3 ms·

*had consensual sex without a condom with, whose partner wanted to compel him to get an STD test, when a prosecutor with a chip on her shoulder and possibly a d

*had consensual sex without a condom with, whose partner wanted to compel him to get an STD test, when a prosecutor with a chip on her shoulder and possibly a dollar bribe in her pocket turned it into what you now think it is. Or at least want us to believe.

matt4077 8y ago
I see no material difference in your description and the term rape. An agreement to have sex with a condom only is certainly not valid for condom-less sex. And your spurious accusation of bribery is just baffling.
- whamlastxmas 8y ago
  Violently and forcibly penetrating someone against their will is a pretty big difference to not using a condom when previously asked to do so. Depending on the country, yes they're both rape by the legal definition, but it's absolutely worth clarifying.
  - matt4077 8y ago
    I‘m sure he would have had to use violence, if his victim had not been asleep at the time.
  - ben_w 8y ago
    One of those is recklessly exposing someone to the risk of an incurable disease, the other is doing the same thing with additional immediately visible damage.
  - erikpukinskis 8y ago
    No, it would be a small difference to some people, and it would be a big difference to others. Just like being choked suddenly without consent would be delightful to some and horrifying to others. It's not a matter of "which act is more violent". There are a class of acts which rise to the level of rape. This includes condom removal, forcible penetration, unforced penetration following clear withdrawal of consent, etc. "Is it rape?" is not a matter of which of these different acts is considered most violent. The law doesn't establish a hierarchy. It's a bar. Either the act rises above the bar or not. It's a matter of whether parties explicitly gave consent, whether they explicitly withdrew consent, and which parties committed which acts under those circumstances. It's important that it is a bar, so that people can know rationally whether they or others have crossed it. A hierarchy with "bad rape", "better rape" and "best rape" would not be a useful social contract.
ben_w 8y ago
What he was accused of doing violated, albeit by my not-qualified-in-law reading, multiple sections of the UK’s Sexual Offences Act 2003. As I recall, the judge in his case said something similar, and agreed to his extradition partly on that basis (although Wikipedia says there isn’t a requirement for double criminality in cases like this).

matt4077 8y ago

I see no material difference in your description and the term rape. An agreement to have sex with a condom only is certainly not valid for condom-less sex. And your spurious accusation of bribery is just baffling.

whamlastxmas 8y ago
Violently and forcibly penetrating someone against their will is a pretty big difference to not using a condom when previously asked to do so. Depending on the country, yes they're both rape by the legal definition, but it's absolutely worth clarifying.
- matt4077 8y ago
  I‘m sure he would have had to use violence, if his victim had not been asleep at the time.
- ben_w 8y ago
  One of those is recklessly exposing someone to the risk of an incurable disease, the other is doing the same thing with additional immediately visible damage.
- erikpukinskis 8y ago
  No, it would be a small difference to some people, and it would be a big difference to others. Just like being choked suddenly without consent would be delightful to some and horrifying to others. It's not a matter of "which act is more violent". There are a class of acts which rise to the level of rape. This includes condom removal, forcible penetration, unforced penetration following clear withdrawal of consent, etc. "Is it rape?" is not a matter of which of these different acts is considered most violent. The law doesn't establish a hierarchy. It's a bar. Either the act rises above the bar or not. It's a matter of whether parties explicitly gave consent, whether they explicitly withdrew consent, and which parties committed which acts under those circumstances. It's important that it is a bar, so that people can know rationally whether they or others have crossed it. A hierarchy with "bad rape", "better rape" and "best rape" would not be a useful social contract.

ben_w 8y ago

What he was accused of doing violated, albeit by my not-qualified-in-law reading, multiple sections of the UK’s Sexual Offences Act 2003. As I recall, the judge in his case said something similar, and agreed to his extradition partly on that basis (although Wikipedia says there isn’t a requirement for double criminality in cases like this).