[j r]

(10-20-2012 03:39 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

Question for you guys who are quick to call this rape (even though the only version in the media is the girl's).

If they continued dating after the sexual encounter, then was it actually rape?

I have had broken noses and torn shoulders and shit. Some would call that assault and battery. If I popped some guy in the jaw, it'd be a crime. Within the *context* of a gym, injuries and brutality were just a regular day in the life.

Do you think context matters?

If they parties continued dating for several weeks or months after the sexual encounter, would you still consider it rape?

Yes, because I have an objective definition of rape that is largely divorced from those contextual issues. Rape is a non-consensual sexual act. Period. There are situations where consent may be implied, like an ongoing sexual relationship, but either person has the right to withdraw that consent any time they want (except for after the fact, of course).

There has to be an objective measure that exists independently of your sympathies for either party. Otherwise, you're doing the exact same thing that feminists do when they try to call a consensual act rape because of how the girl felt afterward or because she may have been in a certain state of mind before.

ps - Note that I am speaking in the abstract. The facts of this case are up to a court of law to decide. I am believer in innocent until proven guilty.