|
Post by big_electron on Dec 7, 2011 2:03:23 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by clockworkgirl21 on Dec 7, 2011 2:45:00 GMT -5
Good to know they're expanding the definition a bit.
|
|
|
Post by stormwarden on Dec 7, 2011 2:54:06 GMT -5
It's about frickin' time.
|
|
|
Post by brendanrizzo on Dec 7, 2011 11:01:15 GMT -5
Wait, the original definition did not include rape by a relative? What the fuck?!
|
|
|
Post by lexikon on Dec 7, 2011 11:06:27 GMT -5
So what do you call it when a man is raped?
|
|
|
Post by itachirumon on Dec 7, 2011 11:19:47 GMT -5
They're not including male/female in the definition so that we can drop the rape vs male rape monkiers.
|
|
|
Post by shykid on Dec 7, 2011 11:45:33 GMT -5
Finally some good news for once. So what do you call it when a man is raped? Rape. (Well, according to the old definition, I don’t know what it would be called. Probably simply assault or battery or suchlike.)
|
|
|
Post by N. De Plume on Dec 7, 2011 11:50:27 GMT -5
They're not including male/female in the definition so that we can drop the rape vs male rape monkiers. I dunno. By this defenition, would a woman’s genitals be considered to have orally “penetrated” a man’s mouth if she forced him to perform oral sex?
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Lithp on Dec 7, 2011 15:06:27 GMT -5
Lexikon, that is a problem with the new definition. It does not make it clear whether or not the victim has to be the one penetrated. But it is still much better in that regard than the old one.
|
|
|
Post by booley on Dec 7, 2011 15:28:06 GMT -5
so male on male forced frottage is still ok then? though seriously, I thought rape was a state or local crime, not federal.
|
|