Victim’s male acquaintance breaks into her apartment and grabs her. He is in a rage because she had refused to go out with him. He roughs her up a bit, including belting her across the face and throttling her. He then forces her at gunpoint to drive him to his house, where he keeps her overnight. He specifically tells her that he will shoot her if she tries to escape. He is distraught and talks repeatedly about how much he loves her. He talks about wanting to live with her in Mexico. Her survival strategy was to pretend to go along with his plans. She wanted to gain his trust. When he had sex with her that night, she “went along with it” in order to survive.
After finally escaping, she went to the police. She expected that he would prosecuted for kidnapping, assault and threatening. She was, however, shocked when I brought a rape charge against him. She didn’t feel that she had been raped because she had “gone along” with the sex. When I questioned her, however, she said that she had “gone along” with it because she thought (quite reasonably under the circumstances) that he would blow her brains out otherwise. But, to my shock, in her mind, she herself felt that it was not a rape because she had not resisted in any way. (Under the law in my jurisdiction, sex that occurs during the course of a kidnapping is rape, and even if that were not so, I think the physical threat against her was sufficient to make this a rape.)
In a fantastic post, the Happy Feminist says (obviously enough to me) that yes, breaking into someone’s house, kidnapping them, beating them, threatening them with a weapon and then having sex with them because they fear you’ll kill them otherwise is probably rape.
But commenter Richard doesn’t agree (kind of scary considering that he’s an attorney).
First scenario: Not guilty. You yourself stated that she had sex with him because, “She wanted to gain his trust.” (only later do you backtrack and say she thought he’d blow her brains out if she didn’t. I usually find first reasons more truthful.) In this scenario you give not one fact that the man demanded sex with her and would not take no for an answer. Zero. And so we are asked to find a rape where there is no evidence the man demanded sex and the woman admits she did not outwardly object. What a great country. (I think your state’s sex-during-kidnap-equals-rape crime is faulty. It’s one of those strict liability facts-be-damned approaches to finding rape. It’s a charge that actually puts into the hands of the sharp-thinking “victim” the power to rack up another offense against the defendant. Don’t tell me is hasn’t or couldn’t happen.)
So because she didn’t outwardly object after she had been kidnapped, beaten, had a gun pulled on her, and was threatened with death, she wasn’t raped. And the statute that criminalizes sex during a kidnapping is bad, because some victims will have sex with their kidnapper just “to rack up another offense” against him. That’s exactly what I’d be thinking if I were kidnapped — “you know, I really wanna get this guy good. I know, I’ll entice him to have sex with me! That’ll get him at least 60 more days in prison!”
I’m constantly shocked at the lengths some people will go to defend rapists and demonize women.
Let’s change the scenario slightly: You get kidnapped and beaten, have a gun pulled on you, and are told that your kidnapper will shoot you if you try and escape. All aspects of the scenario described above are the same, except instead of demanding sex, he says, “Give me your wallet.” Or we can make it even less clear-cut — what if he says, “Can I have your wallet?” What do you do? If you give it to him, were you not robbed? You didn’t vocally object — I mean, you handed the guy your wallet. Sorry, but where I come from, that’s called a gift. Besides, how do we know that you aren’t claiming that you felt forced now, just so that you can rack up extra offenses against him? This seems cut-and-dry to me. The giving of the wallet was voluntary. There was no crime. And I’m just sick of these so-called “victims” reporting robberies that didn’t actually happen, and tarnishing the good name of kidnappers everywhere.
Then there’s this:
My conclusion is that if you “have run across MANY people, including the victims themselves, who didn’t seem to think these were rapes”, then I suggest that the law does not properly reflect community standards and should be amended … Instead of dismissing these “many” as ignorant bumpkins, maybe we should listen to them and then re-evaluate whether our rape laws are reflective of our prevailing social values.
Ah, I love this talk of “prevailing social values” and “community standards.” Kind of how “community standards” dictated that blacks had rights about equal to those of livestock; or how “community standards” clearly didn’t want black children going to white schools; or how “community standards” decided that Jews were sub-human and could be killed by the millions; or how “community standards” dictate that if a woman is raped, she’s an adulterer who deserves to be punished as such. Community standards are valuable, but they should not be the only consideration when making law. Justice counts, too. Attacking that view as “elitist” is just plain ignorant.
Read all of the Happy Feminist’s post. She’s far more good-natured than I am.