Dunno other critters, but mounting and quasi-copulary (wow--sure hope that wasn't a real word. ) behavior is a common dominance mechanism among dogs.

With my two dogs, when they both came into the household, they knew each other, but were out of the old pack. So, it was a matter of some concern to them as to who'd be the top dog. (They agreed it was me--usually, but #2 was pretty important.) This was the first time I saw a female mount a male. Knight didn't like it.... (FWIW, with two adult dogs in a household, with similar dogs, the female is usually the dominant one. Not sure with an adult male and a female pup.)

Nowadays, when I'm brushing Mary's teeth, Knight will try a very discrete version of it--he stays a bit away from her and does the dry-humping thing. He's not quite bold enough to actually mount her--Mary has very sharp teeth. Mary's still the top (4-legged) dog in the house.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
"Rape" apparently pervades the animal kingdom; I read an account of observations of whales where a cow was swimming upside down at the surface, and two (or was it three?) bulls forced her lower so they could copulate with her.� It's certainly a way of passing on one's genes, so it would be an expected evolutionary strategy.� If rape never succeeded (e.g. in a world where women never conceived after non-consensual sex, or if they never brought rape pregnancies to term) it wouldn't have any evolutionary value.

That's all about animals, though.� We're more englightened than that (or so we like to tell ourselves).� The problem with assuming that we have nothing in common with our evolutionary forebears is that we deny that we have certain unwelcome urges and pressures, instead of admitting that they exist but are wrong.� Hell, even some consensual things lead to results which are highly undesirable (stupid) and morally questionable for their effects.

---

There are other problems with looking to animal behavior for explanations of rape. Animal behavior is far more complex and far less understood than we'd like to think, especially in higher-order animals like whales. In fact, when observing dolphins, researches discovered that those creatures have highly complex sexual relationships, including homosexuality, and sex with older animals that were no longer viable. Those particular interactions defy simple "evolutionary/survival" explanations. And, since we can't just ask animals what exactly they're doing and why they do what they do, it makes their behavior even more mystifying in some ways.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ARJ:
As for rape as an evolutionary strategy, I'm not sure on numbers, but it was always my understanding that at least in human beings, pregnancies from rapes [b]are statistically rare, since rapes are generally more of a hit-and-run type of event.[/B]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by ARJ:
[b]Another factoid:� Supposedly, the odds of pregnancy are higher if the woman's orgasm comes after the man's.� In established relationships the order is usually the opposite, but in one-time consensual coitus the man usually comes first.� Looks like human sexuality is set up to improve the chances of out-crossing.� I admit that I find this a little bit unsettling.

---

I don't know of any experimentation or statistics on the effect of female orgasm on the probability of conception.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
Excuse me, but are you seriously suggesting that women achieve orgasm when raped???

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
Another factoid: Supposedly, the odds of pregnancy are higher if the woman's orgasm comes after the man's. In established relationships the order is usually the opposite, but in one-time consensual coitus the man usually comes first.

---

Of course, other things aren't equal, and rape attempts can get men killed (not nearly often enough, alas), so it would also be expected that there would be genes to control said behavior, reducing the risks for the rapist.

All this assumes, of course, that 'rape genes' actually exist, about which I have no opinion.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
Saintonge: The repeated accusations, either baseless or directly contradicting what was actually written, have exhausted my reservoir of goodwill.

---

Tau, I know you find this hard to believe, (so does Astrid, sometimes), but when people say 'Are you saying ... " It may just be because the original poster was obscure.

In any case, a simple, 'No, I'm saying ..." without the unpleasantness works just as well for establishing communication. In fact, it works better!

quote:

---

As for your sentiment regarding rapists, I found this little gem:

---

And "rape" covers a whole spectrum of assaults, from clear cases to very morally messy situations where things are much more ambiguous. For example, a rape can begin *during* an act of consensual sex; if the woman gets bored and asks him to stop, and he doesn't comply quickly enough, well that's rape (and has been found to be so by the courts). Would you say "kill him and let God sort him out" in that case?

