If she says No before penetration and he continues that is rape.
If she says No after penetration,that is no rape in my books, perhaps a mistake

debosky:

Any woman who says yes while 'drunk' and claims rape after is not serious, learn to handle your alcohol.

Touche. . . . . .

Matter of fact, UK courts are looking into that now.

Women have been warned that binge drinking could cost them the right to complain of being raped.
'Drunken consent is still consent,' a jury was told as the prosecution abandoned a rape trial involving a drama student and a security guard.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369561/Drunk-women-able-claim-rape.html

what court case??

if you regret having sex with someone, that is your own fault, there is absolutely no right given to criminalize the person because of that.

A woman wakes up the day after and thinks 'i should never have slept with him!!' and the next thing is to claim rape? I don't think so

It may be regrettable, it may be an error of judgment, it may hurt and be very annoying, but is it rape? NO

@ karma

sharrap!

If someone is mentally retarded and is not qualified to make decisions like that, then she should be in protective custody - its like sending a 3 year old boy into a bar, should never happen in the first place.

Hannibal:

The court has to prove it.
Every move that led to the act would be heard by the jury and they would decide if the act was commited or u were just being silly.
Let it be known that only 5% actually get convicted.
The 5% being the stranger kind of rape where an unknown person attacks a woman and take advantage.

Where did you get these faulty stats. . . . Anyways, the court will hear all that happened. But all the focus will head to where the woman said "NO" [/b]and the man [b]"CONTINUED"

Queenisha:

If she says No before penetration and he continues that is rape.
If she says No after penetration,that is no rape in my books, perhaps a mistake

Osisi. . . . . you've got to be kidding me. It is a woman's RIGHT to say NO and ANY given moment through the act of intercourse.

its a woman's right to say no?Once the act (penetration) has begun, it becomes very grey in my view. It may be her right, but she has made an error and it is unlikely that anyone will convict a man who was given consent till that point.

Simply put - that is another regrettable decision, not likely to be regarded as rape.

I believe a lot of men have been labelled because of some vindictive women.
There's a secretary at my hubby's place of work that obviously has the hots for him
and has made many remarks to him that are obviously sexually harassing.
Turn it around if he were the female and she was the male,he could lose his job and tarnish his records for things like that.
Women know how to manipulate these laws at will and then dock under the cover of "I'm a weaker vessel" when it suits them.

Queenisha:

If she says No before penetration and he continues that is rape.
If she says No after penetration,that is no rape in my books, perhaps a mistake

Haba,you don become even more hardline. Few minutes ago,you drew the line at where the man is a couple of minutes from coming,now you are suggesting the commencement of penetration. Unless you are implying that the usual duration of intercourse-from penetration to ejaculation-is 2 minutes.  

@ karma

sharrap!  Grin

If someone is mentally retarded and is not qualified to make decisions like that, then she should be in protective custody - its like sending a 3 year old boy into a bar, should never happen in the first place.

So it's her fault for not being under a guardian or in an asylum? Therefore any sexual assault on her is justified?  

Assault is definitely not justified, but someone else committed a greater crime by dropping the ball - why expose her to such a situation in the first place. that is criminal negligence and is the root cause of the crime. For we know, the man may not recognise she is incapable of making such a decision.

4 Play:

Haba,you don become even more hardline. Few minutes ago,you drew the line at where the man is a couple of minutes from coming,now you are suggesting the commencement of penetration. Unless you are implying that the usual duration of intercourse-from penetration to ejaculation-is 2 minutes.    

ROFL
Isn't that funmi's theory.
That most of all y'all land the same time it takes to cook a minute rice
I'mjust going by average figures dear

debosky link=topic=166449.msg2740512#date=1220312005:

its a woman's right to say no?Once the act (penetration) has begun, it becomes very grey in my view. It may be her right, but she has made an error and it is unlikely that anyone will convict a man who was given consent till that point.

Simply put - that is another regrettable decision, not likely to be regarded as rape.

So what do you suggest her do. . . . lie there like a casted mummy and except every hump her rapist gives her?

onyinye2:

So what do you suggest her do. . . . lie there like a casted mummy and except every hump her rapist gives her?

I said it earlier.
She should bite her lips and count to 10 multiple times till it's over
she invited the guest in and she should let the guest leave without throwing them out when the visit is over

next time she'll be more specific and make up her mind from the beginning

debosky:

Assault is definitely not justified, but someone else committed a greater crime by dropping the ball - why expose her to such a situation in the first place.

That's not the point. Any circumstance can cause it where she's not under protective custody. dead parents, system let her out. point is whoever decides to get down with such a person despite the fact that it's OBVIOUS that she's mentally incapable to make such a decision is a criminal pure and simple.

Question -
Is there a material psychological distinction to be drawn between the act of power and control in a stranger rape, and failure to control lust in a sexual encounter by two individuals in a relationship?

Queenisha:

ROFL
Isn't that funmi's theory.
That most of all y'all land the same time it takes to cook a minute rice
I'mjust going by average figures dear

A woman's job is to raise her legs up while wailing like a deranged primate. Women should count themselves lucky that sex often lasts up to 2 minutes.

