NationStates Jolt Archive

After reading some other lengthy threads, I thought I'd create a poll about the subject.
What do you believe about the punishment for sex offenders (pedophiles/rapists). Do you think we need stronger punishments? Lesser punishements? Different punishments? Or is the system fine as it is.
Vote. Discuss.

I believe that the punishment should fit the crime. I, like so many others, was a "victim" of "abuse", but I would not incarcerate my father for what went on. But I believe rapists, REAL rapists, should be killed. Not Death Row killed, but bled to death through their genetalia.

Now, I am not talking about "date rape", mpmvioplent nonconsensual sex, or consensual sex where the female decided after the fact that she didn't REALLY want to fuck, she she got raped. That is bullshit.

Now, I am not talking about "date rape", mpmvioplent nonconsensual sex, or consensual sex where the female decided after the fact that she didn't REALLY want to fuck, she she got raped. That is bullshit.

Sorry, but date rape is real rape. Please don't deny it.

WTF is "[nonviolent] nonconsensual sex"? It is rape. Rape is rape is rape.

Sorry, but date rape is real rape. Please don't deny it.

WTF is "[nonviolent] nonconsensual sex"? It is rape. Rape is rape is rape.

Semantical disagreement. I believe that rape is violent, bloody, and traumatic. Nonviolent nonconsensual sex is just what the title implies. It is having sex with someone against their will, or incapacitating them from being able to consent, without resorting to violence. Please do not think I am apologizing for rapists or nonviolent offenders. I believe rapists should be killed, and nonviolent offenders should face harsh consequences.

Now, when a student gets back at a teacher for failing them by claiming abuse, or a woman changes her mind and decides that she was raped instead of just having bad sex, I think that is bullshit. Sexual abuse and nonviolent nonconsensual sex happen, but there are as many cases of a woman being abusive of her position.

Semantical disagreement. I believe that rape is violent, bloody, and traumatic. Nonviolent nonconsensual sex is just what the title implies. It is having sex with someone against their will, or incapacitating them from being able to consent, without resorting to violence. Please do not think I am apologizing for rapists or nonviolent offenders. I believe rapists should be killed, and nonviolent offenders should face harsh consequences.

Now, when a student gets back at a teacher for failing them by claiming abuse, or a woman changes her mind and decides that she was raped instead of just having bad sex, I think that is bullshit. Sexual abuse and nonviolent nonconsensual sex happen, but there are as many cases of a woman being abusive of her position.
I agreed with you on this up to the point where you said "as many cases". Simply not true. Most rapes are never reported, and instances where a rape is reported, and punishment is dolled out to an innocent person are relatively rare. Let's fix the original problem before we worry about the pretenders, because if we can stop rape from happening, there won't be any pretending to worry about, will there?

Personally, I feel that people convicted of rape should be given a period in which to be rehabilitated - in the most restrictive of prisons, mind you - and if they don't shape up, they ship out. Permanently. It doesn't take genitals to commit sexual assault, so they cash out.

Oh, and repeat offenders should be hung by their eyelids until they die of thirst.

all are good. but should be done in stages.
first offense... rehab.
second offense ... tattoo
third offense... mutilation/surgical alteration
Fourth offense.... Surgical alteration/mutilation depending on what was given for the third offense.
Fifth Offense... (if there is one) Life Imprisonment... they become cell mates to repeat offenders of other crimes.

I have heard some bad anecdotal stories that color my judgement. But I agree that a lot of offences, violent or otherwise, go unreported. Because societally, like with pedophilia, some victims of rape or nonviolent offences (like coercion) believe it is somehow their fault for allowing it or bringing it onto themselves. I consider myself an equalitist, meaning that both genders are equal. I am sorry if I come off as a sexist towards women. I do not mean to.

Now, when a student gets back at a teacher for failing them by claiming abuse, or a woman changes her mind and decides that she was raped instead of just having bad sex, I think that is bullshit. Sexual abuse and nonviolent nonconsensual sex happen, but there are as many cases of a woman being abusive of her position.

It can be difficult to distinguish when these are the case however. The current Michael Jackson trial for example…

all are good. but should be done in stages.
first offense... rehab.
second offense ... tattoo
third offense... mutilation/surgical alteration
Fourth offense.... Surgical alteration/mutilation depending on what was given for the third offense.
Fifth Offense... (if there is one) Life Imprisonment... they become cell mates to repeat offenders of other crimes.

Why give an offender the chance to repeat his/her crimes five times, bringing five fold the misery to people, families, relatives, friends? I give violent offenders no chance to reoffend. Certin nonviolent offenders may get one more chance, such as teenagers who are not fully aware of the consequences of their actions, or people in positions of power coercing others, but if they offend a second time, they are removed from the rest of society permanently.

But we cannot have reasonable enough laws and reasonable enough judiciary processes for that.

It can be difficult to distinguish when these are the case. The current Michael Jackson trial for example…

When the first MJ trial happened I was convinced that it was profiteering on the part of the parents of the child. This time there was more evidence, and now I am not so sure....

When the first MJ trial happened I was convinced that it was profiteering on the part of the parents of the child. This time there was more evidence, and now I am not so sure....

Yeah...

I voted rehab ,with reservations, because silly me, I didn't realize it was multiple option.

It would really depend on the number of previous offenses, the age of the victim and the amount of force or violence used. It would be less severe for someone who fondled a child than for someone who had intercouse with a child. I think violent offenders are much less likely to be helped by counseling and rehabilitation.

Sexual offenses have variable effects on the victims and vary in seriousness. I think violent rape and incestuous molestation have the most devestating emotional effects on the victims.

The poll and question is fallacious, there is a difference between a rapist and a pedophile and there are different types of rape - a 16 year old who consents to sex with a 20 year old has still been the victim, legally anyway, of a rape - should the rapist get the same treatment as the guy who kidnaps a 10 year old and rapes her? What about a 30 year old who beats up and violently rapes a woman as opposed to one who merely takes advantage of a drunken/stoned woman who is so out of it she can't say 'No' - you can't have a single punishment for all circumstances.

The poll and question is fallacious, there is a difference between a rapist and a pedophile and there are different types of rape - a 16 year old who consents to sex with a 20 year old has still been the victim, legally anyway, of a rape - should the rapist get the same treatment as the guy who kidnaps a 10 year old and rapes her? What about a 30 year old who beats up and violently rapes a woman as opposed to one who merely takes advantage of a drunken/stoned woman who is so out of it she can't say 'No' - you can't have a single punishment for all circumstances.

Agreed. It has to be case by case.

dp

Why give an offender the chance to repeat his/her crimes five times, bringing five fold the misery to people, families, relatives, friends? I give violent offenders no chance to reoffend. Certin nonviolent offenders may get one more chance, such as teenagers who are not fully aware of the consequences of their actions, or people in positions of power coercing others, but if they offend a second time, they are removed from the rest of society permanently.

But we cannot have reasonable enough laws and reasonable enough judiciary processes for that.hey... I'm for three times at bat... but really. if the convict is sentenced to castration (or whatever the female version is) I think most of the time, it'll stop.

then the prospect of a male rapist being turned into a woman... well that has some justice for me. but if the woman is turned into a man... then #4 is the second choice. if they still continue to proceed with their lifestyle.

After 4... do you really think there will be a fifth... if possible... if so... then Society and the Government has done everything humanly possible to stop the sick animal and so... he becomes punnishment for others... or death... whatever.

Never said my plan was perfect... only fun to watch...

I have heard some bad anecdotal stories that color my judgement. But I agree that a lot of offences, violent or otherwise, go unreported. Because societally, like with pedophilia, some victims of rape or nonviolent offences (like coercion) believe it is somehow their fault for allowing it or bringing it onto themselves. I consider myself an equalitist, meaning that both genders are equal. I am sorry if I come off as a sexist towards women. I do not mean to.

I once read some interesting stats, I'll see if I can dig them up again. But they basically said that with the number of rapes that go unreported, the number of rapists never caught, those that don't have enough evidence to be prosecuted (it was before DNA evidence was much in use) and those aquitted or plea bargained, that only about 1% of first degree rapes resulted in serving time for that charge.

Sorry, but date rape is real rape. Please don't deny it.
It is rape. Rape is rape is rape.

Depends what your definition of "date rape" is...

If its when the girl had too much to drink...then I cant say death Penalty (like I would for real rape.)

POLL: Appropriate punishment for sex crimes.

BEFORE I VOTE...I NEED YOU TO DETAIL YOUR "sex crimes" DEFINITION.

Semantical disagreement. I believe that rape is violent, bloody, and traumatic. Nonviolent nonconsensual sex is just what the title implies. It is having sex with someone against their will, or incapacitating them from being able to consent, without resorting to violence. Please do not think I am apologizing for rapists or nonviolent offenders. I believe rapists should be killed, and nonviolent offenders should face harsh consequences.

No, not a semantic disagreement. Nonviolent rape is an oxymoron.

You have some very inaccurate pictures in your head of rape.

In addition to reading this article, you should look around this website:
All Rape Is 'Real' Rape (http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/alice_vachss.html)


Now, when a student gets back at a teacher for failing them by claiming abuse, or a woman changes her mind and decides that she was raped instead of just having bad sex, I think that is bullshit. Sexual abuse and nonviolent nonconsensual sex happen, but there are as many cases of a woman being abusive of her position.

If it was not so hateful and sad, this would be hilarious.

The Charge of Rape, the Force of Myth (http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/alice_vachss2.html)

FBI crime statistics suggest that false complaints are no more frequent in sexual assault than in any other crime, and this was borne out by my experience when I ran a special victims bureau.

(University of Alberta - 'Sexual Assault and the Law in Canada' (http://www.ualberta.ca/dept/health/public_html/healthinfo/sacan.htm#false) )

False accusations of rape happen no more often than false reports of other types of crime: about 2 to 4%, which means that 96 to 98% of reports are true.

http://www.dekalbrapecrisiscenter.org/display.asp?pageid=171&ms=42&ss=114&contentid=171

MYTH: Women frequently "cry rape."

FACT: Women don't lie about rape. The FBI reports that false accusations account for only 2% of all reported sexual assaults. This is no higher than false reports for other crimes.

http://www.connsacs.org/library/justice.html

The Portland Oregon police reported in 1990 that of the 431 rape and attempted rape complaints received, 1.6% were determined to be false compared with 2.6% of stolen vehicle reports that were false. A 1989 comparative analysis of data on false rape allegations reported a rate of 2%.

http://sa.rochester.edu/masa/stats.php

The rate of false reports of rape is approximately 2 - 3% which is no different than that for other crimes.

http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/criminal_law/sexual_assault/statistics.html

there is approximately just a two to three percent rate of false rape reports, which is consistent with other crimes

No, not a semantic disagreement...

All Rape Is 'Real' Rape
no it is not.

The poll and question is fallacious, there is a difference between a rapist and a pedophile and there are different types of rape - a 16 year old who consents to sex with a 20 year old has still been the victim, legally anyway, of a rape - should the rapist get the same treatment as the guy who kidnaps a 10 year old and rapes her? What about a 30 year old who beats up and violently rapes a woman as opposed to one who merely takes advantage of a drunken/stoned woman who is so out of it she can't say 'No' - you can't have a single punishment for all circumstances.
OK, I probably meant the poll for "worst case" offenders such as violent rapists, and predatory pedophiles - but really, the discussion can apply to anything.

no it is not.

Try reading the article. Then get back to me.

I remember reading about a man accused of raping his girlfriend. he was convicted even tho the girl gave consent.

the accuser... her "Other Personalities" didn't give consent. no shit... they put each personality on the stand to testify that the B/F raped them. even tho the personality who was the G/F consented, he was charged and convicted of Multiple rapes...

can't find the source so take it as an urban legend untill I or someone else does.

no it is not.if the woman says "no" and the man continues... it's rape.

I remember reading about a man accused of raping his girlfriend. he was convicted even tho the girl gave consent.

the accuser... her "Other Personalities" didn't give consent. no shit... they put each personality on the stand to testify that the B/F raped them. even tho the personality who was the G/F consented, he was charged and convicted of Multiple rapes...

can't find the source so take it as an urban legend untill I or someone else does.

Good luck finding a reliable source for that. Cute myth.

... but really, the discussion can apply to anything.For real Rape I would vote Death Penalty...but since its "anything goes" "date-rape" "technical-rape" et all

I vote "let them walk"...until there is a clear classification of your so called "sex crimes".

if the woman says "no" and the man continues... it's rape.what if she says "yes, yes, yes, yeeeeeeeeeeesss..."

and the morning after she says she was too drunk think properly.

No, not a semantic disagreement. Nonviolent rape is an oxymoron.

You have some very inaccurate pictures in your head of rape.

Semantics (http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=semantics) 1. Linguistics. The study or science of meaning in language.
2. Linguistics. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent. Also called semasiology.
3. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics.


It is, most definately, a disagreement in semantics. Now please try to understand where I am coming from. TO ME, it is only rape if it is violent. Because I put a much harsher penalty for rape than nonviolent offence. To my definition, nonviolent rape is indeed an oxymoron.

Oxymoron (http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=oxymoron)A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.

Because to me, rape includes violence. But there are other types of sex offence that do not include violence. Please look at the situation rationally rather than saying "castrate them all!"

Again, please do not infer that I am trying to apologise for rapists or nonviolent offenders. I am not at all. As you can read from my posts, I believe sex offense at all is a serious crime, and rape is the most serious.

As for my saying that a lot of false rapes are reported, this is based on my anecdotal evidence from friends and aquaintences. I am sorry if those do not stand up to United States FBI statistics.

Do not attack me because I have a different definition of terms than you. That point is stupid to quarrel over.

There are any number of situations that qualify as "rape" but are not. Statutory rape, for one, is mostly ridiculous. Two people who are mutually inebriated and have sex, who is the "rapist"? The man? Why?

Semantics (http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=semantics)

It is, most definately, a disagreement in semantics. Now please try to understand where I am coming from. TO ME, it is only rape if it is violent. Because I put a much harsher penalty for rape than nonviolent offence. To my definition, nonviolent rape is indeed an oxymoron.

Oxymoron (http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=oxymoron)

Because to me, rape includes violence. But there are other types of sex offence that do not include violence. Please look at the situation rationally rather than saying "castrate them all!"

[snip]


Do not attack me because I have a different definition of terms than you. That point is stupid to quarrel over.

It is neither a stupid point nor a simple difference in definitions. You really just do not get it.

I am not the one with sick fantasy about castrating all rapists. You are. There are many reasons why that is wrong. Just one of which is that it is ineffective.

