Talk:Rape/Archive 11
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | Archive 13 | → | Archive 15 |
D.O.J. statistics (used for interracial rape section) are beyond reproach
- You can't seriously be arguing that DOJ statistics are bogus?Brutanti (talk) 03:32, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- The DOJ added the astericks themselves saying that three of the four numbers you quoted from the 2005 and 2006 tables were from extremely small sample sizes, blatantly implying that they're unreliable (see [1]). We have no indication of how this data was gathered and processed, only a table of contents at the top of each PDF referring to a document that I can't locate a link to. And, repeating from your Talk page, these are projected numbers whereas you portrayed them as absolutes. And then, since we've seen it, there's that huge but unexplained jump in total rape/sexual assault crimes from 2005 to 2006 that needs explaining. Right now it looks like the chances that the statements you entered are correct are very small.
- I'm trying to find some reliable sources on this question, but seeing mostly racist propaganda websites. [2] was the only reliable source I found in the first 120 Google hits, and on page 9 it says:
- Estimates based on 10 or fewer sample cases have high relative standard errors. Care should be taken when comparing such estimates to other estimates when both are based on 10 or fewer sample cases.
- [3] also looks interesting, but an expert should review it before we cite it here as it is from 1986.
- Simesa (talk) 09:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Rape vs. Abortion
Some ancient, patriarchal cultures consider abortion to be a worst crime/sin than rape. This is also the current view of the Roman Catholic Church (see José Cardoso Sobrinho). This debate has become prominent because of recent legislation on abortion, and some editors might feel that such discussion would be worthy of inclusion within the scope of the article or within related articles. Similar views could also be articulated on the topics of incest and pedophilia ADM (talk) 06:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
- There seem to be no sources in José Cardoso Sobrinho supporting your assertion that it is the current view of the Roman Catholic Church than abortion is "a [worse] crime/sin than rape." Thus you claim seems to currently stand as original research. Blackworm (talk) 09:07, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- The most authoritative statement on this does not come from Monsignor Sobrinho himself, but from Cardinal Giovanni Battista Re, who is on record saying that abortion is wrong every time, even in the case of rape. [4] Anyways, that was not so much my point, I only meant to show that there have been several historical and legislative dilemmas of this nature, which are notable and debatable to the extent that they are a fairly important topic in the field bioethics. ADM (talk) 18:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Sacred rape
I'm not sure how to add this, but in certain ancient cultures, rape was related to the sacred temple women, see for example religious prostitution. [5] ADM (talk) 18:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
False allegation
As there is not a specific article on false accusation a link to the False allegation of child sexual abuse article could be added in the "see also list". Godtadet (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
References needed:
"In recent years, women have been convicted of raping or sexually assaulting men; for example, by the use of an object or when the man is below the statutory age of consent. Also, in recent years women have also been convicted of rape or sexual assault by procuring a man to rape another woman, and by being an accomplice to a rape." Sounds true, probably is true, but needs references right? Deathbird909 (talk) 19:15, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
A question about rape?
How do you tell the difference between a real rape victim, and a woman who cries rape in order to hide her pregency? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.80.96 (talk) 17:04, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I have a question
I heard a lot about how if you are attractive and rich you can get a better lawyer and a much lighter punishment then a less attractive defendent who commited that same crime is it true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.187.80.96 (talk) 22:46, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
It's true of just about any crime. 69.207.50.47 (talk) 00:43, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
Motivation
This edit reverted, without edit summary, my previous edits to the motivation section, in which I rewrote the summary of the various proposed motivations. Note that the only cited motivations are those of Paglia, yet the reversion inexplicably assigns greater weight to the uncited, unsourced motivations. I ask that this reversion be explained, and supported by reliable sources. Blackworm (talk) 06:23, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Rape in war
Rape in war topic covers only "bad countries" (Japan in WWII, USSR, etc). War rapes by the solders of US, Britain, France and other "good democratic" regimes should be added. Otherwise the section lacks neutrality. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.160.6 (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
- Actually the article names "bad" countries which created policies of systematic rape as weapon of war. This is entirely different from the circumstances of rape occasionally committed by individual soldiers, regardless of country of origin, in the presence of policies and penalties against rape. But perhaps you are suggesting that individuals from "good" countries should be listed in volume first so as to hide the shame of the policies of bad countries.
