Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Fri Dec 13 06:31:58 PST 2019

Utopia Talk / Politics / Sweden is the most civilized country
Victim
Member
Sat Jul 13 11:49:16
http://www...xual-consent-law-led-to-change

'Negligent rape': Has Sweden's sexual consent law led to change?

12 July 2019

One year ago, Sweden introduced a law change that meant sex without explicit consent was considered as rape, including when the victim did not actively say 'no'. The Local spoke to experts to find out the impact this has had on court cases and within Swedish society.

The law change meant that participants needed to clearly demonstrate that they wanted to engage in sexual activity in order for it to be considered consensual.

Two new offences of "negligent rape" and "negligent sexual abuse" were created for acts where courts found that consent had not been established, but in which the perpetrator had not intended to commit rape or assault. Previously, a decisive factor for a rape conviction was proof that a perpetrator used force, threats, or taken advantage of someone in a vulnerable situation.

The law faced backlash at the time, and had to be clarified after Sweden's Council on Legislation said it was too unclear. Others criticized it as signalpolitik, meaning a policy implemented only for appearances and unlikely to make a real difference.

Twelve months on, rights organizations say the law has had a measurable impact on court cases and helped change the national discussion on sexual autonomy – but warned there was still work to be done.



'Negligent rape' sentences

"Earlier this year, we looked at 30 court judgments, and these included cases which definitely would not have been considered to be rape before the change in the law; where no violence or other means of force was used," Katarina Bergehed, an Amnesty International expert in women's rights, told The Local.

Over the past year, the new law has been decisive in at least seven rape cases which went to court, according to an investigation by Swedish radio programme I lagens namn (In the name of the law).

The programme said that of 60 rape cases, the new law was crucial in seven, including six convictions of negligent rape.

A study from the Siren news agency reached the same conclusion, finding that in 84 cases where prosecutors mentioned "negligent rape", 45 resulted in a rape conviction while six were sentenced for negligent rape.




'Sleeping in the same bed and wearing only underwear does not mean consent'

One of these sentences was confirmed by Sweden's Supreme Court on Sunday, marking the first time the country's highest criminal court made a judgment relating to negligent rape.

The 27-year-old male plaintiff was found guilty of the negligent rape of a woman while staying overnight at her home.

The woman said had agreed he could stay overnight, but made it clear she did not want to have sex. Despite that, the man initiated sexual intercourse.

Both the perpetrator and the plaintiff said that she was passive throughout the intercourse, and that they did not speak. The plaintiff said she "froze and did not know how to act", while the perpetrator said he was not sure whether she was awake when he first initiated sexual contact, "but [he] had the impression that she wanted to have sex" and continued because she did not tell him not to. He also said that he stopped the intercourse when he thought she didn't want to continue.

In a statement accompanying its decision, the Supreme Court wrote: "A person who is subjected to sexual acts against their will does not have any responsibility to say no or express their reluctance in any other way. Furthermore, the court notes that the fact that the plaintiff and the perpetrator agreed to sleep in the same bed and that they were dressed in only underwear does not mean that the plaintiff voluntarily participated in the sexual acts."

The man now faces two years and three months in jail, although this includes sentences for other crimes he was found guilty of. The penalty for the count of negligent rape was eight months’ jail, according to the Supreme Court.

Without the 2018 law, it is likely that the man would have been acquitted, since intent was previously required for a conviction of rape or sexual assault, and the Supreme Court found no evidence of intent.




'Greater awareness about consent'

The fact that Sweden's law now sets a clear boundary between consensual sex and rape or assault has also helped open up to discussions about sex and consent, the Swedish Association for Sexuality Education (RFSU) told The Local.

"There is increased awareness and a greater openness towards talking about [sexual consent] today," said RFSU's Maria Bergström, when asked what changes she had observed since the consent law was passed.

"For example, we can see that this has made it easier for people who have previously experienced this to put words on what happened to them, and to then perhaps go further with reporting it or seeking support. The law has finally made it clear that one always has a responsibility to ensure that there is consent."

"There is a much greater awareness and more conversations today on these questions among young men but also in the adult population -- we also see that the question is raised by the media in a different way than before," she said.

Bergström also mentioned the impact of the #MeToo movement in putting the question of consent and boundaries on the political agenda, as women from a wide range of industries came forward with their experiences of assault and harassment, all calling for tangible change.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 07:40:06
It is as if future negligent rapers will not learn where the new legal limit goes and start denying that thing ever happened.
jergul
large member
Sun Jul 14 08:32:40
Nimi
Forsenics.