Try reading the article (http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/alice_vachss.html). You are right that not all sex offenses are the same.

But rape -- any case meeting the legal definition of rape -- is rape.

Saying otherwise is trivializing serious offenses and perpetuating rape myths -- whether you mean to or not.

As for my saying that a lot of false rapes are reported, this is based on my anecdotal evidence from friends and aquaintences. I am sorry if those do not stand up to United States FBI statistics.

I am sorry, but your anecdotal evidence is simply wrong. That is the point of the overwhelming statistical evidence.

Yes, there are some false rape accusations. There are also some false reports of other crimes. It amounts to about 2% of all reports.

Again, please do not infer that I am trying to apologise for rapists or nonviolent offenders. I am not at all. As you can read from my posts, I believe sex offense at all is a serious crime, and rape is the most serious.

Whether you mean to or not, you are. Read the article. All Rape Is 'Real' Rape (http://www.vachss.com/guest_dispatches/alice_vachss.html)

If that isn't enough, here are more:
Rape and "Real Rape" (http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/proceedings/20/spangaro.pdf)
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/001955.htm

Try reading the article. Then get back to me.the article has nothing new...nada....its all the same blah-blah-blah


...We can believe the people who insist that... "real" rape is the only form of sexual assault...

"real" rape is the only thing that deserves the DeathPenalty...

the others are not even crimes.

I do not want to merely castrate violent offenders. I think they forfeit their right to life. I do not believe nonviolent offenders deserve to die. Thus I make a distinction between rape and nonviolent offence. What most people call rape, I call nonconsensual offence, and both should be delt with identically. Rape is more severe to me, and merits a more severe penalty.

I will not read the article, because I do not think that this person's opinions are any better than my own. I have apologized for my false assumptions previously, and will no longer make them. That you restate what you previously asserted after I aquiesced lends evidence that you are attacking me instead of my positions, and are not really listening to what I am trying to say.

I am finished with this discussion. There are varying degrees of sex offence, and not all sex offenders are men who target women, sometimes the roles are reversed. I believe that nonviolent offenders should be rehabilitated, and I believe that violent offenders can not be. There is no way I can make my position more clear than that.

the article has nothing new...nada....its all the same blah-blah-blah




"real" rape is the only thing that deserves the DeathPenalty...

the others are not even crimes.

I'm not sure I can respond without flaming. You are beyond hope.

Your views are scary combination of deliberate ignorance and misogyny.

Nice misquote, BTW.

And the "Feminist NYTimes Columnist" =

Alice Vachss, JD, is the former Chief of the Special Victims Bureau of the Queens (NY) DA's Office. During her tenure, she prosecuted more than 100 felony cases to verdict, including rape, child sexual assault, elder abuse, domestic violence, cult abuse, and homicide.

Depends what your definition of "date rape" is...

If its when the girl had too much to drink...then I cant say death Penalty (like I would for real rape.)Agreed. If a girl gets herself plastered then takes a boy she's never met to a room and sleeps with him it isn't rape.

I think the difference is when the perpetrator intentionally and forcefully gives the victim a substance with the idea of sleeping with her (Spiking drinks).

I do not want to merely castrate violent offenders. I think they forfeit their right to life. I do not believe nonviolent offenders deserve to die. Thus I make a distinction between rape and nonviolent offence. What most people call rape, I call nonconsensual offence, and both should be delt with identically. Rape is more severe to me, and merits a more severe penalty.

I will not read the article, because I do not think that this person's opinions are any better than my own. I have apologized for my false assumptions previously, and will no longer make them. That you restate what you previously asserted after I aquiesced lends evidence that you are attacking me instead of my positions, and are not really listening to what I am trying to say.

I am finished with this discussion. There are varying degrees of sex offence, and not all sex offenders are men who target women, sometimes the roles are reversed. I believe that nonviolent offenders should be rehabilitated, and I believe that violent offenders can not be. There is no way I can make my position more clear than that.
Its the way I see it too....or close enough...
and im signing off too...

BTW i did read the article...and its same ol...same ol..

And the "Feminist NYTimes Columnist" =

Alice Vachss, JD, is the former Chief of the Special Victims Bureau of the Queens (NY) DA's Office. During her tenure, she prosecuted more than 100 felony cases to verdict, including rape, child sexual assault, elder abuse, domestic violence, cult abuse, and homicide.
so?

Nice misquote, BTW.

feel free to "full quote" yourself...it will not change anything...it will not invalidate my point...

I do not want to merely castrate violent offenders. I think they forfeit their right to life. I do not believe nonviolent offenders deserve to die. Thus I make a distinction between rape and nonviolent offence. What most people call rape, I call nonconsensual offence, and both should be delt with identically. Rape is more severe to me, and merits a more severe penalty.

I will not read the article, because I do not think that this person's opinions are any better than my own. I have apologized for my false assumptions previously, and will no longer make them. That you restate what you previously asserted after I aquiesced lends evidence that you are attacking me instead of my positions, and are not really listening to what I am trying to say.

I am finished with this discussion. There are varying degrees of sex offence, and not all sex offenders are men who target women, sometimes the roles are reversed. I believe that nonviolent offenders should be rehabilitated, and I believe that violent offenders can not be. There is no way I can make my position more clear than that.

I apologize to the extent I have attacked you personally. I recognize that I have done so to a certain degree. I am sorry.

You stated previously that your views were based on anecdotal evidence. I missed where you said you agreed your assumptions were false and you would no longer make them. I apologize for that oversight.

As to the rest of the opinion you mantain, you might consider that they too are based false assumptions. The author of the article is an expert. You might be persuaded by her explanation of why your view is both wrong and dangerous.

Wishing the death penalty for rape does not impress me. Most sexual assault conselors and anti-rape advocates oppose the death penalty for rape. The greatest problem with rape under our criminal justice system is not lack of punishment. It is lack of convictions. Your views make the latter worse.

I respect that your heart is in the right place. But the point that you do not get is that your views are not just misguided but based on stereotypes that perpetuate rape.

To me, the severity is based on the motive and force:

A girl who drinks herself stupid then goes and agrees to sleeps with someone isn't being raped, isn't being "date raped," and is a victim only of her own irresponsibility. It would be like me drinking myself stupid then charging someone with assault after they retaliate from me punching them in the face.

Statutory rape is pretty iffy. In NZ the legal age for females is 16 and there is no legal age for males. A 16.1 year old boy could be charged for rape against a 15.9 year old girl after completely consensual sex. Depends on case. Only where age has been used to intimidate or manipulate should statutory rape be applied. NOT in consensual relationships.

Someone who attacks using force is commiting "full" rape. I believe this includes date/drug rape also (when administered by attacker for the purpose - see above on alcohol). If you head out and spike someones drink with a substance designed to render them helpless you are doing the chemical equivilent of carrying them off and tying them up.


Funny(ish) story:

There was a mentally-ill woman in a facility who would accuse other patients, staff and visitors of raping her on a regular basis. In one case when she accused a male patient of raping her, it was later discovered that he was not a man and had no penis.

feel free to to "full quote" yourself...it will not invalidate my point...

You had a point?

I'm looking for the joke with a microscope.

Your views are scary ....
I get that a lot.

welcome to the Club :D

You had a point?

I'm looking for the joke with a microscope.

maybe you need a new microscope....or a new <nevermind>

To me, the severity is based on the motive and force:

A girl who drinks herself stupid then goes and agrees to sleeps with someone isn't being raped, isn't being "date raped," and is a victim only of her own irresponsibility. It would be like me drinking myself stupid then charging someone with assault after they retaliate from me punching them in the face.

Statutory rape is pretty iffy. In NZ the legal age for females is 16 and there is no legal age for males. A 16.1 year old boy could be charged for rape against a 15.9 year old girl after completely consensual sex. Depends on case. Only where age has been used to intimidate or manipulate should statutory rape be applied. NOT in consensual relationships.

Someone who attacks using force is commiting "full" rape. I believe this includes date/drug rape also (when administered by attacker for the purpose - see above on alcohol). If you head out and spike someones drink with a substance designed to render them helpless you are doing the chemical equivilent of carrying them off and tying them up.

Generally agreed, but ...

The first scenario is -- if that is what happened -- not rape. If the girl has too much to drink, flirts with a guy -- hell, even agrees to sleep with him -- but changes her mind -- and then he rapes her, it is rape. But his story will be that she got drunk, slept with him, and is now having second thoughts. It scary how many rush to believe such a story. The fact is that this almost never happens. Those who think it does should prove it.

The second scenario is very rarely prosecuted. Trying finding numbers for people convicted of such statutory rape that have been incarcerated. Statutory rape is sometime relied upon to prosecute cases where the rape was nonconsensual, but the rapist claims it was consensual. (It is amazing how often this happens. Because a claim of consent is best defense to rape charges, many idiots will take this position on the record before they realize they have admitted a crime.)

Generally agreed, but ...

The first scenario is -- if that is what happened -- not rape. If the girl has too much to drink, flirts with a guy -- hell, even agrees to sleep with him -- but changes her mind -- and then he rapes her, it is rape. But his story will be that she got drunk, slept with him, and is now having second thoughts. It scary how many rush to believe such a story. The fact is that this almost never happens. Those who think it does should prove it.

The second scenario is very rarely prosecuted. Trying finding numbers for people convicted of such statutory rape that have been incarcerated. Statutory rape is sometime relied upon to prosecute cases where the rape was nonconsensual, but the rapist claims it was consensual. (It is amazing how often this happens. Because a claim of consent is best defense to rape charges, many idiots will take this position on the record before they realize they have admitted a crime.)I have a feeling that if you were the Judge most boys would end up in Jail...either way.

Generally agreed, but ...

The first scenario is -- if that is what happened -- not rape. If the girl has too much to drink, flirts with a guy -- hell, even agrees to sleep with him -- but changes her mind -- and then he rapes her, it is rape. But his story will be that she got drunk, slept with him, and is now having second thoughts. It scary how many rush to believe such a story. The fact is that this almost never happens. Those who think it does should prove it. If she makes it clear to him that she does not want it, then yes, it is date/drug rape. Remember that they are probably just as pissed as each other. Yes, he has a responsibility not to continue if she clearly expresses that she does not want to, but she has the responsibility to express that wish clearly (Especially if she's taken him into a room and ripped his clothes off - kinda confusing).

I don't know the stats. I do expect any girl with a personality that would let her get really drunk and sleep with a stranger would probably not regret it strongly and probably not cry rape.

The second scenario is very rarely prosecuted. That's the impression I had, still a problem with the law though.

I have a feeling that if you were the Judge most boys would end up in Jail...either way.


....
And the "Feminist NYTimes Columnist" =

Alice Vachss, JD, is the former Chief of the Special Victims Bureau of the Queens (NY) DA's Office. During her tenure, she prosecuted more than 100 felony cases to verdict...

Is that you? :confused:

OK, I probably meant the poll for "worst case" offenders such as violent rapists, and predatory pedophiles - but really, the discussion can apply to anything.

then i say death.

there are shades of grey for some of the other scenarios mentioned though.

then i say death.

there are shades of grey for some of the other scenarios mentioned though.

Even for something so severe, the death penalty is still too much. The death penalty is too much for anything, even serial killers.

Look at it this way: They kill people, so they're bad. If we sentence them to death, it makes us no better.

would you support life imprisonment over death penalty?

the article has nothing new...nada....its all the same blah-blah-blah

"real" rape is the only thing that deserves the DeathPenalty...

the others are not even crimes.

I've always thought of rape as something I wouldn't wish on anybody. I believe I've changed my mind.
Your kind of thinking is the same as many rapists. Nice club you have.

Is that you? :confused:

<sigh>

I don't know why I bother to respond to your idiotic drivel, but no. I am not Alice Vachss. I am also not her husband Andrew Vachss. They both happen to be experts on sex crimes. I know neither personally, but know of their work. If you knew anything about the subject, you would likely have heard of them.

I happen to be male. I also happen to have worked as a Public Defender. So, contrary to your assumptions, I am not anti-male and I wouldn't convict all males accused of rape. I wouldn't convict everyone charged with anything. Most would consider me soft on crime.

You've already stated that most rapes are not crimes. So we know where you stand. With the rapists -- no matter how guilty.

I've always thought of rape as something I wouldn't wish on anybody. I believe I've changed my mind.
Your kind of thinking is the same as many rapists. Nice club you have.

Whew, I was starting to think I was alone here against the He-Man Women-Hater's Club.

Nicely put.

would you support life imprisonment over death penalty?

Yes.

i find the idea of being confined for a lifetime much worse then death. i think we would be doing them a service.

It's a lot better than offing them like barbarians.

i find the idea of being confined for a lifetime much worse then death. i think we would be doing them a service.

It's not even primarily my concern with the prisoner, though that's part of it. It's what I think of societies willingness to take a life. I refuse to quietly acquiesce to the government killing in my name.

i find the idea of being confined for a lifetime much worse then death. i think we would be doing them a service. The problem being (at least here) that "life" imprisonment means bugger all.

If it were "throw away the key" type life, then I think that would be great. With a bit of hard labour thrown in. None of this cable TV crap either.

Look at it this way: They kill people, so they're bad. If we sentence them to death, it makes us no better.
Look at it this way: They kidnap people and hold them against their will, so they're bad. If we sentence them to jail and hold them against their will, it makes us no better.

Hmm?

I'm back for a bit and had time to think. While I still believe that violent cases of rape, where the victim is beaten and has to remain in hospital for a while, should remove the offender from the ability to do it again, wether it be with swift execution or otherwise.
That means that the legal system and judiciary process needs to be reformed to seek out the truth instead of the best lawyer. I do not care how barbaric it is, as I do not view barbarism as a bad thing in all cases, (barbarians are in my heritage), if you could kill someone else or cause them such grievous trauma, you have forfeited your life. In my view only those who are insane, or are deeply, deeply remorseful, deserve to live.

Death is final. I believe that removing them from the ability to cause harm to other people is much preferable, and less "barbaric", than making them rot in a penatentiary for the rest of their lives.

But, to another degree, I believe every case should be looked at upon its own merits and not sentenced based on a previous case.

As you can see, I am very confused.

The problem being (at least here) that "life" imprisonment means bugger all.

If it were "throw away the key" type life, then I think that would be great. With a bit of hard labour thrown in. None of this cable TV crap either.

Life without possibility of parole is an available sentence.

More importantly, all this chest pounding about severity of sentence misses the mark. The biggest problem in dealing with sexual offenses is not that the punishments are too light. It is the low rate of convictions. Increasing the punishments only makes getting convictions more difficult. It is counter-productive.

