quote: The suspects, members of the Mepham High School football team in Bellmore, N.Y., face a list of juvenile court charges, including involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, kidnapping, aggravated assault, unlawful restraint and false imprisonment.
Is it worse for a male to be raped by another male than it is for a female to be raped by a male?
Is it worse to rape someone in a "deviate" way than it is to rape someone in a "normal" way? Is there such a thing as non-deviant "involuntary sexual intercourse"?
From the standpoint of the victim, I would say yes. I think it probably does more damage to the victim to be violated in a way that the victim considers deviant. It seems intuitive to me that the psychological trauma would be worse, because in addition to dealing with issues of powerlessness, violation, and possible blame, the victim would also deal with the moral quandaries caused by this deviant "behavior," and with a greater degree of humiliation as well.
But from the standpoint of the law, should we be saying that "gay rape" is worse than "straight rape," and should be punished differently? Doesn't this seem to imply an endorsement by our legal system of a "correct" type of intercourse?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: But from the standpoint of the law, should we be saying that "gay rape" is worse than "straight rape," and should be punished differently? Doesn't this seem to imply an endorsement by our legal system of a "correct" type of intercourse?
Maybe not. I think I would be more traumatized by a group of homosexual men rather than a group of women (as if that would ever happen ).
It's not endorsement, it's discernement of which type of rape is more traumatizing to the victim.
That said, rape is rape. I believe they should both be punished equally.
[ October 04, 2003, 01:19 PM: Message edited by: Nick ]
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the deviant part of this rape was not that all parties involved were male, but that the defendents used multiple foreign objects on their victims. They weren't even having sex, they were violating their victims for a wholly different kind of pleasure.
Posts: 1307 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
First, I do have a hard time finding a basis for believing that a male victim of rape is any more traumatized than a female victim. They are probably going to find it harder to find support services, though.
As to the law, here's a quote from the article:
quote:The teens have been under investigation by authorities and a grand jury in Pennsylvania for allegedly sexually torturing the teammates with a broomstick, pine cones and golf balls during the Aug. 22-27 camp in Preston Park, about 125 miles north of Philadelphia.
Seems the law isn't really about "gay" vs. "straight," or male vs. female victims. Rape is a narrowly defined act. These charges would apply, I think, regardless of the gender of the perpetrator or the victim.
posted
I read the article. I also read Caleb's post. I'm actually a pretty good reader. I know what they did. That doesn't make me an expert on the law. I do know that the crime they are being charged with is stated in the article to be "involuntary deviate sexual intercourse." That would seem to imply to me that in a different case, one where intercourse took place, that charge could apply. So my question is, what constitutes "deviate"? Is involuntary deviate sexual intercourse punished more or less heavily than other forms of sexual harrassment/sexual assault/rape?
Who draws the line and says what kind of sexual assault is "deviate" and what kind is "normal"? Doesn't the question itself seem absurd? Is using objects deviate while male-on-male penile rape is not? But some people willingly use objects. Isn't what makes it deviate the fact that it is sexual assault, and not the particulars?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:First, I do have a hard time finding a basis for believing that a male victim of rape is any more traumatized than a female victim.
Well, rather than address the whole question, let's get specific. Is it possible that some rapes may be more traumatic than others? Is it possible that the particulars of the act (or the attitudes of the victim) might make it more damaging?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Aw crap. Didn't you see the smilie? I wasn't responding to you specifically, but to the fact that two people had replied by quoting to me what these boys had actually done! The smilie was to indicate that I was not ticked, but gently pointing out that my focus was not so much the particulars of this case as questioning the need for and value of the law.
posted
That's why I started a new thread . . . because I wanted to talk about the meaning and implications of this law in itself rather than how the boys or their parents or their school should be punished.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Since most rapists are male, it inadvertantly comes close to implying that it is a worse crime to rape a male than it is to rape a female.
I'm not disagreeing with that, because a male being raped by women is very unusual. What I'm saying is that the law doesn't necessarily imply a correct form of intercourse.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
I think it's quite possible that there's a great deal of variation in how individuals deal with and recover from a rape or other sexually-related violence (this can be true of non-sexually related violence as well.). I don't think it's possible to categorize groups of people into recovery patterns.
I think we have to assume that the charges are related to the testimony and evidence produced from the two victims.
They would have testified to being sexually tortured by the defendents.
I think the law sees that as worse than your normal rape, perhaps because it's end is copulation rather than torture. Of course even your "normal rape" could easily count as torture. Once again we see how the perpetrator's motive has an active role in the eyes of the Justice system.
