- #36
Pengwuino
Gold Member
- 5,124
- 20
Yah but I am still amazed at what this ruling is...
Actually, this is not a reliable indicator of consent. It's not hard to imagine that a 14-yr-old boy would be physically aroused by a pretty woman, but not actually have the intention of having intercourse or consenting to it...afterall, 14-yr-olds often find themselves in a state of arousal that leaves them rather embarrassed because they do know acting upon it would be inappropriate.TheStatutoryApe said:My main point regarding the difference between males and females in regards to sex was that if the male achieves a state of arousal and preforms normal sexual intercourse it is quite difficult to declare that the "victimizer" coerced the "victim" into having sex. A female can engage in normal sexual intercourse without being aroused but ofcourse the problem here is that it would be quite difficult for a defense to prove that the female was aroused and desirous to protect their client from further charge if the court were to handle these cases the way I'm suggesting.
Oh I know that it's not a reliable indicator but in a court case it would be difficult to try proving otherwise. It's more or less your word against the other person and the fact that your body was reacting the way it was makes it difficult to back up your word on the matter.Moonie said:Actually, this is not a reliable indicator of consent.
Pengwuino said:whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa whoa
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...888035,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...888035,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...888035,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...888035,00.html
A High Court judge yesterday threw out the case of a student who claimed that she was raped while drunk and unconscious on the basis that “drunken consent is still consent”.