Rape law permits changing mind during sex act
Illinois law believed to be first of its kind in the country
Wednesday, July 30, 2003 Posted: 10:10 AM EDT (1410 GMT)
SPRINGFIELD, Illinois (AP) -- A new rape law in Illinois attempts to clarify the issue of consent by emphasizing that people can change their mind while having sex.
Under the law, if someone says "no" at any time the other person must stop or it becomes rape. The National Crime Victim Law Institute said it believed the law is the first of its kind in the country.
Lyn Schollett, general counsel for the Illinois Coalition Against Sexual Assault, said the law was important to make it clear to victims, offenders, prosecutors and juries that people have the right to halt sexual activity at any time.
"I think it will empower prosecutors in charging cases where the victim and the offender have a sexual history," she said.
But the director of the Victim Advocacy & Research Group in Boston said it would be hard to imagine courts not upholding a woman's right to withdraw consent.
"To me, it's demeaning," Wendy Murphy said. "It's like the old saying: 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it.' I don't think it was broke."
The law was inspired by a California case involving two 17-year-olds who had sex at a party. The girl changed her mind about having sex, but the boy did not stop immediately.
He was charged with rape, and it took years for the courts to decide that he could be found guilty under California law. The California Supreme Court ruled in January that a man can be convicted if a woman first consents but later asks him to stop.
Lawmakers said they wanted to avoid the same kind of long legal battle in Illinois. Gov. Rod Blagojevich signed the law Friday but did not announce it until Monday.
This is just sooooo wrong. This is a typically ham handed way of the legislature using law to fix a problem that really can't be legislated. The potential for abuse is astronimcally high. When does consent end? Is it even reasonable for a woman to engage in sex and suddenly say no?
The law is NOT a sharp surgical instrument, it is a bludgeon and here we see the bludgeon in action trying to deal with a very throny issue.
Wherever you go, there you are.
Ripped Shirt Monkey - BOTMWriter's GuildCybertron's FinestJustice League
This updated sig brought to you by JME2
"If scientists and inventors who develop disease cures and useful technologies don't get lifetime royalties, I'd like to know what fucking rationale you have for some guy getting lifetime royalties for writing an episode of Full House." - Mike Wong
"The present air situation in the Pacific is entirely the result of fighting a fifth rate air power." - U.S. Navy Memo - 24 July 1944
Wait a minute... Does that article say that she said "No" during, originaly consentual, intercourse and that the guy was convicted of rape because he did not stop at once?
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.
The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | LibertarianSocialist |
Where's the problem? If she's got a right to decide your dick is no longer welcome at any time, regardless of whether or not you get your rocks off. I agree it's going too far to call it rape if he doesn't IMMEDIATELY leap off her and pull up his pants, but if she says stop and you don't, it's no longer consensual sex.
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963 X-Ray Blues
what in sam hell? as a person who has had someone close to me experience such a crime i can perfectly understand and completely support rape charges if a woman says no and a guy goes ahead anyway, but this is a tad too far......laws and sex are two things that never fucking go well together, and i think this will end up hurting more people than it helps.
"This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we’ll be lucky to live through it.” -Tom Clancy
Rape is a crime of violence and control, nox sex per se.
All the Illinois law is doing is cheapening the definition of rape.
When does consent end? Is it even reasonable for a woman to engage in sex and suddenly say no?
Consent ends when it's withdrawn. It's even reasonable to suddenly say no.
What's unreasonable under this law is the potential for abuse.
Just imagine what a mess breakups can become under this law. Look for guys to be convicted because they pissed off their GF's, not because they committed rape.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."- General Sir Charles Napier
What is it with these insinuations upon my character?? I am vauguely insulted.
Glocksman, LOVE your new AV.
Anyway, perhaps I went too far but how many of us have gone up the hesshey highway with someone, the girl invaribaly starts going, "No..no." then as she adjusts to the situation suddenly starts going "Yes Yes..." and very passionately I might add.
I think that a woman knows what the fuck she is doing when she is having sex and I certainly never stopped in the middle of a romp to go...hmmmm...maybe this isn't right.
But that's just personal experience. I'm far more afraid of the abuse that will come from this law.