Life without possibility of parole is an available sentence. International barrier to communication :) It ain't over here.

More importantly, all this chest pounding about severity of sentence misses the mark. The biggest problem in dealing with sexual offenses is not that the punishments are too light. It is the low rate of convictions. Increasing the punishments only makes getting convictions more difficult. It is counter-productive.Or you could take another step back and look at preventing it.

Do you know that in NZ pepper spray is illegal? So are tazers.

How do you propose to increase convictions? You still need evidence to convict, if we lower the level of evidence you need we simply open the way to the "cry rape" cases (No matter how rare they are). Are you talking about getting more women who are raped to report it in the first place?

This is where I differ on most people about the death penalty. I do not believe that the justice system should be based upon revenge, but based upon keeping people safe. Killing a murderer, serial killer, rapist et cetera is permanently removing them from the populace at large, thus ensuring that they can no longer ruin lives. Forcing them to remain locked away in prison where htey can rape and murder other inmates (really, when you get a fourth consecutive life sentence, you probably stop caring too much) is done out of revenge, not out of an attempt to keep the rest of society, even more minor criminals, safe.

International barrier to communication :) It ain't over here.

Or you could take another step back and look at preventing it.

Do you know that in NZ pepper spray is illegal? So are tazers.

How do you propose to increase convictions? You still need evidence to convict, if we lower the level of evidence you need we simply open the way to the "cry rape" cases (No matter how rare they are). Are you talking about getting more women who are raped to report it in the first place?

If rape trials didn't put the victim on trial instead of the offender, more victims might be willing to come forward.
A case in Florida failed to convict because the woman was wearing a lace mini-skirt and had gone to the mans car to do drugs with him. Apparently the willingness to do drugs negates the right to say "no."

It's a lot better than offing them like barbarians.

whats more barbaric, locking someone away for decades at a time in a building where they will likely be regularly beaten and raped by other men or putting a needle in them and seeing them slowly drift off to sleep?

If rape trials didn't put the victim on trial instead of the offender, more victims might be willing to come forward.
A case in Florida failed to convict because the woman was wearing a lace mini-skirt and had gone to the mans car to do drugs with him. Apparently the willingness to do drugs negates the right to say "no."

No, the willingness to go into someones car while dressed like a slut to do drugs destroys your credibility is what it does.

No, the willingness to go into someones car while dressed like a slut to do drugs destroys your credibility is what it does.
Apparently you and the jury foreman think alike. Shouldn't it destroy his credibility at least as much as it does hers.
Are you one of those people that think only the pure can be raped?

Apparently you and the jury foreman think alike. Shouldn't it destroy his credibility at least as much as it does hers.
Are you one of those people that think only the pure can be raped?

Sure, it destroys his credibility too, but he has the presumption of innocence, so with both of their credibilities destroyed, I have to find him not guilty. Unless there was better evidence.

Apparently you and the jury foreman think alike. Shouldn't it destroy his credibility at least as much as it does hers.
Are you one of those people that think only the pure can be raped?

i think it matters a lot more if the person who has been raped is "pure". i have little sympathy for drug users i'm afraid...

I must say the number of people on here who think certain kinds of rape are ok disgust me.

for the record, non-violent can have some of the worst psychological effects - with the victim feeling like it's their fault.

Many times I have thought about getting a shotgun and aiming it crotch-high...

but in a civilised society we must rise above that.

I am intrigued by the idea of chemical castration for serial offenders. If they really are son mentally ill they cannot stop themselves lusting after children or women or men, maybe that would be best for them?

I think more should be done to try and prevent it happening in the first place. After all, a vast majority of rapes are by someone the victim knows, and these could be prevented with better education and by getting children out of abusive homes. We know that violence and abuse at home drastically increases the chance of someone being violent and abusive towards their own partner/children.

Maybe compulsory anger management and childcare classes for all parents to be?

Sure, it destroys his credibility too, but he has the presumption of innocence, so with both of their credibilities destroyed, I have to find him not guilty. Unless there was better evidence.
I see where you're coming from, but willingness to use drugs doesn't make a woman believable in my eyes.

EDIT:
And I don't care if she's wearing a sheer thong and no top, it doesn't make rape alright. And I wouldn't consider a stripper or prostitute less believable.

^ See above post.
IMHO you need some help.

i think it matters a lot more if the person who has been raped is "pure". i have little sympathy for drug users i'm afraid...

I see where you're coming from, but willingness to use drugs doesn't make a woman believable in my eyes.

EDIT:
And I don't care if she's wearing a sheer thong and no top, it doesn't make rape alright. And I wouldn't consider a stripper or prostitute less believable.

I guess its a matter of personal opinion. I tend not to trust drug addicts or prostitutes. Strippers is a different topic because stripping is not a criminal activity. I dont think the word of a stripper is discredited because of his/her occupation unless they are also prostitutes (which is very common in the world of strippers).

I guess its a matter of personal opinion. I tend not to trust drug addicts or prostitutes. Strippers is a different topic because stripping is not a criminal activity. I dont think the word of a stripper is discredited because of his/her occupation unless they are also prostitutes (which is very common in the world of strippers).
Why not prostitutes?

Why not prostitutes?

Because their disregard for the law and selling of their own bodies shows a lack of morals. Someone who lacks basic morals cannot be trusted because lying is an immoral decision and these people have already proven themselves to lack morals. Also, most prostitutes are drug addicts and the fact they are willing to sell their body to feed their habit makes it likely that they would be willing to do other things such as lying to feed their habit or for other selfish reasons. The bottom line is that they show a lack of morals that puts their word in question. That doesnt mean I would automatically acquit if a prostitute accused someone of rape. What it means is that their word is nearly worthless and I would need to see some evidence solid enough to overcome the prostitutes' lack of credibility.

Of course if I was living in a jurisdiction where prostitution was legal, it would be a different story entirely.

If rape trials didn't put the victim on trial instead of the offender, more victims might be willing to come forward.
A case in Florida failed to convict because the woman was wearing a lace mini-skirt and had gone to the mans car to do drugs with him. Apparently the willingness to do drugs negates the right to say "no."I agree that the "she asked for it" thing is bollocks, but you can't ignore the whole situation either.

A slutty, drunk, drugged up girl getting into a car with a guy after telling him she wanted to sleep with him vs. a girl in a pub having a wine and a meal whose drink gets spiked.

You just can't treat those situations exactly the same.

I agree that the "she asked for it" thing is bollocks, but you can't ignore the whole situation either.

A slutty, drunk, drugged up girl getting into a car with a guy after telling him she wanted to sleep with him vs. a girl in a pub having a wine and a meal whose drink gets spiked.

You just can't treat those situations exactly the same.

She never said she was willing to sleep with him. It might have been his hope, but it doesn't mean she had any such plans.

But mainly screw them the hell over, keep em alive for as long as poss, leaving them to suffer for what theyve done, they don't deserve death - same as murderers, peadophiles,torturers and politicians. (Oh yeah, and fox hunters) :gundge:

After reading some other lengthy threads, I thought I'd create a poll about the subject.
What do you believe about the punishment for sex offenders (pedophiles/rapists). Do you think we need stronger punishments? Lesser punishements? Different punishments? Or is the system fine as it is.
Vote. Discuss.
all sex crimes should carry the same penalty: life of hard labor with no possibility of parole. all the wages from the hard labor should go to charities and organizations which help the victims of sexual abuse and sex crime.

She never said she was willing to sleep with him. It might have been his hope, but it doesn't mean she had any such plans.I'm not referring to any particular case. I was just pointing out extremes to show that, even though a short skirt isn't a invitation to sex it may not be completely discountable (when combined with other things, etc, etc) as the situation must be considered as a whole.

Death is final. I believe that removing them from the ability to cause harm to other people is much preferable...
I agree,

Death Penalty is what they deserve.

This is where I differ on most people about the death penalty. I do not believe that the justice system should be based upon revenge, but based upon keeping people safe. Killing a murderer, serial killer, rapist et cetera is permanently removing them from the populace at large, thus ensuring that they can no longer ruin lives. Forcing them to remain locked away in prison where htey can rape and murder other inmates .....

That is an exellent point.

One problem with punishing sex offenders is that someone has to punish them. And who would be legally allowed to mutilate another human being? How would that make us better than them?

One problem with punishing sex offenders is that someone has to punish them. And who would be legally allowed to mutilate another human being? How would that make us better than them?why mutilate a rapist, just put them to sleep...parmanently.

all sex crimes should carry the same penalty: life of hard labor with no possibility of parole. all the wages from the hard labor should go to charities and organizations which help the victims of sexual abuse and sex crime.

Why are sex crimes more serious than non-sex crimes?

all sex crimes should carry the same penalty: life of hard labor with no possibility of parole. all the wages from the hard labor should go to charities and organizations which help the victims of sexual abuse and sex crime.thats stupid.

If rape trials didn't put the victim on trial instead of the offender, more victims might be willing to come forward.
A case in Florida failed to convict because the woman was wearing a lace mini-skirt and had gone to the mans car to do drugs with him. Apparently the willingness to do drugs negates the right to say "no."The Jury has to take into consideration the fact that she was going drugs...

and in rape cases her testimony is the only proof...all she has to say is that at some point she said "no"(its his word against hers...she wins)

The Jury has to take into consideration the fact that she was going drugs...Why?
and in rape cases her testimony is the only proof...all she has to say is that at some point she said "no"(its his word against hers...she wins)She wins if the jury both believes her and cares. They may disbelieve her. They may believe her but still think she deserved it. It is in the nature of juries that they can do some of their own thinking.

Death Penalty is the best solution.
its all rapists deserve.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/iran_hanging

Why? .They do it for every witneses, why would you want an exeption?

all sex crimes should carry the same penalty: life of hard labor with no possibility of parole. all the wages from the hard labor should go to charities and organizations which help the victims of sexual abuse and sex crime.

How can you give a unilateral punishment for varying degrees of crime? Justify that with any kind of logic instead of letting your emotions rule the day.

Ando n the whole drugged up prostitute or whatever the situation, I believe that being inhebriated on any substance renders your judgement invalid. Both parties are equally at fault because neither could make effective judgements because of the substances they were abusing.

Going in to someone's van that you barely know to do drugs is stupid, anyway. Some believe that a girl would deserve whatever she gets

They should immobilize the offender using succinylcholine, and then while the offender is conscious, they should use surgically implanted electrodes to stimulate the pain center of his brain - inducing a sensation thousands of times greater than any possible real physical pain.

Keep the pain on at that level until the offender dies of thirst or starvation.

They should immobilize the offender using succinylcholine, and then while the offender is conscious, they should use surgically implanted electrodes to stimulate the pain center of his brain - inducing a sensation thousands of times greater than any possible real physical pain.

Keep the pain on at that level until the offender dies of thirst or starvation.
Ouch that's harsh.
Personnaly, I don't think nonconsensual sex is anymore than theft. Well except in some tribal anti-sex judeo-christian societies.

Ouch that's harsh.
Personnaly, I don't think nonconsensual sex is anymore than theft. Well except in some tribal anti-sex judeo-christian societies.
Something tells me that you've never been on the recieving end of nonconsentual sex. It's traumatic. Victims of rape - in just about any form - develop Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD), the same thing that all those Vietnam war veterans came home with. The rape haunts them for the rest of their lives, just like the war haunts the veterans. Kinda puts a new perspective on things, doesn't it?

Something tells me that you've never been on the recieving end of nonconsentual sex. It's traumatic. Victims of rape - in just about any form - develop Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome (PTSD), the same thing that all those Vietnam war veterans came home with. The rape haunts them for the rest of their lives, just like the war haunts the veterans. Kinda puts a new perspective on things, doesn't it?

I work with battered women - the man doesn't even have to rape you to give you a bad case of PTSD. It's almost impossible to work with some of them - they can't handle being within 50 yards of any male for the rest of their lives.

Death by agonizing electronic stimulation of the brain over a period of days is the least we can do.

- the man doesn't even have to rape you to give you a bad case of PTSD...Would you give us an example...

not that I doubt you...Im just trying to figure...

I work with battered women - the man doesn't even have to rape you to give you a bad case of PTSD. It's almost impossible to work with some of them - they can't handle being within 50 yards of any male for the rest of their lives.

Death by agonizing electronic stimulation of the brain over a period of days is the least we can do.how do you do the electronic stimulation thingie?

Would you give us an example...

not that I doubt you...Im just trying to figure...

Try being stalked and occasionally beaten by an EX-husband for six years.

Then try and go outside - just to go to work - without being afraid - without constantly looking over your shoulder.

how do you do the electronic stimulation thingie?

Read back in the thread - it's there.

When the first MJ trial happened I was convinced that it was profiteering on the part of the parents of the child. This time there was more evidence, and now I am not so sure....

There's also more evidence of profiteering. Including but not limited to a miraculous recovery from terminal cancer on the part of the accuser. The fact that he was dying with only months to live is what got him into Neverland in the first place. Now, I'm not saying that people don't recover from potentially deadly cancer. However, if David Copperfield turned water into wine I'd check his stage equipment before calling him Jesus.
The mother of the accuser has already used the publicity from this case to commit fraud, gaining hundreds of thousands of dollars in the process.

Raping or sexually abusing (IE no penetration) any child should be jail and castration. And i mean take all the bits both getting rid of the urges and the equipemnt (men can take hormones after castration so it's not enough)

Chemical castration can also be overridden with hormones.

There can be no second chances with kids!

Rape of an adult or young woman (or man) should depend on the circumstances. Repeat offenders should also receive the same treatment.

One off or less violent offenders should be improsones for 15 to life depending on the severity of the crime and castrated should they reoffend. Two chances are enough people, they know it's wrong.

Try being stalked and occasionally beaten by an EX-husband for six years.
that is not a case of Real Rape its something else....like agrvated assault...battery etc?
.
.

BTW that "ex-husband" of yours deserves to be Flogged in public (Singapore Style)...and the locked so he can think about it.

that is not a case of Real Rape its something else....like agrvated assault...battery etc?
.
.

BTW that "ex-husband" deserves to be Flogged in public Singapore Style...and the locked up so he can think about it.

PTSD - Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome - is real. It is caused by traumatic events - events that do not have to be rape.

It was first recognized during WW I as "shell shock". Very real.

The crime you're thinking of is "stalking".

Try being stalked and occasionally beaten by an EX-husband for six years

that is not a case of Real Rape its something else....like agrvated assault...battery etc?

In these cases they system works fine, in theory! All that needs improving is the inforcement of court orders and harsher punishments when they are broken. For example, sereious jail time or forcing the ex to move to another state (like hawaii or alaska, and if they come from there florida or something) if the order to stay away is broken.

