Is it Rape?

[wise acre]

Sure, but what if part of the game is that you're supposed to scream and cry and beg him/her to stop?

That's very tricky. But at least in that situation you actually talked to the person who is the 'victim'. I can imagine it being considered rape if she changed her mind, but as the judge and hell as the prosecutor, I would aim very low.

anyone considering such lunacy should have a safe word like 'kangaroo'. You yell kangaroo and it's over, period.

 

[wise acre]

I know for sure that if I was that friend, I would have demanded to have a talk with the woman first so we could agree on a 'safe word' she could use if she felt unsettled and wished to stop the scenario.

Right, thank you. What kind of person does not get worried? Even if I thought it was a 1 in a thousand chance....I mean really. And the moment she seemed to mean business, like she looked really afraid...how could that not stop someone and make them do a quick check in?

Hi, I work in a bank. We want to test our security measures. Here's a gun. You 'rob' it. Don't worry, we've told everyone who is armed.

And so you go downtown and pretend to rob a bank.

You are so stupid you are a threat to society. You are criminally stupid.

 

[wise acre]

How about this. The guy meets with his friend and the woman he believes to be the "victim" in the rape fantasy. They agree upon a safe word, but unless she uses the safe word, the "rapist" is supposed to ignore her pleas and proceed with the fantasy. Unbeknownst to him, the girl he met is not really the guys wife, but just some girl he hired to play his wife for that meeting who looks a lot like her. So now the "rapist" shows up, does the deed despite the wife's pleas that he stop since she never utters the safe word (he assumes she's acting).

Is that rape? Who is the rapist?

I think you will find the answer by noticing the reasons you would never agree to this.

The guy who acts out the rape is not the same as other rapists - maybe - and I would give him a lower sentence. But he is dangerous.

He is later approached by someone in a suit....

Hi, I work in a bank. We want to test our security measures. Here's a gun. You 'rob' it. Don't worry, we've told everyone who is armed.

He is then introduced to a man who looks like the bank manager. (but who is in on the 'prank')

Next day he sees 'the same guy' the bank manager go into the bank and then runs in and holds it up.

A security guard shoots him in the leg, a through and through that kills a kid.

the idiot pretend bank robbe should go to jail.

His stupidity and lack of self care is threat to society.

 

[takandjive]

The husband should be charged just like if he hired someone to kill her.

The friend should get his ass kicked.

This.

That's no excuse. It would be up to the friend here to make sure the woman consented.

I don't see why they didn't talk and just agree to rape play. Trust me, even if it's your significant other and you've agreed that you're going to reenact a rape, it feels very real. No excuse here.

If the woman said, 'throw me a surprise rape', maybe.. I have serious doubts that many women like that type of thing though.

Very common fantasy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_fantasy

How about this. The guy meets with his friend and the woman he believes to be the "victim" in the rape fantasy. They agree upon a safe word, but unless she uses the safe word, the "rapist" is supposed to ignore her pleas and proceed with the fantasy. Unbeknownst to him, the girl he met is not really the guys wife, but just some girl he hired to play his wife for that meeting who looks a lot like her. So now the "rapist" shows up, does the deed despite the wife's pleas that he stop since she never utters the safe word (he assumes she's acting).

Is that rape? Who is the rapist?

Not safe, sane, consensual sex. I'm kinky as all get out, and I'd charge the guy with rape. If my partner REALLY had a desire to experience watching me being raped, I might agree, but he better be there and I better know the guy beforehand.

That's very tricky. But at least in that situation you actually talked to the person who is the 'victim'. I can imagine it being considered rape if she changed her mind, but as the judge and hell as the prosecutor, I would aim very low.

anyone considering such lunacy should have a safe word like 'kangaroo'. You yell kangaroo and it's over, period.

I think safe words are pretty useless. What if you're gagged? What if you're into a scene? And safe words are an excuse. If you're REALLY submitting and someone's really dominating, you just don't think to use it.

Be a good partner and be sensitive to your partners needs; negotiate everything out loud. My partner may consent to me jamming a hand in his ass, but it's my responsibility as a partner to stop if I know deep down he doesn't want it.