Wherever you go, there you are.
Ripped Shirt Monkey - BOTMWriter's GuildCybertron's FinestJustice League
This updated sig brought to you by JME2
Some university, I can't remember which, recently came out with guidelinges stipulating that a person must have progressive consent with each new act of love making or it would be considered date rape.
May I kiss you? Yes No
May I now use my tounge? Yes No
Can I fondle you? Yes No
...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
intial here, here and here and sign at the bottom.
It goes too far. Time to break rape up into different categories and stop lumping it all together. Violent rape is just that....RAPE.
Some chick changing her mind durring sex and the guy keeps going is still wrong but I don't know if it is rape (in my mind) uless the guy holds her down and finishes thus making it rape. I am not a mind reader and if the girl is still going while she mutters 'no, no , OH GOD YES' I tend to get confused.
Some chich changing her mind the next morning is not rape yet under current laws it can be prosecuted as such.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
Stravo wrote:What is it with these insinuations upon my character?? I am vauguely insulted.
Psh, Strav, we just know you'll be makin' it up with the ladies and far more likely to meet some of the crazy ones than us humble average men.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.
The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | LibertarianSocialist |
Time to get the old red marker out and apply it to Illanois. Not going there - loons.
And of course, men don't get the same protection
And this will really make BDSM practices a problem in Illanois.
Idiots. It isn't something that can be so easily defined.
Superior Moderator - BotB - HAB [Drill Instructor]-Writer- Stardestroyer.net's resident Star-God.
"We believe in the systematic understanding of the physical world through observation and experimentation, argument and debate and most of all freedom of will." ~ Stargate: The Ark of Truth
Sometimes I wonder if there are some women out there that just cannot, do not, or will not take responsibility for their own actions. If a woman has consented and actively participated in mutual sexual play to the point where the guy is inside her and humping away, she has to understand that she is partially responsible for getting to that point. If she was unsure, she should have said "no" at some point before.
There has to be some "point of no return" beyond which a woman is indeed told, "hey, if you didn't actually want sex, why did you let things go and go and go to that point?"
This could open up so much abuse. A woman goes to a party or something, consents to sex, then wakes up feeling guilty or dirty. She says "I didn't want to" and the guy gets nailed for what he thought was a no-problem event.
This is going to make communication between the sexes that much more difficult or suspect. Perhaps a woman that says she wants sex is really some kook trying to set a guy up for something-- God knows there are some weird people out there. What about a bad breakup, or a girl who decides even months or years aftre the fact that she wants to "get" some guy in revenge for some perceived slight?
Something about Libertarianism always bothered me. Then one day, I realized what it was:
Libertarian philosophy can be boiled down to the phrase, "Work Will Make You Free."
In Libertarianism, there is no Government, so the Bosses are free to exploit the Workers.
In Communism, there is no Government, so the Workers are free to exploit the Bosses.
So in Libertarianism, man exploits man, but in Communism, its the other way around! If all you want to do is have some harmless, mindless fun, go H3RE INST3ADZ0RZ!! Grrr! Fight my Brute, you pansy!
Let's be reasonable, people. If you're fucking some girl and she suddenly decides that she doesn't like your style, why can't she say "stop"? Are you seriously suggesting that if a woman says "stop", you can say "too bad, you agreed to this half an hour ago" and force yourself upon her?
Of course, the key is that a woman must be able to present some evidence that this actually happened, but that's just the burden of proof which applies to all criminal offenses.
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing
"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC
"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness
"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.
We had a floor meeting about this when I was living in the dorms. I don't have a problem with stopping in the middle. If she doesn't want you there anymore, you shouldn't be there anymore. However, in Illinois, it's possible for a girl to shout "Rape!" and say that she was drunk that night. In Illinois, intoxicated people aren't capable of making rational decisions. Of course, if both the partners are intoxicated, then the woman can still sue for rape, which is simply absurd. That's the more dangerous law. It gives women the power to take a man to court if they regret having sex with him.