- The big thing missing about wartime rape is the fact that in more ancient times the policy of rape was not just a terror tactic nor just a reward to soldiers. The tactic properly used often worked to disorganize future resistance by setting mothers of children with mixed backgrounds at odds with the surviving pure blood males. Blended cultures are less likely to rebell. Of course the most successful users of forced interbreeding also tended to follow conquest rape policies with local marriages and melding and settling retiring and garrison troops into the populations as soon as possible. Thus believe it or not the ancient policy of conquest rape was often a humanistic policy of accelerated absorption with the goal of lowering long term casualties to both sides by reducing prospects for protracted war across several generations. At a minimum the mixed breed children were fed by the enemy but not fully trusted as potential troops.
- Also notably is the "political correct" move of dropping the long recognized fact that the average soldier usually rapes out of fear that it is his last chance to have children - i.e. death may come quickly and unexpectedly. I would cite authorities but of course their authority has been PC withdrawn by modern society. It is simply not acceptable to look through the eyes of such a rapist and see their fear or stress as primary contributers to the action of rape. It is true that protracted fear or war may eventually evolve fear to hate in some soldier resulting in potential for atrocities. Thus there may or may not be feelings that the enemy can be degraded through the proxy of their females. In any case despite the accepted pre-justice of prosecution, the women themselves might not have been targeted for degradation - though it is certainly the effect especially in conservative societies. The current news articles about the extreme promiscuity of female US Marine soldiers would tend to prove this feeling is not limited to males. 69.23.124.142 (talk) 05:12, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Motivation of a rapist
A deep misunderstanding makes some people, especially feminists, rage against books like "A natural history of rape" because they falsely accuse them to contradict the thesis that a rapist wants to exercise power over his victim and humiliate her. This is utterly not the case: Darwinism does not deal with the inner intentions and aims of an acting individual but with the statistically most probable consequences of the action. Given a boy with little tolerance on refusion - clearly not a natural born rapist but more prone to rape than some other boys. If he is refused by a girl who appeals him and he is very angry and wants "to show her who's boss" and therefore rapes her, his intention will clearly not be reprodiction but humiliation. Hovever, he might impregnate his victim, and if she does neither contracept nor abort, she will have a baby who would never have existed if the boy had accepted the refusal.--Slow Phil (talk) 21:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Matrimonial rape in German law
In Germany, rape was not defined within a marriage until the late 1990s. Some (chiefly conservative) politicians resisted the reform for a long time because they affirm a (mutual) debt for matrimonial cohabitation. Their disputants might deny it but I think this is not even necessary: The allowance of brute force makes the "mutual" debt a rather unilateral issue. Additionally, if someone owed money to another, no sensible person would affirm the donor's right to break the debtor's bones or to threaten his family to get it back. There cannot be a right to hurt or to injure his spouse - and without any injuries, it will be hard to prove rape. In spite of these arguments, even a however brutal rape within a marriage was not regarded as rape by German penalty code unil as late as 1997.--Slow Phil (talk) 22:12, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Observation -- Germany is in no way unique. In fact legal rape within marriage is pretty much exclusively a development of the 20th century of first world European descended countries. Rape within marriage is still not acknowledged as a point of law by the majority of the world. The problem is that the above argument about physical force is INCORRECT. If it was true then legislatures would have moved to clear all obstacles for the much easier to handle charges of assault and battery within marriage instead of rape. Advocates instead held out for rape because the charge is more severe especially in terms of social impact outside the law and the charge does NOT necessarily require physical injury or even physical force. If you check your law cases you will already find cases based on the husband simply impregnating the wife when she claims that was never her life plan. Rape is unfortuantely not an objective law like assault, battery, or maiming laws. Both the very claim of wrong doing and the penalties desired are often highly emotional. The physical act might not even be considered rape if emotional bonds remained good. In the case of drugged and abducted rape, many prosecutors and victims screw up by pursuing the complicated charge of rape rather than the simple high penalty crime of kidnapping. 69.23.124.142 (talk) 15:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
- It is worth observing that most Western societies have long allowed a rape defensive in case of spouse murder before rape in marriage was a crime...unless big money was inconvenienced. 69.23.124.142 (talk) 15:58, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Looking for Case
I am looking for a particular rape case. This happened one to three years ago in the united states. The accused was in his early twenties and was the son of a famous athlete I believe it took place at a college. He had sex with a comatose woman who did not consent to sex. However he was not charged with rape and walked. This is not the James Plunkett case.
