"Levels of rape"

C

Chunkofcoal

New member
Apr 5, 2008
23
0
1
Cheerful thread I know. Anyway, apparently there's some row between Ed Miliband and Ken Clarke over a radio interview that's ended up with Miliband crying for Clarke's resignation. The quote he apprently read out was:



to which Miliband replied:



Personally I see this as more of a "oh jump on another party member" thing than serious actual offence at what was said but reading around the internet there are quite a few people who are upset at this and I cannot understand why? Rape's a serious offence, I'm not going to downplay it, and its up there with peadophilia in crimes that are pretty much guaranteed to instantly illciit pleads for the death penalty and/or torture, but honestly I think he's right. There's differences between things like date rape and a gang breaking into a home and assualting the occupants but both are serious, however I can't put them anywhere near the same category as his example of a 17 year old having sex with a minor, not least because if the whole "kids are maturing earlier debate."


EDIT: Ah apparently the bbc do have an article on it so some other quotes of what was actually said:

That looks like they cut part of the quote out which is annoying but I can't find a reason to hate on him for saying that.


Again true, from the tiny bit I've heard about this date rape cases can be very hard to get a sure decision on and I'm sure I've heard somewhere, probably the mail, that there is a problem with women claiming rape. Also reminds me of a thread a little while back about this but I can't remember the specifics.

So is this just another political thing where people read a headline and make a decision or is the outrage at Clarke's comments genuinely what the majority of people feel? I honestly can't see a problem in saying there are levels of rape and cases need to be judged dispassionately case by case rather than the usual "He's a rapist! castrate him!" response the word always seem to get. It still seems to be a very taboo thing to talk about.
 
"Levels of rape"

I think most blokes in the country would be guilty of rape then. I know I am, The fact that it was consentual and i stayed with her for eight years and had two children is obviously irrelevant.
 
"Levels of rape"

I had sex with a miner once.
Kept bashing me in the back of the head with the light on his hard-hat.

Now I know it doesn't add to the debate but I couldn't help myself. Please delete, after having a sly giggle at it, so the proper debate can continue.
 
"Levels of rape"

OK I giggled


Problem is people clam up when you try to point that out. If by some miracle I ended up sleeping with a 15 year old over the weekend and it somehow ended up in court I doubt I'd get a prison sentence over it but I'm still going to be on the register
 
"Levels of rape"

I fully understand the purpose of enforcing the age of consent from the persepctive that it's not there to criminalise young people but to remind adults that it is their duty not to even so much as seek consent from an underage person.

The two big reasons for this, as I see it, are:

1. It's easy for an adult to manipulate a young person into giving consent. I don't necessarily mean saying "yes" but meaning "no" - I mean convincing a teenager that it's what they want. People do it all the time ("Hey, why not take a chance? You seem like a strong, independent woman. Society can't tell you what to do, you're your own woman, am I right?") - and I don't mean to underage people, I mean any guys who exploit a position of power or are just good with chat-up lines.

2. Sorry to any teenagers here, but teenagers are poor decision-makers. They engage in risky behaviour and are bad at monitoring their own goals and priorities. You cannot necessarily trust a teenager to make the best decision for their own welfare. For that reason, we take the decision out of their hands.

Having said that, it's not the same as someone forcing themselves on someone else and I'm sure that if you looked at the penalties courts give out for each category, it would reflect that.
 
"Levels of rape"

Boy, this is a can with a huge heaping helping of worms. I have 23 women who work for me. At dinner tonight I threw this topic out and it was quite a hot conversation. Basically it was going well down the lines of two threads; rape between say, a 30 year old man and an unwilling 25 year old woman YES they screamed, thats rape. A 17 year old guy and a consensual 15 year old girl? NOOOOOOOO they said, thats not rape, shouldn't even be registered. Then I threw out a 30 year old guy and a consensual 15 year old girl, THROW HIM IN JAIL!!!!! I said in the eyes of the law why should a 17 year old and a 30 year old be any different???? Seems like their picking the rules to suit their purpose to me.

I'm still looking for bruises, but its technically the same thing in my state.
 
"Levels of rape"

D:

It's hurtful as it is truthful. Most of my friends make decisions which are completely wrong in so many ways.
 
"Levels of rape"

most kids i know go by the two year rule. i.e. if your 17 get it on anyone two years older or younger than you.
i know a 18 year old kid who claims to have had sex with a 13/14 year old at my skool.
the short story - he walks with a limp
 
"Levels of rape"

All rapes are serious crimes. No-one, including Kenneth Clarke, disputes that. But as with many offences, the definition of the crime covers a wide range of scenarios. Mr Clarke was simply pointing out, in response to the argument that rape sentences are too low, that the mean average sentence for rape is a misleading statistic, as it is pulled down by crimes which do not quite fit the ultra-violent image most of us have in our minds when we think of rape. His only error was in failing to anticipate how easily his words would be distorted, and I imagine more offence will arise from the headlines surrounding the incident than from the Today programme itself. I seriously hope he doesn't resign as in my view he has been the first cabinet minister for decades to break the cycle of "tough" posturing and without him the Tories will be back to their old hang 'em and flog 'em ways.

