US redefines rape; adds men, others as victims

[doggie]

this will piss off fundies I bet but it is a very good thing.

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration on Friday expanded the FBI's more than eight-decade-old definition of rape to count men as victims for the first time and to drop the requirement that victims must have physically resisted their attackers.

The new definition will increase the number of people counted as rape victims in FBI statistics, but it will not change federal or state laws or alter charges or prosecutions. It's an important shift because lawmakers and policymakers use crime statistics to allocate money and other resources for prevention and victim assistance.

The White House said the change was not motivated by the recent Penn State child sex-abuse scandal. Indeed, the expanded definition has been long awaited as many states and research groups made similar changes in their definitions of rape over recent decades.

Senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett called the change a "very, very important step." The issue got top-level White House attention starting last July, when Vice President Joe Biden raised it at a Cabinet meeting.

Biden, author of the Violence Against Women Act when he was in the Senate, said the new definition is a victory for women and men "whose suffering has gone unaccounted for over 80 years." Calling rape a "devastating crime," the vice president said, "We can't solve it unless we know the full extent of it."

Since 1929, the FBI has defined rape as the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will. The revised definition covers any gender of victim or attacker and includes instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of the influence of drugs or alcohol or because of age. Physical resistance is not required. The Justice Department said the new definition mirrors the majority of state rape statutes now on the books.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said all rape victims "should have access to the comprehensive services that will help them rebuild their lives."

In November, Leahy introduced legislation to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act and provide an increased emphasis on efforts to stop sexual assault.

"We've always had a broad definition of who is eligible for services, and the change could result in additional resources being made available for survivors of rape," said Linda McFarlane, deputy executive director of Just Detention International. The nonprofit human rights organization works to eliminate sexual abuse in prisons and other detention settings.

Congress approved $592 million this year to address violence against women, including sexual assault, domestic violence, dating violence and stalking, under the Violence Against Women Act and Family Violence Prevention and Services Act. Of that amount, $23 million goes to a sexual assault services program and $39 million to a rape prevention and education program administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Obama administration had sought $777 million to combat violence against women.

The change likely will result in big increases in the number of reported rapes, but it was not immediately clear how big. To take just one example of how the FBI totals will change, Chicago didn't report any rapes to the FBI for 2010 because its broad definition of the crime didn't match the FBI's narrow definition.

The change has been sought by women's groups for more than a decade.

The Women's Law Project, on behalf of more than 80 sexual assault coalitions and national organizations concerned about violence against women, wrote FBI Director Robert Mueller in 2001 that the narrow definition was based on gender-based stereotypes and requested it be changed then.

Using the old definition, a total of 84,767 rapes were reported nationwide in 2010, according to the FBI's uniform crime report based on data from 18,000 law enforcement agencies.

Nearly 1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men in the U.S. have been raped at some time in their lives, according to a 2010 survey by the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which used a broader definition.

Those figures were what framed much of the discussion, said Lynn Rosenthal, the White House adviser on violence against women.

Rosenthal said discussions were under way long before the Penn State child sex-abuse scandal became public and that the scandal did not drive the policy change. Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky is charged with more than 50 counts of child sex abuse; Sandusky says he is innocent.

Trust between police and the public is a vital ingredient in lower crime rates, and undercounting a crime like rape can undermine that trust, said Chuck Wexler, executive director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit group that represents police departments across the country.

The revised FBI definition says that rape is "the penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object," without the consent of the victim. Also constituting rape under the new definition is "oral penetration by a sex organ of another person" without consent.

[Peas n carrots]

This is excellent. They also needs to be more done to acknowledge domestic violence between same sex and transgendered partners as well. We're getting there folks, slowly but surely. As much as the fundies scream and holler and make noise, progress is still happening in this country.

[genericJname]

I'm very glad they are finally changing this.

[AnnoDomini]

High time, too. How anyone can oppose this?

[Witsec1]

AD, why are you wasting time on the Internet? You have real work to do.

Have you checked out these resources yet?

viewtopic.php?p=166388#p166388

[ADoyle90815]

I'm glad this is being done. Still, more has to be done for domestic violence to be recognized as something that does happen in all types of relationships, and that it's not just a man abusing his wife or girlfriend.

[deelaem]

Yeah, adding men to the definition was the most important thing to add to rape laws. After all, women are treated completely fairly now when they make a rape report.

/big, fat, hairy sarcasm :roll:

[Conuly]

Yeah, adding men to the definition was the most important thing to add to rape laws. After all, women are treated completely fairly now when they make a rape report.

/big, fat, hairy sarcasm :roll:

I don't like it when people go "Why are you concerned about unequal treatment here when women have to wear burqas in Iran" because it implies that there is no point fixing small, local problems.

Although our rape laws and justice system have a long way to go, that really was an astonishing oversight, to only count one portion of rape victims. Sure, there are other important - even more important - things to fix, but I'm not going to argue against making ANY positive change.

[emmiedahl]

I cannot believe that raping a man was not considered rape already! What happened to the little boy at Penn State, was that not already rape? If not, what the hell was it?

[ElphabaGalinda]

I cannot believe that raping a man was not considered rape already! What happened to the little boy at Penn State, was that not already rape? If not, what the hell was it?

I also cannot believe this is a new thing. It is a good step, but it should have happened long ago. I didn't even know the definition was so narrow, but I'm glad it isn't anymore.