Rape of an adult or young woman (or man) should depend on the circumstances. Repeat offenders should also receive the same treatment.

One off or less violent offenders should be improsones for 15 to life depending on the severity of the crime and castrated should they reoffend. Two chances are enough people, they know it's wrong.
15 years? so they can rape and be raped in Jail...and then rape some more when they are freed...

Nah...I like better how the Iranian handled that case...

In these cases they system works fine, in theory! All that needs improving is the inforcement of court orders and harsher punishments when they are broken. For example, sereious jail time or forcing the ex to move to another state (like hawaii or alaska, and if they come from there florida or something) if the order to stay away is broken.

In general, the system doesn't work. At all.

It's nearly impossible to get a restraining order or protective order in most US states. And, once you get one, the police will take every opportunity to try not to enforce it - even if the language in the order is very specific.

A lot of women die, and many more are beaten - not because they go back, but because they left - and their ex-husband or ex-boyfriend stalked them down and attacked them. Despite the protective orders.

Men who commit domestic abuse and stalking should be shot. On the first offense.

The crime you're thinking of is "stalking".
stalking is not the same as Assault.

and the thread is about Rape anyways.

.....and about "sex crimes" (whatever that is :confused: ).

stalking is not the same as Assault.

and the thread is about Rape anyways.

.....and about "sex crimes" (whatever that is :confused: ).

For a minute there, we were talking about PTSD...

For a minute there, we were talking about PTSD...
you are rigth...my mistake.

the article has nothing new...nada....its all the same blah-blah-blah

"real" rape is the only thing that deserves the DeathPenalty...

the others are not even crimes.

The U.S. Supreme court has ruled that the death penalty for rape is unconstitutional.

The U.S. Supreme court has ruled that the death penalty for rape is unconstitutional.cant they use the "not-so-secret-anymore" CIA chartered planes to send them to Iran?

cant they use the "not-so-secret-anymore" CIA chartered planes to send them to Iran?

lol -
Actually, most rape and "sex crimes" are prosecuted by state, rather than federal, authorities - most states don't have the money to send their prisoners to Iran, even if Iran would accept them so, nope, I guess were just stuck with 'em here.

that is not a case of Real Rape its something else....like agrvated assault...battery etc?

dont get me wrong, i wouldnt be crying if that happened.

In general, the system doesn't work. At all.

It's nearly impossible to get a restraining order or protective order in most US states. And, once you get one, the police will take every opportunity to try not to enforce it - even if the language in the order is very specific.


Hence the "In theory" bit of my post. the legislation and laws are there, they just need enofrcing.

The U.S. Supreme court has ruled that the death penalty for rape is unconstitutional.

If you had the death penalty for rape many many more rapists would murder their victims. 1. because they;re gonna be fried anyway so why not and 2. they stand a better chance of excaping justice if the victim isnt alive to ID them and say what happened before, during and after.

Having the death penalty for rape will only lead to more dead women.

The U.S. Supreme court has ruled that the death penalty for rape is unconstitutional.

That's too bad. Lucky for us, the Supreme Court can always change its mind.

If you had the death penalty for rape many many more rapists would murder their victims. 1. because they;re gonna be fried anyway so why not and 2. they stand a better chance of excaping justice if the victim isnt alive to ID them and say what happened before, during and after.You are raising a very interesting issue.

In the US (and maybe other countries too) any person accused of Rape is sure to be tortured and sometimes killed in Jail...many of them are raped while still waiting to see their case heard...

so most of them are not willing to xpend a week inside...

Sadly thats why in the US the Rape victims are murdered so often...

so I still say we need deathPenalty for men convited of Real rape.

Ummm... What's so horrid about rape..? Not to sound insensitive, only, don't you get over it in a year or two?

I think the punishment should be jail for several years.

Ummm... What's so horrid about rape..? Not to sound insensitive, only, don't you get over it in a year or two?

I think the punishment should be jail for several years.

You haven't ever been raped, obviously.

Ummm... What's so horrid about rape..? Not to sound insensitive, only, don't you get over it in a year or two?

I think the punishment should be jail for several years.

Many victims, especially those who are the victim of violent assualts and young children who are forcibly raped don't "get over it" in a few years - it can and does haunt them and effect them for the rest of their lives in many cases.

Ummmmm... No. I haven't.

Have you? Is rape very common?

Ummmmm... No. I haven't.

Have you? Is rape very common?

Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault. (NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.)

Over the last two years, more than 787,000 women were the victim of a rape or sexual assault. (National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice, 1996.)

The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States wereraped last year. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996.)

Whatever the judge decides.

and thats just based on reported figures, more women date raped dont report it.

...Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice...
see?

we dont have enough Jails...

we need Flogging ...and the death penalty for the Real cases of Rape...

OOC: Revenge is the only suitable punishment for any crime, but this is especially true of rape. Let the rapist's victims put on strapons and have their way with him. Better yet, make it public to heighten the humiliation of the criminal.

IC: Yes, this is actually the punishment for rape in Olwe. Victims of theft get to raid the houses of the people who wronged them as well. :D

...Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.......see?

we dont have enough Jails...

we need Flogging ...and the death penalty for the Real cases of Rape...
Im sure the Jails in Singapore are not overcrowded.

OOC: Revenge is the only suitable punishment for any crime, but this is especially true of rape. Let the rapist's victims put on strapons and have their way with him. Better yet, make it public to heighten the humiliation of the criminal. :D
an eye for an eye...its on the Bible.

Originally Posted by Olwe
OOC: Revenge is the only suitable punishment for any crime, but this is especially true of rape. Let the rapist's victims put on strapons and have their way with him.

to hell with that! I'd want an old, splintering baseball bat!

Flogging? Like Flogging Molly?

I Love FM!

Why are sex crimes more serious than non-sex crimes?
never said they were. this topic is about punishment for sex crimes, so i responded to the topic alone rather than going on some tangent.

thats stupid.
well gee, you sure showed me!

How can you give a unilateral punishment for varying degrees of crime? Justify that with any kind of logic instead of letting your emotions rule the day.

my decision was actually reached specifically by NOT letting my emotions rule the day. my emotions tell me that any person who would sexually violate another human should themselves be sexually violated until they die. however, my mind over-rides that and reaches the only solution i find acceptable to both spirit and reason.

i believe death would be the most appropriate penalty for sexual assault, but i don't believe our justice system is accurate enough to avoid killing innocent men if we tried to use the death penalty. therefore, i believe a life of labor in service of their victims is the best punishment our falible system can mete out. if they are later acquitted they can always be released. if not, then they can spend the remainder of their existence trying to pay back their debt; they never will be able to, of course, because what they took is beyond price, but at least they can work toward it.

Ouch that's harsh.
Personnaly, I don't think nonconsensual sex is anymore than theft. Well except in some tribal anti-sex judeo-christian societies.What the hell is nonconsensual sex if not rape?

I don't see how you can have sex with someone against their will but have that not be rape.

When a man chops your arm off is that just theft of your arm?

Make 'em eunichs. ;)

Ummm... What's so horrid about rape..? Not to sound insensitive, only, don't you get over it in a year or two?Thats disgusting.

Rape is being violated in the most private, personal place possible. A bruise might last a few weeks, but I believe a lot of women never fully get over it, some committing suicide. Sex (for most people) is a very personal thing.

Ummmmm... No. I haven't.

Have you? Is rape very common?
On top of what Mauiwowee contributed above, it's estimated that one out of every four women has been, or will be raped at some point during their lives.

What should be the appropiate Punishement for an acomplice...someone directly helping the rapist comit the crime...

like someone holding the hands or something like that.

What the hell is nonconsensual sex if not rape?

I don't see how you can have sex with someone against their will but have that not be rape.

When a man chops your arm off is that just theft of your arm?

YEAH! Well said.

(And I love your next post too.)

What should be the appropiate Punishement for an acomplice...someone directly helping the rapist comit the crime...

like someone holding the hands or something like that.

Interesting question to most probably, but most states will consider an accomplice to be as guilty as the principal if he "aided, abbetted or encouraged" the principal to commit the underlying offense - i.e. you hold her/him down so your buddy can rape him/her - you're just a guilty as the person who committed the acts themselves - best defenses:
1. you didn't know that was what was gonna happen when you held him/her down;
2. You had a reasonable belief if you didn't go along with it, you'd get raped/killed/seriously injured yourself - i.e. you were coerced into your participation.

Thinking about it more, if for any reason the state wouldn't keep them in prison until they rot, tatooing is an interesting idea.

It would be a good form of social punishment, and would ensure they continued to be affected by the consequences of thier crime (just as the victim is).

It also adds a measure of protection against re-offending. Imagine someone with an 'R' tatooed on their cheek trying to chat someone up in a bar. Even further to this, if I owned a bar I'd have anyone with an 'R' or 'DR' (Drug/date rape) walk right back out the door.

It would be a lot harder to get victims to trust you. Most rapes are commited by people the victim knows. This way you'd know if the guy you met at the bar might not be a good person to get to know.

Any thoughts on tatooing?

Thinking about it more, if for any reason the state wouldn't keep them in prison until they rot, tatooing is an interesting idea.

It would be a good form of social punishment, and would ensure they continued to be affected by the consequences of thier crime (just as the victim is).

It also adds a measure of protection against re-offending. Imagine someone with an 'R' tatooed on their cheek trying to chat someone up in a bar. Even further to this, if I owned a bar I'd have anyone with an 'R' or 'DR' (Drug/date rape) walk right back out the door.

It would be a lot harder to get victims to trust you. Most rapes are commited by people the victim knows. This way you'd know if the guy you met at the bar might not be a good person to get to know.

Any thoughts on tatooing?

Simple answer: It's worse than Megan's law - example - what about a guy who is twenty who does a 16 year old with full consent who is convicted of statutory rape - should he be tatooed? I say "no way."

Again, it is a matter of circumstance as to what the punishment should be.

Simple answer: It's worse than Megan's law - example - what about a guy who is twenty who does a 16 year old with full consent who is convicted of statutory rape - should he be tatooed? I say "no way."

Again, it is a matter of circumstance as to what the punishment should be.Roger that, see my post earlier in the thread on statutory rape.

What's your view for it's use in violent or drug rape?

Ummm... What's so horrid about rape..? Not to sound insensitive, only, don't you get over it in a year or two?

I think the punishment should be jail for several years.

I suppose to really know you'd have to have been there.
This is the site: http://www.ncptsd.va.gov/facts/general/fs_what_is_ptsd.html

But for those that just want an over view-

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, or PTSD, is a psychiatric disorder that can occur following the experience or witnessing of life-threatening events such as military combat, natural disasters, terrorist incidents, serious accidents, or violent personal assaults like rape. People who suffer from PTSD often relive the experience through nightmares and flashbacks, have difficulty sleeping, and feel detached or estranged, and these symptoms can be severe enough and last long enough to significantly impair the person's daily life.

PTSD is marked by clear biological changes as well as psychological symptoms. PTSD is complicated by the fact that it frequently occurs in conjunction with related disorders such as depression, substance abuse, problems of memory and cognition, and other problems of physical and mental health. The disorder is also associated with impairment of the person's ability to function in social or family life, including occupational instability, marital problems and divorces, family discord, and difficulties in parenting.

Who is most likely to develop PTSD?
1. Those who experience greater stressor magnitude and intensity, unpredictability, uncontrollability, sexual (as opposed to nonsexual) victimization, real or perceived responsibility, and betrayal

2. Those with prior vulnerability factors such as genetics, early age of onset and longer-lasting childhood trauma, lack of functional social support, and concurrent stressful life events

3. Those who report greater perceived threat or danger, suffering, upset, terror, and horror or fear

4. Those with a social environment that produces shame, guilt, stigmatization, or self-hatred

PTSD is associated with a number of distinctive neurobiological and physiological changes. PTSD may be associated with stable neurobiological alterations in both the central and autonomic nervous systems, such as altered brainwave activity, decreased volume of the hippocampus, and abnormal activation of the amygdala. Both the hippocampus and the amygdala are involved in the processing and integration of memory. The amygdala has also been found to be involved in coordinating the body's fear response.

Psychophysiological alterations associated with PTSD include hyper-arousal of the sympathetic nervous system, increased sensitivity of the startle reflex, and sleep abnormalities.

People with PTSD tend to have abnormal levels of key hormones involved in the body's response to stress. Thyroid function also seems to be enhanced in people with PTSD. Some studies have shown that cortisol levels in those with PTSD are lower than normal and epinephrine and norepinephrine levels are higher than normal. People with PTSD also continue to produce higher than normal levels of natural opiates after the trauma has passed. An important finding is that the neurohormonal changes seen in PTSD are distinct from, and actually opposite to, those seen in major depression. The distinctive profile associated with PTSD is also seen in individuals who have both PTSD and depression.

Roger that, see my post earlier in the thread on statutory rape.

What's your view for it's use in violent or drug rape?

I'll put it this way, rather than write a huge post -

Juries are the conscience of our communities, whatever they say should go as far as immediate punishment, once the person has done their time, including any parole they may be entitled to under state laws, they should be free to go about their lives without hinderance - where I live, rape will get you 10-40 or life with a requirement you do 70% of a "term certain" before you are eligible for parole - i.e. someone convited of "rape" must do a minimum of 7 years before they could even hope to get parole.

Furthermore, the sentencing guidelines for my state call for a standard of 20 years (i.e. 14 before parole) for a singular, 1st offense conviction.

I oppose tatooties and Megan's law since both "punish" people above and beyond that which the law imposes.

Don't get me wrong though - you violently rape a person, life without parole is too good for you. However, if the jury, the voice of our society, says you should only do 20 years, then once that time is up (14 in prison and 6 on parole; for example) then it should be up and you should not be stigmatized for what you did in the past - people can and do change. A past horrendeous act, like a violent rape, does not mean, automatically, that another such rape will take place.

I'll put it this way, rather than write a huge post -

Juries are the conscience of our communities, whatever they say should go as far as immediate punishment, once the person has done their time, including any parole they may be entitled to under state laws, they should be free to go about their lives without hinderance - where I live, rape will get you 10-40 or life with a requirement you do 70% of a "term certain" before you are eligible for parole - i.e. someone convited of "rape" must do a minimum of 7 years before they could even hope to get parole.

Furthermore, the sentencing guidelines for my state call for a standard of 20 years (i.e. 14 before parole) for a singular, 1st offense conviction.

I oppose tatooties and Megan's law since both "punish" people above and beyond that which the law imposes.

