749
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2023
749 points (97.7% liked)
politics
19089 readers
1886 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
No on can stand him
He fucks an underage prostitute
"fucks an underage" has a name. It's "rape".
Well, statutory rape. I’m not trying to let him off easy, but semantics are important
I'm also more fond of something like "Sexually assaulted a minor" or "engaged in sex with a child". You know, something that hammers home what he did.
Statutory rape is rape. It's in the name.
It is deemed that an underage person (child) is not able to make decision of this sort. Similarly to an intoxicated person.
I will continue to call it rape, sorry.
I disagree. I think there's a fundamental difference between violent rape, coercive rape, and manipulative rape. And our current terminology doesn't really work well for pointing out those differences. But the distinction between "rape" and "statutory rape" is a good one.
I think you're really harming victims of violent rape by equating that with a 19 year old and a 17 year old having a lay. Or even a 29 year old and a 17 year old. It waters down the term. Now when you say "so and so is a convicted rapist" people can go "yeah, but was it really?"
Edit: my favorite argument for this was how the right wing started calling Bill Clinton a rapist. Do they actually think he's a rapist? Of course not. Does anyone really? Of course not, except for naive fools. But technically, by the Progressive, ivory-tower, PC, inclusive, new definition of rape...he was. So they used that to attack him, with a bonus of making the actual rapists on their team seem not so bad.
So, how violent does the rape have to be to be called a "violent rape"? Is a slap on the ass enough? Or does it have to be face? You see where I'm going with this?
Honestly, comparing rape severity isn't really helpful to any victim. And it's exactly my point. Rape is rape. No matter the severity.
You really don't understand the concept of severity?
No, I do not. Explain it to me.
You can be severely drunk, but that is a number. You can be severely in debt, but that's also a number. You can be severly ill, but that's is also quantifiable.
Explain me, the different severities of rape, without sounding like a rapist who is trying to downplay and gaslight their victim.
"Nah, it's wasn't that bad".
The "severity" of rape is completely down to the victim and the psychological effect it had on them. There is no tier list I'm affraid.
I understand there are circumstances that would increase the punishment, but I disagree that it's related to the "severity of rape".
There literally is, though. Most states have "misdemeanor sexual assault", "felony sexual assault", "statutory rspe", and "rape" as different crimes with different penalties. Other sex crimes have other names with other levels of severity.
"Statutory rape" is literally a legal term.
I don't know where you got the idea that all rape is equally bad, but it's wrong and nonsensical.
For example, in California:
https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/defense/penal-code/261-5/#5.2
Because laws historically have always been just, and never improved or corrected... Especially laws regarding sexual assault.
I understand that it is different, but really what I'm trying to say is that it I really think it shouldn't be.
The "severity" should only be described by the victim.
The only thing that should matter, is the intention of the offender. I understand that mistakes happen in the heat of the moment, especially when you're around that age of ~18.
But we're talking about Sex traffic'ed minor abuse.
So yeah, it's still rape.
Oof
So if you're staring into the distance, and someone happens to think you're staring at them, and they feel violated, and they claim you sexually assaulted them, which under your definition is the same as rape...that's okay? You're alright going to prison for 4 years and registering as a sex offender?
Objective definitions matter. A LOT. They're the bedrock of our entire legal system.
You say "oof" and you reply with that? Holy Yikes. I'd delete that if I were you.
There’s no need to apologize. You can call it whatever you like. However, legally—the important distinction—the charge would be statutory rape (among others, like trafficking).
It would also depend on the state. I’m not actually sure where the sexual act took place, but in Florida (where he’s from) the age of consent is 18. Should this have happened in Washington State, for example, this would not be statutory rape because the age of consent is 16.
Either way, it’s prostitution of a minor and sex trafficking which is equally reprehensible.
Anyway, semantics matter in court, but we’re just chatting.
Well, you see....FUCK YOU!
-- Republicans
Still get reelected
-- Republicans
I love it.
"We are calling for him to be impeached!"
"Why?"
"He's just such an asshole!"
"Underage prostitute" is more like "a trafficked minor."