With Regards to http://human-stupidity.com/stupid-dogma/mens-rights-feminism/whats-so-terrible-about-rape-rape-is-not-as-bad-as-it-used-to-be
To preface, due to the extreme lack of any valid resources in the original article, I am at liberty to not include any in mine either. Blogs, news reports, and statistical information from non-statisticians are not real sources. Neither is Wikipedia.
1: Rape consequences are not what they used to be
With regards to your opinion on the purpose and history of rape, and it sociological consequences, I have to take some exception. All of the things you mention still apply in many societies today, but since it is clear we are looking at a strictly western point of view, we'll stick with that.
Women who are raped are still socially ostracized, and a strong cultural ideology that "blames the victim" is still present. Wearing a sexy outfit, trimming pubic hair, or going to a dance club are not justifications for rape, although many people will still argue to the contrary.
The concept of 'damaged goods' does still exist, and many men feel uneasy about entering a relationship knowing that rape was in the past. Largely, this may have to do with the need for counseling, talking about it, and other things that are decidedly un-masculine.
The major topic you do not seem to address is psychological impacts of rape, which harms a person’s ability to function in society. Serious mental disorders, such as depression, happen in far greater frequency to rape victims. When judging the severity of the crime, courts do take into account the impact that rape has on the life of the victim, her employers, friends, family, and society as a whole.
This might be why 'forcible rape' where bones are often broken, reproductive organs often destroyed, and which end in murder in many cases, is held as a far more serious crime than not obtaining express consent at a party. The consequences are far greater. I am not saying that the latter example is OK, but that it has been determined that it is not nearly as damaging as the former.
On evolutionary biology: You can't compare ducks to people. How could you even attempt to compare birds to people? Seriously. I will not even justify this with a proper argument, as it is far too weak and irrelevant to the entire conversation.
Modern Technological Alleviations of Rape Consequences:
Birth control and abortion are frowned on by almost every religious institution. You cannot persecute people for strongly held beliefs on how to live a good and virtuous life, their belief of when life begins, because it is disjoint with yours. To say that religious discrimination is allowable opens your own personal beliefs to the same treatment. Given that MOST people in western society practice some form of religion, certainly the laws that protect them must take this into account? Remember that the personal definition of murder plays here, and may make both birth control and abortion a completely unacceptable path for many women.
Keep in mind, DNA testing doesn't really have as large an impact as you say, because if you don't know who raped you, and they aren't in the registry, it doesn't help. Also, try to think of the mental consequences of raising a person that is half rapist, in your eyes.
On Irrational Rape Hysteria: Interesting you use hysteria, the wandering uterus of words. Being sensitive to how other people feel, instead of believing that psychological distress plays no role in anything, is exactly the reason many feminists still persist in demonizing rape. The reason that feminists persist in reforming rape legislation is because we are all quickly becoming aware of the social impact of rape, as opposed to the now defunct monetary ones.
Rape ceased to be serious as murder: "very unpleasant". This portion relies on the rest of the article, and contains no logical arguments. Not all rape is treated as serious as murder, and few rapes result in sentencing as strict as murder either. This is precisely why there are numerous definitions, to prevent statutory rapists 2 years older than their victim from getting the gas chamber.
Less serious than damaging the face:
Obviously, you have never heard of what happens to the genitals of a victim of violent rape. If, by your logic, a non-violent rape occurs and the women just happens to opt for abortion, this causes serious long term damage to the uterus. This also harms the women’s ability to reproduce, significantly. Serious damage can occur to the reproductive organs, especially the external genitals, during a forcible rape. A few lost teeth vs. the inability to feel pleasure from sex is not the same, and should not be categorized as such.
Also, comparing being raped to being swirlied is just sad.