Don't get me wrong though - you violently rape a person, life without parole is too good for you. However, if the jury, the voice of our society, says you should only do 20 years, then once that time is up (14 in prison and 6 on parole; for example) then it should be up and you should not be stigmatized for what you did in the past - people can and do change. A past horrendeous act, like a violent rape, does not mean, automatically, that another such rape will take place.
Let's not forget, though, that there is modern technology to remove tattoos. Supposing we make it impossible, or nearly so, for a convicted rapist to get the tattoo removed privately / outside of the system, we could produce a system by which, once their sentence was up, the tattoo designating them as a rapist would be removed.

Personally, I'd be more comfortable if this were a moot point and rapists were simply imprisoned indefinitely or removed from the gene pool. But that may not really be practical.

In any case, we definitely need a way to make it impossible, or nearly so, for rapists to rape again. Tattoos are one good idea, does anyone else have another?

I'll put it this way, rather than write a huge post -

Juries are the conscience of our communities, whatever they say should go as far as immediate punishment, once the person has done their time, including any parole they may be entitled to under state laws, they should be free to go about their lives without hinderance - where I live, rape will get you 10-40 or life with a requirement you do 70% of a "term certain" before you are eligible for parole - i.e. someone convited of "rape" must do a minimum of 7 years before they could even hope to get parole.

Furthermore, the sentencing guidelines for my state call for a standard of 20 years (i.e. 14 before parole) for a singular, 1st offense conviction.

I oppose tatooties and Megan's law since both "punish" people above and beyond that which the law imposes.

Don't get me wrong though - you violently rape a person, life without parole is too good for you. However, if the jury, the voice of our society, says you should only do 20 years, then once that time is up (14 in prison and 6 on parole; for example) then it should be up and you should not be stigmatized for what you did in the past - people can and do change. A past horrendeous act, like a violent rape, does not mean, automatically, that another such rape will take place.

I generally agree with your perspective, but your premise is wrong: juries don't determine sentences in the US. (I don't know if they do elsewhere.) Juries do determine if someone who is eligible for the death penalty may be sentenced to death. Otherwise, juries determine guilt and judges determine sentences.

Life imprisonment on an island FAR FAR FAR away. That way there's no possibily of escape. No parole either. The island would only have sex offenders.
Failing that, after utterly conclusive DNA evidence, Death would be my second choice.
On the island there could be research done to find out what makes people into such criminals and see if in fact such persons could be treated before they ever offend.
To me the best thing would be if such crimes could be prevented ahead of time.

I generally agree with your perspective, but your premise is wrong: juries don't determine sentences in the US. (I don't know if they do elsewhere.) Juries do determine if someone who is eligible for the death penalty may be sentenced to death. Otherwise, juries determine guilt and judges determine sentences.

In Arkansas, where I live, juries determine sentences. A judge decides whether they are "stacked" or not (consectutive vs. concurrent) he can also overrule a jury's sentence if it is without "substantial support" - However, in 15 years as an attorney, I never saw a judge reject a jury suggestion and impose more time and I never saw one impose less. Judges run for election here and if a jury says "this is it" they won't, as a practical matter, reject the jury sentence. They may stack it against a jury's reccomendation, but they won't change the time imposed.

I guess I'd say it this way - as a matter of law, yes, the power of sentence is with the court. As a matter of "fact" it rests with the jury as few trial judges will ever overturn a jury.

So you guys are willing to kill or mutilate people who are unfortunate enough to have a sexual orientation that deviates from the mainstream? (I am begining to consider paraphilia an orientation in it's own respect, considering human sexuality is not just "straight" or "gay" and is much more vast a continuum as people realize).

It's not their fault that they are attracted to younger people, really.. do they deserve death for acting on their feelings which to them feel as natural as a man and a woman consecrating their love?

While, it depends on how they act on their feelings.. but... it depends on the context of what goes down. meh, I'm bored I don't want to talk anymore. bye bye.

So you guys are willing to kill or mutilate people who are unfortunate enough to have a sexual orientation that deviates from the mainstream? (I am begining to consider paraphilia an orientation in it's own respect, considering human sexuality is not just "straight" or "gay" and is much more vast a continuum as people realize).

It's not their fault that they are attracted to younger people, really.. do they deserve death for acting on their feelings which to them feel as natural as a man and a woman consecrating their love?

While, it depends on how they act on their feelings.. but... it depends on the context of what goes down. meh, I'm bored I don't want to talk anymore. bye bye.


WTF!! - Please stay away from me!!! Violent rape and the use of force to "get your rocks off" is just a "sexual orientation?" Taking a 5 year old to bed is "natural?" The things I want to say to you would get me banned, let's just say that I seriously suggest and recommend you discuss your opinoins with a really good psychiatrist; you clearly have failed to consider significant facts in forming your ideas.

In Arkansas, where I live, juries determine sentences. A judge decides whether they are "stacked" or not (consectutive vs. concurrent) he can also overrule a jury's sentence if it is without "substantial support" - However, in 15 years as an attorney, I never saw a judge reject a jury suggestion and impose more time and I never saw one impose less. Judges run for election here and if a jury says "this is it" they won't, as a practical matter, reject the jury sentence. They may stack it against a jury's reccomendation, but they won't change the time imposed.

I guess I'd say it this way - as a matter of law, yes, the power of sentence is with the court. As a matter of "fact" it rests with the jury as few trial judges will ever overturn a jury.

I'm afraid I'm too used to federal courts. Forget about those pesky states. :D

I'm also afraid I'm too used to assume that people really don't know what they are talking about on here. I apologize for making that assumption.

Anyway, thanks for correcting my error. Now that I'm set straight, I wholeheartedly agree with your position.

I'm afraid I'm too used to federal courts. Forget about those pesky states. :D
They really are a pain aren't they? :)

I'm also afraid I'm too used to assume that people really don't know what they are talking about on here. I apologize for making that assumption.
No sweat, usually it is a safe assumption, I make it often as well.

Anyway, thanks for correcting my error. Now that I'm set straight, I wholeheartedly agree with your position.

Ya' know, in some places you can get life for agreeing with a lawyer. :D

Thanks though. Your posts have been meritorious as well. Now, ya' want to make fun of Doujin?

So you guys are willing to kill or mutilate people who are unfortunate enough to have a sexual orientation that deviates from the mainstream? (I am begining to consider paraphilia an orientation in it's own respect, considering human sexuality is not just "straight" or "gay" and is much more vast a continuum as people realize).

It's not their fault that they are attracted to younger people, really.. do they deserve death for acting on their feelings which to them feel as natural as a man and a woman consecrating their love?

While, it depends on how they act on their feelings.. but... it depends on the context of what goes down. meh, I'm bored I don't want to talk anymore. bye bye.This is a topic about rape.

Do you consider rape being a sexual orientation? The matter is not about sexual orientation but about force. Rape is force. Drug rape is force. Molesting a child who can not comprehend or fight back against what you are doing is force.

This is a topic about rape.

Do you consider rape being a sexual orientation? The matter is not about sexual orientation but about force. Rape is force. Drug rape is force. Molesting a child who can not comprehend or fight back against what you are doing is force.

Much more polite than I wanted to put it.

This is a topic about rape.

Do you consider rape being a sexual orientation? The matter is not about sexual orientation but about force. Rape is force. Drug rape is force. Molesting a child who can not comprehend or fight back against what you are doing is force.

No it isnt, the topic is sex crimes. This includes rape as well as consentual sex between a minor and adult, and in some jurisdictions anal or oral intercourse between consenting adults. In Alabama, USA this now includes buying or selling vibrators or other sex toys as well.

No it isnt, the topic is sex crimes. This includes rape as well as consentual sex between a minor and adult, and in some jurisdictions anal or oral intercourse between consenting adults. In Alabama, USA this now includes buying or selling vibrators or other sex toys as well.

Buying or selling a dildo in Alabama is a sex crime? Shit, I though Arkansas was retarded, thank god for Alabama.

Buying or selling a dildo in Alabama is a sex crime? Shit, I though Arkansas was retarded, thank god for Alabama.

I thought the US supreme court would throw it out for sure, but they didnt. They agreed Alabama has the right to ban sex toys if they feel like it.

Buying or selling a dildo in Alabama is a sex crime? Shit, I though Arkansas was retarded, thank god for Alabama.

Yeah, and in Alabama, golf courses still don't allow black people to play on them. Not all golf courses, but I've heard that plenty are that way.

I thought the US supreme court would throw it out for sure, but they didnt. They agreed Alabama has the right to ban sex toys if they feel like it.

That is not quite accurate. The US Supreme Court merely didn't grant the petition of certiorari. They here only a small portion of cases appealed to them and denial of certiorari carries no inference of approval of the decision appealed.

Granted, the 11th Circuit's decision (www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216135.pdf) was wrong, but it was not entirely inane. It was based on the fact that the law only prohibits the commercial activity of selling sex toys -- and not the use, possession, or gratuitous distribution of sex toys. The issue was whether there was a fundamental right to sexual privacy that required the statute be subject to strict scrutiny. The decision was 2-1.

Yeah, and in Alabama, golf courses still don't allow black people to play on them. Not all golf courses, but I've heard that plenty are that way.

That's legal if they are private clubs.

Private clubs can refuse anyone membership they want, just like you don't *have* to let anyone you don't want into your house.

:ADDENDUM: This is how Augusta manages to deny female golfers.

Why are sex crimes more serious than non-sex crimes?
never said they were. this topic is about punishment for sex crimes, so i responded to the topic alone rather than going on some tangent.
I inferred that you believe that they are from your idea of suitable punishment for sex crimes, which you stated and which seems considerably more severe than the punishments you would suggest for non-sex crimes. As this topic is about appropriate punishment for sex crimes, I am asking you why you think it is appropriate to punish sex crimes more severely than non-sex crimes. I'll endeavour to be clearer in future.

I said rape was no more than theft and some people talked about PTSD.
First off, theft can lead to PTSD if it is violent. Let say someone breacks into your house with a gun, threaten you and fire around you then he burns your house and steal your car. This can cause PTSD.
On the other hand, if someone drugs you and steal your car while your are asleep, you can just wake up and say "shit my car is gone". It depends on your sensibility.
The point is that rape does not necessarily lead to PTSD. In anti-sex judeo-christian societies, it does often, but even there not always. There is a saying where I live which says "if rape is unavoidable, close your eyes and enjoy it". Some people wake up after a drug rape and just think "shit this guy raped me, I'm not gonna talk to him anymore". I know a girl who has been raped and didn't have PTSD and she certainly doesn't want his offender to be killed. She would rather have him forced to clean her toilets for one year.
But of course as soon as you talk about sex in the US, there is a general hystery and they all finger point the bad bad sex-loving animal like Bill Clinton (who bombed Kosovo) the sex criminal.

I said rape was no more than theftYou commies, have to make everything about property :rolleyes:

There is a saying where I live which says "if rape is unavoidable, close your eyes and enjoy it". Some people wake up after a drug rape and just think "shit this guy raped me, I'm not gonna talk to him anymore". I know a girl who has been raped and didn't have PTSD and she certainly doesn't want his offender to be killed. She would rather have him forced to clean her toilets for one year.. what country is this?

it's all about your sense of self isn't it, and where you invest your sense of self. In a non-violent rape, what is damaged is your sensibility. I suppose there is a certain kind of sensibility that might not be damaged by rape.

Having said that, I certainly wouldn't say that rape is no more than theft, just because some people might be ok with it.

If anyone is familiar with the Dave Chappelle show on Comedy Central, Dave made a skit where he was in the moment with a woman, but before he would have sex with her he made her sign "The Love Contract"...stating that the sex is consensual..."initial here for oral"..and "initial here for anal" ..funny. The sad truth is that today there are so many scumbag rapist men and lying women that unless there is hard evidence either way in a rape case you just don't know who to believe.

You commies, have to make everything about property :rolleyes:

what country is this?

it's all about your sense of self isn't it, and where you invest your sense of self. In a non-violent rape, what is damaged is your sensibility. I suppose there is a certain kind of sensibility that might not be damaged by rape.

Having said that, I certainly wouldn't say that rape is no more than theft, just because some people might be ok with it.
Yes I think it depends on what importance you give to sex (or to your car in the example above).
I believe it is relative to your culture. If you are a christian who thinks sex should never happen before wedding and get raped, it is not just your pussy which is raped, but your religion as well. If you are a bitch who sell your body regularly to strangers and get raped, you just think that guy stole you the money you deserve for your body.
But this is not new, justice is relative to your culture anyway. In some cultures, killing your dog is a crime, in others it is delinquance.
In my books, rape is not a crime.

In my books, rape is not a crime.

I should think that your books would change if it happened to you.

In my books, rape is not a crime.i'm glad i don't live in your books

If anyone is familiar with the Dave Chappelle show on Comedy Central, Dave made a skit where he was in the moment with a woman, but before he would have sex with her he made her sign "The Love Contract"...stating that the sex is consensual..."initial here for oral"..and "initial here for anal" ..funny. The sad truth is that today there are so many scumbag rapist men and lying women that unless there is hard evidence either way in a rape case you just don't know who to believe.

I spelled consentual wrong in thew previous...Ha, what dumb f**K

I should think that your books would change if it happened to you.
I don't think so. I can't believe non-violent rape on me would lead to PTSD. I would think about it for a month or 2, get drunk, have a fatty and forget about it. But it didn't happen, so I don't know. Anyway I would certainly rather be raped than murdered by far. But raping me is difficult because I'm nearly always consential.

I don't think so. I can't believe non-violent rape on me would lead to PTSD. I would think about it for a month or 2, get drunk, have a fatty and forget about it. But it didn't happen, so I don't know.

Violent rape is more than PTSD. And I would bet that you would feel violated.

If rape isn't a crime, and your body is merely property (in your eyes, state property), then we could have the state force women to sexually service any male who feels he didn't get his fair share of sex.

Right? We do want an equitable distribution of property, and in your books, that would be an equitable distribution of property by the state.

Just pair off, according to your sexual preference, and we'll force everyone to have sex.

Violent rape is more than PTSD. And I would bet that you would feel violated.

If rape isn't a crime, and your body is merely property (in your eyes, state property), then we could have the state force women to sexually service any male who feels he didn't get his fair share of sex.

Right? We do want an equitable distribution of property, and in your books, that would be an equitable distribution of property by the state.

Just pair off, according to your sexual preference, and we'll force everyone to have sex.
You don't have to link anything I say with communism. But if you want to talk economy, I will say that capitalism is what you describe. Sexual service is mandatory for the poor so they can eat.

You don't have to link anything I say with communism. But if you want to talk economy, I will say that capitalism is what you describe. Sexual service is mandatory for the poor so they can eat.Which poor?