Right, thank you. What kind of person does not get worried? Even if I thought it was a 1 in a thousand chance....I mean really. And the moment she seemed to mean business, like she looked really afraid...how could that not stop someone and make them do a quick check in?

Hi, I work in a bank. We want to test our security measures. Here's a gun. You 'rob' it. Don't worry, we've told everyone who is armed.

And so you go downtown and pretend to rob a bank.

You are so stupid you are a threat to society. You are criminally stupid.

You don't understand anything outside of missionary. Strawman. We're talking about a private sex act.

 

[nietzschefan]

Just get out of the relationship before you get hurt Orly.

 

[Orleander]

Just get out of the relationship before you get hurt Orly.

LOL, silly boy.

 

[Randwolf]

Quite the gedanken you've concocted here Orly... :bugeye: And, it's not helping that others are making things more complicated by throwing in additional "what ifs". Frankly, I would need a little clarification on your original question - does the woman discuss with the man that she would like to take the "rape" thing a little further, or is that purely conjecture on the part of the husband? My further comments are based on the assumption that she indicated that she was desirous of participating...

The friend is guilty of rape, or not, depending upon her desire / consent. Ascertaining the mindset and her degree of consent would be very difficult in the circumstances you describe. I mean, if the friend asks "Are you OK with this honey?", doesn't that sort of ruin the whole rape fantasy thing in the first place? Good faith is one thing, and perhaps should be considered in the sentencing phase, but as to the initial charge, hell yeah, it's rape, and conspiracy to commit a felony. It would seem that the husband would have some complicity here, in that he conspired to set this rape scene up.

Now let's look at this from a different perspective. Let's assume that the woman wanted to experience a rape fantasy, approaching the real thing in every aspect possible. How would she go about carrying out such a fantasy? If you get close enough to the "real thing", does not the fantasy and the reality become indistinguishable? I mean, does the girl really want to be raped, or does she want to participate in a fantasy wherein she "knows" at some level that it is not real?

Furthermore, if one is trying to circumvent potential legal ramifications, how would you set it up? Should she have left written, notarized evidence explicitly expressing her desire to participate?

Even then, how do you deal with Asguard's (I think) point that consent can be withdrawn at anytime?

I don't know the answers, and there are many, many variables here. In the simplest case, the girl wanted the experience, the husband set out to make it happen, the act occurred and everyone should be happy. Any, and I mean any deviations from this perfect scenario are just accidents waiting to happen.

Bottom line, from my perspective, both the men, and perhaps the woman as well, are idiots, or at least acting irresponsibly. They knew, or should have known, that their actions were opening them up to all sorts of potential hell. So if nothing else, they are guilty of stupidity. As to the outcome in the courts, the whole case would hinge upon intent and mindset, difficult to prove in the best of cases.

If I was involved in this scenario, I would like to think I would back off from the whole mess. The closest personal experience I have was being in bed with a woman who was into the whole "erotic asphyxiation" thing, and I simply refused to participate. I think that is the only sexual request I have ever turned down in my life, but I was not about to try to explain to some square cop: "But officer, she wanted to to be strangled, really! I didn't mean to kill her off..." Not happening. For once in my life, even in the heat of passion, I managed to think with the big head...

So, not much help, but I honestly don't know the answer to your question, beyond what I have touched on here...

 

[Orleander]

Quite the gedanken you've concocted here Orly... :bugeye: And, it's not helping that others are making things more complicated by throwing in additional "what ifs". Frankly, I would need a little clarification on your original question - does the woman discuss with the man that she would like to take the "rape" thing a little further, or is that purely conjecture on the part of the husband? My further comments are based on the assumption that she indicated that she was desirous of participating......

the wife doesn't know a thing about it. The husband just wanted her hurt. Everything he has told his friend is a lie.
There is a link in the OP to a current actual case. The husband is being charged and they are looking for the other guy. They do not know if they will charge him.

 

[takandjive]

It's no different than historical reenactment: You have your facts straight before you do it.

If you want to do something, you work it out with your partner. If it can't be worked out what is or isn't okay, it stays a fantasy in your head, like sex with octopus space monsters or something...

 

[Orleander]

If I asked my best friend to do something like this, she would trust me completely. She would never think to check my story by asking my husband if it was ok.