Wikicallipy (talk) 04:01, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- I would recommend findlaw, lexisnexis, or westlaw to search for it; I think the last two are subscription only but also the most likely to find your results quickly. Fuzbaby (talk) 18:46, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
- It is something of a jape to rape the ape! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 100 uses for a dead cat (talk • contribs) 11:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Rape and murder
There should probably be additional material somewhere on criminal cases of rape and murder, where a female victim is typically raped and subsequently murdered. ADM (talk) 22:17, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Honor rape
Another issue that could possibly be covered is the concept of honor rape, which is an archaic practice of allowing a woman to be raped by another man as a punishment for a crime that one of her male relatives might have committed. [6] [7] [8] ADM (talk) 04:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
What?
"Rape, also referred to as sexual assault, is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with or without sexual penetration of another person without that person's consent."
Sexual intercourse is penetration...statement is invalid. 98.201.38.4 (talk) 21:13, 18 August 2009 (UTC) (unlogged in)
- While sexual intercourse traditionally and typically means penis/vagina intercourse, the term has expanded and is sometimes used to refer simply to two people having had any kind of sex together (with maybe the exception of mammary intercourse). And as the Non-penetrative sex article says, "'Outercourse' is something of a misnomer, as it contrasts 'outer' with 'inter' but the 'inter' in 'intercourse' means 'between two people.' It does not describe being inside or outside of the body."
- However, since sexual intercourse is more commonly thought of as penetrative sex, as even the Sexual intercourse article (which I have worked on) notes, it might be best to tweak the above quote you have presented. Flyer22 (talk) 04:54, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Worth it?
Mentioning how feeling violated exactly feels like. 86.41.90.120 (talk) 14:07, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be worth mentioning. Is it not already in the article? I will have to check and see. I have not read this article all the way through yet. Flyer22 (talk) 08:34, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
- Right now, from just scanning this article, I see that the Effects on victims section covers part of what being violated in this way feels like. I get that you mean in the exact moment of being raped, right? But what, other than horror, can we relay about that moment? Flyer22 (talk) 08:41, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Kraped
Kraped is a verb. Kraped comes from the word Krape, Which means to kiss someone out of random without their permission. Thus, Krape means to Kiss Rape. Which comes from the word Cat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.32.206 (talk) 20:18, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
War Rape
I notice that, much like the War Rape article, this section seems to lack mention of American offenses.
Many GIs held the Okinawans in open contempt. Initially such disdain reflected the savage fighting that had taken place in the archipelago in the closing months of the war. Rape became so commonplace in the wake of battle that the Army decreed the death penalty for offenders in an attempt to curb its incidence.
From page 441 of source, if anyone wants to add that. WookMuff (talk) 06:35, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- Do you have any actual confirmable government statistics? The word "commonplace" is rather vague. And how credible is the author of this book? Some soldiers were misbehaving, so the military did something to stop it. That happens everywhere, only America didn't cover it up, but did something to stop it from happening. Mentioning what happens in every single nation might be too long for an article, and it can't possibly compare to what others have done. The Japanese government/military allowed and encouraged rape. Ever hear of the rape of Nanking? That wasn't an isolated incident. It was common for them to round up women to rape, everywhere they conquered. Since Korean girls were more likely to be healthy virgins, they kidnapped them and forced them to become sex slaves for the Japanese army, raping them constantly. Mentioning what is happening in the Congo right now, or Sudan, would be good examples of this situation. Dream Focus 10:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Female-female rape.
There's almost no mention of it. For goodness' sake there was even a documentary (She Stole My Voice, 2008). If you're coming to me with some bullshit "female-female rape doesn't happen" argument, go rape yourself. Otherwise, if someone who's actually seen this movie or has access to research on this matter could comment (good god, there isn't even any mention of the movie on Wikipedia!), that would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.90.55.168 (talk) 11:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm. Good points. From what I know, though, this mainly happens in prisons...just like male-male rapes most often do. It still does not mean it should not be mentioned in this article, of course. After all, we do mention male-male rape in the lead (though male-male rape is the most prominent of the two). Flyer22 (talk) 20:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
- I Googled for that documentary but didn't find any reviews from any publications for it. If you make an article without that, some evil deletionists will come along and destroy it, no matter how important the subject matter is. Anyway, I did read a lot of the comments left in discussions on various sites about this, women talking about their personal experiences with this horrible crime, and I agree, we certainly need to make an article about it. I'll help make one now. Dream Focus 03:16, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_gender#Rape_of_females_by_females already exist. It mentions the documentary you mentioned there also. I'm having trouble finding news stories, so many other things come up instead. If enough information can be found to fill its own article, so be it. At the moment that appears sufficient. Do you agree? Please comment on what more could be added. Dream Focus 04:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
- I was unaware of that article's existence. Thank you. Maybe there should be a link there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.90.55.168 (talk) 08:49, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Definition of Rape
The definitions section includes the following uncited assertion:
Other jurisdictions define all non-consensual sexual activity to be rape; but the terminology varies, with some places using other terms.