When we build rape up into this big terrible thing, then we're not helping matters at all; we're increasing the social taboo and stigma, and making it worse to be raped. If it was treated like a normal assault (which is all it really is -- a penis is much less damaging than a fist in most circumstances), then I can't help but think that it would be more psychologically healthy for all concerned.

The rape stigma/taboo is really all about men, not women; rape is regarded as a huge offence because it transgresses against men's feelings of ownership over women. Which is why, although I know these shows of chivalry are meant well, I can't help but think that they're counterproductive in the long run.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
Just wondering why you guys think that a rape is necessarily so much terribly worse than any other kind of assault that it deserves the death penalty.

---

hmmn. not sure, myself.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:

And "rape" covers a whole spectrum of assaults, from clear cases to very morally messy situations where things are much more ambiguous. For example, a rape can begin *during* an act of consensual sex; if the woman gets bored and asks him to stop, and he doesn't comply quickly enough, well that's rape (and has been found to be so by the courts). Would you say "kill him and let God sort him out" in that case?

---

Never heard of case beginning with consensual intercourse.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:

When we build rape up into this big terrible thing, then we're not helping matters at all; we're increasing the social taboo and stigma, and making it worse to be raped. If it was treated like a normal assault (which is all it really is -- a penis is much less damaging than a fist in most circumstances), then I can't help but think that it would be more psychologically healthy for all concerned.

The rape stigma/taboo is really all about men, not women; rape is regarded as a huge offence because it transgresses against men's feelings of ownership over women. Which is why, although I know these shows of chivalry are meant well, I can't help but think that they're counterproductive in the long run.

---

Well, this last part seems idiotic on several parts to me. Women need to really comment though to get the real picture I think.

If it was mostly a property/man thing, then one'd think that rape would have been taken more seriously in times past. ...although as I write this I wonder. Was not considered
rape if wife, ...seems to support you. OTOH,
...hmmn, gotta think about this one. Don't know my history enough.

Regards severity and lesser of penis/fist, that's what got my idiotic appellation above, and where I'd especially like to hear from a lot of other women.

From my one data point (one lover who'd been raped prior to our meeting): I don't think
it's a normal assault. I think the emotional/psychological affects as far more
impact.

Perhaps part of this might be akin to part
of what (in my opinion) makes child abuse so pernicious -- it's a violation of trust.
Rape isn't always that, but considering it's
more often than not (as I recall from years ago stats) someone known...

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sad:
If it was mostly a property/man thing, then one'd think that rape would have been taken more seriously in times past.

---

In Anglo-Saxon times, rape was punished with death .... for the victim. The idea being that if a well is polluted, it doesn't matter how the pollution came about.

quote:

---

From my one data point (one lover who'd been raped prior to our meeting): I don't think
it's a normal assault. I think the emotional/psychological affects as far more
impact.

---

But that's my point. The emotional and psychological effects are socially constructed; people are emotionally affected because they are taught to be. It's learned behaviour. Across countries, the rape/suicide correlation is directly linked to the strength of the social taboo. SA has the highest rate of rapes in the world, btw.

quote:

---

I don't know. It's hard for me to imagine that if someone sexually assaulted me, that I'd find it akin to 'simple' assault.

---

Why should male rape be another ball game.

quote:

---

Across countries, the rape/suicide correlation is directly linked to the strength of the social taboo.

---

Explain this statement further, please.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
Just wondering why you guys think that a rape is necessarily so much terribly worse than any other kind of assault that it deserves the death penalty.

---

We haven't talked much about assaults or anything like that, but IMHO the victim of an assault or a threatened assault is entitled to use as much force as necessary to stop the assault and/or repel the (threatened) assailant.  This is about preventing a crime or stopping a crime in progress, not about punishment after the fact.  If the victim doesn't have enough latitude to threaten with a gun (and repel the assailant) without increasing their danger (if the assailant has already closed or is in the victim's dwelling, it may be impossible to react in time to a move on the assailant's part) it is reasonable to use force immediately.  The blame for the assailant's fate falls on the assailant.