Posts: 1307 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is it the perpetrator's motive or the effect on the victim?
But yes, that's the point in a nutshell . . . and so my question is, as with hate crime legislation, is this distinction between two kinds of involuntary sexual intercourse appropriate?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Counter question: Are they dangerous because their sexual assault was deviant, or because it was torture?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
My question is: does our justice system work be attempting to rule for justice, or to protect society? And is it capable of ruling the other way?
quote: CHAPTER 31. SEXUAL OFFENSES Subchapter B. Definition Of Offenses § 3123. Involuntary deviate sexual intercourse. (a) Offense defined.--A person commits a felony of the first degree when he or she engages in deviate sexual intercourse with a complainant:
by forcible compulsion; by threat of forcible compulsion that would prevent resistance by a person of reasonable resolution; who is unconscious or where the person knows that the complainant is unaware that the sexual intercourse is occurring; where the person has substantially impaired the complainant's power to appraise or control his or her conduct by administering or employing, without the knowledge of the complainant, drugs, intoxicants or other means for the purpose of preventing resistance; who suffers from a mental disability which renders him or her incapable of consent; who is less than 13 years of age; or who is less than 16 years of age and the person is four or more years older than the complainant and the complainant and person are not married to each other.
(b) Definition.--As used in this section, the term "forcible compulsion" includes, but is not limited to, compulsion resulting in another person's death, whether the death occurred before, during or after the sexual intercourse.
quote:CHAPTER 31. SEXUAL OFFENSES Subchapter B. Definition Of Offenses § 3121. Rape. (a) Offense defined.--A person commits a felony of the first degree when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant:
By forcible compulsion. By threat of forcible compulsion that would prevent resistance by a person of reasonable resolution. Who is unconscious or where the person knows that the complainant is unaware that the sexual intercourse is occurring. Where the person has substantially impaired the complainant's power to appraise or control his or her conduct by administering or employing, without the knowledge of the complainant, drugs, intoxicants or other means for the purpose of preventing resistance. Who suffers from a mental disability which renders the complainant incapable of consent. Who is less than 13 years of age.
(b) Additional penalties.--In addition to the penalty provided for by subsection (a), a person may be sentenced to an additional term not to exceed ten years' confinement and an additional amount not to exceed $100,000 where the person engages in sexual intercourse with a complainant and has substantially impaired the complainant's power to appraise or control his or her conduct by administering or employing, without the knowledge of the complainant, any substance for the purpose of preventing resistance through the inducement of euphoria, memory loss and any other effect of this substance.
quote:Rape is gender neutral so the same wrongdoing might constitute both the crime of rape and the crime of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse under § 3123. Commonwealth v. Frank, 640 A.2d. 904 (Pa.Superior Ct.:1994); Commonwealth v. K.M., 680 A.2d 1168 (Pa.Superior Ct.:1996).
ibid.
Wow, the list of charges is longer than I thought.
quote: The three teens were charged with the following: involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, aggravated assault, kidnapping, unlawful restraint, false imprisonment, terroristic threats, criminal coercion, simple assault, recklessly endangering another person, ethnic intimidation and multiple counts of criminal conspiracy to commit many of the above crimes.
quote: "Deviate sexual intercourse." Sexual intercourse per os or per anus between human beings and any form of sexual intercourse with an animal. The term also includes penetration, however slight, of the genitals or anus of another person with a foreign object for any purpose other than good faith medical, hygienic or law enforcement procedures.
posted
I never noticed before that that smiley winks after it puts its hat back on!!
Hobbes, I don't think we as a society have answered that question, and I think it's at the route of all of our controversies. The problem is that we don't appear to be capable of successfully doing any of the things that the criminal justice system could be about, and so in our frutration we try to do all three. We don't seem to be able to protect society by putting away the dangerous people, because there are too many of them (though that would seem to be the easiest of our goals to achieve.) We certainly don't seem to be able to rehabilitate criminals. We aren't succeeding in deterring criminals. And serving justice is the hardest thing to define. And as a society, we seem to be schizophrenically twitching between goals, without a clear idea of what we are trying to do. We try to serve justice and somebody pops up and says, this doesn't deter crime. We try to rehabilitate criminals, and somebody pops up and says, this is not just. I think we as a society desperately need to decide which of these goals is most important to us in our dealing with criminals, and we need to decide it soon, because I think the problem of violent crime is getting worse, nnot better.
