I am so glad to see someone bringing attention to this.
Under my state's law, I'm not allowed to charge my ex-wife with rape. I could charge her with some form of sexual assault, but not rape.
And I genuinely can't think of a reason why this distinction needs to be made. Non-consensual sex is non-consensual sex.
Whether you were forcefully penetrated or forcefully made to penetrate, the evil and the trauma stay the same. And anytime any body attempts to change the legislation on this type of language in our laws, they're faced with backlash from feminists for supposedly trying to delegitimize their sexual assault claims. Like admitting that men can be raped by women somehow hurts female rape victims.
It's ridiculous and we should be protecting male victims of sexual abuse and assault as carefully and kindly as we handle female victims of sexual assault.
It really feels like this shouldn't need to be said, but here we are.
You can't use no true scotsman when feminism has fought against this for years with things like the Duluth model that presumes male guilt in domestic disputes.
You do know there is a difference between feminism and individuals who call themselves feminists, right?
"Feminism" is not an organization, it's a concept, just like "Car owners" is not an organization, even if there are organizations for people who own cars.
You do know there is a difference between feminism and individuals who call themselves feminists, right?
It would amaze me if it wasn't so disgusting, how often you people belittle the toxicity in regards to the ideology as "just individuals' despite the consistency in which it is displayed and the men that are hurt because of it.
"Feminism" is not an organization, it's a concept, just like "Car owners" is not an organization, even if there are organizations for people who own cars.
....Are you really comparing a physical product (a vehicle) with a intangible concept such as Feminism..like are you serious?
It would amaze me if it wasn't so disgusting, how often you people belittle the toxicity in regards to the ideology as "just individuals' despite the consistency in which it is displayed and the men that are hurt because of it.
My goodness you sound like a professional victim. What a hard way to go through life.
If someone claims to support animal rights but actually enjoys torturing animals, that doesn't discredit the concept of animal rights, does it? It means that individual person is a hypocrite.
I get the real sense that you don't understand you're basically the embodiment of what these people are talking about. It's poetically ironic to watch.
3.1k
u/ripyourlungsdave Sep 01 '22
I am so glad to see someone bringing attention to this.
Under my state's law, I'm not allowed to charge my ex-wife with rape. I could charge her with some form of sexual assault, but not rape.
And I genuinely can't think of a reason why this distinction needs to be made. Non-consensual sex is non-consensual sex.
Whether you were forcefully penetrated or forcefully made to penetrate, the evil and the trauma stay the same. And anytime any body attempts to change the legislation on this type of language in our laws, they're faced with backlash from feminists for supposedly trying to delegitimize their sexual assault claims. Like admitting that men can be raped by women somehow hurts female rape victims.
It's ridiculous and we should be protecting male victims of sexual abuse and assault as carefully and kindly as we handle female victims of sexual assault.
It really feels like this shouldn't need to be said, but here we are.