Definition of “Rape”: When a “Rape” is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word “Rape” & the Perversion of Language

Abused Language: When a “rape” is not a rape

“Fondling a child”, or “consensual sex with an adolescent” nowadays can be called “rape”, in press reports, even in legal code (“statutory rape”).

This purposeful confusion created by the dilusion of the word “rape” helps to whip up punishment frenzy for crimes of “adolescent seduction” or “child fondling” at the expense of banalizing real forceful violent penetrating non-consensual rape.

So the word “rape” is abusively re-defined to serve an agenda: to make smaller transgressions look like heinous crimes.

The entire World Press,  the United Nations, everyone swallowed the bait and became manipulated! Amazing!

Similarly,  “adolescent nudity” no can be called “child porn”.  Defining 17 year olds as children has the collateral effect that now there is no word for real children of 12 and under, as there is no word  left for real rape.  This confusion must have a manipulative motive, as there is no logical need to change the meaning of words that had a clear definition for centuries.

Real meaning of the word “rape”

What do most people understand by the word “rape”? What was the meaning of “rape” for centuries? Non-consensual intercourse with penetration, usually involving violence or threats.

In criminal law, rape is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with another person without that person’s consent. Outside of law, the term is often used interchangeably with sexual assault,[1][2][3] a closely related (but in most jurisdictions technically distinct) form of assault typically including rape and other forms of non-consensual sexual activity.[4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape

A criminal offense defined in most states as forcible sexual relations with a person against that person’s will.

Rape is the commission of unlawful sexual intercourse or unlawful sexual intrusion. Rape laws in the United States have been revised over the years, and they vary from state to state.

Historically, rape was defined as unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman against her will. The essential elements of the crime were sexual penetration, force, and lack of consent. Women who were raped were expected to have physically resisted to the utmost of their powers or their assailant would not be convicted of rape.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/rape

Shocking, is it not? He raped a girl and was set free because he was mistaken about her age! It is ok to rape a girl if she is 19 years old?

Well, he did not REALLY rape her. If she is 19 years old then consensual sex, initiated by the girl who brought the condoms, is not called rape.  Dear Reader, haven’t you understood that any sex with a 12 year old is rape?  Our language has changed in the last 25 years! But, of course, this is on purpose. Once you understand that rape is not rape, the intended shock effect gets lost.

So the 12 year old was eager to have sex with him, actively initiated sex and purposefully deceived the barman into thinking that she was 19.  So, miraculously, he was freed. Doesn’t sound so shocking any more.

See Why I hate statutory Rape Laws | A Public Defender

After breaking marriage vow, sex becomes rape

Having a sexual relationship with a woman with a false promise of marriage can also be termed as rape. The case was being heard in a Delhi Court and it involved a man having sexual intercourse with his neighbour. The man was found guilty of rape and sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment.

In the present case, Chhotey Lal, the convict and father of six children, had eloped with his neighbour in New Delhi in September 2004, and took her to far away places like Jaipur and Chandigarh. According to the girl, the duo established sexual relations after Lal assured her that he would marry her ‘very soon’. Meanwhile, the girl’s father lodged a ‘missing’ report with the police. The police detained Lal and the girl in March 2005 at Sarai Kale Khan Bus Terminal when they were returning to Delhi. Chhotey Lal was prosecuted for abducting the girl and having sexual relationships with her on false pretext.

“The so-called consent under a false promise to marriage is no consent,” additional sessions judge Mahavir Singhal said.

Highlighting the difference between ‘will’ and ‘consent’, the court said that a nod for sexual relations obtained by a man on the false pretext would not amount to a ‘legal or valid’ consent to save him from punishment for rape.

The Court observed that, even if the woman is assumed to be a willing partner in having a physical relationship, that the accused had no intention to marry her would make it a case where consent was given under misconception of facts, nullifying the efficacy of the nod.
Rape by promising marriage in India

Adolescent raped repeatedly?

Due to the language confusion, we really can not know if she was raped, or more likely, seduced. But most women don’t get raped repeatedly on various days.

In 1997, 15-year-old Tina Anderson became pregnant after being raped repeatedly by an older man she knew from church. Shockingly, when her pastor found out, he forced her to apologize in front of the entire congregation in Concord, New Hampshire, and then promptly helped whisk her away to live in Colorado.

According to Tina, the first time she was raped by Ernest Willis, it was in the backseat of car after he’d given her a driving lesson. She didn’t tell anyone because she was terrified that she’d be blamed. After being raped by Willis again, Tina became pregnant.
http://womensrights.change.org/blog/view/ teenager_forced_to_apologize_to_her_church_for_being_raped

Did she get “raped” or seduced? we don’t know

What does the average reader of this article think? They guy attacked the girl in a dark alley and had sex with her under the threat of violence.  Strange, though, that he raped her repeatedly on different days.
Now it is amazing that feminists and moralists managed to put such manipulative language even into penal codes. It is easier to promote your agenda with misleading language. “Teenager forced to appologize for being seduced” does not sound so shocking.  The word manipulation must  be planned and purposeful.
http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality
http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt

Language confusion obfuscates facts

So no matter if you think sex with underage should be punished, I hope you agree that the truth should be said and that manipulative language should be abolished.
By the way, Ernest Willis is a child rapist. Because according to new definitions of child pornography, a child now is anyone under 18. The United Nations, the US, and Europe have adopted that definition.