Which poor?
Those who are forced into prostitution by their financial situation.

You don't have to link anything I say with communism. But if you want to talk economy, I will say that capitalism is what you describe. Sexual service is mandatory for the poor so they can eat.

Well, if you're saying that people will work according to their talents, virtually every woman is capable of servicing a man sexually. And if you're providing to everyone according to their needs, there are few men who would say that they don't need sex.

So the communist government should force women to service men (at no cost, obviously) whenever a man says he needs sex. Any woman a man passes should be considered communal property.

Those who are forced into prostitution by their financial situation.
In the US, even the poor here eat better than most people in the Third World. Without resorting to prostitution.

Most prostitutes here (the ones on the street especially) do so to fund their drug habits.

I should add that a communist government should also provide free heroin, crack, and meth to any addict, as that is their "need".

Those who are forced into prostitution by their financial situation.so sexual service isn't mandatory for the poor, it is in fact mandatory for those poor people for whom it is mandatory, which makes it exactly as mandatory as getting a clown tattooed on your left buttock.

Well, if you're saying that people will work according to their talents, virtually every woman is capable of servicing a man sexually. And if you're providing to everyone according to their needs, there are few men who would say that they don't need sex.

So the communist government should force women to service men (at no cost, obviously) whenever a man says he needs sex. Any woman a man passes should be considered communal property.
Interesting there is a word about this accusation in the communist manifesto. Read it I don't want to hijack this thread for educating people about communism, which is a lost cause on you anyway.

In the US, even the poor here eat better than most people in the Third World. Without resorting to prostitution.

Most prostitutes here (the ones on the street especially) do so to fund their drug habits.

I should add that a communist government should also provide free heroin, crack, and meth to any addict, as that is their "need".
it would almost certainly cost the US less to hand out free class As to whoever wanted them than it costs to fight the "war on drugs".

In the US, even the poor here eat better than most people in the Third World. Without resorting to prostitution.

Most prostitutes here (the ones on the street especially) do so to fund their drug habits.

I should add that a communist government should also provide free heroin, crack, and meth to any addict, as that is their "need".
Please stop this random talk about communism, which you obviously don't understand. Address the topic instead. And don't attack me personnaly, my opinion is still valid, whether it shocks you or not.

it would almost certainly cost the US less to hand out free class As to whoever wanted them than it costs to fight the "war on drugs".

Don't get me started on the War on Drugs. It would save innumerable lives (in terms of stopping the violence) if we legalized drugs. And if we spent a fraction of the 40 billion we currently spend per year on handing out some drugs to the poor instead of funding the militarization of our police, we would stop most violent crime AND most theft and burglary. And most prostitution would stop as well.

so sexual service isn't mandatory for the poor, it is in fact mandatory for those poor people for whom it is mandatory, which makes it exactly as mandatory as getting a clown tattooed on your left buttock.
I was talking about more than 95% of the prostitutes of the world.

I was talking about more than 95% of the prostitutes of the world.you've counted them have you?

I was talking about more than 95% of the prostitutes of the world.
Please give us a link, or we'll put this in the same category as "everyone wants communism".

you've counted them have you?
No I didn't. Anyway this is way off topic. You just attack me personnaly because you are shocked by my opinion. I'm not surprised you are shocked because it is in conflict with your judeo-christian values. You should consider it anyway because it is a valid opinion.

Please give us a link, or we'll put this in the same category as "everyone wants communism".
I will just say that I found interesting that you accused communism a communist government should also provide free heroin, crack, and meth to any addict, as that is their "need" and then And if we spent a fraction of the 40 billion we currently spend per year on handing out some drugs to the poor instead

I don't want this thread to derive like that.
I said my opinion and you attacked me on something completelly different than my stated opinion and you attack me again and again personnaly in order to avoid the topic which shocks you, but you don't address the roots of your problem. You are anti-sex and anti-communism by culture. Just open your mind to new ideas and taste the freedom.

No I didn't. Anyway this is way off topic. You just attack me personnaly because you are shocked by my opinion. I'm not surprised you are shocked because it is in conflict with your judeo-christian values. You should consider it anyway because it is a valid opinion.Please point out a personal attack. There isn't one. How can I consider your opinion when what you said wasn't an opinion? You said something like "95% of the world's prostitutes are forced into prostitution because it is the only way they have to keep them from starving". That isn't an opinion. It is a statement of fact. I haven't attacked you. I have asked you how you know this fact.

I suspect that you are wrong, but because I don't confuse my suspicions with facts, I am asking you to teach me something I didn't know. How do you know this "95%" fact? How did you arrive at it? That is all I asked you. How is that an attack?

And furthermore, you have no idea what my values are, so how can you tell what conflicts with them? And how do you arrive at the conclusion that they are judaeo-christian?

Even a prostitute can be raped ya' know - should someone who rapes a hooker be punished more or less than someone who rapes a "nice girl?"

Please point out a personal attack. There isn't one. How can I consider your opinion when what you said wasn't an opinion? You said something like "95% of the world's prostitutes are forced into prostitution because it is the only way they have to keep them from starving". That isn't an opinion. It is a statement of fact. I haven't attacked you. I have asked you how you know this fact.

I suspect that you are wrong, but because I don't confuse my suspicions with facts, I am asking you to teach me something I didn't know. How do you know this "95%" fact? How did you arrive at it? That is all I asked you. How is that an attack?

And furthermore, you have no idea what my values are, so how can you tell what conflicts with them? And how do you arrive at the conclusion that they are judaeo-christian?
I confused you with Whispering Legs. that they are more than 95% or not is not important at all. It was a reply to a personnal attack by Whispering Legs. I don't know this "fact" (which is a personnal estimation actually). I was using a random number in order to make a point. You can use 99% or 80%, it still works. What it does it just to just distract from the original topic anyway. I believe you just attack numbers and ask for proofs in order to think of something else and not be shocked by what I think.

I suspect you are judaeo-christian because you speack english and because IMO your political correctness about sex and rape fits with the judaeo-christian values, but I could be wrong.

Even a prostitute can be raped ya' know - should someone who rapes a hooker be punished more or less than someone who rapes a "nice girl?"
A prostitute can be a "nice girl" in my books. In the judaeo-christian culture nice girls don't sell their body but not in all cultures. but yes I knew a prostitute can be raped and I even talked about prostitutes being raped.
Your question is interesting. Should justice be relative to your culture or to the dominant culture in your country?

No it isnt, the topic is sex crimes. This includes rape as well as consentual sex between a minor and adult, and in some jurisdictions anal or oral intercourse between consenting adults. In Alabama, USA this now includes buying or selling vibrators or other sex toys as well.I officialy change my vote from "DeathPenalty" to "Nothing"

I confused you with Whispering Legs. that they are more than 95% or not is not important at all. It was a reply to a personnal attack by Whispering Legs. I don't know this "fact" (which is a personnal estimation actually). I was using a random number in order to make a point. You can use 99% or 80%, it still works. What it does it just to just distract from the original topic anyway. I believe you just attack numbers and ask for proofs in order to think of something else and not be shocked by what I think.

I suspect you are judaeo-christian because you speack english and because IMO your political correctness about sex and rape fits with the judaeo-christian values, but I could be wrong.

It's not a personal attack. I just don't buy the numbers unless I see proof. That's not a judeo-christian idea, or even an anti-Communist idea - to see facts and proof.

And I'm not anti-sex. I'm against personal violations of an individual against their will. That's not anti-sex.

Yes I think it depends on what importance you give to sex (or to your car in the example above).
I believe it is relative to your culture. If you are a christian who thinks sex should never happen before wedding and get raped, it is not just your pussy which is raped, but your religion as well. If you are a bitch who sell your body regularly to strangers and get raped, you just think that guy stole you the money you deserve for your body.
But this is not new, justice is relative to your culture anyway. In some cultures, killing your dog is a crime, in others it is delinquance.
In my books, rape is not a crime.
*looks quizzically at psylos*

you mean you think theft should be legal? if rape is theft, then the rapist is breaking the law eh?

what about the assault and battery that is incidental to violent rape? can a rapist be jailed for THAT?

if (nonviolent) rape is not a crime, does this mean that a woman is required to provide sex to any man who "asks" for it? after all, if he is strong enough to overpower her, he can take it.

if a woman FIGHTS BACK when a man tries to force himself on her, is SHE guilty of battery? should she end up in prison if she does not meekly submit?

Even a prostitute can be raped ya' know - should someone who rapes a hooker be punished more or less than someone who rapes a "nice girl?"

less

Death

When I created this poll/thread, I meant penalty for crimes such as violent rape and pedophilia.
The term "sex crimes" covers a wide variety of other crimes - I apologize for the confusion.

When I created this poll/thread, I meant penalty for crimes such as violent rape and pedophilia.
The term "sex crimes" covers a wide variety of other crimes - I apologize for the confusion.Hmm, if it's a wide range of sex crimes then it's kinda hard to answer the poll.

I don't think many people would advocate the death penalty for a sexist joke, or 5 hours community service for violent gang rape.

thats why i didn't vote..

It's not a personal attack. I just don't buy the numbers unless I see proof. That's not a judeo-christian idea, or even an anti-Communist idea - to see facts and proof.No it is not and that is not what I was talking about.
I was talking about the fact that I stated my opinion and you attacked communism, even if my opinion had nothing to do with communism just because I'm a communist, because you think a communist is always wrong about anything no matter the subject. Then the thread derived into a debate about a number I gave in order to defend my communist position, but I shouldn't have.

And I'm not anti-sex. I'm against personal violations of an individual against their will. That's not anti-sex.
I am as well. There is a difference between be against personal violation of an indivual and be psychotic about anything related to sex. When you talk like you are, you are psychotic.
They should immobilize the offender using succinylcholine, and then while the offender is conscious, they should use surgically implanted electrodes to stimulate the pain center of his brain - inducing a sensation thousands of times greater than any possible real physical pain.

Keep the pain on at that level until the offender dies of thirst or starvation.
Just for having sex with someone against her will.
I think it is a bad thing, but no worse than stealing a car. And I don't support the death penalty for stealing a car.

*looks quizzically at psylos*

you mean you think theft should be legal? if rape is theft, then the rapist is breaking the law eh?
Not at all. Please re-read my posts. Nowhere did I say I support theft.

what about the assault and battery that is incidental to violent rape? can a rapist be jailed for THAT?This is a different problem. I think violence is a more important problem than theft. I should be punished more harshly, be it related to sex or not.

if (nonviolent) rape is not a crime, does this mean that a woman is required to provide sex to any man who "asks" for it? after all, if he is strong enough to overpower her, he can take it.Not at all. You are very confused. I think rape is a delinquance and should be punished with a fine or something and that the victim should be compensated.

if a woman FIGHTS BACK when a man tries to force himself on her, is SHE guilty of battery? should she end up in prison if she does not meekly submit?
NO, NO and NO. What is the problem? Is my english so bad? Why do you want me to support rape just because I'm not anti-sex?

*snip*

Just for having sex with someone against her will.
I think it is a bad thing, but no worse than stealing a car. And I don't support the death penalty for stealing a car.

Not at all. You are very confused. I think rape is a delinquance and should be punished with a fine or something and that the victim should be compensated.

I've been trying to decide if you are just extremely ignorant, completely callous, a misogynist, or a combination of all four. I'm leaning toward the last.

I really hope you never learn personally how much worse rape is than having your car stolen. They are not even comparable.

Really think hard about what it would be like if you were raped. Think real hard. Would a fine of the rapist be compensation? If you say "yes," think some more.

Perhaps you should visit a rape crisis center and talk to someone who has been raped and see what they think about being "compensated" by a fine. (Perhaps you shouldn't as you are likely to suffer violence.)

I've been trying to decide if you are just extremely ignorant, completely callous, a misogynist, or a combination of all four. I'm leaning toward the last.

I really hope you never learn personally how much worse rape is than having your car stolen. They are not even comparable.

Really think hard about what it would be like if you were raped. Think real hard. Would a fine of the rapist be compensation? If you say "yes," think some more.

Perhaps you should visit a rape crisis center and talk to someone who has been raped and see what they think about being "compensated" by a fine. (Perhaps you shouldn't as you are likely to suffer violence.)
I know someone who has been raped. She was just like "oh shit". I know that some other people can take it very bad but it is not everybody.
I've tryed to think very hard about it. First off it would be difficult to rape me as I would certainly be consential. But I really don't think a dick can be that bad. It is just a dick really. If it happens while I'm asleep, it is likely I wouldn't even know I have been raped. Actually I'd rather been raped than have my car stolen and I would gladly offer sex services for a car. If the rape is violent, it is a completely different matter.

I know someone who has been raped. She was just like "oh shit". I know that some other people can take it very bad but it is not everybody.
I've tryed to think very hard about it. First off it would be difficult to rape me as I would certainly be consential. But I really don't think a dick can be that bad. It is just a dick really. If it happens while I'm asleep, it is likely I wouldn't even know I have been raped. Actually I'd rather been raped than have my car stolen and I would gladly offer sex services for a car. If the rape is violent, it is a completely different matter.

Now I have to add dishonest to the combination.

And apparently unable to follow simple instructions. You did not think very hard.

Perhaps we have a language barrier -- do you know what "rape" means?

EDIT: And, reviewing, your posts I've realized you are a troll. Rape isn't a subject to joke about, bud.

You are anti-sex and anti-communist by culture. Just open your mind to new ideas and taste the freedom.

i think calling us (western civilization i'm assuming) anti-sex is innaccurate. we are not "against" it, we respect and honour it. maybe in whatever third world hell hole or screwed up commune you come from it's perfectly acceptable to practice free love and other perversions, but here we have morals.

the west is not anti-sex, quite the opposite, we recognize it's power and like any sensible people we set restrictions on it, for the good of our society.

ever wonder why africa is like it is?

Now I have to add dishonest to the combination.

And apparently unable to follow simple instructions. You did not think very hard.

Perhaps we have a language barrier -- do you know what "rape" means?
Indeed it is possible that I have a language problem since english is not my native language. I thought rape was about forcing someone to have sex. Is that correct? If that is correct, then drug rape is not so bad as anti-sex people think for me as it is non-violent. I understand it can be very bad in a judaeo-christian culture, but not in mine.

Indeed it is possible that I have a language problem since english is not my native language. I thought rape was about forcing someone to have sex. Is that correct? If that is correct, then drug rape is not so bad as anti-sex people think for me as it is non-violent. I understand it can be very bad in a judaeo-christian culture, but not in mine.

Stop trolling.