Please also keep in mind, that crimes are considered substantially more serious if committed during a felony. If someone dies, even inadvertently, during arson for instance, the arsonist is charged with first degree murder. Similarly, the judge takes into account the severity of the injuries physically suffered by a rape victim in the context that it was a direct result of the rape, and sentences accordingly. This is why we have judges, to hand down fair sentences that reflect the crime, and also why there is no automatic sentencing to put everything in the same box.
Glenn Wilson: It's not my fantasy to be raped by a woman, nor is it the fantasy of anyone. An extreme minority might, but that is not proof for the whole.
2) Rape prevalence.
Frequency doesn't count for anything. Just because non-statisticians made a mistake, does not give another non-statistician license to make another erroneous argument. Also, it does not justify anything. It's actually not the point.
People do lie. That's bad, and if found out should be punished. Yes, it can be very difficult in cases dealing with the topic of consensual sex, but that is what it is. It is the courts purpose to determine the truth of the matter, and the appeals system is in place for the instance of mistakes. The few mis-attributions of guilt, for any crime, do not make our justice systems useless.
Don't blame the victim. Don't generalize every rape. You can't, and it is illogical to do so.
3)
Your 20 kinds of rape are not objective, nor lawful. There are far fewer classifications, and each of those incidents you've pointed out fall into them. Although some may not be seen as just in the public eye, that is why we have an appeals system. I don't believe that I've ever heard of someone being charged with a count of "Swedish Broken Condom Rape" before.
The reason for different kinds of rape is to determine the severity of the consequence and impact for different categorizations. No, having sex with a 15 year old is not the same as dragging a grown woman into the woods and leaving her for dead after crippling her with sexual violence. That is why we have different kinds, and have different sentencing guidelines for each. I agree that some kind of reform to the age-based one is needed, to stop 19 year old men from being arrested for statutory rape of their 17 year old girlfriend, but that doesn't mean the entire system is broken.
As always, an extreme minority of 'bad decisions' does not justify your argument. That's just poor form.
4) You're right; male on male rape in prison should be addressed. It's horrible, and not in line with the reformative mandate that prisons are supposed to follow (as opposed to punitive). Prisoners are often last in line for legislative protection, largely because they're criminals and most people are still in a punitive mindset. One day.
Arguing that reproductive rights negate rape legislation is weak and in light of my arguments, wrong.
Your police state argument and the guilty-until-proven-innocent concept cannot happen without amending the constitution, which for some reason seems sort of difficult to do. Poorly written, reported, and baseless articles to the contrary are not proof of this happening.
Due process does exist. You are making assumptions based on a very small number of cases reported badly. Perhaps you should attend the trial of an accused rapist? You might find it interesting, so long as you can keep an open mind.
"rape of our language" this sentence is wrong, as rape is used incorrectly. You should have said something like "We need to work towards making the English language more concise and less ambiguous".
Consent IS consent, and you are taking things out of context. Your suggestion that people are children under twelve is disgusting, as it insinuates that you would find it acceptable for a 40 year old man to engage in sex acts with a 13 year old. The reason for the age line to be where it is is actually because that is the average age at which a young woman has finished most of her sexual maturing, and intercourse before that age may in some cases cause irreversible damage. That and their mental maturity level.
With regards to marital rape: Beer does not equal sex, and rape is indeed rape. If she says no, you can't take it. Women are not your property simply because of marriage. Perhaps you should contact a women’s shelter and ask about the societal impact of marital abuse and rape.
To finish:
I read with an open mind, and found your argument weak. Without addressing any of the ongoing social impact to modern society, the real physical damage that is associated with rape, and the cost to the victim both mentally and monetarily makes much of your argument problematic at best.
Finally, yes, most men ARE averse to rape. "rape culture" refers more to the fact that comedians use rape as a joke, and that "prison rape" is seen as somehow just desserts for inmates. That is wrong too. It also includes things like "Rape of language", where rape is used inappropriately to describe something. Men AND Woman are averse to rape because of its inherent damage to society, and to a greater extent, the victim. Being sympathetic to psychological trauma does not invalidate law; if anything, it strengthens it.
