Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Releases New Diversity Numbers, Hired Over 11,000 Women in Past Year
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think the question is whether men "made to" penetrate (against their will) is rape.
What is being questioned is what constitutes "made to".
This is something that needs to be explained a little more thoroughly.
Last edited:
Hold the phone, are you implying women aren't just men sans a penis? That's dangerous thoughts. If it were true then differences in education and career choices couldn't all be summed up as gender discrimination...
As the GOP has found out and is well-illustrated here, when some men try to discuss rape, they TEND to fail miserably.
(Did I couch that statement enough?)
(Did I couch that statement enough?)
Would you please fix your quote. I've been skipping over the rape debate as best I can. IMO Tech forums aren't the best place for that kind of debate as it might trigger some people with a history.
I don't even know how to respond to this. It's just so irrational. Of course men and women are different. As ALL people are different. And those differences in strengths (diversity) are what makes a work team strong. The problem lies in the biases people involved in hiring have that men are good at job A and women aren't and vice versa. THAT'S gender discrimination. Not whether men or women (or ethnicity or economic status) *tend* to prefer one occupation vs another. The people who DO prefer that occupation should all have an equal chance to do it without someone assuming they can't do it well because of their sex or race. Because those discriminatory biases DO still exist in the hiring environment, programs have been put in place to overcome them to some degree. Again, it's removing a negative starting point for people, not creating an advantage for them.
See, what the DOJ definition does is describe the act of rape in as generalized terms as possible, without making any consideration to genders. There are no direct references to penetrators or penetratees, just penetration, which is, of course, the prerequisite of a rape.
And "made to" is simply that. You're penetrating someone against your will. Either through force, coercion, or being taken advantage of while unconscious. Basically the usual definition of rape applies to men and women both.
My apologies. The quote has been fixed. It seems that since MR has switched to this new system misquotes and double posts have become more frequent ... at least for me.
The new multiquote setup is kinda spastic sometimes, ain't it? I haven't seen it misquote anyone yet, but that's probably because it only works once out of every 5 times for me, so I quit using it.
Coercion by definition is, "the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats."
So again I have to wonder what form of force or threat are these men experiencing? Of course that doesn't mean that women are incapable of force or dire threat, but until some evidence is offered, I'm highly skeptical that this is occurring as much to men as it does to women.
These numbers are from the CDC, the some survey was used to give us the 1/5 women are raped statistic. If you are sceptical of the CDC numbers, you should also be sceptical of the 1/5 women are raped numbers.
That is the act. It does not describe the force needed to achieve it.
**** me or I'll punch your face in ... is rape.
**** me or I'll be really upset ... is not.
I'm certainly skeptical of self reporting (see defensive gun uses) ... especially when it doesn't agree with other sources.
I'd need to see more corroboration before I leap to accepting that.
If I were to take a guess, I'd say most male rapes happen to people who are so drunk, they're barely holding on to consciousness, have been drugged in some way, are being blackmailed, or have a gun pointed at them. It's considerably more difficult for a woman to overpower a man physically, get him into a state of arousal, then have her way with him than it is vice versa.
I agree with you that it probably doesn't happen quite as often in public, because male rape requires much more conditional circumstances for it to happen. That's not to say it's incredibly rare, but I wouldn't think it happens as much.
Now if you include prisons, cfedu might actually have a point, because male on male rape is considerably easier from a logistics point of view than female on male, and you're in an environment that practically endorses it.
When the amount of total people raped and sexually assaulted in 2013 in the is less than 0.1% . that is a rate almost 20 times lower than the numbers from the CDC.
So if a woman does not fight back, is it not rape?
Lots of assumptions, if the these CDC numbers are not credible, than so are the numbers on female rape. If 1 in 5 rape number is not true, than most people who claim to be raped are false. Can I safly say that 99% of rape allegations are false now?
It's interesting that in the posted scenarios that you quoted said nothing about the victims response, but were about the aggressors actions instead. Yet you turned that around to make it about the victim.
I find that very curious. I think you're perspective on this whole rape issue is ... curious.
Considering the fact I never said that...
You know, you have some severe problems with inserting things between the lines, putting words in people's mouths, and extrapolating logical conclusions from basic information.
These women who are supposedly oppressed, should be the very first ones against oppressing other women. As they should know what it feels like. Makes no sense whatsoever. Your relatives are more then likely not trained in human resources or have the educational back ground to support that field. Any personal experiences don't nessicarily apply to everyone, everywhere.
I can tell you human resources are more then well versed in equal opportunity, sexual harassment and many related issues on both the college level and company level. For legal, ethical & moral reasons.
Well, choosing not to fight back isn't consent. Like anything, it's dependent on the circumstances. Who's doing what, when, and how. But in the end, the line between rape or consensual sex can be defined rather easily. Was it willing engaged in, or was it forced?
Though of course some people can blur the line by considering begrudging consent to be as bad as unwilling, but really, the whole topic of what constitutes rape is one big can 'o hard to chew worms.