And no, I don't draw any lines between attempted murder, rape, robbery or just beatings when it comes to self-defense (and how's a possible victim to know what an assailant intends?).  People have a right not to be assaulted, and if assailants find themselves confronted with the prospect of deadly force that is just tough for them.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:

As for failing to stop when the partner gets bored... that's cause to rebuke someone. �That may even be decent grounds for divorce.� Criminal prosecution?� Give me a break.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
In Anglo-Saxon times...

---

quote:

---

The emotional and psychological effects are socially constructed; people are emotionally affected because they are taught to be. It's learned behaviour. Across countries, the rape/suicide correlation is directly linked to the strength of the social taboo.

---

It still astounds me to see you, or any woman, trying to explain away the impact of rape as a "social construct". From a man with your academic background, it might be understandable, but it amazes me that university brainwashing is so effective that it can convince a woman that being raped is, or should be, no worse than a beating. If I didn't know better, I'd think you were one of those pathetic men who pose as women on the Internet just to get someone, anyone, to pay attention to them. I swear, your academicism has turned you into a gutter barrister (sorry, I mean "lawyer" -- I'm still learning to speak USian) of philosophy, able to twist things this way or that according to the whims of intellectual fashion.

quote:

---

Male rape is a whole nother ball game. But it's hard to see, in objective terms, why it should be so much more awful for the victim than female rape (and it is; suicide figures bear this out).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
For one thing, the strong correlation between child rape and multiple personality syndrome is . . . .

---

Only observed in societies with an Anglo-Saxon/Christian culture. MPD barely exists in Arab countries, where child rape is much more common, or in SouthEast Asia, where child prostitution is more or less institutionalised. In fact, the only really valid observations (ie those for which there is decent evidence that it's anything other than garden-variety schizophrenia) are in the USA.

quote:

---

It still astounds me to see you, or any woman, trying to explain away the impact of rape as a "social construct". From a man with your academic background, it might be understandable, but it amazes me that university brainwashing is so effective that it can convince a woman that being raped is, or should be, no worse than a beating.

---

Gawd, you're such an *engineer*, and a pretty poor feminist to boot. This is about objective analysis, not your idea of a sex war, Minds. Why on earth should anyone think differently about this issue just because they're a woman?

quote:

---

If I didn't know better, I'd think you were one of those pathetic men who pose as women on the Internet

---

Damn, rumbled I'm actually a big sweaty Boer rugger player called Hansie, just like you like 'em

quote:

---

Male rape is a whole nother ball game. But it's hard to see, in objective terms, why it should be so much more awful for the victim than female rape (and it is; suicide figures bear this out).

---

Oh gawd, somebody's been at the pop science books again ..... let me guess, evolution of social norms is Darwinian, huh?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
... although I know these shows of chivalry are meant well, I can't help but think that they're counterproductive in the long run.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
I tend to think of chivalrous behavior (men opening doors for me, and so on

---

That's gentlemanly behaviour, not chivalrous. Some hard-core types think that it contains a hidden message about female helplessness, but that's bridge too far into loonyness for me.

"Chivalry", in my book, contains an undertone of aggression -- look at the etymology -- and also directly refers to a culture under which women were chattel property.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
MPD barely exists in Arab countries, where child rape is much more common, or in SouthEast Asia, where child prostitution is more or less institutionalised.

---

quote:

---

Why on earth should anyone think differently about this issue just because they're a woman?

---

quote:

---

Looks like someone got out of the wrong side of bed this morning, with a big sweaty American Football player called Hank ...

---

I guess it irks me when someone asks what the big deal is about rape when all my female friends (I found these tidbits after we've been friends for a while) have been raped at one point or another. I only know of one male that has had that 'experience' but it wasn't physically violent (the assailant was female) but that case is empirically(sp?) no different.

I feel (strongly) that the difference between rape and murder is that you let the victim live with the crime. Ok, that's true for both cases just that the murder victim has a much shorter life span from the time point of the action. Rape utterly destroy's a person's life (as opposed to just ending it). It ruins any type of trust relationship that person may develop later. It will destroy emotional relationships. It will cause massive depression. Its a personal and embarrassing crime. Its an invasion into a person's most important privacy. It leaves a person with feelings of vulnerability and weakness.
Its something that can't ever be taken back and it stays with the victim for life.