Even so, when I asked the woman talking with us about the percentage of cases that wound up in conviction over this law, she said something like 3%. The less legitimate the claim to rape is, the more difficult to burden of proof is to satisfy. Unless there are blatant signs of struggle (like bruises or cuts) on the woman, she can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that she was having sex forced on her. So, there aren't a whole lot of sexual abuse convictions in Illinois, but this doesn't change the fact that such a charge is a good way to destroy someone's reputation. The option, of course, is to counter-sue in civil court for damages or perhaps wrongful prosecution in a criminal court.
Damien Sorresso
"Ever see what them computa bitchez do to numbas? It ain't natural. Numbas ain't supposed to be code, they supposed to quantify shit."
- The Onion
Darth Wong wrote:Let's be reasonable, people. If you're fucking some girl and she suddenly decides that she doesn't like your style, why can't she say "stop"?
By all means, you ought to stop, but do you feel that this should equate to (and carry the same punishment as) out-and-out violent rape?
I think what Mike was trying to point out is that contining going after she says stop is the rape.
Or rather, ignoring her and keeping it up.
I.e if your screwing with a girl and she says 'wait, I don't want to fuck anymore', all you have to do is stop, pull out, and there ya go.
I agree, abuse of it by kooks could be a problem. However, if she doesn't say stop to the next day, (as people have suggested), then it comes down to burden of proof. And a good lawyer could rip apart a 'next day no' without problem.
There are polygraph tests at time of complaint.
'Did you tell him during the actual intercourse to stop?'
'Umm, no."
"okay, thank you, You have no case. Thanks for stopping bye."
They're horribly unreliable, ipso facto, they are inadmissible in court.
"You know what the problem with Hollywood is. They make shit. Unbelievable. Unremarkable. Shit." - Gabriel Shear, Swordfish
"This statement, in its utterly clueless hubristic stupidity, cannot be improved upon. I merely quote it in admiration of its perfection." - Garibaldi in reply to an incredibly stupid post.
The Fifth Illuminatus Primus | Warsie | Skeptical Empiricist | Florida Gator | Sustainability Advocate | LibertarianSocialist |
Darth Wong wrote:Let's be reasonable, people. If you're fucking some girl and she suddenly decides that she doesn't like your style, why can't she say "stop"? Are you seriously suggesting that if a woman says "stop", you can say "too bad, you agreed to this half an hour ago" and force yourself upon her?
I don't think anyone is suggesting that. Personally, I think that a guy that would do that is as bad a rapist as anyone.
The problem is this law invites abuse. There are already enough cases of questionable merit filed by regretful lovers and flaky idiots. Add in people out to exploit the system for where reason. This law makes abusing the system much easier.
Darth Wong wrote:Of course, the key is that a woman must be able to present some evidence that this actually happened, but that's just the burden of proof which applies to all criminal offenses.
The problem with rape, as with all sex crimes, as that a charge is as damaging as a conviction. This law turns it into a he said, she said thing and it's crime that's far to serious to bring it down to splitting hairs.
As Vorlon practically invited me up there to contirbute to this thread, I will violate my 'no N&P' rule.
I think rape is rape is 'sexual intercourse without consent'
You don't have to hit a girl and hold her down and threaten her with a knife to make it rape.
Sex can be bloody painful for the girl (read: person with the penis inside them). It is not unreasonable to chnage your mind once you realise it's not comfortable.
Rape trials are also a bloody pain, even when the defence is on your side. If it does boil down to 'my word against yours' then the victim (be it the actual vicitm or the falsely accused) can be dragged to Hell and back. The purpose of this law is simply to make cases like that Calfornia case quicker to move the courts, so that a veridct can be arrived at quickly and cleanly.
Should it still be a case of 'my word against yours' the burden of proof is, as always, still on the accuser.
"I fight with love, and I laugh with rage, you gotta live light enough to see the humour and long enough to see some change" - Ani DiFranco, Pick Yer Nose
"Life 's not a song, life isn't bliss, life is just this: it's living." - Spike, Once More with Feeling
Wait a minute... Does that article say that she said "No" 
what in sam hell? as a person who has had someone close to me experience such a crime i can perfectly understand and completely support rape charges if a woman says no and a guy goes ahead anyway, but this is a tad too far......laws and sex are two things that never fucking go well together, and i think this will end up hurting more people than it helps.
