When is it Rape-Rape?

Classy thread, OP.

IMHO, "Rape" is a continuum... the lower end deserves (at most) shaming, the high end deserves prison & sex offender status. The problem is, feminists have expanded the definition of rape and pushed for the harshest punishments all the way down.

One line I'd draw to divide them is positive active harm (or threats of), vs cessation of assistance or mere inaction:

* If it's a freezing night, you're homeless, I owe you nothing, and my permission to let you spend the night in my warm house is contingent upon having sex you didn't want... and you do it to avoid getting told to leave... it isn't 'rape', it's prostitution with mutual beneficiaries and nothing more than a business transaction.

* If I'm an agent & I promise to try and get you acting jobs if you have unwanted sex, it's not rape. It's prostitution.

Now, revisiting those two scenarios a bit more...

You have a perfectly good home. I invite you to my home out in BFE & send a limo driver or let you fly in my private jet. You decline sex, and I threaten to throw you out in the cold. This falls somewhere on the rape spectrum because I actively contributed to youre vulnerable situation. I'd hesitate to say it's criminal rape worthy of prison & sex offender status, but should probably be an easy civil lawsuit for monetary damages.

Ditto, if I hire you as an actor actress, then fire you because you decline unwanted sex. Civil matter adequately covered by present-day labor law.

OK, suppose I physically detain you, or cause nonconsensual pain or injury. Rape. Ditto, if I threaten to not only fire you, but actively sabotage & harm your career as well. Prison is appropriate, but lifetime sex offender status might be negotiable. Or maybe, multiple levels of sex offender status ranging from "he'll take advantage of you, avoid becoming vulnerable to him" to "predatory pariah, keep him out of your neighborhood, away from your kids, and view him like a rattlesnake".

I'd say that draconian lifetime sex-offender-status is excessive and cruel in at least 10-30% of actual cases, precisely because the law presently acts like someone who rapes nuns & schoolgirls at knifepoint is as dangerous as someone who merely takes advantage of people with poor judgment or desperate needs who themselves tread into independent sex-worker territory.

r2 This place hoards sociopaths

Shut up Harvey.

OP would give anything to be "raped" by a Hollywood power broker, the jealous bitch!

[quote]* If it's a freezing night, you're homeless, I owe you nothing, and my permission to let you spend the night in my warm house is contingent upon having sex you didn't want... and you do it to avoid getting told to leave... it isn't 'rape', it's prostitution with mutual beneficiaries and nothing more than a business transaction.

Your example ceases to be a business transaction and becomes rape with this part "and you do it to avoid getting told to leave."

That sentence demonstrates a predatory intent. How did you lure the person into your home in the first place? Did you make the approach or did the other person? Did the person make the decision to go to your home with full information of your intent to predicate staying on sex?

If you're going to equivocate in this manner and draw nuances, then you cannot simply focus on details that make the scenario convenient, but must consider the broader context in which potential coercion or withholding of value occurs.

[quote]* If I'm an agent & I promise to try and get you acting jobs if you have unwanted sex, it's not rape. It's prostitution.

If a boss tell you he won't give you a raise or promotion unless you have sex, it's not a business transaction, it's rape. Likewise, an agent has a fiduciary responsibility to the client to act in their best interests - it's literally in the title that he's your "agent," a person who acts on behalf of another person. By making that contingent on sexual favors, it becomes rape. If he cannot act on your behalf to represent your interests without sexual favors, he shouldn't take you as a client, as the sex becomes a requirement for advancement in your chosen career.

Sometimes I forget how MRA-ish the DL is.

It depends on where it is on the spectrum.

[quote]It depends on where it is on the spectrum.

And, we know who else is always making excuses for things being on a "spectrum."

Interesting video on that topic

Well, whenever [italic]you[/italic] say so, OP. We should make a tribunal comprised solely of bitter DLers to distinguish whether it's "rape-rape". Perhaps this could be part of some conservative LGBTQ+ outreach program? Either way, I'm with you. We gotta stop the girl who cried, "RAPE!"

Especially when she's BEING raped! Have you noticed that? That raped people complain about rape the loudest? What's the deal? And they're never clear about whether it was "rape-rape" or not, and when you ask they get mad, like, CUNT, how am I supposed to know whether you were legitimately raped unless you PROVIDE THE PAPER. WORK. It's easy.

Actually, how about that? Women who've been raped must show like the receipts, the paperwork from the kit, and possibly proof the perp was sentenced before they even BEGIN to talk about it.

I believe in receipts too. Innocent until proven guilty. Not really a fan of witch hunts. Maybe I'm affected by one someday and I would want to be treated fairly under the law.

We need to root out false accusers? What should their punishment be? Maybe rape-rape?

R13, you have to be kidding me. The author of that article also wrote ‘How to avoid false accusations of rape’. It’s on amazon. One reviewer said “Wow. This book is a must read for man entering college or just man in general. The current state of America is not how it used to be. I believe in gender equality. It's good that woman have the rights to vote, work, and do things that man have done.”

Really? You’re very generous allowing us to vote and work. What in the actual fuck?! Incel bastards. Also, no woman is going to accuse a gay man of rape, dumb ass.

I suspect the concerners about these issues wanna rape, but wanna know how far [italic]they[/italic] can go before it's "rape-rape". They're hoping lawyers answer so they can know how far to take things on the dates they hope to get one day.

Is it rape when you go to Harvey's hotel room at 2:00 am and then go back a few days later?

R15 Your reply is stupid. All you do is being emotional because you read someones review. False accusations on campus are very real and even when students have evidence against them, they are still expelled.

False accusations of rape occur in less than 2% of cases. False reports of robbery occur in 5% cases.

R17, the jury certainly thought so. 82 women filed sexual assault complaints.

R17 Haha, like the fucking Weinstein case is the only instance of rape. Not that you said that, but come on, why use [italic]that[/italic] situation to make any type of point? No one looks good in that predicament.

At the end of the day false accusations are bad and rape is bad. It's a complicated matter because issues of rape are almost always he said she said cases, which are ultimately emotional and tricky to prove. Not making any excuse for false accusations or rapists, but that's the complicated nature of the situation and there's no ONE simple way to look at ALL of these cases.

So the most logical, and mature approach would be to assess these instances on a case by case basis, but we don't currently live in a time of reason or nuance. Everyone would rather shout at each other. But what I find funny are the people who are using the Weinstein situation as some hill to die on. For what purpose? Yeah, we get it, false accusations are bad, but it seems like false accusations are brought up [italic]anytime[/italic] rape is mentioned for [italic]any[/italic] reason. I always see it on DL. No matter what the headline is, if it's rape-related, there's always scrutiny on the person claiming rape. I think we should scrutinize claimants, but not at the expense of the potential rapist.

Regardless, unless we're actual jurors on these trials it doesn't matter. We're just yelling into the void, but it's foolish to think anyone's listening, and if they are, that they care.

But go nuts cycling through the SAME goddamn headlines. What are they? Weinstein? Brock Turner? Mattress Girl? Just rinse and repeat through those three topics until you feel like some goddamn genius or something, I don't know.

R19 Your statement is not correct.