Rape is not something someone can just deal with it and be done. You have to deal with the memory and emotions every day for the rest of your life.

So, to treat rapists with a light hand of authority sends a message to the victims that the victimization wasn't really that bad.
Similar actions also send a glaring message:

About 2-3 years ago, a woman in Oregon was imprisoned for shooting (and killing) the man that raped her. I don't remember there being any type of statement by authorities proclaiming the right or wrongness of the man's actions but obviously she wasn't legally justified in her actions.

Ok, enough brooding out of me...
I'll slip back into the silence.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Veldrane:
I only know of one male that has had that 'experience' but it wasn't physically violent (the assailant was female) but that case is empirically(sp?) no different.

---

quote:

---

I feel (strongly) that the difference between rape and murder is that you let the victim live with the crime. Ok, that's true for both cases just that the murder victim has a much shorter life span from the time point of the action. Rape utterly destroy's a person's life (as opposed to just ending it)...

---

If a woman is raped, she shouldn't think afterwards, "My life is ruined, I'll never be happy again." At that point, she might as well commit suicide! Better, instead, to say, "I've just been through a terrible, traumatic experience, and it will surely take time to come to terms with it, but eventually I'll be able to get back to living my life." One needs all the optimism one can get in such a situation.

In a way, I think that the idea that "rape ruins a woman's life forever" is essentially identical to the old idea that "a raped woman is worthless garbage" (which people still believe in backwards places like southeastern Europe, according to things I've read about Kosovo), and I object to it for the same reasons. Rape is a terrible thing to go through, but it isn't the end of your life, and it is possible to find happiness again, even if it always has something of a shroud over it.

From everything I know about rape in advanced Western societies (i.e. ones in which raped women aren't considered garbage), most women would much rather be raped than murdered, by a long shot. This may seem like a rather obvious, trivial thing to say, but it conflicts with your notion that being raped is essentially equivalent to being murdered.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
Actually, there are differences. The rape of a male by a female, unless we're talking about anal rape involving an artificial phallus, is not penetrative (to the victim) and does not involve a risk of the victim becoming pregnant.

---

quote:

---

Well, I think you're overdoing it, but again, there are historical aspects to this. The whole "rape utterly ruins the victim's life" thing was, I think, part of the same sociopolitical campaign as "rape is not sex", directed against the previous social tendency (at least among men) to trivialize rape.

---

quote:

---

...it conflicts with your notion that being raped is essentially equivalent to being murdered.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
The way you said that gave me a thought.� Perhaps one of the best parts of looking at rape as distinct from sex is that it helps the victim put her (almost always her) sexual life back together.

---

In any case, the value of these semantic distinctions will surely vary from person to person, and it's not as if the label really matters much compared to the actual event. I'm sure many raped women, when they later feel uncomfortable in the arms of a lover, tell themselves that the rape was a fundamentally different thing. I suspect, though, that this thought doesn't really help much; my guess is that it tends less to ease their suffering than to make them feel guilty for continuing to suffer.

Notably, her response to Astrid regards emotional impact and Astrid's word play.

Also agree with Mindy's response to Veldrane (?) about rape not meaning that
life's over and what it would mean if it did mean such. Again going back
to Malcom X, one of the reason's I'm so moved by his story, is that it demonstrates
that one always has choice.

Regards male/female rape...I don't know.
But some good points by Tau about risks....though those all seem like side affects, rather
than main issue. Something about rape itself seems inherently awful to me, without
consideration of physical harm/affects.

In the physical harm realm, men can't get pregnant -- but can begat kids.
And consequently be held financially/legally/etc. responsible for them.
Somehow a pregnancy rape seems *far* more intense, but this is not trivial
in the least.

While it's not rape, I know several guys whose wives lied about the pill
and got pregnant. They explicitly did not want to have children. She
flat out lied to him -- result being that he's responsible for this child.