That seems improbable. Most jurisdictions use "sexual assault" and varying degrees. The quoted text should be removed until such jurisdictions are identified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sammichraptor (talk • contribs) 22:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
- Depends on what country you are in, and what area in that nation even. This would be a good list article, showing what its called in each nation and state/province/territory. Dream Focus 00:21, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
CBS news says many rapes don't get prosecuted because of the cost of the DNA testing
Saw something on CBS news tonight, something rather horrifying. Less than a 1/4th of rapes reported end with someone getting arrested! The main reason is that to send off the DNA for testing in a rape kit cost over a thousand dollars. If I can find something published on CBS news site, I'm working that into the article. Dream Focus 00:20, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- Found it. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/11/09/cbsnews_investigates/main5590118.shtml?tag=contentMain;contentBody Need a rape by country article I believe. Dream Focus 00:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Proposed split
I have carried out a cleanup of the article. It was a real mess. I have added a globalize and split tag to the article. This article should be totally generic with little or no refs to individual countries. The country specific info should be in their own articles. These will be linked via the category but a Rape statistics by country (or suchlike) article may help to link them all. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 11:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
I have now moved the country specific material to there own articles. Some info already existed as an exact copy at the established articles. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 22:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
- I am not sure how I feel about you removing the Laws by jurisdiction section, but I added back the information that was in the Statistics section and the Global situation section. Just because there is already an article on a section...does not mean we should not cover some of it here. It is pointless to have a Statistics section, if we are going to note very little about rape statistics and have the section rather serve as a link to the Rape statistics article. It might as well be in the See also section. The Statistics section can be cut down, but some (as in not a little note) of the information about rape statistics should be covered in this article. From that section...we are suppose to point to the main article to give a more in-depth look/study of that topic, not link to it just to cover the whole topic. I am also not seeing why the statistics about rape in the U.S. should not be mentioned in the lead, which is why I added it back as well. Yes, this article is not only for Americans, but still...
- I added back the Global situation section, because it is important to briefly provide global information about this; it leads people to the bigger articles on it. So would placing its links in the See also section, but I feel that the little information we provide on it is better than simply linking to it. The rape problem in Africa seems especially notable for mention here. Flyer22 (talk) 23:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
- I went ahead and combined the Statistics and Global situation sections; separately, they were both about statistics. Now they are about statistics as a whole, divided by mention of how rape is in a few different countries. A lot of this infomation is not in the Rape statistics article, and I am not sure that it is sufficiently mentioned in these countries' individual articles about sexual violence. I also added a link to the Rape in the United Kingdom article, which you recently created; it has been added as a main article link to the United Kingdom section. People need to know that these articles exist. Linking to them through this article is the best way for that. Flyer22 (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
concerns about the Rape in the United States of America article
I made the article Rape in the United States of America because I felt there is a lot of things that could be added that wouldn't fit here, and which belonged in a separate article. Some over at the crime Wikiproject [9] are complaining about that, since a large chunk of it was copied from the main article here. Please give your opinions please. And if you wish to help out, please read the talk page, and discuss what needs to be done to improve it. Dream Focus 14:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I fully agree with the split out of that article and I have removed the duplicated material for this article. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 11:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
- That article is currently up for deletion, I see. I will go see what is being stated, though I am not sure I will have anything to state on that matter. As for Alan Liefting's comment, I responded below. Flyer22 (talk) 23:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
- Update, for any new people that happen by. The article was kept, although renamed Rape in the United States. Dream Focus 19:45, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
- That article is currently up for deletion, I see. I will go see what is being stated, though I am not sure I will have anything to state on that matter. As for Alan Liefting's comment, I responded below. Flyer22 (talk) 23:20, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
I feel like these paragraphs should be reversed.
