Norwegian Court Convicts First Woman for Rape

[watcher2001]

Textbook definition of Rape

1. The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
2. The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
3. Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.

Note #1 states Sex acts, not penetration. Last time I checked, "correct me if I am wrong Mr Clinton" a Blow Job counts as a sex act.

whether we agree with it or not... IT was rape

 

[emw]

True, but we don't have a long history of equality.

So true. Hopefully things are getting better.

 

[MarkCollette]

What if the guy were gay? Then the idea of any kind of sex with a woman would be completely repugnant to him and being forced to could be traumatizing, akin to a straight guy being forced by another man. A blowjob feels good, right? But does that mean that a heterosexual man would be fine with getting one from a guy? Probably not.

A person's reasons for not consenting to sex shouldn't be questioned, whether it's a male or female. If s/he doesn't want to, then it shouldn't be done.

Right, plus who knows what STDs that kind of woman would have?

I mean, it sounds all cool and macho to wake up to getting head, but there's tonnes of scenarios that I'm sure would make ALL of us reconsider.

Eg:
- Nastily ugly or fat chick
- Psycho ex girlfriend stalking you
- Chick trying to get pregnant to get child support
- Bitter woman with AIDS trying to kill all guys
- Chick trying to break you and your girlfriend up (maybe she just hates your girlfriend, and doesn't even care for you)
- Totally nice chick that maybe you'd like, but oops, she has oral herpes


Hey, I don't mean to be a let down, and ruin everyone's beer commercial induced hallucinations, but when I go to a party, I'd like to sleep with less than half the chicks there, so I don't think I'd be happy waking up to one from the nasty majority...

 

[MarkCollette]

No one is equating the act of a blowjob with penetrative sex. The critical factor here is consent. If it's not consensual, then it's sexual assault and/or rape. To reduce rape to a matter of physical injury is to trivialize its harm.

Rape doesn't always result in injury. The vagina is capable of expanding large enough to pass a child through it... Requiring proof of tearing or something like that just doesn't fit with the biological reality.

Plus, lots of rape involves drugging, where the victim doesn't know what's happenning, and so doesn't defend themselves.

In any case, injury (torn tissue) may have nothing to do with it.

 

[Mechcozmo]

Um, equality would be more like 50%.

Some people are more equal that others.

 

[erikh]

I don't know what the standard punishments for rape are over there, or if the type of sex act is considered in assessing severity. The sentence seems light by US standards, but then our whole crime/punishment system is so brain-bogglingly wrong-minded that... The article did make a big deal, though, of the prosecution trying for as egalitarian a handling of the case as possible. But it doesn't really quote them on whether they felt the sentence was a success or a failure in that light.

I can tell you that oral sex is not very likely to be seen as a "severity" here in Norway, by most people. Had this woman for instance, as suggested in another post here, sodomized this man, the jail sentence is likely to have been longer.

As to the length of the sentence compared to the, unfortunately, more common "reversed situation", I have scanned national newspapers' coverage of previous rape trials, and the sentences ranging from 340 hours of forced community labor to 15 years of detainment, with most cases ending up at 1-2 years of jail-time, it seems. Anyway, IANAL, so do look for a pinch of salt to go with this...

 

[mkrishnan]

As to the length of the sentence compared to the, unfortunately, more common "reversed situation", I have scanned national newspapers' coverage of previous rape trials, and the sentences ranging from 340 hours of forced community labor to 15 years of detainment, with most cases ending up at 1-2 years of jail-time, it seems. Anyway, IANAL, so do look for a pinch of salt to go with this...

Thanks for the info! Is the Norweigian prison system considered effective at..."rehabilitating" prisoners? I think Americans are skeptical because our prison system is very focused on punishment, and so we don't have an expectation of actually making the prisoner better, and we just look for long jail times.... Not that I should really be starting *that* fight in this thread.

And as for your IANAL comment (hehehe, always happy to learn new 'net acronyms! ), don't worry, I don't have any immediate intention of raping anyone anywhere, regardless of the definition. So hopefully I won't be needing a lawyer anytime soon.

 

[gekko513]

Thanks for the info! Is the Norweigian prison system considered effective at..."rehabilitating" prisoners? I think Americans are skeptical because our prison system is very focused on punishment, and so we don't have an expectation of actually making the prisoner better, and we just look for long jail times.... Not that I should really be starting *that* fight in this thread.

And as for your IANAL comment (hehehe, always happy to learn new 'net acronyms! ), don't worry, I don't have any immediate intention of raping anyone anywhere, regardless of the definition. So hopefully I won't be needing a lawyer anytime soon.

I don't know how effective it is or if it's any more or less effective compared to other countries, but it is definitely supposed to be "rehabilitating" by design. The maximum sentence is 21 years even for a serial killer or treason (against the country).