3 ms·

Can you clarify what sort of coercion was involved? My understanding is that rape does involve physical violence, or at least physical coercion. In particular,

by swatow 12y ago

Can you clarify what sort of coercion was involved? My understanding is that rape does involve physical violence, or at least physical coercion. In particular, "give me a blowjob or you are fired" is not rape, but "give me a blowjob or I'm not unlocking the door" is.

e40 12y ago
My understanding is that rape does involve physical violence, or at least physical coercion. You're missing the threat of violence.
jdub 12y ago
Which part of "consent" is confusing to you?
emmab 12y ago
The former is most definitely rape. We call sexual coercion rape because it can cause severe and lasting trauma even if physical violence or threat of physical violence is not part of the coercion.
Lazare 12y ago
Rape is a colloquial term for a range of specific crimes with technical legal definitions. In NZ, for example, the former would be the crime of "Sexual conduct with consent induced by certain threats" (penalty of up to 14 years in prison), whereas the latter would be the crime of "sexual violation" (penalty of up to 20 years in prison). Other countries might lump them together, or call them different names. If you're trying to discuss the actual crimes, you'd want to 1) mention what jurisdiction you're talking about and 2) use the actual names of the crimes as per the statute book. But as a practical matter, it's all rape.
- swatow 12y ago
  You say that rape is a colloquial term for a range of specific crimes and chide me for not being more specific. And yet the person I replied to was making a positive claim that certain actions were rape. So how am I supposed to interpret that claim? Does rape take on a different meaning (e.g. a broader feminist definition) in that context? If rape is defined to be a crime or class of crimes, it's completely unreasonable to selectively ask people to be very specific about which crimes they mean. In the US I don't believe there is any such crime as rape by threatening to fire someone, or if there is it is not a serious crime.
  - Lazare 12y ago
    > So how am I supposed to interpret that claim? As someone using a colloquial term for anything sexual without consent, obviously. Sex without consent is generally called rape; most people don't have any clue about the exact legal definitions. You don't even know what legal jurisdiction OP is in; how could you interpret the word as anything but the colloquial definition? > In the US I don't believe there is any such crime as rape by threatening to fire someone, or if there is it is not a serious crime. First, sex crimes are defined at the state level in the US, so it doesn't even make sense to discuss what "the" law is in the US. Pick your state, and you get your answer. Second, if we pick, eg, Michigan, you're describing...hmm. "Third Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct", which is punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Not sure about you, but I'd call that a serious crime. Other states have different laws, but generally speaking getting someone to perform an act via the threat of firing is coercion, and penetration achieved via coercion is one of the more serious forms of sexual assault.
    - swatow 12y ago
      As someone using a colloquial term for anything sexual without consent, obviously. Sex without consent is generally called rape; most people don't have any clue about the exact legal definitions But most people don't subscribe to your consent based definition of rape. I think the majority of people would lean towards the force based definition of rape. You personally might think that rape should be defined as sex without consent, but that's a different matter. True, there has been some movement towards consent based laws in the US, but many states still retain the requirement of force (which could be expanded to include threats and physical restraint).
      - snowwrestler 12y ago
        > But most people don't subscribe to your consent based definition of rape. I think the majority of people would lean towards the force based definition of rape. You are wrong; see for example Wikipedia, which represents a broad agreement of many editors and includes both coercion and abuse of authority as types of rape. Edit to reply to swatow since I've hit the reply limit: that's a good article and I hope you read it carefully and think about what it says.

by swatow 12y ago

e40 12y ago

My understanding is that rape does involve physical violence, or at least physical coercion. You're missing the threat of violence.

jdub 12y ago

Which part of "consent" is confusing to you?

emmab 12y ago

The former is most definitely rape. We call sexual coercion rape because it can cause severe and lasting trauma even if physical violence or threat of physical violence is not part of the coercion.

Lazare 12y ago

Rape is a colloquial term for a range of specific crimes with technical legal definitions. In NZ, for example, the former would be the crime of "Sexual conduct with consent induced by certain threats" (penalty of up to 14 years in prison), whereas the latter would be the crime of "sexual violation" (penalty of up to 20 years in prison). Other countries might lump them together, or call them different names. If you're trying to discuss the actual crimes, you'd want to 1) mention what jurisdiction you're talking about and 2) use the actual names of the crimes as per the statute book. But as a practical matter, it's all rape.

swatow 12y ago
You say that rape is a colloquial term for a range of specific crimes and chide me for not being more specific. And yet the person I replied to was making a positive claim that certain actions were rape. So how am I supposed to interpret that claim? Does rape take on a different meaning (e.g. a broader feminist definition) in that context? If rape is defined to be a crime or class of crimes, it's completely unreasonable to selectively ask people to be very specific about which crimes they mean. In the US I don't believe there is any such crime as rape by threatening to fire someone, or if there is it is not a serious crime.
- Lazare 12y ago
  > So how am I supposed to interpret that claim? As someone using a colloquial term for anything sexual without consent, obviously. Sex without consent is generally called rape; most people don't have any clue about the exact legal definitions. You don't even know what legal jurisdiction OP is in; how could you interpret the word as anything but the colloquial definition? > In the US I don't believe there is any such crime as rape by threatening to fire someone, or if there is it is not a serious crime. First, sex crimes are defined at the state level in the US, so it doesn't even make sense to discuss what "the" law is in the US. Pick your state, and you get your answer. Second, if we pick, eg, Michigan, you're describing...hmm. "Third Degree Criminal Sexual Conduct", which is punishable by up to 15 years in prison. Not sure about you, but I'd call that a serious crime. Other states have different laws, but generally speaking getting someone to perform an act via the threat of firing is coercion, and penetration achieved via coercion is one of the more serious forms of sexual assault.
  - swatow 12y ago
    As someone using a colloquial term for anything sexual without consent, obviously. Sex without consent is generally called rape; most people don't have any clue about the exact legal definitions But most people don't subscribe to your consent based definition of rape. I think the majority of people would lean towards the force based definition of rape. You personally might think that rape should be defined as sex without consent, but that's a different matter. True, there has been some movement towards consent based laws in the US, but many states still retain the requirement of force (which could be expanded to include threats and physical restraint).
    - snowwrestler 12y ago
      > But most people don't subscribe to your consent based definition of rape. I think the majority of people would lean towards the force based definition of rape. You are wrong; see for example Wikipedia, which represents a broad agreement of many editors and includes both coercion and abuse of authority as types of rape. Edit to reply to swatow since I've hit the reply limit: that's a good article and I hope you read it carefully and think about what it says.