What should the answer be, though? Beats me.
As to your second question, I'm not sure I understand it . . . can you clarify?
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with your answer Icarus, and you said it better than I could so I'll let it stand as is. My second question was baasically, whichever way it is that we do work, can we create a asystem that would work the other way? In other words, can we change if we want to?
posted
I think the root problem of your root problem, Icarus, is that our society chooses to live under the rule of law.
It's a system designed to promote "good", but at the same time, it's designed to be unbiased as possible.
But I think there are more benefits to that system than faults.
I wonder if what you say about violence is true. Is it really getting worse, or is it just on the news more than it used to be?
Furthermore, I think we should realize that the Justice system is there to react and deal with crimes, not to prevent them. That we live in a violent society is more indiciatve of the way we treat each other than it is of the way we treat our criminals.
Posts: 1307 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, then let's forget about whether or not our sentences act as deterrents. How, then, do we deal with crime: punishment, or rehabilitation?
-o-
I'm not objecting to the fact that we live under the rule of law, just acknowledging that our system is not the only possible one, and wondering if it's possible to improve on it, at least in terms of having a clear focus. I don't think our justice system has a clear focus at this time.
-o-
I don't know if there really is more violence now. This is just my experience as a public school teacher talking: I see more brazenness, more crime, and more violence among young people now than I did when I was in school, or ten years ago when I entered the profession.
Posts: 13680 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would doubt the validity of that fact. It would seem some lawless place like Russia, Yugoslavia, or Sierra Leone would beat us per capita.
Posts: 650 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
In that movie, Moore argues while the rate of violent murders have declined within the last couple of decades, media coverage of violent crimes actually increased, thus prompting an irrational fear of violent death among suburbanites.
Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I dunno. I'm definantly not a fan of Moore's politcal views (for obvious reasons). It's just seems logical that the rate per capita would be higher elsewhere.
And is that the main thrust of Bowling for Columbine? Because I thought it was an anti Bush movie.
Posts: 650 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ryan, I was actually responding to Nick's post but I guess I was a little late.
Bowling for Columbine is not an anti-Bush movie, although Moore has often been brutal in his criticism of the Bush administration. Moore himself was a card-carrying member of the NRA and he wanted to see why America has the highest firearms-related death rate among the industrialized nations. You will probably disagree with a lot of his assumptions, but I think you will enjoy the movie. Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
i guess i would like to see any one who does this to anyone, male or female, be involuntarily and permanantly removed from this world.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually Beren, it's wierd that you would mention it. The movie prompted me to ask those questions, although I think the movie was awful and Michael Moore is an idiot. I just sent it back to netflix, and I'm irritated at a wasted rental, but it was thought provoking.
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rape is rape, no matter the sex of the individuals involved.
I have posted Washington State law (and links) here any number of times and won't do so again. Go to www.leg.wa.gov and search yourselves.
Rape is wrong. Whether it's male to male, female to female, male to female or female to male.
It's not about sex.
It's about power. The ability to hurt. To be in control.
I expect my thoughts on why America the Great has these crime stats is layed out PARTIALLY in the earlier post referred to by Icarus. I could wax philosophical is anyone cares, and lay out ALL my ideas on why we as a country have these stats. Let me know. Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ooh, I'm always interested in stuff like that. Anything move down on that "craziest Hatrackers" list. Posts: 9871 | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nick, no wonder your questions sounded so familiar.
I think Moore and Rush Limbaugh share the same problem. They want to be entertainers and political pundits at the same time. Their exaggerated style draws attention to the issues they care about, but at the same time undermines the credibility of their arguments.
I personally enjoyed the movie, probably because of my fairly liberal leanings. Posts: 4116 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ooohhhh - I might just have to post my list of why we are what we are, bullet by bullet - could be fun!
Posts: 5609 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I personally enjoyed the movie, probably because of my fairly liberal leanings.
I thought some of it was pretty bad. Some of the statements about Asia and the Middle East weren't true.
But, let's not hijack this thread. If you want to talk to me about it, email me: nickmayo@comcast.net Or, you can reply with a post that says you want me to start a thread or you could start one. Or bump some old one. Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nick, I think our view of the movie isn't that far off. The movie raised important questions, and I give you credit for watching the whole movie despite the fact that you disagree with his premises, and that Moore's overbearing style and fuzzy factual assertions can be very annoying.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
). ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Hail]](graemlins/hail.gif)
Kayla
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
Oh well, I guess it bears repeating! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