Queenisha:

I believe a lot of men have been labelled because of some vindictive women.
There's a secretary at my hubby's place of work that obviously has the hots for him
and has made many remarks to him that are obviously sexually harassing.
Turn it around if he were the female and she was the male,he could lose his job and tarnish his records for things like that.
Women know how to manipulate these laws at will and then dock under the cover of "I'm a weaker vessel" when it suits them.

If your husband wasnt flattered by the attention osisi, he would have reported her. This isnt Nigeria, the woman would get a warning for such. Sure if it were reversed case it'D be a bigger deal but with the new laws, whether a woman or man commits such an offence, either one will get punished

Queenisha:

I said it earlier.
She should bite her lips and count to 10 multiple times till it's over
she invited the guest in and she should let the guest leave when the visit is over

next time she'll be more specific and make up her mind from the beginning

Osisi. . . . . you've got to be kidding me. So you who tell this to your own daughter if she was in this compromising position?

KarmaMod:

That's not the point. Any circumstance can cause it where she's not under protective custody. dead parents, system let her out. point is whoever decides to get down with such a person despite the fact that it's OBVIOUS that she's mentally incapable to make such a decision is a criminal pure and simple.

I don't agree - are you saying that someone else can make the decision for her? Are you saying because of this mental 'incapability' the person cannot have sex with another person? This is highly debatable.

what exactly would you define as 'obvious'? Its a matter of perspective my dear - what may be obvious to you may not be so obvious to another observer.

4 Play:

Women should count themselves lucky that sex often lasts up to 2 minutes.

Can you now imagine a woman trying to cut it off at the 103rd minute?

Sisi answer my question!  

onyinye2:

Osisi. . . . . you've got to be kidding me. So you who tell this to your own daughter if she was in this compromising position?

I'll tell her not to go to a secluded corner with a man and take off her clothes willingly.
That's a better piece of motherly advice

Queenisha:

Can you now imagine a woman trying to cut it off at the 103rd minute?

In reality,it's the one-minute men that have the most reasons to worry. A man who has the self-control to last 103 minutes should have the self-control to stop when his woman says so.

To Clarify Helen Mirren's comment, she is saying that not everything sexual act called RAPE is RAPE, which means it can't be criminal.

Helen's contention was that a woman who voluntarily ended up in a man's bedroom and engaged in sexual activity – but then said no to intercourse – could not seriously expect to take that man to court on a charge of rape if he ignored her last-minute insistence that she did not want full sex.

Queenisha:

I'll tell her not to go to a secluded corner with a man and take off her clothes willingly.
That's a better piece of motherly advice

That doesn't cut it. You should tell her that at any given moment it is her right to say NO to her man.

KarmaMod:

If your husband wasnt flattered by the attention osisi, he would have reported her. This isnt Nigeria, the woman would get a warning for such. Sure if it were reversed case it'D be a bigger deal but with the new laws, whether a woman or man commits such an offence, either one will get punished

which man wouldn't be
You now how they are?
obviously he's flattered but he like most men would do nothing about it.

4 Play:

In reality,it's the one-minute men that have the most reasons to worry. A man who has the self-control to last 103 minutes should have the self-control to stop when his woman says so.

KarmaMod:

Chei I meant 103 seconds.
Who dash them 103 minutes?
Do I even have 103 minutes to give when there are other things to be done LOL

Queenisha:

Chei I meant 103 seconds.
Who dash them 103 minutes?
Do I even have 103 minutes to give when there are pther things to be done LOL

Trust me. . . . after 103 minutes of some of that. . . . you will be lucky if you remember how to spell your name.

onyinye2:

That doesn't cut it. You should tell her that at any given moment it is her right to say NO to her man.

My dear that may be you style.
It's like me telling someone don't do it but here this is a condom, in case you need it.

onyinye2:

Trust me. . . . after 103 minutes of some of that. . . . you will be lucky if you remember how to spell your name.

almost 2 whole hours when daylight is only 12 hours?
please I don't have that much time to spare all at once
take alittle more than 30 mins,I'll want to watch Judge Mathis
do you know that too much sweating and wrestling is bad for our hair?
after paying akata $100 for a do,I don't want it messed up in a single night

Queenisha:

My dear that may be you style.
It's like me telling someone don't          but here this is a condom, in case you need it.

Of course i wouldn't send my child out and tell her she can put herself in such a position. I do agree that if you play with fire. . . . you might get burned. But i will tell her that in the midst of it all. . . . she has the right to put out the flames.

Sisikill:

To Clarify Helen Mirren's comment, she is saying that not everything sexual act called RAPE is RAPE, which means it can't be criminal.

Helen's contention was that a woman who voluntarily ended up in a man's bedroom and engaged in sexual activity – but then said no to intercourse – could not seriously expect to take that man to court on a charge of rape if he ignored her last-minute insistence that she did not want full sex.

The women can and they do.

This helen herself knows that. Where was she when Mike Tyson was getting himself in trouble?