Virtual Rape Is Traumatic, but Is It a Crime?

[_ID_]

Ok, so I come across a blog on the wired.com website.

http://www. wired.com/culture/lifestyle/commentary/sexdrive/2007/05/sexdrive_0504

Great site for technological news and such. The author of this blog asks the question "is virtual rape a crime?". Although the idea is preposterous to me, I thought I would post it here, and see what others had to say about the subject, since many of us are involved online in one way or another.

I did the Gor thing for a few months, and can agree with the author that online community involvement can be an emotional investment, and has the possibility of making people feel hurt, or loved, or hated or any other gambit of emotions.

I know there are going to be real rape survivors on here, and know that they would be more inclined to feel a deeper impact, but would they still feel the violation that occurs during a real rape if it were to be attempted in an online environment?

Additionally, I am curious to know how others feel if a rape were committed/attempted in an online environment. Should legal action be taken? Or would just simply banning that IP address be sufficient?

Thoughts?

[ElectricBadger]

This answer is probably very Man, but I don't think any experience that a person capable of consent could have online would equate to rape. Rape is about force, about lack of control, consent, or will. That would never be the case, because ultimately we all have a simple option: turn the computer off. With such a safety valve, there's nothing that can really happen without some level of consent on our parts.

A sudden, offensive message/picture/etc could violate that somewhat (there's still the question of pre-consent by participation). There could something we don't wish to see, but do...but again, I can't really compare that to rape; it's just life -- bad things happen. Besides, I exist in a country based (somewhat arguably) on free speech -- so even offline, this is not rape, just rights.

The only real exception I see are those incapable of consent -- that is, kids and the mentally ill, who may participate in something without fully comprehending what they're doing. In such a situation, yes, I strongly feel that rape is possible and should be punished. As for legal action per se...that's a rough question to ask an anarchist :)

[MajesticFae]

I don't really think it's possible to be "raped" over a virtual enviroment unless actively 'role playing' it. Like EB said we all have the option to turn off the computer, close the IM or block the person from contacting us. Even if it's a child or a mentally ill person, I still don't consider it rape. If a child sees something they shouldn't see or speaks to someone they shouldn't, the parent isn't watching that child close enough, or the computer isn't set up to protect from those sorts of things. I know this from experience. I used to be a 12 year old looking around on porn websites behind my parents backs because I was curious. I never got caught, either. All you had to do was lie and say you were 18, it's easy enough.

Never having been raped, the only way I see rape is if it is physical with a mental component involved, and sometimes just physical. Frankly, online enviroments are mental. Someone can't reach through the computer and grab you; they can tell you that they're doing that, but there is no physical contact.

[Rhabbi]

I am going with the flow here, virtual rape is not a crime because the victim can always close the window, there is no force involved. The only exception to this would be those that are legally incapable of giving consent, ie minors or those who are legally defined as not being able to give consent. Or if there was some coersion used that would constitute force. As an example, if I knew something about a person and threatened to expose it, that is legally rape.

[anonymouse]

Rape, as defined in law, is a type of (physical) assault. As such, it's impossible to rape anybody online. I believe it would be wrong to redefine rape to include anything that could possibly happen in an online environment. Laws already exist in a lot of countries to deal with internet stalkers -- something that is a crime, but it isn't rape.

[cadence]

While I agree with everyone else that "rape" is seemingly impossible online.

I do believe that a person can be emotionally, and mentally traumatized through the actions and words of others.

People join groups, forums, chats, etc... to meet with others who share similar likes and dislikes online.
Sometimes they like to keep thier anonymity, and sometimes they can create a whole new personae they would not otherwise be able to be or show in real life.

The online community can be a great place to meet new people, share your thoughts, and make new friends.

But of course there is always a downside to things as well. I am sure that there are adults out there who strive to belong in a place where in real life they are unsuccessful.

This is probably where the fine line of "virtual rape" would come into play.
A person who would do anything to be accepted, wanted, or needed, could also convey a newbie sort of eagerness, that a sexual online predator could possibly pick up on.
I have heard many stories of women who are eager to please and be accepted, be taken advantage of online, and the emotional scars can last a very long time.

Since we now have cyber bullying, I am guessing that a person taken advantage of in any sexual form on line, would be considered a virtual rape.
And since cyber bullying can now harbour criminal charges, I am sure that given time there will eventually be one for virtual rape as well.

