What are you going on about? I said that unless there was violence or the threat of violence, date rape should be treated differently. It is not quite rape if the woman simply gave up resisting a persistent man, without real belief that she was in danger. Sorry, there are cases like that........
Would you accept that the word "force," which is not quite the same as violence, or as "danger," should be included?
I agree that a certainty that actual force was used against an unwilling female is harder to establish in date rape cases.
But I hope that you would agree that there is a circumstance in which superior weight and strength can, without the sort of activity one thinks of as "violent" (eg hitting, arm twisting, infliction of severe pain, the brandishing of a weapon), and without any clear "danger" of significant physical injury being present (let's put aside possible disease-transmission or pregnancy for purposes of this clarification), result in the woman's being unable to prevent vaginal or anal penetration to which she very much objects.
So.. would you agree that your formulation should read,
.."unless there was violence or the threat of violence, or physical force, used, date rape should be treated differently. It is not quite rape if a woman who had the physical strength to prevent penetration and depart the scene simply gave up resisting a persistent man, without real belief that she was in danger."
? |