I've noticed you claim to be from different cultures in different threads. Pray tell, what culture are you claiming to be from now?

i think calling us (western civilization i'm assuming) anti-sex is innaccurate. we are not "against" it, we respect and honour it. maybe in whatever third world hell hole or screwed up commune you come from it's perfectly acceptable to practice free love and other perversions, but here we have morals.

the west is not anti-sex, quite the opposite, we recognize it's power and like any sensible people we set restrictions on it, for both the good of our society.

ever wonder why africa is like it is?I'm not talking about the western culture, just about the judaeo-christian one. The romans and the greeks were very open about sex at the highst of their civilization. It is just the christians who were not.

Stop trolling.

I've noticed you claim to be from different cultures in different threads. Pray tell, what culture are you claiming to be from now?
My culture is communist. I have communist parents and I was teached communist values. I was teached that religion was the root of all evils. That is how I define my culture.

My culture is communist. I have communist parents and I was teached communist values. I was teached that religion was the root of all evils. That is how I define my culture.

Cute. And where did this occur?

I like that your "culture" is you and your parents.

And I am not the slightest bit religious or anti-sex. Just anti-rape and anti-troll.

My culture is communist. I have communist parents and I was teached communist values. I was teached that religion was the root of all evils. That is how I define my culture.

gotta love that marxism...


Stop trolling.

what is trolling exactly?

Cute. And where did this occur?

I like that your "culture" is you and your parents.

And I am not the slightest bit religious or anti-sex. Just anti-rape and anti-troll.
I'm not a troll and I am anti-rape.
You are shocked because I don't say rape is the worst crime ever invented by the man and that the offenders should be castrated, tortured and killed along with their family and their friends.
I just have a more moderate, reasoned and tempered view on sex than you have.
And you don't have to be religious to have a judaeo-christian culture. You don't believe in god, but you have the same values as them. You believe in charity, property rights and that a familly is a man, a woman and children and that having sex with someone is something sacred. If you are a little extreme, you think having sex with someone means you belong to him or her and that she or he belongs to you or worse you think it is dirty. You feel bad when you hear the word "dick".

I'm not a troll and I am anti-rape.
You are shocked because I don't say rape is the worse crime ever invented by the man and that the offenders should be castrated, tortured and killed along with their family and their friends.
I just have a more moderate, reasoned and tempered view on sex than you have.
And you don't have to be religious to have a judaeo-christian culture. You don't believe in god, but you have the same values as them. You believe in charity, property rights and that a familly is a man, a woman and children and that having sex with someone is something sacred. If you are a little extreme, you think having sex with someone means you belong to him or her and that she or he belongs to you.

The only thing I am shocked by how ignorant, callous, and misogynist your view of rape is.

If you had paid attention, I have not advocated castration, torture, or the death penalty for rape. To the contrary, I have expressly argued against such penalties.

You are no more anti-rape than you are anti-speeding.

I could care less about your view of sex. I think any consensual sex between adults is entirely their business and completely moral.

If you think I believe in the values you attribute to me, you are sadly mistaken.

Nothing about your view of rape is moderate, reasoned, or tempered.

You can play the "I'm so left-wing, cool, and casual" card all you want. Doesn't impress me. I'm extremely left-wing myself.

And I have noticed that you did not answer my question.

I said rape was no more than theft and some people talked about PTSD.
First off, theft can lead to PTSD if it is violent. Let say someone breacks into your house with a gun, threaten you and fire around you then he burns your house and steal your car. This can cause PTSD.
On the other hand, if someone drugs you and steal your car while your are asleep, you can just wake up and say "shit my car is gone". It depends on your sensibility.
The point is that rape does not necessarily lead to PTSD. In anti-sex judeo-christian societies, it does often, but even there not always. There is a saying where I live which says "if rape is unavoidable, close your eyes and enjoy it". Some people wake up after a drug rape and just think "shit this guy raped me, I'm not gonna talk to him anymore". I know a girl who has been raped and didn't have PTSD and she certainly doesn't want his offender to be killed. She would rather have him forced to clean her toilets for one year.
But of course as soon as you talk about sex in the US, there is a general hystery and they all finger point the bad bad sex-loving animal like Bill Clinton (who bombed Kosovo) the sex criminal.

Robbery has a relatively low incidence of PTSD, unless your life is threatened. Car accidents and natural disaster have a somwhat higher incidence. Sexual assualt victims have between a 60% and 80% incidence of PTSD. Your friend is very lucky, and may have an especially strong coping mechanisms or be in denial. I never wanted my rapist killed, but putting him away for a nice long time seems like a good idea.
I'm not anti-sex, and was raised atheist. Any woman whose response to date-rape is just not to talk to him anymore needs some serious support. I come from Texas where the saying "Rape is like rain, if you can't do anything about it you should just lay back and enjoy it." used to be common. Even there it's not tolerated anymore.
Rape is about humiliation, power and control. The rapist damages the victims sense of self. Even atheists usually consider sex something intimate. You either are one of the most ignorant insensitive boobs on the planet, or you are a misogynistic prick. Take your pick.

Yes I think it depends on what importance you give to sex (or to your car in the example above).
I believe it is relative to your culture. If you are a christian who thinks sex should never happen before wedding and get raped, it is not just your pussy which is raped, but your religion as well. If you are a bitch who sell your body regularly to strangers and get raped, you just think that guy stole you the money you deserve for your body.
But this is not new, justice is relative to your culture anyway. In some cultures, killing your dog is a crime, in others it is delinquance.
In my books, rape is not a crime.

I'm not religious so that has no bearing. And prostitutes who get raped can become traumatized by it. As a matter of fact, many prostitutes have been victims of sexual assualts and have very low self-esteem, which is frequently why they are prostitutes.
And your description of prostitutes as bitches shows you seem to have more patriarchal judeo-christian ideas about sex than most of the christians I know.

I am as well. There is a difference between be against personal violation of an indivual and be psychotic about anything related to sex. When you talk like you are, you are psychotic.

Just for having sex with someone against her will.
I think it is a bad thing, but no worse than stealing a car. And I don't support the death penalty for stealing a car.

Traumatic events are more likely to lead to PTSD if they are the result of human malice as opposed to an accident or a natural disaster. Prevalence of this disorder is somewhere between 1 and 5% of the American population. Most men who have the disorder have experienced combat and most women have been the victim of a physical assault or rape.

I suppose since a combat veteran who is uninjured hasn't had anything tangible taken from him, he should be just fine?
It effects someone emotionally far more than having a car stolen. I've been through both, and comparitively, having my car taken was a picnic.

The only thing I am shocked by how ignorant, callous, and misogynist your view of rape is. Perhaps you are less ignorant than me... Have you been raped? I know someone who has been raped. Callous is the one who support torture, death or castration for rapists. My view of rape has nothing to do with mysogyny.

If you had paid attention, I have not advocated castration, torture, or the death penalty for rape. To the contrary, I have expressly argued against such penalties.Then no need to try to argue against me and call me what you call me since we have the same views. Why do you do that if you agree with me?

You are no more anti-rape than you are anti-speeding.Rape is worse than speeding, unless you kill somebody, in which case speeding was worse than rape.

I could care less about your view of sex. I think any consensual sex between adults is entirely their business and completely moral.

If you think I believe in the values you attribute to me, you are sadly mistaken.Then I appologize. BTW why just adults? Is sex not moral for non-adults?

Nothing about your view of rape is moderate, reasoned, or tempered.

You can play the "I'm so left-wing, cool, and casual" card all you want. Doesn't impress me. I'm extremely left-wing myself..if you agree with me why are you saying I'm trolling?

And I have noticed that you did not answer my question.
I suppose you are refering to where I live right? If this is the question you want answered, here it is : I'm from occitania.

Rape is about humiliation, power and control.I thought it was about sex.
Then it means McDonalds is a rapist and should be jailed.
Any woman whose response to date-rape is just not to talk to him anymore needs some serious support.I say you are psychotic. Re-read what you wrote with a reasoned and tempered mind. It doesn't make any sense. You said someone who doesn't have a problem should get support. I suspect you want her to have a problem because it shocks you that she gets along.

I'm not religious so that has no bearing. And prostitutes who get raped can become traumatized by it. As a matter of fact, many prostitutes have been victims of sexual assualts and have very low self-esteem, which is frequently why they are prostitutes.
And your description of prostitutes as bitches shows you seem to have more patriarchal judeo-christian ideas about sex than most of the christians I know.
I'm not a native english speacker. I thought bitch was prostitute. Is there a difference?
And what does prostitution have to do with low self-esteem?

Traumatic events are more likely to lead to PTSD if they are the result of human malice as opposed to an accident or a natural disaster. Prevalence of this disorder is somewhere between 1 and 5% of the American population. Most men who have the disorder have experienced combat and most women have been the victim of a physical assault or rape.

I suppose since a combat veteran who is uninjured hasn't had anything tangible taken from him, he should be just fine?
It effects someone emotionally far more than having a car stolen. I've been through both, and comparitively, having my car taken was a picnic.It all depends on your sensitivity. Some people take pride in their car and have low self-esteem when they are robbed.

I'm not a native english speacker. I thought bitch was prostitute. Is there a difference?
And what does prostitution have to do with low self-esteem?

LOL
A bitch is:

4 entries found for bitch.
To select an entry, click on it.
bitch[1,noun]bitch[2,verb]bitch goddessson of a bitch

Main Entry: 1bitch
Pronunciation: 'bich
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English bicche, from Old English bicce
1 : the female of the dog or some other carnivorous mammals
2 a : a lewd or immoral woman b : a malicious, spiteful, or domineering woman -- sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse
3 : something that is highly objectionable or unpleasant
4 : COMPLAINT


The part I use as my name is 2b.

Or it can be used as a verb.
Main Entry: 2bitch
Function: verb
transitive senses
1 : SPOIL, BOTCH <I must have bitched up my life -- Mavis Gallant>
2 : CHEAT, DOUBLE-CROSS
3 : to complain of or about
intransitive senses : COMPLAIN

Many prostitutes have been victims of previous sexual abuse. It frequently causes them to see themselves as something to be used, or someone who has no other value.

LOL
A bitch is:

4 entries found for bitch.
To select an entry, click on it.
bitch[1,noun]bitch[2,verb]bitch goddessson of a bitch

Main Entry: 1bitch
Pronunciation: 'bich
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English bicche, from Old English bicce
1 : the female of the dog or some other carnivorous mammals
2 a : a lewd or immoral woman b : a malicious, spiteful, or domineering woman -- sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse
3 : something that is highly objectionable or unpleasant
4 : COMPLAINT


The part I use as my name is 2b.

Or it can be used as a verb.
Main Entry: 2bitch
Function: verb
transitive senses
1 : SPOIL, BOTCH <I must have bitched up my life -- Mavis Gallant>
2 : CHEAT, DOUBLE-CROSS
3 : to complain of or about
intransitive senses : COMPLAINI appologize. That is not what I wanted to say. I don't think prostitutes are bitches. I've just seen this term used instead of prostitutes and I thought it was the same.
BTW what is a whore? Is that a prostitute?

Many prostitutes have been victims of previous sexual abuse. It frequently causes them to see themselves as something to be used, or someone who has no other value.
I see what you mean. It is not always the case though.

It all depends on your sensitivity. Some people take pride in their car and have low self-esteem when they are robbed.
PTSD is not a matter of "low self-esteem". Boy, you really need to go back to school.

I thought it was about sex.
Then it means McDonalds is a rapist and should be jailed.
I say you are psychotic. Re-read what you wrote with a reasoned and tempered mind. It doesn't make any sense. You said someone who doesn't have a problem should get support. I suspect you want her to have a problem because it shocks you that she gets along.

Sex is definitely not what rape is about. Old ladies and small children get raped. Fat ugly women get raped. Rich good-looking men can be rapist. Married men get raped.* (I meant can be rapists, but either way can be true.) I've never said that rapists should be tortured or killed. I would prefer they get treatment, but a jail term is appropriate.

I don't want your friend to have problems, I said she either had very good coping mechanisms or was in denial. Denial is common, because rape victims just want life to go on as before. I think you are very uninformed about it, and that you are somewhat lacking in empathy.


I'm sorry if my words were intemperate, but you need to get youself informed. I will be back later, but my roommates want me to go to breakfast with them.

PTSD is not a matter of "low self-esteem". Boy, you really need to go back to school.
Did I say that? My english must really be fucked up.

After reading some other lengthy threads, I thought I'd create a poll about the subject.
What do you believe about the punishment for sex offenders (pedophiles/rapists). Do you think we need stronger punishments? Lesser punishements? Different punishments? Or is the system fine as it is.
Vote. Discuss.
My opinion: Just focus on rehabiliation. Punishment doesn't work; its evil.

Sex is definitely not what rape is about. Old ladies and small children get raped. Fat ugly women get raped. Rich good-looking men can be rapist. Married men get raped.* (I meant can be rapists, but either way can be true.)That is SOME cases. In many cases (most?), it is about sex.
It would be like saying stealing a car is about humiliating. Sometimes it is that, but most of the time it is just about the car.I've never said that rapists should be tortured or killed. I would prefer they get treatment, but a jail term is appropriate.I agree with you.

I don't want your friend to have problems, I said she either had very good coping mechanisms or was in denial. Denial is common, because rape victims just want life to go on as before. I think you are very uninformed about it, and that you are somewhat lacking in empathy.She just doesn't care that much about her pussy. She wasn't educated this way. She usually fucks with anybody who is willing. She didn't make a big deal out of it. Many many people don't make a big deal out of rape but you don't hear about it because they don't make a big deal out of it indeed. You just hear about the worst cases.

I'm sorry if my words were intemperate, but you need to get youself informed. I will be back later, but my roommates want me to go to breakfast with them.
You need to be informed as well. We have different point of views, but your point of view is not more informed, it is just different informations.

That is SOME cases. In many cases (most?), it is about sex.


All studies indicate that forcible rape is almost NEVER about sex. It's about physical domination - the men who commit it are motivated psychologically by a desire to compensate for their powerlessness in the world. By dominating another human being. It's the same motivation that drives domestic violence.

All studies indicate that forcible rape is almost NEVER about sex. It's about physical domination - the men who commit it are motivated psychologically by a desire to compensate for their powerlessness in the world. By dominating another human being. It's the same motivation that drives domestic violence.
You have a link of that? Show me proofs!!!!!
And I don't want any link from a judaeo-christian biased source.
I say it is about sex most of the time, maybe not in your culture, but I believe rape is most of the time about having sex in most cultures. Don't confuse your opinion with facts.