 

[takandjive]

Yes, but don't you think she'd have a few questions for you if you were like, "Okay. So I want you to break in the house and rape Mr. Orly. He'll LOVE IT! Here's a miniature baseball bat. Put this in his rectum. He LOVES that!"?

It's not like asking your friend to join in a threesome or pop out of a cake naked.

 

[Asguard]

as i said earlier (when orleander asked what if they wernt friends just someone the husband met) what about this senario:

female x wants to hurt female y, calls prositute and organises rape fantasy, pays in advance and tells the prthe address and that there will be a key under the mat at the front door and that the safe word will be eggs or whatever. pro does what he has been paid to do in good faith. who is guilty?

i would argue that its female x not the prostitute who is guilty of rape

 

[Randwolf]

the wife doesn't know a thing about it. The husband just wanted her hurt. Everything he has told his friend is a lie.
There is a link in the OP to a current actual case. The husband is being charged and they are looking for the other guy. They do not know if they will charge him.

OK, got it now. Sorry, I missed the link, I guess I took the underlining as emphasis. I can be pretty stupid sometimes...

Anyway, now I think I understand what you're after. The third person involved, at least in theory, had no idea that the woman was not into the fantasy. I think I will have to fall back on my position that the guy should be convicted of stupidity, but that (unfortunately) is not a crime.

Technically, he is guilty of rape. The whole "intent" issue is balanced out by the legal concept of "known or should have known". He knew, at the very least that he was participating in a risky venture, and should have taken precautions to ensure that everything was on the level. Also, one would hope that a person has enough human sensitivity to "feel" that something was not exactly kosher once he started the sex. I mean, acting is one thing, but pure terror is another, and I would hope that he would notice the difference. Apparently not.

So, once again, the rape charge should be made, and in my opinion conviction should occur. Then take the extenuating circumstances into account during sentencing...

If "ignorance of the law is no excuse", then how can ignorance of the husband's true motives be an excuse? Especially if said husband is asking that individual to commit a prima facie crime?

In a way I feel sorry for the guy, but he should have known better, and based on you comments in post #48, the husband needs to "have the book thrown at him".

 

[Randwolf]

Upon further reflection, I think all these scenarios boil down to one central question:

Can sexual consent be given by one person on behalf of another?

I think the answer is NO - emphatically. This would seem to solve all these hypotheticals, the person with whom you are about to have sex is the only person qualified to give consent, and it's your responsibility to obtain said consent.

From there, everything else would seem to fall into place...

 

[madanthonywayne]

In real life, though, I'm sure that at some point the "friend" would have to realise that it was all a bit too realistic, causing him to doubt that consent was real.

I did say there was a safe word. In sexual role play situations, unless the safe word is invoked, you're supposed to ignore all pleas. After all, the person involved is supposed to know that all they must do is utter the safe word and everything stops. I'd lay all the blame on the husband in this, admittedly, contrived scenario.

 

[CutsieMarie89]

Yes it's rape.

 

[S.A.M.]

Just switch it around to the wife asking a male friend to "rape" her husband. If the husband does not know or consent, is it rape?

 

[Asguard]

sam of course it is just like all these senarios are. the only thing people are arguing about is who is at fault. its the person who set it up in all cases as long as the person knew nothing about it.

why would rape be any different from murder?

if i tell you x's favorite food is penuts (knowing full well x is highly allergic) and that you should surprise them with a cake or biscuits or whatever made from them its not you who are responcable its me. why would being set up for rape be any different?

 

[takandjive]

Because flipping someone over and brutally pounding someone in the ass is different from making someone a birthday cake for obvious reasons.

 

[Asguard]

what? one leads to death and the other to pain?

what about the nazi experiment where people were told to "torture" prisionors by pressing a button to which the person who they said was an actor would simulate being electrocuted. except it was real, not a simulation

should they be charged under torture laws or should the "doctors" be charged?

rape isnt so special that it is above the basics in all law, ie if you are tricked into unknowingly aiding in a crime through fraud or cohersion (seprate topic i know) then you are NOT criminally responcable

lets sat the person happens to hit on the safe word and the prositute who was set realises whats going on and then suffers significant psycological harm from what they were tricked into doing and then sues the women who tricked her, should women y who tricked him be liable for that damage?