[anonymouse]

(Cadence - I LOVE your avatar! :) )

Rape in real life is a horrendous crime, often far more brutal and bloodthirsty than the media is allowed to report. To talk of 'cyber rape', in my personal opinion, elevates the relatively lesser crime of verbal abuse in such a way as to diminish the abhorence society should rightly reserve for real life rape. This isn't to say that stalkers and cyber bullies shouldn't be dealt with in real life courts although, in all honesty, even this is a slippery slope to get on. Perhaps the best way to explain what I mean is to give a few personal examples of experiences.

In the days before Yahoogroups and sophisticated, specialized message forums such as this, there was Usenet. (I'm not old enough, in online years, to speak of the earlier Bulletin Board Services) The newsgroups, when I first started taking tentative steps online, were something of an online urban jungle. Social groups formed by association through various interests that, by and large, operated without a framework of rigid rules. There was a sense of Darwinism at play -- an intellectual and emotional 'survival of the fittest' ethos. I would have died a quick 'virtual death' from some of the emotional confrontations I experienced had it not been for the fact I had the intellectual capacity to 'fight back'. I'm not talking about engaging in a battle of wits, though this did happen. Rather, I learned very early on how to draw a very clear 'virtual line in the sand' to distinguish online fantasy from reality.

Fast-forward from here to more organized (and moderated) groups. There was Lycos and Excite, then MSN and Yahoo. Each evolutionary step brought with it more 'safety from idiots' but paradoxically, more idiots to be on guard against. My online education through Usenet taught me how to be guarded with regards to my privacy and anything else that may be a target for online predators but even so, I still ultimately fell victim to an online stalker.

It was a relationship that originally was completely consensual and even enjoyable. It's too long a story to tell in its entirely but essentially, there was a man who slowly pushed past BDSM boundaries we'd agreed to and refused, after being politely and then more bluntly told to stop. Actually, it wasn't that he refused to stop: he simply ignored me and persisted. After all attempts at reasoning with him failed, I (metaphorically) cut him adrift in the ether of the Net.

He may well have started his stalking long before it reached this point. It didn't matter, however, because I had set up defenses against such an outcome right from the start and as much as he thought he was stalking the 'real' me, he was chasing a phantom -- the 'online' me. That said, he came close to breaching the divide between online fantasy and real life criminal activity, but I was able to escape unharmed.

Some time after this, I became aware of him 'impersonating' me online. My own stupid fault for having shared a picture or two with him, and the way in which he passed himself off as me was deeply disturbing. I made some attempts to reconcile the problem through appeals to Yahoo (copyright infringement of all things) but this fell on deaf ears. Ultimately what I did was to re-establish communication via email with him -- according to the old maxim, "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer".

I think what I'm trying to say here is the Net still is, and should remain, free from the constraints of real life. The individual I've just spoken of still roams the Net. Like most mentally unbalanced weirdos, he probably hasn't forgotten about me, but he's so caught up in the online fantasy of his own creation, he doesn't have time anymore to stalk me. The point here is, as long as his fantasy doesn't escape from the Net into real life, as disturbing and unsettling as it might be, it remains contained in a fantasy world that I don't believe should be regulated according to 'real world' laws.

I may come back and edit this at a later date :)

anonymouse

[_ID_]

anonymouse - you bring up an interesting point about letting the things on the internet remain free from the constraints of real life. I agree with you.

The internet when it first started was very much anarchy in how it operated. Only the strong survived. There are still corners of the net that have this kind of lawless environment. IRC is one of those. For anyone who has ever gone to that arena, there are areas of IRC that (by some peoples definition) are of the most perverted and depraved subject matter. Even though these areas are by all rights more demented than anyone would want to admit, they exist, and no one is trying to stifle their existence. For those that have no clue what I am referring to, it's probably best it remains that way. For those that do, you know that every crime imaginable occurs in the virtual environment of IRC.

Personally, I believe that what happens in the virtual realm (aside from child abuse, to include child porn) should remain there. Places such as IRC and Gor and Second Life are places that allow us to explore our fantasies, our desires, our dreams in a fashion that let's us safely play out things that we would never do in the real world.

[Sir_G]

anonymouse - you bring up an interesting point about letting the things on the internet remain free from the constraints of real life. I agree with you.

