in-distress" scenario, and it's pervasive in our culture's storytelling, which reflects our underlying society. Hero, villian, damsel. Villian threatens damsel (often sexually), hero defeats villian and rescues damsel, and damsel rewards hero. Oddly, the hero and damsel are often (perhaps usually) portrayed as being celibate and non-sexual, since our culture views sex in such a negative light. The result is that sexuality becomes associated with villiany.

I tried to tackle this in my novel by inverting the roles. The villian is nonsexual, and the hero and heroine are extremely sexual. More than this, though, it is the heroine who in the end saves the hero, making the tough call that the classic damsel-in-distress story usually assigns to the man. It was an interesting exercise, but I'm sure it'll be drowned out by all the typical love stories where the woman is a prize, because that's what people seem to want to believe about women.

Which is a pity, because I agree that it causes problems in relationships and elsewhere.

 

[sweetnpetite]

Boxlicker,

Date Rape is not a term reserved to define what actions take place during a rape. It is a term used to define the difference between being raped by a stranger and being raped by someone you know that isn't related to you which would be Incestuous Rape. The better and more accurate term to use is Aquaintence Rape.


-B

Thank you for pointing this out.

The term date rape was originaly meant to make people aware that they *could* be raped by people they new, and even people they agreed to go out with. NOT to imply that it is some *lesser* sort of offense.

Most rapes are commited by people known to the victim.

It seems that so many people still believe that 'real' rape is when an ugly smelly stranger jumps you in the dark and forces you to the ground, rips your clothes, punches you or cuts you for fun and leaves you there when he's done.

So not true.

Rapists can and are goodlooking, employed, well groomed, charming and many other things. Rapes often take place in the victims home or in a public or semi-public setting. Most of them don't even take place at night.

Legally there is no such thing as 'date rape' it's not a legal term. If you are raped on a date or by someone you know it is simply rape- criminal sexual conduct. The degree of the offense goes by what sexual contact was made, not on how or how well the victim and rapest where aquanted.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Boxlicker,

Date Rape is not a term reserved to define what actions take place during a rape. It is a term used to define the difference between being raped by a stranger and being raped by someone you know that isn't related to you which would be Incestuous Rape. The better and more accurate term to use is Aquaintence Rape.

There are gray areas in sex and there are women who don't say what they mean but it is not a good legal defense to expect a judge to believe you're a mind reader and knew beyond a shadow of a doubt that even though she was saying "No, I don't want to" she really meant "Yeah, come on and do me."

I'm sure you didn't mean to imply that women are liars and cockteases and that unless you punch her then it's not rape, but that's how your post comes across.



How scary do you think a guy needs to be before a woman can honestly be in fear of physical violence? Most adult women have the upper body strength of a 12yo boy. They can be wrestled and held down without too much effort and if she believes that by laying there and taking it she may avoid being beaten on top of being raped then you can't really blame a girl for making that choice.

I haven't noticed that people always make a threat or a verbal announcement that they're about to punch you in the face or slap you or anything else. "Fucking whore" doesn't really convey the exact message "I'm now going to pummel you". Regardless, you can't prove a warning was or wasn't given unless there were witnesses.

Perhaps it's not something that someone who hasn't been there can understand, but you don't have to actually hit someone to put them in fear that you might do so.


-B

I don't like your definition (or your spelling) of acquaintance rape. To use a scenario again, suppose there is a man who is staling a wolman and she complains and he goes to jail. When he gets out, he takes revenge by raping and beating her. You are defining that as acquaintance rape while I just call it rape and the fact that knew each other is immmaterial except for the purposes of her identifying him. I wouldn't call that date rape either, just rape and assault. I use the term "date rape" the way it is usually defined. A "date" is some kind of social engagement, usually between a man and a woman, although the persons involved could be gay men or women. "Date rape" would be a rape perpetrated by one of the persons against the other during the date or at its conclusion.

There are gray areas and there are women who don't mean what they say, as you say. I agree that if one person says to the other "No, I don't want to do that" and the other person forces the speaker to have sex, that would be rape. On the other hand, if the person is coyly saying "Oh, I really shouldn't be doing this" while holding up his or her arm so the other person can remove his or her shirt, or turning his or her back so the other person can remove his or her bra, rising up from a bed or sofa or car seat to facilitate removal of undergarments, that would be a different story. In this case, I think the alleged victim's actions would be more important than what was said.