As a (sometimes overwhelmed) dad, I can't imagine the internal conflicts /
choices in dealing with a child forced upon one -- by either of the above
scenarios. In some ways, in this small regard (and frankly I don't know why
I'm rambling on comparing these scenarios -- but after all a 5 page thread of this nature
gives one license to go off on any tangent ) I think it'd be easier to
decide as a woman what to do about rape pregnancy versus a man being lied
to in the above scenario. Not that'd be easy, I think. I'm not trivializing it.

But the woman could choose (by my book, ethically) to abort -- or to carry
the kid to term. Either way, it's a valid choice -- and the woman gets to make it.

In the case of a man, there's no choice there.

Yeah, there've been some furious arguments here, but this make us all look like brain surgeouns.

What idiocy: http://salon.com/mwt/feature/2000/09/15/homework/index.html

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
Just wondering why you guys think that a rape is necessarily so much terribly worse than any other kind of assault that it deserves the death penalty.

---

Well, for one thing, I did a research project on the subject of rape once (part of a school assignment), and the impression I got was that the victims found it particularly awful. Possibly they are all suffering from false consciousness, but I'd need some evidence on that.

quote:

---

Astrid:
And "rape" covers a whole spectrum of assaults, from clear cases to very morally messy situations where things are much more ambiguous. For example, a rape can begin *during* an act of consensual sex; if the woman gets bored and asks him to stop, and he doesn't comply quickly enough, well that's rape (and has been found to be so by the courts). Would you say "kill him and let God sort him out" in that case?

---

No. For that matter, there are other circumstances where the context is less ambiguous, but still perhaps not deserving of death.

Btw, the context of the picture is plainly a women confronting a would-be rapist, not a judicial death penalty case. In the context of that picture, there's nothing ambiguous.

quote:

---

Astrid:
The rape stigma/taboo is really all about men, not women; rape is regarded as a huge offence because it transgresses against men's feelings of ownership over women. Which is why, although I know these shows of chivalry are meant well, I can't help but think that they're counterproductive in the long run.

---

Rape can injure a woman's sexual organs, give her venereal disease, leave her pregnant, and, as I said, seems to be partcularly loathed by it's victims.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
In Anglo-Saxon times, rape was punished with death .... for the victim. The idea being that if a well is polluted, it doesn't matter how the pollution came about.

---

And it still is, in many Arab counties.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
And no, I don't draw any lines between attempted murder, rape, robbery or just beatings when it comes to self-defense (and how's a possible victim to know what an assailant intends?).

---

Me either. The more women who kill, say, men who beat them, the better.

quote:

---

Astrid:
Like it or not, that's the law -- unless you're aware of a clause in the code which says that a woman only has the right to decide what happens to her own body when there isn't a penis inside her.

---

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to have a touch of anger there, at the thought that a women might not have "the right to decide what happens to her own body," when a man she previously allowed into her body refuses to leave because she changed her mind.

Assuming that supposition is correct, it would seem to contradict your 'rape isn't that bad' argument. If the very thought of a hypothetical man not immediately pulling out gets you that angry, why do you assume that the particularly intense emotional reaction to a man forcing his way into a woman is merely 'socially contructed?'

I do agree that Mindy's multiple personality disorder argument is weak. There's some evidence that the diagnosis is merely fashionable, and the incidence greatly exagerated. We need better data.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
Why should anyone have a deeper understanding of something that affects them personally? Can you guess?

---

Good shot, Mindy! Hit her again, while she's still wobbly.

Being a man who has never been raped, but has been beaten, my impression is that the psychological impact of having someone thrust part of his body into you is much more disturbing than being struck, but I lack good data on this (and I still have the Race Traitor anthology to read, so I will not be starting another research project).

I do know a man who was raped in the face at knife point, and he seemed to take it pretty hard. I'll have to ask him how it compared to being beaten up, assuming he ever was.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
Not that men can't be raped, of course, but statistically, how many are? Compared to about 30% of all women?