This is good in sense that rape becomes less heinous. A negligent murderer should have a stigma greater than a negligent rapist.

There is a disconnect in how seriously rape is weighed morally compared to other serious crimes.

The moral bar should be lowered and the legislation helps lower it.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 08:41:44
Jergul
Do you think forensics is a new tool in the toolkit?

You have two options, deny everything or if you suspect there is forensic evidence, deny that there wasn't consent.
jergul
large member
Sun Jul 14 08:58:41
Nimi
I was pointing to the flaw in your original suggestion.

There is a third option. Not raping people in the first place.
Dukhat
Member
Sun Jul 14 08:59:38
I don't see what the problem is. I always ask a girl if he wants my big juicy cock and when she says yes, I go to town.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jul 14 08:59:40
"There is a disconnect in how seriously rape is weighed morally compared to other serious crimes."

Whose fault is that, exactly? Conservatives thought rape should be a DP-worthy offense.
Rugian
Member
Sun Jul 14 09:01:06
Anyway, this is a pretty clear-cut case of turning the concept of presumed innocence on its head. The next time someone insists that women don't actually run everything, just point to BS like this.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 09:11:48
Jergul
Thanks, but we went through the very simple scenarios back when this law was suggested, you and me. All this law means is that the he said she said starts earlier, at consent. Is what I said.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 09:16:20
Rugian
No it isn't, the guy admited to sticking his finger inside her.

"while the perpetrator said he was not sure whether she was awake when he first initiated sexual contact, "but [he] had the impression that she wanted to have sex" and continued because she did not tell him not to."

If you are not sure someone is a sleep, don't stick fingers inside their holes. Really romatic btw, no kissing, no nothing, just shove em in there eh?
jergul
large member
Sun Jul 14 09:50:08
Ruggy
You misunderstand. I think we should think of people convicted of rape in the same way we do of others convicted of physical assault.

The idea that someone has been dirtied somehow is very oldfashioned.

Nimi
7 convictions suggest you are wrong. But I would view it more as a preventive thing. The law clarifies that you have to be very sure the person wants something done before you do it.

Ideally at the same level of assuring consent if you believe someone wants you to slap them. It would be assault if you cannot prove there is consent.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 09:59:21
Jergul
Wow, 7 convinctions 1 year after the new law. I suggest you start looking at things in a window of 3-5 years.

>>The law clarifies that you have to be very sure the person wants something done before you do it.<<

Oh I was really sure. I promise, unfortunatly your honor there are no witnesses to verify my story.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 10:02:59
You keep doding the fact that this in no way makes it easier to prove something illegal happened. Which is, has always been and will continue to be the lproblem with rape as a legal issue.

"Don't rape", well, it only takes us that far Jergul.
Paramount
Member
Sun Jul 14 10:03:37
There is never going to be any romance if a man must ask for permission everytime and before he do anything.

Man: Can I kiss you?
Woman: Yes

Man: Can I touch your tits?
Woman: Yes

Man: Can I undres you?
Woman: What are you waiting for, you wimp.

Man: Can I touch your vagina?
Woman: Yes

The man then touch her vagina and eventually puts a finger inside her.

Woman: NO STOP! I never said you could put your finger inside me. I only agreed that you could touch my vagina. THIS IS NEGLIGENT RAPE!

Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 10:13:41
Para
No no, it has not even started. She says nothing, you have sex, the next morning she kisses you good bye. You keep in touch for years. (Later you hear that this is perfectly normal for someone who has been raped)

Then 5 years later you get a call from the police. When the investigation is dropped, she outs you on social media. You lose your job and become a social pariah.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Sun Jul 14 10:17:38
What this law amount to is to criminalize behavior that was not explicitly illegal before. It does not makes it easier to prosecute anyone, which if people had paid attention was what the high priest feminist lawyer was saying when it was suggested.
Pillz
Member
Mon Jul 15 03:45:40
Sweden is basically a liberal sodom. God's judgment can't some soon enough
RugianLovesTheCock
Member
Mon Jul 15 04:40:10
I enjoy rape during my sleep, that's why I sleep with my mouth open.
Nimatzo
iChihuaha
Mon Jul 15 05:53:35
Sweden is ground zero, AKA SJWeden.
jergul
large member
Mon Jul 15 06:17:12
"What this law amount to is to criminalize behavior that was not explicitly illegal before"

Yepp. Its actually good as it provides practical recourse and should cut back on vigilante social media justice.

show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share