Rape

There is a lot of chatter about this topic of late. Firstly the case of Julian Assange, who is accused of sexual misdemeanors in Sweden, and secondly the comment of American politician Todd Akin. However, these are just representative of opinions that are occasionally heard, usually by less prominent people.

What is worse, as a male, I find that there is a subtle tendency to assume that I accept that rape is sometimes acceptable, that the boundaries are rather blurred.

I should point out that this is not the case.

Firstly, what is rape? Well, the BBC site shows some legal definitions ( WARNING: Explicit. Definitely NSFW ). However, I would be a little less specific, not needing to make a full legal definition. I would say rape is any sexual action done without the consent on any participant.

Now this definition does not have any sense of a relationship in it, so just because the people are married doesn't mean that it isn't rape. Any more than it wouldn't be if it was your sister. Rape is rape, however the people are related.

It also does not have any sense of history involved. So the fact that two people have previously had sexual relationships previously does not mean that any future activity cannot be rape, any more than people arguing means that it cannot be murder next time they meet. Rape is rape, whatever the history.

Another myth is that women who dress provocatively are "asking for it" - the famous Fendi slogan "Shaped to be raped" from 1984, which quite rightly attracted a whole lot of shock and criticism, shows that this idea is very widespread. Women dress to be sexually attractive. Often they are open to, or looking for, a sexual encounter. But they are after a consensual encounter, not rape.

The only real issue involved in consent. This is where it becomes far more of a problem, because once in a relationship, consent can sometimes be assumed, or taken as implicitly given, rather than explicitly stated. The subtleties of a relationship mean that communication can be more complex. But there must still be consent, however this is given - and refusal means no, whatever the previous state of the relationship.

The other issue around consent is that consent is a conscious decision. It is not related to specific sexual acts, it is related to a conscious decision to participate or not. This is why Todd Akins argument (apparently supported by doctors) that a womans body will not conceive from rape is meaningless. The mechanics of a the female reproductive system are not governed by the conscious mind - the system does not know whether the acts are consensual or not. Akin should find some doctors who know what they are talking about, because it is clear that the ones who have advised him do not.

A final comment, and a final critical issue, is that rape is not a sexual crime. It is a crime of violence. Yes it has a sexual element, but it is not a sexual crime. Rape is about one person inflicting violence on another. All of the arguments about what is and isn't rape, what is "legitimate rape", then we should apply this to other crimes of violence against a person. There is no such thing as a "legitimate kicking their head in". However you dress, you are not asking to be beaten up.

Rape is Rape. If there is not consent involved, it is wrong. How difficult can it be to grasp that?