---

But there I disagree. The '30%' figure seems to have come about by redefining rape till it included 'Well, I wasn't in the mood, but I let him.' That trivializes a terrible assault.

------------------
Saintonge

1. Of course I'm not doing anything so ridiculous as to claim that the victims of rape *don't* regard it as very terrible indeed; I'm just asking *why* that should be the case, as in, what objective reason. Since, as a single white woman living in South Africa, I'm probably at the greatest risk of being raped, I'm quite aware of how afraid I am of it.

2. It's not me that says that a man who doesn't leave a woman's body when asked is committing rape, it's the law. Several men have been found guilty, and some of these have gone to jail, for failing to extend this act of politeness. I have no anger about this, but it's a fact.

3. And equally, it is not possible for a man to be raped by a woman. The law recognises that women can commit sexual assaults against men, but they are not referred to as rape. And indeed, in anything other than bizarre circumstances, "physical consent" to intercourse on the part of the male is taken as pretty powerful evidence of legal consent.

4. All the boys who think that men and women run an *equal* risk of sexually transmitted diseases from acts of intercourse need to take a refresher course in Sex Ed.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
All the boys who think that men and women run an *equal* risk of sexually transmitted diseases from acts of intercourse need to take a refresher course in Sex Ed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Astrid Leuer:
That's gentlemanly behaviour, not chivalrous.

---

quote:

---

"Chivalry", in my book, contains an undertone of aggression -- look at the etymology -- and also directly refers to a culture under which women were chattel property.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
A better distinction to make is between "sex" and "love-making", defining sex as simply the physical act and love-making as the emotional intimacy that gives sex its real value to those of us who want something more than just orgasms.

---

quote:

---

Rape is most certainly sex; it is not love-making.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sad:
In the physical harm realm, men can't get pregnant -- but can begat kids.
And consequently be held financially/legally/etc. responsible for them. Somehow a pregnancy rape seems *far* more intense, but this is not trivial in the least.

While it's not rape, I know several guys whose wives lied about the pill and got pregnant. They explicitly did not want to have children. She flat out lied to him -- result being that he's responsible for this child.

---

Scenario:� 18+ yr-old babysitter plays around with 14-yr-old male charge.� Babysitter is charged and convicted of statutory rape, serves time for the crime.

Babysitter also gets pregnant.� Perpetrator of the crime sues the victim for support for her child.� Courts uphold parental responsibility for the victim of the crime.

There is no justice.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
It sure beats the feeling that you used somebody.

---

Don't knock it till you've tried it

quote:

---

Scenario:� 18+ yr-old babysitter plays around with 14-yr-old male charge.� Babysitter is charged and convicted of statutory rape, serves time for the crime.

Babysitter also gets pregnant.� Perpetrator of the crime sues the victim for support for her child.� Courts uphold parental responsibility for the victim of the crime.

There is no justice.

---

????? First, you seem to be very keen on digging up these bizarre court cases where the perceived injustice is to a white person or a man -- are you sure you aren't missing the bigger picture here?

Second, this doesn't seem to be an injustice of any sort. "Statutory rape" in this case is not remotely comparable to a real act of rape. What's under discussion is a consensual sex act between two sexually mature people, resulting in the birth of a child. Of course the father has to take his share of the responsibility. So to speak, if he's old enough to f**k, he's f**king old enough. The fact that in some jurisdictions, a sexually mature fourteen year old is not legally regarded as able to initiate sex is not really relevant.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
I question the idea that rape is necessarily sex.� Penetration with, say, a broom handle is sexualized, but it isn't sex.� That's the kind of example which draws the distinction between lovemaking and rape into sharp relief.

---

quote:

---

Scenario:� 18+ yr-old babysitter plays around with 14-yr-old male charge.� Babysitter is charged and convicted of statutory rape, serves time for the crime.

Babysitter also gets pregnant.� Perpetrator of the crime sues the victim for support for her child.� Courts uphold parental responsibility for the victim of the crime.

---

It does seem sort of perverse that a male "rape victim" should be forced to support a child conceived in his "rape", but that's just semantic confusion; it's not as if this is at all the same situation as a forcible rape.