I do not mean to say that women are liars and cockteases, although some are. I also don't mean that beating her up is the only way to rape her, and I certainly didn't mean to imply that. Looking over my recent posts, I don't see how they could be taken to imply that.

Being scary is something that guys can't help. If a man and a woman are parked somewhere and petting and he says something like "Let's get into the back seat and have sex", with no threat of any kind, implied or overt, and she goes along, can she later say that she was scared that he would be violent if she didn't? I certainly hope not because almost every non-marital sex act that happenbs could be considered to be rape. On the other hand, if he wrestles her to the ground and holds her against her will, that would constitute violence and is certainly rape or if he threatens her, or even treats her roughly, that could be considered to be a threat and the result could be rape.

 

[cantdog]

I submitted the little story, edited a bit tighter, in the Non Consent category. My other story was there a couple days and got zero views, then three, and it still had three this morning, while the Non Consent one (Dean and Nancy at the fair) already had twelve views. I guess it's hovering on the edge of what's cool, and being passed around and discussed.

I will certainly write more of the story if the thing goes up on the boards here.

I can't see it a "fantasies of control," but I hope to be able to spin a tale to draw a little meaning out of the incident.

cantdog

ps I can't speak to the date rape definition argument we have here; sorry, box. I don't know what it's supposed to mean. I had the impression that what I saw fit the category, that's all.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The distinction of force versus not forced is, at least in some legal circles, what consitutes the difference between first degree, second degree and third degree rape.

As an example, see: http://www.wsu.edu/~wrc/Advocacy/definitions.html

Let's take another scenario to illustrate the point:

Man and woman in bed together. She says explicity that she wants oral sex and maybe a hand job but doesn't want intercourse.

Later, he gets her off really good and she is laying there enjoying the afterglow. He then turns silent, pins her wrists to the bed, opens her legs with his and fucks her.

The whole time, she stays "stop", "quit", "no", "get off me" etc. But because of his superior strength (and the fact that he happens to be on top at the moment). She can't fight him off.

Not only that but his hands aren't leaving any bruises on her wrists.

To me, holding her down when she says "no" is violence and I think it would meet your informal standard, although it might not leave enough evidence to be provable.

So, let's actually divide the up into categories:

A. Direct Threat of deadly force (knife at throat etc.)
B. Physical violence (battery etc.)
C. force that overcomes resistance (holding down, handcuffs etc.)
D. implied threats
E. Not capable of consent (under age, Mental incapacity etc.)
F. threats to a third party (i.e. "I'll kill your son...")

Items A and B (under the rules cited in the above link) would be First Degree. Items C, D, E and F would be Second Degree.

Washington State also adds a third degree which includes "... lack of consent ... clearly expressed by the victim's words or conduct", which I would guess means saying "no".

I'm guessing that you would say that third degree rape (by this definition) isn't rape?

What say you to the various forms of Second Degree Rape (again, according to this definition)?

BTW: In the cited in the link above, it says that Third Degree Rape applies to "... sexual intercourse with another person, not married to the perpetrator".

That seems to say that Third Degree Rape cannot be committed on a wife (or husband). Only First and Second Degree rapes can be committed on a spouse.

So, if I read this correctly, consent is not an issue between spouses. It isn't rape unless the husband uses force, threat of force, implied threat etc. A wife can't just say "no" she has to resist (or be threatened) in order for it to be rape.

Since your post started with a part of my post, I am assuming that you are asking my opinion.

In the case of the man and woman in bed, I would consider this to be rape but I doubt that it would ever be prosecuted if she complained.

As for the categories, I would say that A, B, C and F are certainly rape. As for D, I'm not sure what an implied threat would be. If the man says "If you don't suck me off, I am gonna break your jaw," that is a threat, not an implied threat. On the other hand, if a man and a woman are petting and making out and he suggests having sex and he is not treating her roughly, and voices no threat, I don't see how there can be considered to be an implied threat. If she later says something like "He is so big and strong, I was afraid he might injure me if I didn't give in," I would consider that to be bogus.

As for E, statutory rape is statutory rape, whether perpetrated against a boy or a girl. When I was a teenager, if an adult woman had wanted to have sex with me, I would have considered myself to be a beneficiary, not a victim, and so would have virtually every teenage boy at that time. Now, I'm not so sure. As for mental capacity, that would depend on the degree. Mildly retarded but able to think for themselves, I would say "NO". So retarded as to be practically a vegetable, I would say "YES". In between would be a grey area. Unconscious from drugs, including alcohol, would be rape but that is also a matter of degree. If a person is just barely drunk enough to be unable to drive legally, that person could still give or withhold consent. If that same person were passed out from drinking, then sex would be rape.