You have a link of that? Show me proofs!!!!!
And I don't want any link from a judaeo-christian biased source.
I say it is about sex most of the time, maybe not in your culture, but I believe rape is most of the time about having sex in most cultures. Don't confuse your opinion with facts.

It's from the psychological profile experts at the Federal Bureau of Investigation - they don't base their profiles on religion. They base them on provable psychological evidence. Here, they give their information to this newspaper:

http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive/news/projects/rape/profiles.html

It's from the psychological profile experts at the Federal Bureau of Investigation - they don't base their profiles on religion. They base them on provable psychological evidence. Here, they give their information to this newspaper:

http://www.sacbee.com/static/archive/news/projects/rape/profiles.html
This link doesn't say that rape is more about domination than sex. It does just say that rapists have a psychological profile. It could be said of anything. CEOs have a psychological profile, they like power as well, but they also like managing.

ICly, this nation I'm using would probably pick the second option from this list. Without anaesthesia. Then insert a microchip that allows the government to monitor his activities constantly. And brand him as a sex offender.

OOC, I believe sex offenders need to be monitored constantly and I wouldn't be opposed to the second option as appropriate punishment.

This link doesn't say that rape is more about domination than sex. It does just say that rapists have a psychological profile. It could be said of anything. CEOs have a psychological profile, they like power as well, but they also like managing.
It describes their motivation. The motivation is not sex.

Date rape is usually about sex. But not most forcible rape.

It describes their motivation. The motivation is not sex.

Date rape is usually about sex. But not most forcible rape.
I think it is too obvious that their motivation is sex to appear in their profile.

You have a link of that? Show me proofs!!!!!
And I don't want any link from a judaeo-christian biased source.
I say it is about sex most of the time, maybe not in your culture, but I believe rape is most of the time about having sex in most cultures. Don't confuse your opinion with facts.


If it was about sex, then why dont the rapists just go out on a date, get a girlfriend or a prostitute? Its FORCIBLE sex .....of course its about power.

I think it is too obvious that their motivation is sex to appear in their profile.
http://www.rapecrisisonline.com/Offenders.htm

Myth: "Castration would solve the sex-offender-problem."
Fact: Rapists act out of anger, rage, and fear. They will continue to find ways to inappropriately act on these feelings, even if they are castrated. While sex is the weapon used in an act of pure violence, rape is more about what's inside the mind of the offender, rather than what is between his legs.

If it was about sex, then why dont the rapists just go out on a date, get a girlfriend or a prostitute? Its FORCIBLE sex .....of course its about power.
And why don't car-jackers just buy a car?

http://www.rapecrisisonline.com/Offenders.htm

Myth: "Castration would solve the sex-offender-problem."
Fact: Rapists act out of anger, rage, and fear. They will continue to find ways to inappropriately act on these feelings, even if they are castrated. While sex is the weapon used in an act of pure violence, rape is more about what's inside the mind of the offender, rather than what is between his legs.
Ok many rapists are mad.

The poll and question is fallacious, there is a difference between a rapist and a pedophile and there are different types of rape - a 16 year old who consents to sex with a 20 year old has still been the victim, legally anyway, of a rape - should the rapist get the same treatment as the guy who kidnaps a 10 year old and rapes her? What about a 30 year old who beats up and violently rapes a woman as opposed to one who merely takes advantage of a drunken/stoned woman who is so out of it she can't say 'No' - you can't have a single punishment for all circumstances.

I dont get this
"a 16 year old who consents to sex with a 20 year old has still been the victim, legally anyway, of a rape"
She consented so why is it called rape

And why don't car-jackers just buy a car?

Because youre comparing apples and oranges. Theres nothing sexy about a 5 year old, so I fail to see how the rape of a child is about 'Sex". Sex is about pleasure and affectionate emotion. Rape is about forcing someone to do something against their will .The ultimate invasion of privacy. Have you ever actually spoken to a rape victim....or offender for that matter? I have, and its very plain that rape is about power and the need to fulfill some deep seeded void at the expense of someone elses misery.

Because youre comparing apples and oranges. Theres nothing sexy about a 5 year old, so I fail to see how the rape of a child is about 'Sex". Sex is about pleasure and affectionate emotion. Rape is about forcing someone to do something against their will .The ultimate invasion of privacy. Have you ever actually spoken to a rape victim....or offender for that matter? I have, and its very plain that rape is about power and the need to fulfill some deep seeded void at the expense of someone elses misery.
I know a rape victim. And I know several offenders, they all did it for sex without violence. I specifically know the offender of the victim I know. They are still friends, although they don't talk much to each other these days. Most rapes are not involving 5 years old.

I know a rape victim. And I know several offenders, they all did it for sex without violence. I specifically know the offender of the victim I know. they are still friend, although they don't talk. Most rapes are not involving 5 years old.


I think, you think, you know more than you actually do. I also think your opinion on the matter is basically in reference to statutory rape....not violent rape. If a person holds someone against their will, hits them, threatens them with a weapon, and then takes their body without consent.....that is about power. How can you not see that? Do you have any idea how many children are victims of sex crimes? Be it a child or an adult, if you force someone to do ANYTHING, much less sex, its about you showing them that you are in control and *this* is going to happen no matter what you say.

Nicholas Groth, a clinical psychologist and author of Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender, says all sexual assault is an act of aggression, regardless of the gender or age of the victim or the assailant. Neither sexual desire nor sexual deprivation is the primary motivating force behind sexual assault. It is not about sexual gratification, but rather a sexual aggressor using somebody else as a means of expressing their own power and control.

I think, you think, you know more than you actually do. I also think your opinion on the matter is basically in reference to statutory rape....not violent rape. If a person holds someone against their will, hits them, threatens them with a weapon, and then takes their body without consent.....that is about power. How can you not see that? Do you have any idea how many children are victims of sex crimes? Be it a child or an adult, if you force someone to do ANYTHING, much less sex, its about you showing them that you are in control and *this* is going to happen no matter what you say.
You raise a good point actually.
There are different kinds of rape. I think statutory rape is different than violent rape and the punishment should not be the same.
Violence by itself should be punished IMO. But not more harshly than any violence. That it is about sex shouldn't mean it is somewhat a worse crime.
Saying that violence is somewhat worse when it involves sex is being anti-sex.

Nicholas Groth, a clinical psychologist and author of Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender, says all sexual assault is an act of aggression, regardless of the gender or age of the victim or the assailant. Neither sexual desire nor sexual deprivation is the primary motivating force behind sexual assault. It is not about sexual gratification, but rather a sexual aggressor using somebody else as a means of expressing their own power and control.
Psylos, a well known psycholigist says that sometimes rape is about sex.
The case to study is this one : let say the girl is exciting the guy (willingly or unwillingly) and the guy is unstable or has some other psychological problems so that he looses control of himself. Bang he rapes the girl. Or the guy kindly ask her but she refuses. he offers her a drink and she drinks and he offers another and another until she is so drunk she doesn't have control anymore. She is so drunk that she does stupid things and ends up half naked and unconscious on the sofa. The guy is even more excited. Bang the guy rapes her. (what happened to my friend). On the day after, she looked at the guy and said "Hey I said no!" and he said "sorry".
Rape is very common in some animal societies and is almost everytime about sex.

the guy is unstable or has some other psychological problems so that he looses control of himself. Bang he rapes the girl.


No rapist has ever felt compelled to commit his act in front of the police station. So no matter how mental he might be, he is still consciously making a moral choice.

No rapist has ever felt compelled to commit his act in front of the police station. So no matter how mental he might be, he is still consciously making a moral choice.
Indeed he is. That doesn't mean his act is worse than stealing a car.

I think the reason you guys have been running into so many problems with discussing motivations and punishments is because you are lumping so many different things together.

"Sex Crime" is a big catch-all term that describes a wide variety of different behaviors that have very little in common. "Sex crime" describes violent rapists, non-violent rapists, adults who have consentual relations with a minor not far removed from their own age, adults who have consentual relations with children (which can further be broken down into preferential pedophiles or situational pedophiles), adults who perform consentual but illegal sexual acts with each other, and people who have sex with animals or dead bodies. Each of those types of people is different and motivated by different things. The violent rapist is motivated exclusively by a desire for power and control, sex is just a means to an end. The non-violent rapist is interested in sex. The preferential pedophile is attracted to children. The situational pedophile just wants easy sex. The adult who has sex with a minor not much younger than themselves is simply a normal person who got nailed by a technicality. Etc, Etc...

The term is simply too broad. Thus the question of what the punishment for sex crimes should be is an unfair question. The punishment should vary depending on the individual case.

I think the reason you guys have been running into so many problems with discussing motivations and punishments is because you are lumping so many different things together.

"Sex Crime" is a big catch-all term that describes a wide variety of different behaviors that have very little in common. "Sex crime" describes violent rapists, non-violent rapists, adults who have consentual relations with a minor not far removed from their own age, adults who have consentual relations with children (which can further be broken down into preferential pedophiles or situational pedophiles), adults who perform consentual but illegal sexual acts with each other, and people who have sex with animals or dead bodies. Each of those types of people is different and motivated by different things. The violent rapist is motivated exclusively by a desire for power and control, sex is just a means to an end. The non-violent rapist is interested in sex. The preferential pedophile is attracted to children. The situational pedophile just wants easy sex. The adult who has sex with a minor not much younger than themselves is simply a normal person who got nailed by a technicality. Etc, Etc...

The term is simply too broad. Thus the question of what the punishment for sex crimes should be is an unfair question. The punishment should vary depending on the individual case.

<sigh>

Yet another one who believes in "non-violent rape."

<sigh>

Yet another one who believes in "non-violent rape."

Thats because it exists. People who rape a girl who is unconscious from excessive drinking and/or drug use for example. There is no violence involved but there is still rape. Unless you consider sex an act of violence, in which case I feel sorry for you.

Perhaps you are less ignorant than me... Have you been raped? I know someone who has been raped. Callous is the one who support torture, death or castration for rapists. My view of rape has nothing to do with mysogyny.
Then no need to try to argue against me and call me what you call me since we have the same views. Why do you do that if you agree with me?
Rape is worse than speeding, unless you kill somebody, in which case speeding was worse than rape.
Then I appologize. BTW why just adults? Is sex not moral for non-adults?
if you agree with me why are you saying I'm trolling?

I suppose you are refering to where I live right? If this is the question you want answered, here it is : I'm from occitania.

Your assertion that we agree about rape is not just wrong, but insulting.

Your nauseating views on the subject -- if they are your views, which I doubt --are not worthy of the attention they have recieved here.

You've not even bothered to deny that you are a liar. Which is particularly true if you are from Occitania.

Your alleged views are that of a rapist. Hopefully, you are not and never will be one -- just as hopefully you will never be raped.

I will be ignoring you in the future.

Research on spousal and acquaintance rape (also known as marital and date rape)
has shown that these types of rapes also fall under the 3 Groth
categories, with the majority of them being power rapes, the minority (~1%)
sadistic rapes, and the rest are anger rapes.

In 1979 Dr. Nicholas Groth and H. Jean Birnbaum developed a profile of several
types of assault, drawn from their work with people who had been arrested,
convicted and incarcerated for crimes of sexual violence.4 The information, while
not inclusive of all behaviors, can be used by the police officer to develop appropriate
investigative questions and to determine patterns of offenders in a given
community. Following are those profiles:

ANGER RAPE
1. Aggression: more physical force used than is required to overpower victim;
victim is battered and suffers physical trauma to all areas of her body.
2. Assault is more impulsive, spontaneous and unplanned.
3. Offenders mood is one of anger and depression.
4. Offenses are episodic.
5. Language is abusive: cursing, swearing, obscenities, degrading remarks.
6. Assault is of relatively short duration.
7. No weapon, or if one is employed, it is a weapon of opportunity used to hurt
not to threaten victim.
8. Victim selection determined by availability; trend towards persons of same
age or older.
9. Dynamics: retaliatory aggression; retribution for perceived wrongs, injustices,
or putdowns experienced by offender.
10. Prior criminal record: crimes of aggression such as reckless driving, assault
and battery, breach of peace.
11. Comprises approximately 31-35% of rapes.

POWER RAPE
1. Aggression: offender uses whatever threat or force is necessary to gain control
of victim and overcome resistance; victim may be physically unharmed;
physical injury would be inadvertent rather than intentional.
2. Assault is premeditated and preceded by persistent rape fantasies.
3. Offender's mood state is one of anxiety.
4. Offenses are repetitive and may show an increase in aggression over time.
5. Language is instructional and inquisitive: giving orders, asking personal
questions, inquiring as to victim’s response.
6. Assault may extend over a short period of time with victim held captive for a number of hours.
7. Weapon frequently employed and brought to crime scene for the purpose of
threat or intimidation more than injury.
8. Victim selection determined by vulnerability; trend towards persons of the
same age or younger.
9. Dynamics: compensatory aggression to feel powerful and deny deep-seated
feelings of insecurity and inadequacy.
10. Prior criminal record: crimes of exploitation such as theft, breaking and
entering, robbery and/or prior sex offenses.
11. Comprises approximately 60-65% of rapes.

SADISTIC RAPE
1. Aggression: physical force is eroticized; if power is eroticized victim is
subjected to ritualistic acts such as bondage or shaving. If anger is eroticized,
victim is subjected to torture and sexual abuse.
2. Assault is calculated and preplanned.
3. Offender's mood state is one of intense excitement.
4. Offenses are compulsive, structured, and ritualistic, generally involving
bondage, torture or bizarre sexual acts.
5. Language is commanding and degrading, alternately reassuring and threatening.
6. Assault may be for an extended duration in which victim is abducted, held
hostage, assaulted and disposed of.
7. Weapon generally employed to capture victim; instruments for restraints and/
or torture may be used.
8. Victim selection determined by specific characteristics or symbolic representation;
usually complete strangers.
9. Dynamics: eroticized aggression, symbolic control, elimination, or destruction
of threat or temptation in order to regain psychological equilibrium.
10. Prior criminal record: none or a bizarre ritualistic or violent offense.
11. Comprises approximately 3-7% of rapes.

From: http://www.vaw.umn.edu/documents/policeresponse/connsac5.pdf#search='offender%20rape%20motivation'

You notice that they don't have any such thing as desire orsexual gratification rapes. The FBI also uses this system.

Yet another one who believes in "non-violent rape."

Sorry, but there is non violent rape.

Rape is called rape because it is sex without consent.

Non violent rape simply involves sex without concent, weather it involves threats, drugs or alcohol.

Violent rape is by it's definition violent, non consentual sex.

Ask a date rape victim if her rape compares to women beaten, tied up or half strangled. If they say it is comparable, they really dont know what violent rape is.