In recent years, women have been convicted of raping or sexually assaulting men; for example, by the use of an object or when the man is below the statutory age of consent. Also, in recent years women have also been convicted of rape or sexual assault by procuring a man to rape another woman, and by being an accomplice to a rape.
In Brazil, the definition of rape is even more restrictive. It is defined as non-consensual vaginal sex.[8] Therefore, unlike most of Europe and the Americas, male rape, anal rape, and oral rape are not considered to be rape. Instead, such an act is called a "violent attempt against someone's modesty" ("Atentado violento ao pudor").
As I said, it seems to me like the Brazil definiton of rape should go directly under the discussion of definitions of rape in different jurusdictions, especially since it says "even more restrictive" under a paragraph describing a recent expansion in the definition of rape, female on male. 128.227.51.89 (talk) 17:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
ayyo
"Rape, also referred to as sexual assault, " wrong.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.89.82.205 (talk) 13:26, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Anthony Beevor's dubious claim of 200,000 women raped by Red Army
I've checked out the sources listed in the entry for Beevor's rather shocking claim of this many women in Germany raped by the Red Army troops. Where does he get 200,000 from? According to the source[10]:
"How many German women were raped? One can only guess, but a high proportion of at least 15 million women who either lived in the Soviet Union zone or were expelled from the eastern provinces. The scale of rape is suggested by the fact that about two million women had illegal abortions every year between 1945 and 1948."
Looking at historical abortion rates in East Germany (compilations by William Robert Johnston with several sources are available for both the BRD [11] as well as the FRG [12]) from the 1940s to the 1980s, the data doesn't seem to match up with the claim that, according to Beevor, from 1945-1948 the high abortion rate indicated mass rape (all abortions were illegal in East Germany until 1972 and in the FRG until 1976). For 1948 we see that the illegal abortion rate was 5.3 out of every 1000 women ages 15-44 in East Germany.
So less than one in 200 of all women in East Germany in 1948 even had an abortion according to the data from Johnston (which uses as sources publications from the UN and Council of Europe). Rather than seeing the rate sharply drop in 1948 as according to Beevor's hypothesis that the illegal abortion rate is an indicator of the Red Army's mass rape, a drop in the abortion rate does not occur until 1950 (the year that the BRD integrated into the COMECON Soviet economic bloc in which the economy was restructured into a Soviet-dominated international "division of labor" between various Eastern bloc states and the Soviet Union itself, but resulted in a post-war increase in the standard of living and ability of people to afford children, one would assume). This is compared to, say, one out of every four women in the Soviet Union having an abortion in the single year after its relegalization in 1955.
I removed this sentence as it is dubious, the source has no evidence for this beyond anecdotes and unrelated data, and even this data is contradicted by more credible sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YaniaTierra (talk • contribs) 21:50, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
Merge discussion
Sexual assault and rape should be merged under the term sexual assault is this term is more official and more encyclopedic.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
- Against merge Rape gets 39,200,000 results in Google, while "sexual assault" only gets 5,220,000. I recall having this discussion before somewhere. Read the definition of sexual assault in its article, it explaining up top why its different. Sexual assault is just a less dramatic sounding term than rape, just as they say child molestation instead of child rape in the media. Molestation originally meant to annoy or harm. It wasn't until 1950 they started using it to refer to rape. [13]. Dream Focus 00:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Note, some government websites even call it "sexual violence", someone suggesting we change the name to that once. [14] Dream Focus 00:26, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I do not see were it says the two are different? As far as I am aware they are synonymous. Regardless of what name is used these two should be merged as it is just duplication. Look at the references on the rape page and may of the title refer to sexual assault.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:39, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I agree to merge it all to Rape, not to merge it Sexual Assault. It currently says "While sexual assaults are associated with the crime of rape, it may cover assaults which would not be considered rape.[4] What constitutes a sexual assault is determined by the laws of the jurisdiction where the assault takes place, which vary considerably, and are influenced by local social and cultural attitudes." Most people consider rape to be any unwanted sexual activity, or that which involves someone too young or not mentally fit to give consent. The dictionary defines rape is just intercourse, not other forms of sexual abuse. So we really need to get the dictionary people to upgrade themselves, and avoid all problems. Dream Focus 00:50, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Dream focus, when you read in the media someone is charged with molestation of a child, that means they touched or fondled a child for sexual gratification. When you read of child rape that means that they penetrated the child/had intercourse. Molestation = touching.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 02:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Molestation does not always equal only touching. This is why child molestation redirects to the Child sexual abuse article. Flyer22 (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose merger. Rape is a specific type of sexual assault which involves penetration, where as sexual assault covers the entire range of sexual assaults against a person's will.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 00:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Technically maybe but currently the page on rape deals with both as does the page on sexual assault. In general use they are synonymous. If sexual assault is the broader term then we should move all content there and then have rape as a sub page if as LG says it just refers to a subsection of sexual assault.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ah right ok. The content which is not to do with rape but is to with other forms of sexual assault should mostly or entirely moved over to the sexual assault article. I think on the main sexual assault page that rape should be covered in summary form with a see also link or main article link to this rape page.--Literaturegeek | T@1k? 02:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Agree with Lg's latest proposal above.