I would go further and add sex through extortion. If a woman is shoplifting and the store security spots her and catches her red-handed and says something like "Sex or jail," and she chooses sex, I would consider that to be rape because she hasn't really given her consent.

 

[Guest]

Two things real quick:

One, I haven't been around for a while and have not read all the posts in this subject. Two, I never knew there WAS A rule against rape on this sight.

Now, for why I started this post.

I find it hard to beleive that there is a rape rule and if so, I find it even harder to beleive that there is some kind of LINE that writers are not allowed to cross.

I read some of the posts and people said "Fantasy Rape" is allowed but "Real" rape, or violent rape, isn't! In my opinion, this would be a very hard thing to judge. I have a story posted on another website, my only rape story. It isn't real violent, no one is beaten or killed, Hell there isn't even a weapon.

In this story the TWO male's end up having sex with TWO different girls. The first one enjoys it. She's asked for it. The second girl DOESN'T want it or enjoy it. How would this story be judged? Maybe I'll submit it and find out.

I read others that stated that "if the 'victim' orgasmed, it wasn't a rape. It was non-consent or fantasy.

I hate to spoil the idea, but it is a fact of life that a LOT of women who are raped, violently, do end up having an orgasm. Their own body betrays them. The assault isn't bad enough, isn't traumatic enough to stop the woman's body from enjoying what it is DESIGNED to enjoy. The human female was designed to enjoy being penetrated by the human male, to assure the continuation of the speicies. Just like the male was designed to enjoy penetrating the female.

Before I go on, let me explain that I do NOT approve of rape in any form no matter how this next part of my post sounds. I beleive rapists should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Honestly, I don't think the law goes quite far enough in punishing rapists. I think injuring or killing Children is the worst crime possible. Injuring or killing a FEMALE, child or adult, is second. I know and accept that date rapes happen. BUT I also understand that our nation has not yet learned how to PROPERLY prosecute a rapist. A woman stating "He did it!" Should NOT be enough to convict a man and ruin his life. There have been MANY, MANY cases where it turned out an acccused or even a convicted rapist, was NOT the real criminal. The way we prosecute rape crimes MUST be changed somehow. I digress...

Now, for the rest of my statement.

While it's probably true that some do not enjoy rape stories, there are some, myself included, who do enjoy rape stories, fantasy rapes as well as "violent" rapes. As I said above, I would never committ the crime in reality, but there is absolutly NOTHING wrong with reading about it in a FICTIONALIZED story.

I don't get into the victim being severely abused so I don't read those stories and I don't think I have EVER read a snuff story but I do enjoy an occasional rape story, fantasy or otherwise.

There is no law against writing or reading a rape story and I personally, think it's rather odd that a site committed to erotic, sexually charged stories would BAN rape stories. I understand it's a private site and the owner(s) can do as they wish. I just find it odd and slightly hypocritical.

If you use the arguement that a Rape story might INSPIRE someone to rape. Then allowing people to read non Consent stories could give them the same ideas. Bondage, sadism, masochism(sp?) and others CAN BE JUST as dangerous and can lead to rape when brought into the real world and used to surprise someone.

Can you imagine coming home and your spouse, who you love very much, decides they want something new and tie you down and spank you with a leather belt without you knowing anything about it and not giving you the option to back out. Your spouse may think you would enjoy such an experience. My wife gets into being spanked LIGHTLY on her ass. But she doesn't want me to use a belt or a whip on her. Yet, an erotic story could lead me to beleive that if she enjoys being spanked, she might enjoy more.

As you can tell, I am not a strong beleiver in this "We'll ruin our children, if we show them sex and violence on TV and in the movies" bit. I think a normal, well adjusted child could watch pretty much ANYTHING on TV or in the movies and understand that it IS MAKE BELEIVE!!!!! Those children who go off the deep end about violence and sex on TV most likely were already maladjusted before they EVER saw these images on TV or on the internet.

To refer back to an earlier point, a MONSTER or ALIEN raping a woman can give someone the same ideas as a HUMAN MAN raping a woman.

Lecture finsihed.

-Doffy (Aka Jefferson)

 

[cantdog]

I think "implied threats" are situations where the rapist has the life or livelihood of the person in his hands. As a parent, a step-parent, an employer.

Leverage enough not to have to make an overt threat.

cantdog