Whoppi Goldberg differentiates “rape-rape” and non-violent so called “rape”

Hollywood has rallied behind Roman Polanski after his arrest in Switzerland over the weekend, with the actor Whoopi Goldberg suggesting that whatever he was guilty of it wasn’t “rape-rape”.

As a guest on The View chatshow on US television, she said: “I know it wasn’t rape-rape. It was something else but I don’t believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like, ‘You know what, this guy’s going to give me a hundred years in jail. I’m not staying.’ So that’s why he left.”

Polanski was not guilty of ‘rape-rape’, says Whoopi Goldberg

Age discimination: why is a 15 year old capable to consent to sex with a 16 year old but not with a 35 year old?

Then we can disagree on the last point: if a 15 year old can decide who to have sex with. Interestingly, she can decide to have sex with a 16 year old. How come she cannot have sex with a 35 year old? Age discrimination by law?

Mandatory psychological counselling before underage sex?

Are you worried about manipulation of the tender 15 year old? what about legalizing sex with underage girls, if they first undergo an hour of mandatory counselling and a 2 day cool off period? That should take care of this issue. This would guarantee safety for the 15 year old against being conned or manipulated. And it would be a good idea even for sex between consenting teenagers. So there would be no age discrimination!

Click on “more” for the rest of the story ……..

There seems to be another, hidden agenda. Not the concern for the well being of the teenager, but reducing the chances of oder men to get young girls. See http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt/pedophile-witch-hunt-solutions and http://theantifeminist.com/.

18 year old boy allegedly fondles a 14 year old against her will: a rapist?

Jose Reyes, the former 18-year-old Roosevelt High School student charged with raping a 14-year-old developmentally delayed freshman in May pleaded not guilty Monday to third-degree rape.

Reyes, who is being held on $100,000 bail, briefly appeared in King County Superior Court during his arraignment. He faces a sentence of 14 months if convicted.

According to Seattle police:On May 18, Reyes convinced the girl to skip class and go into a girl’s restroom, where she was fondled, police say. The girl told Reyes to stop, which he only did when somebody else came into the restroom. On May 20, the girl told a school counselor what happened, police said. Reyes was then arrested.

Reyes, who lived with his family in Greenwood for years but recently moved to Kent, began acting out sexually as early as age 13, according to court papers.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/theblotter/2012054274_teen_sex_offender_charged_with.html?prmid=obinsite

Rape? He allegedly indecently fondled a girl. Even when she, allegedly, said no. No rape in the “classic” sense of the word. No violence, much less any penetration. Why this unnecessary distortion of language?

If it were any other crime, if he were accused of bullying, beating, taking away her money under threats, he would not be arrested without further proof. He would not face huge penalties.

Seattle School District spokeswoman Teresa Wippel said Reyes was expelled from Roosevelt High School after his arrest.

Any proof for his crime? Just one accusation? It looks like he is guilty, from his past record. But if he were a murderer, an arsonist, a thief, a habitual violent bully, proof would be required to expel him. Not just one lone accusation.

Rape of a 4 year old: no mention of bodily harm?

A Kent man accused of raping a 4-year-old girl and broadcasting it live over the Internet has been sentenced a minimum 26 years in prison.

Seattlepi.com reports 36-year-old Brian Keith Beston apologized for his “poor judgment” when sentenced Friday by King County Superior Court Judge Regina Cahan.

After he serves 26 years, Beston will be confined until state authorities decide whether he should be released.

Beston pleaded guilty in April to first-degree child rape, first-degree child molestation, sexual exploitation of a minor and dealing in child pornography.

Kent man gets 26 years for broadcasting rape of child on Internet

Penetration of a 4 year old? And no conviction for bodily harm? I am not saying that he should not be punished. I am saying that the language should provide clarity, not distort facts.

• a rape is a rape. Yes, rape. Penetration …
• fondling is fondling. Not rape.
• indecent touching is indecent touching. Not rape.
• seducing a minor is seducing a minor Not rape.

Kent man gets 26 years for broadcasting rape of child on Internet

Reading this headline, I imagine a man having penetrative intercourse with a 4 year old. Without being a medical specialist, I believe that this must cause major injuries. How come, there is no report about this? No penalty for injuring a child?

• Most likely because all he did was fondling.
• Child molestation, yes.
• Should he be punished? Yes.
• But if all he did was fondling, 26 years and more, in jail? If he threw the child against the wall, beat the child with broom handles, burned it with cigarettes, he would get a lesser punishment.
• Did he rape in the true sense of rape? penetration? most likely not. But impossible to know. Why? Intentional disinformation.
• And of course we can not watch the Video he transmitted over the internet, of what he did to the child. Just watching the video would be a heinous crime. Strange! But youtube is full of videos of nannies beating and shaking toddlers in health endangering ways. No penalty for watching physical child abuse.
• I want to know the truth of the crime. Can I know the truth? No! why not? because the word rape was banalized. Used for all kinds of meanings. We don’t know any more what “rape” is.