Interestingly, it seems that in the US the age of consent varies considerably by state, anywhere from 14 to 18. So, in a sense, the babysitter's real mistake (aside from not using contraceptives) was to be living in the wrong state.

Ok, since its slightly on topic now that I see a lot of comments about "as a father he's responsible for supporting his child" so I thought I might pose this question:

Assuming all people have equal rights and no special rights(I'm just taking it for granted that this is true), regardless of color, gender, or sexual orientation; If a female has a right to end her responsibility of supporting/raising a child (aka: abortion), does the male parent also have the right to end his responsibility of supporting/raising a child?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:

Scenario:� 18+ yr-old babysitter plays around with 14-yr-old male charge.� Babysitter is charged and convicted of statutory rape, serves time for the crime.

Babysitter also gets pregnant.� Perpetrator of the crime sues the victim for support for her child.� Courts uphold parental responsibility for the victim of the crime.

I agree with Astrid on this one. You don't give any indication that it wasn't a mutually consentual situation ("statutory" rape is sort of weird in this regard, especially when the victim, despite being underage, is clearly old enough to know what s/he is doing), so we'll assume that it was. That being the case, the father ought to support his child.

It does seem sort of perverse that a male "rape victim" should be forced to support a child conceived in his "rape", but that's just semantic confusion; it's not as if this is at all the same situation as a forcible rape.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Veldrane:
Assuming all people have equal rights and no special rights (I'm just taking it for granted that this is true), regardless of color, gender, or sexual orientation; If a female has a right to end her responsibility of supporting/raising a child (aka: abortion), does the male parent also have the right to end his responsibility of supporting/raising a child?

---

However, family-related laws tend to be based not so much on simple fairness as on the desire to ensure that children are properly provided for. And also, one could argue that if you aren't willing to support a woman's child, perhaps you should think twice about depositing your sperm into her vagina, even if you think she's on the pill. After all, the only 100% effective contraceptive is abstinence.

There is a natural assymmetry in the roles of the sexes, in that only the woman gets pregnant. This is reflected in law by the fact that the decision to get an abortion is the woman's alone. I would not be at all comfortable with the idea that a man could force the woman carrying his child to have an abortion, or that his consent was required if she wanted to abort. It is his child, but it's not his pregnancy.

Of course, one could resolve this assymmetry by outlawing abortion. That way, whenever there's a pregnancy, both parents incur responsibility, without any easy legal way out other than putting the child up for adoption. But I don't think that proposal will meet with sufficient approval in any of the advanced Western countries to make it into law. (Personally, I strongly dislike abortion, but I think history shows that when it is outlawed, people do it anyway, whatever the risks, so I prefer to have it legal rather than have women die from botched procedures.)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mindy Viridis:
Of course, one could resolve this assymmetry by outlawing abortion. That way, whenever there's a pregnancy, both parents incur responsibility, without any easy legal way out other than putting the child up for adoption. But I don't think that proposal will meet with sufficient approval in any of the advanced Western countries to make it into law. (Personally, I strongly dislike abortion, but I think history shows that when it is outlawed, people do it anyway, whatever the risks, so I prefer to have it legal rather than have women die from botched procedures.)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tau Zero:
More than "sort of perverse".� There are huge issues of deception, control over the outcome of events ...

---

quote:

---

... and ability to enter into contracts here.

---

quote:

---

In every one of these categories, the power was with the criminal (babysitter)

---

quote:

---

... yet the victim is paying. �Paying with his college money, more likely than not.� Paying for someone else's crime with his future.

---

Do you realize you're making essentially the same argument as people who think juvenile delinquents should be treated let off lightly? "He's only 14, you can't send him to jail! His future would be ruined!"

quote:

---

I figured you would agree with Astrid on this, and I think it means that both of you have some homework to do on the subject of empathy and equality.

---

quote:

---

Like, maybe the victim should have been able to place the child for adoption over the objections of the perpetrator, solving the issue of the support for the child and the responsibility of the legally-unconsenting parent.

---