- Aside to Dream Focus: I think "molest" has somewhat different meanings in UK and US. It wasn't that long ago an American woman walking late at night in Aberdeen was surprised when a nicely dressed man grabbed her arm and said loudly, twice: "I'm not going to molest you!" She thought rape; he probably didn't. (He was just warning her of a creep seen following her.) - Hordaland (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Both seem to be the same as per the Oxford English Dictionary, agree with Dream0 the other dictionary definition mentioned is not common usage. The OED "2. trans. a. To carry off (a person) by force; esp. to abduct a woman, usually for the purpose of sexual violation. Freq. with away, from. Also fig. Cf." and "sexual assault n. the action or an act of forcing an unconsenting person to engage in sexual activity; a rape; (Law) a crime involving forced sexual contact, variously defined as inclusive or exclusive of rape." sexual assault kit is also in the OED Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose merger: The concepts "rape" and "sexual assault" are distinct (see for example [15] or [16]), with "rape" being a strict subset of "sexual assault". If the rape article contains material which should be in the sexual assault article, then the proper course of action would be to move that material, not merge the articles. Gabbe (talk) 12:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I don't think that is a sufficient reason to merge them. For instance, in science, the concepts "theory" and "hypothesis" are distinct, but popular usage of those words conflate their meanings. Similarly, the concepts "rape" and "sexual assault" are distinct, but the word "rape" is sometimes used colloquially as a synonym for "sexual assault". I don't think Wikipedia should further this common misunderstanding by mixing them up. A complete rewrite of the rape article may be warranted, but I don't think a merger is a good idea. Gabbe (talk) 12:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose merger: Sexual assault is broader topic than rape, The sexual assault article primarily deals with rape and child sexual abuse. Child sexual abuse in most cases isnt rape. But there might be a case for merging sexual assault into sexual abuse.--Penbat (talk) 12:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose without more input from legalese specialists. My understanding is that rape is a loaded term for one type of sexual assault and often legally used to differentiate between various types, I certainly could be wrong. Pending that an entire article just on the word "rape" itself would overwhelm the main article. -- Banjeboi 19:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Soft Support merger This 2005 scientific review published in the J Epidemiol Community Health stat the terms are often used interchangeably. Well the legal definitions may be different and this would be addressed in a section on definitions the rest of the scientific literature cannot be divided along these line and thus these are currently meddled cotracks. Krantz G, Garcia-Moreno C (2005). "Violence against women". J Epidemiol Community Health. 59 (10): 818–21. doi:10.1136/jech.2004.022756. PMC 1732916. PMID 16166351.
{{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter|month=ignored (help)Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:53, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- Opposed to merge, especially if we are thinking of merging Rape to Sexual assault. Rape is most definitely the more notable term. And sexual assault can mean a variety of things. Though rape and sexual assault are sometimes used interchangeably, there are sexual assaults that people would not consider to be rape. Merging it all to here is suggesting that it is all rape. Flyer22 (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
The consensus seems to be against merging, is it OK if I remove the {{merge}} templates? Gabbe (talk) 13:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Doc James, what concerns do you have left about this article? Is it that attempted rape is covered here as well? Attempted rape is related to rape, and rape starts with an attempt, as we know. Thus, attempted rape seems perfectly appropriate to be covered here. We certainly do not need a separate article about attempted rape. Flyer22 (talk) 20:20, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
this is way 2 long —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.79.98 (talk) 21:58, 23 January 2010 (UTC)