No-Fault Rape, What Do You Think?

Question

One of the biggest problems preventing a woman from divorcing a man to collect alimony and child support in the past were the laws that refused a woman the right to annul a marriage for no reason. The laws used to require a proof of misconduct, like abuse or infidelity to cash out. So feminists did the logical thing and got rid of the reasons and therefore the requirements of proof. Now we can cash out whenever we want.

Same problem with rape now. If we want to have a man sent to jail for rape, we have to do this patriarchy inspired "giving proof" thing, So there is a lot of argument about "fault in rape", why don't we just do away with requiring reasons and go by women's word? If she feels like she was raped, then she was. We can have a "no fault rape", where a reason for the women thinking she was raped is not required, thus doing away with the need for proof. That way the man is convicted regardless.

Beautiful and allowing women so much more freedoms and rights, don't you think?

Oh it makes me so glad to see there is at least one real man here kyrel, one who is kind and decent enough to want to protect women and give them their rights. I thankyou deeply for your generosity. But don't get any ideas mind, or you know what will happen!! (hahh just joking)

smarr: A reason why she thinks she was raped is what I'm talking about, and proof of that.

Of around 95% of cases that go to court only 5% are actually found to be provably rapes, so proof has to be done away with, just like in marriage. Juries are a bigger reason why rapes go unpunished.

Answer 1

Getting a divorce called "no fault" is one thing, but accusing someone of rape is a different and serious thing. If a woman is raped, then she should have to prove it. Guys have rights too. I am a lady.

Answer 2

Your stepfather is a sick bastard, and if your mother stayed with him--well, she is the female equivalent of a sick bastard, whatever that is. Seriously, these are two very messed up people. You would probably do well to never see or talk to either of them, ever again. Rape is never the victim's fault. But this is even worse, because he was an authority/parental figure to you and should never have used you in this way. And the whole thing is made EVEN worse, because your mother attacked you for it, instead of protecting you like a real mother should do. You need to get some rape counseling, and really, remove yourself from these people. Don't look back. They are evil. To answer your question, no honey, if you've had intercourse you are not a virgin. But that doesn't mean you're a slut or a whore. You didn't choose to have sex. You are not impure. That bastard stole something from you, you did not give it to him. Consider yourself hugged.

Answer 3

"No fault" divorce was a stupid idea to begin with. Also, it wasn't just women who were put to the test and told to prove that her husband was at fault. One of my great-great-grandfathers had to sue his second wife for divorce for cruelty to his children--that was back in the 1880s.

The institutions of marriage and the process of divorce were created not for the husband or wife, but mainly for the security of any children. It was (and still should be) presumed that children are better off with both of their natural parents. This is not always the case (and my wife seems to be much better off not having seen her father since she was about 12), but if there are children involved, there should be "just cause" and a standard of proof to get a divorce.

Secondly, divorce is a civil matter. Rape is a criminal matter. In a criminal matter, the victim of a crime doesn't have to prove anything; the prosecuting attorney has the burden to prove the crime occured. In the United States, all people who are accused of a crime are presumed innocent. The burden of proof falls to the prosecution, representing the State or the People.

Speaking of rape: Rape is one of only three capital crimes (a crime for which you can be sentenced to death), the other two being Murder and Treason. Most states have either done away with rape's capital crime status by statute, or judges ignore it. This is a shame.

And not all rapes involve a man raping a woman. (There are some cases that are the other way-round, and cases of men raping men or women raping women.)

And by the way, if you like the idea that a criminal should be presumed guilty, or that a defendant in a civil case should be presumed to be at fault, and that they sould have to prove their innocence, you could always move to one of the many countries in the world where this is the norm. The U.S.A. is very special in placing the burden of proof on the prosecution & plaintiff, and I believe it is the right policy.

Answer 4

Now first of all part of the penalty for rape should first be, stretch out the convicted ones buddy on a board, drive a nail through the head, nailing it to the board, Take a meat tenderizer with a 3' foot handle and and begin to tenderize the man's meat with about 8-12 whacks.

