The general presumption about law is that its made for the good of generality and not for the few.If it is made to correct or to avoid crime,then everybody is invovled no matter the gender.
Many difficulties has keep me off in this area of law and i think to most learned writers and students alike.
The definetion of rape tends to protect the woman more going than the men,going by its definiton.The big questions is,can't a man be raped?
Rape is defined in SOA 2003,s 1:As, when a person intentionally penetrates the vigina,,anus or mouth of another person with his penis, the person does not consent to the penetration and he does not reasonably believe that the victim consented.
The above definition buttreses the point that only a woman can be raped because of the use of words 'penis and penetration'.
The legal unattended quesions are
1.Can't a man be raped?
2.Can't a man be penetrated?
3.Are women the only weaker sex that can be protected by this Act?
Be that as it may,then i think legal arguments should be discarded and the reasonableman test and logic should always be applied in our courts.Without being bias,i think that my fellow learnered gentlemen(mostly women) should agree with me that the legislation governinig rape should be properly looked into and amended to suit all gender.
law should be made to protect all and not the few.lets still keep the legal and juristic issues alert.
You made a very good thesis uddo! This is a very problematic area of law! But... the statistics say that the women are those that are being raped and not the men. The law also clearly defines rape when a person intentionally penetrates the VIGINA, ANUS or MOUTH of another person with his PENIS! could you find one case where a man has been raped from a woman? I found this link when a woman raped a man and convicted to prison for 30 years (http://www.fathermag.com/news/rape/spokane.shtmland), another case which is also very interesting is that of a woman who raped 10 men (http://blogs.app.com/saywhat/2009/06/19/woman-on-trial-for-raping-10-men/). Also In a landmark case a 23-year-old woman has been convicted by a Bergen court for the rape of a 31-year-old man (http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article1027927.ece)! I will agree that a man yes can be raped and the law must overlook the definition of rape! I agree that the legislation governing rape should be properly looked and amended to suit all gender but i will disagree on the point 3 that you made! My opinion is that the weaker sex are the woman statistically ONLY SPEAKING without want to be feminist!
ReplyDeleteYou have pointed out a much disputed area of law! Every single male friend of mine has a comment to make about this legislation and, naturally, they all agree with you. I should agree with Androulla above, there is no point in adding "with his penis", since penetration can occur in a number of ways. This issue of rape has been over-complicated for no reason. Rape should merely be penetration without consent, either with a body part or with an object.
ReplyDeleteAnother interpretation of the legislation could be that a woman cannot rape and not that a man cannot be raped. In other words, it would only be considered rape if the male rapist raped another man or a woman. Which is fair enough, but in reality and as androulla has proved above, there are a number of cases where a woman HAS, indeed, raped a man (or several for that matter!).
I guess the wording remains from older times, when people refused to accept that men can be raped, and raped men themselves, would NEVER come out and admit it openly. Because of this embarrassment, so many tragic cases of men being raped by other men or women, have gone unreported, without the perpetrator being punished. If there are no statistics, the problem does not exist, hence it cannot be solved. Some vicious cycle huh?