[bananacat]

I cannot believe that raping a man was not considered rape already! What happened to the little boy at Penn State, was that not already rape? If not, what the hell was it?

This is a declaration that applies to the FBI and the federal level. States and districts have had the right to make their own definition, and most of them had stricter definitions. Even in places that didn't legally consider it rape if the victim was a man, it still would have been illegal but under some different term.

But I am definitely glad to see this.

[valsa]

Yeah, adding men to the definition was the most important thing to add to rape laws. After all, women are treated completely fairly now when they make a rape report.

/big, fat, hairy sarcasm :roll:

I know I probably shouldn't respond because this type of thing is where you typically get your head stuck up your rear end but, to quote MLK Jr, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Including rape against men into the definition doesn't hurt women rape victims. Also, I'm hard pressed to think of how a change to FBI definitions can help women be treated more fairly when they make a rape report, other than the changes just included along with the gender change. Many state rape laws are actually more strict than the FBI definitions.

[doggie]

Yeah, adding men to the definition was the most important thing to add to rape laws. After all, women are treated completely fairly now when they make a rape report.

/big, fat, hairy sarcasm :roll:

so it's ok if boys are raped right?

[deelaem]

so it's ok if boys are raped right?

Yes, you idiot, that's exactly what I meant. :roll:

[deelaem]

I know I probably shouldn't respond because this type of thing is where you typically get your head stuck up your rear end but, to quote MLK Jr, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." Including rape against men into the definition doesn't hurt women rape victims. Also, I'm hard pressed to think of how a change to FBI definitions can help women be treated more fairly when they make a rape report, other than the changes just included along with the gender change. Many state rape laws are actually more strict than the FBI definitions.

Soooo glad you're back, valsa!

[doggie]

Yes, you idiot, that's exactly what I meant. :roll:

you compassion is showing again. I bet men rape victims are treated even worse then woman rape victims. so that should make you happy.

[notsocommon]

What a slap to the face of the tea baggers who wanted to change some state definition of rape!

[Trynn]

I can't believe that this hasn't been done before...wow. Well, I know there's more work to be done but this is DEFINITELY a step in the right direction.

I don't think including men in the definition in any way contributes to unequal treatment of women...

[debrand]

I am trying not to post on here so often but notsocommon's comment shocked enough to ask for a link. The tea baggers wanted to redefine rape? What the hell?

This part is very good

The revised definition covers any gender of victim or attacker and includes instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of the influence of drugs or alcohol or because of age. Physical resistance is not required. The Justice Department said the new definition mirrors the majority of state rape statutes now on the books.

Being too terrified to fight back does not mean that the victim was not raped. Being unconscious and unable to say no, does not mean that the victim gave consent.

[Austin]

I am trying not to post on here so often but notsocommon's comment shocked enough to ask for a link. The tea baggers wanted to redefine rape? What the hell?

This part is very good

Being too terrified to fight back does not mean that the victim was not raped. Being unconscious and unable to say no, does not mean that the victim gave consent.

Fighting back can get you killed.

[lauracat7]

you compassion is showing again. I bet men rape victims are treated even worse then woman rape victims. so that should make you happy.

Here's a story that outlines many of the issues resulting from male rape. So glad we are finally getting more realistic in legal definitions- we just need to catch up on same-sex DV/rape and LGBT DV/rape as well. I so wish we could just forclbly download compassionand understanding "software patches" into some rigid and ignorant heads :mrgreen:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jul/17/the-rape-of-men

[Buzzard]

Sorry guys, but this is a completely useless action. All this does is allow the FBI to compile statistics and say "there were x number of rapes". It has no bearing on actual arrests, charges or prosecutions. This is purely statistical.

As it pointed out, Chicago had numerous rape arrests but werent in the statistics because of how the FBI defined things.

While I'm glad they are thinking about keeping more accurate records this will change nothing in reality. If you want accurate statistics in your jurisdiction just ask your local prosecutor for crime stats.

[valsa]

Buzzard, I don't think it's completely useless. According to the article, "It's an important shift because lawmakers and policymakers use crime statistics to allocate money and other resources for prevention and victim assistance."

While it doesn't affect arrests, charges, or prosecutions, it can affect how much money is ear-marked for victim-related services.

[Buzzard]

Buzzard, I don't think it's completely useless. According to the article, "It's an important shift because lawmakers and policymakers use crime statistics to allocate money and other resources for prevention and victim assistance."

While it doesn't affect arrests, charges, or prosecutions, it can affect how much money is ear-marked for victim-related services.

Atleast here in Georgia we use our own crims stats because the FBI's are so jacked up. They overinclude a lot of things - like defining just about every assualt as an aggravated assualt. Throwing an empty beer can is not the same as shooting at someone. We have one victim advocate on a federal grant. The rest are state or county paid.

The crimes that will now be called "rape" likely were still counted, just as something else. I've seen some male sexual assault cases coded as false imprisonments, sodomy, aggravated sodomy etc.

[notsocommon]

I am trying not to post on here so often but notsocommon's comment shocked enough to ask for a link. The tea baggers wanted to redefine rape? What the hell?

This part is very good

Being too terrified to fight back does not mean that the victim was not raped. Being unconscious and unable to say no, does not mean that the victim gave consent.

There was someting a while back that someone wanted to change some state's law to make it rape only if the woman fought back or a weapon was involved.... too buzzed right now to google for it, though.