Then continue with the rest of the punishment faze

NOW!!!

That is just like you spiteful mean spirited Liberal Feminists.

Years ago, in the 50's, Rape carried a possible death penalty if convicted. How many times have women cried RAPE when there was no rape at all.

Your word? Ya right!.

That is why in the United States of America, we have trial by jury to guard against spiteful people like your self who feel just your word is enough.

If women were absolutely truthful in the areas of rape that may work.

But, we all know there are mean spirited women (Especially in the Feminist Movement) who have ruined men's lives and entire families, their bank accounts, and their credibility by revengeful mean spirited women who falsely made accusations that were absolutely not true.
If this became law, would you be willing for the same, for men who accuse women of raping them.

Doesn't make any difference if that is possible or not. It would be diminishing the double standard. That you Left Wing Liberal Feminists are so concerned about.

I also like the answer directly above me. Thanks

Answer 5

How in the world would this standard hold up in court? You have to provide proof for lesser crimes, like shoplifting. I think your suggestion would just make a mockery of the legal system and sully legitimate accusations of rape.

A woman doesn't have to provide a REASON why she was raped - does somebody have to present a reason why they were mugged? "I guess I just looked like I had cash on me, your honor!" Of course not. What does need to be presented is enough evidence to make the charge stick.

If you want to enhance respect for women, then it would have to be in making the prosecution of rape less painful and humiliating - for instance, make the admission of her prior sexual history inadmissable. (Nearly EVERY rape charge is countered with the "nuts and sluts" defense that the woman is either crazy or promiscuous, or both.) Or perhaps allowing women to come forward and go through the process with an anonymous alias of some kind.

The idea of being humiliated or known as a rape victim is what prevents most women from coming forward.

Answer 6

If a man could be sent to jail on just a women's word that she was raped then there would be lots of men in jail who are innocent. There ARE women who claim they were raped, but weren't. There are also a lot of women who are raped. The cases are complicated and developing a better way to convict them is needed. Keep in mind that there are a lot of other situations where a criminal goes free for murder, torture, abuse, etc. It's sad that it happens, but the only thing that can be done about that is improving the courts and ability to gather evidence. People can lie. The word of one person shouldn't not be trusted in a court.

Answer 7

Rape is a criminal offence carrying serious penalties if found guilty. In any criminal offence, the persons guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The reason for this safeguard is that some people may wish to send others to prison for motives not connected with an actual crime. With your proposal a womans word would be considered as proof all by itself irrespective of what actually transpired. The accused man is therefore guilty until proven innocent. Without the evidence gathering process it would be impossible for him to prove that he did not have sex with her, that she consented, that no struggle or resistance had taken place because he does not possess any of that evidence.
I agree that a better solution should be found but I don't think that this is it.
The accused has to be innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof has to lie with the accuser and the authorities. I agree that rape is a terrible crime deserving the most sever punishment and that the process of collecting and presenting evidence should be done with the minimum of emotional damage to the victim but not at the cost of abandoning rights which have been fought for for hundreds of years.

Answer 8

I would think that's not right at all. BS on Nu Fault.
That would be like saying," So help me I'll rape you.
So rape me and I'll help you. Is that what they mean by Nu Fault? BS.
RAPE IS RAPE. What really pisses me off is they go to jail, get out before time well served or before their time is up.
SOME WITH NO COUNSELLING AT ALL IN JAIL.
To what offend again!

PS. Not that you may want to hear this but men too get raped, some just to scared to report. They are in fear of being ridiculed, or embarrassment.

Answer 9

i think that what they mean by "fault rape" is a false accusation . like with what happens to alot of celebrities. however if the woman realy was raped then i could see why she would be upset. however these fake accusations have sent many innocent men to prison. its a bad bunch of women who have messed it up for the women who actualy were raped. and it must be very frustrating for the real victims of such a crime

Answer 10

you gotta be jacking us.

Are you implying that women never lie? That a man should go down on her word alone?

Jeez. I've seen some piggy things posted by men around here, but this one takes the pie.

I hope it was a troll