The problem is, anything involving rape or paedophilia provokes such a powerful emotional response in people that they don't always listen. Jumping the gun the minute someone is accused of a serious offence is exactly the kind of thinking that a responsible criminal justice system in a liberal society exists to oppose.
 
"Levels of rape"

I'm realistic enough that even if I was lifting heavy weights full time I would still be 'the weaker sex'. So with that said, on consent it is more than awkward if you say no and they go ahead anyway, how much violence there is in it could depend on the individuals involved and how much resistance before and during it. I've been in that situation, it changed my opinion on consent. I've also been a juror on a rape case more than 10 years ago, it changed my opinion on courts and justice
 
"Levels of rape"

As a non UK-ian could you outline who Ed Miliband and Ken Clarke are? Sometimes their position and social standing can dictate was is appropriate and not-appropriate to say, particularly when being publically broadcast.

To be very sterile about the issue rape is in some ways no different to other crimes in that there is always going to be different levels of severity. Assault is an example. It's because of this that judges are given leeway to determine an appropriate penalty that matches the severity of the crime within pre-determined guidelines.
 
"Levels of rape"

I think concentual sex regardless of age difference shouldnt be called rape. It goes from child abuse right through to kids being kids. What's wrong with the old law of sex with a minor? Keep the title of rape for what it is
 
"Levels of rape"

Ed Milliband is currently leader of the Labour Party. While David Cameron has gained some level of gravitas as PM even though he is fairly young, I feel Ed has not, and just doesn't come across as someone with any authority. Ken Clarke is Minister of Justice (apparently), I'm a bit confused as I would have thought a lot of his remit is covered by the Home Secretary's role. He's been around a long time, and had a few Cabinet positions under Thatcher, then was on the backbenches for a while after he stood as Conservative leader some time before the new guard came in
 
"Levels of rape"

But there are minors, and there are minors. If a child is too young to know what sex is and thus show non-consent it should still most definitely be rape, in addition to sex with a minor and child abuse and anything else they can find to pile on.
 
"Levels of rape"

I think it's the argument previously mentioned that anyone under the age of consent cannot give their consent as it is believed they are not mature enough to make this choice on their own so in law it will always be non-consensual and therefore rape. The rise in visibility and intolerance of peodophiles (as they have always been around, just went pretty much unpunished) has probably had something to do with the change in the law. The other side of the argument, the increasing sexualisation of children is quite interesting, if disturbing as the free market vs childhood. It wasn't that long ago, okay maybe a couple of hundred years ago that parents had the right of live or death over their children. How times have changed
 
"Levels of rape"

Personally I think it should be beyond rape. A child abuser is far worse than a rapist. I'd like the term rape to mean what most people thinks it means. Raping a child should be two offences
 
"Levels of rape"

His mistake was implying that there could be rapes that were non-serious. That said, I think it's important to recognise the range of severity that such crimes can exhibit.
 
"Levels of rape"

I agree with Mr. Clarke's comment: "Rape has been singled out as an example mainly to add a bit of sexual excitement to the headlines." Milliband will do anything to gain favour with the people, considering he's the leader (?) of the party which left the UK in such a shoddy state.
 
"Levels of rape"

Which is plain dumb. Legal age of consent is 16 at the moment suggesting that a girl/guy 1 day off of there 16th birthday is incapable of giving knowledgable consent whilst a day later they suddenly become mature and wise. The thing is that as a species we develop sexually much earlier than 16 and it is legislation steered by religion that dictates such rules, not individual understanding or even common sense.
Refering back to what Kwajman said earlier about how a 17 and 15 year old is fine but a 30 and 15 year old isn't, this has to be looked at in it's own right, examined thoroughly and not through the minds of daily mail readers whose idea of perverts and paedo's is coloured by the sensasional headlines and buzz words. Black and white just don't work.
 
"Levels of rape"

I agree, SpikeD. I was at a club in Phoenix last year and one of my friends got chatting to a beautiful blond gal; she had the whole package - gorgeous eyes, straight teeth (), great rack and long legs (around 5'8 or 5'9 tall). Everyone who saw her, and whom I spoke to about her, thought she was 20 or 21. She approached my friend, they got chatting and appeared to be getting on great, then he walked away from her. When I asked him why he didn't keep talking to her, he replied: "She's 14." Just goes to show.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Serving Met officer charged with six counts of rape and threat to kill
Replies
0
Views
20
admin
A
A
Rape trial of Moroccan singer Saad Lamjarred starts in Paris
Replies
0
Views
16
admin
A
A
Letters: The Conservative Party no longer represents the views of its members
Replies
0
Views
1
admin
A
A
Senegal opposition leader Sonko convicted of corrupting youth, acquitted of rape
Replies
0
Views
10
admin
A
W
Deciphering Swiss Mortgages
Replies
0
Views
31
wereli
W
Back
Top