The internet when it first started was very much anarchy in how it operated. Only the strong survived. There are still corners of the net that have this kind of lawless environment. IRC is one of those. For anyone who has ever gone to that arena, there are areas of IRC that (by some peoples definition) are of the most perverted and depraved subject matter. Even though these areas are by all rights more demented than anyone would want to admit, they exist, and no one is trying to stifle their existence. For those that have no clue what I am referring to, it's probably best it remains that way. For those that do, you know that every crime imaginable occurs in the virtual environment of IRC.

Personally, I believe that what happens in the virtual realm (aside from child abuse, to include child porn) should remain there. Places such as IRC and Gor and Second Life are places that allow us to explore our fantasies, our desires, our dreams in a fashion that let's us safely play out things that we would never do in the real world.

I agree fully with what ID has said here. Whilst I agree people can be hurt on emotional level virtual rape is not really possible. Close the window/program when someone becomes obnoxious and its all over. Then block em if it's on a chat program etc.

The online environment should be used to do the things we may not have the opportunity to do in real life or to hook up with people we can do them with. Safe, sane and consential that's what matters.

[ceegee{Benz}]

Well I have been pondering over this ever since ID started the thread.

Virtual rape isnt really possible as rape as we know it. When we hear the words RAPE we automactically associate it with forms of unconsented sexual acts to another human being. But rape comes in main forms. It is abuse..a violation of another human being.
This is where it gets confused on the net. People can abuse and do abuse others on the net...not physically but mentally to the point it affects that person's everyday life. As it does a person who has been Raped in the real world.

To understand rape is to have lived it and for those who havent...they can only try to understand what that person has been through. The emotional damage...the physical damage and the mental damage is ...well... there are no words to describe it. And the memories do not go away...it is always there with you for the rest of your life. Any one little thing can trigger off the memory of that event, whether it be a certain smell, a certain place, a name anything at all.
And to top it off..if and when a rapist is convicted and sent down for however long...for them and the jury it is all done and dusted.
But what about the victim????
They have to live with what was done for the rest of thier lives.

ceegee

[Guest 91108]

Well I have been pondering over this ever since ID started the thread.

Virtual rape isnt really possible as rape as we know it. When we hear the words RAPE we automactically associate it with forms of unconsented sexual acts to another human being. But rape comes in main forms. It is abuse..a violation of another human being.
This is where it gets confused on the net. People can abuse and do abuse others on the net...not physically but mentally to the point it affects that person's everyday life. As it does a person who has been Raped in the real world.

To understand rape is to have lived it and for those who havent...they can only try to understand what that person has been through. The emotional damage...the physical damage and the mental damage is ...well... there are no words to describe it. And the memories do not go away...it is always there with you for the rest of your life. Any one little thing can trigger off the memory of that event, whether it be a certain smell, a certain place, a name anything at all.
And to top it off..if and when a rapist is convicted and sent down for however long...for them and the jury it is all done and dusted.
But what about the victim????
They have to live with what was done for the rest of thier lives.

ceegee


I think this covers my view of it.
If the receipent veiws it as abusive...
If it isn't just a matter of cutting off the window or shutting down the pc...
Then it has crossed a line that the being merely online.
for many .. Online is as real as real life. It depends upon that persons views.
Online relationships can be just as close as real life, even crossing over into real life with face-to-face meetings.
I do not draw such distinctions.
so a mental/virtual rape could/would be criminal IMM.
I'm sure Rape victims would view it's occurence as just as harmful.
And with my understanding of traumatic experiences it would add to anything previously.. so would be even more harmful.

[cadence]

The question and my post to it, has been bothering me, so I decided to look up more information on the Virtual Rape story.

I am the Queen of Assumptions, and basically misunderstood the whole interpretation of virtual rape.

After reading an article revolving around a virtual rape that has been brought forth before the courts. I find the whole thing brings up many points to ponder about virtual life and real life, and how they can at times almost connect together if you let them.

In my own opinion, virtual rape is not a crime, it can be emotionally devastating, to the actual person (not the character), but to pull it out into the real world seems a bit much.
And yes virtual rape and real rape cannot be compared as the same thing. Although the same word is used to decribe both occurances, the actual acts are very different.

Considering the whole story, it involves a virtual setting where a character makes a "voo doo" doll to force two other characters to perform unwanted, unwilling sexual acts.
The ending to the story involves the rest of the virtual community to forgo a "virtual death" to the rapist. Now you have a virtual rape, turned into a virtual murder, and I highly doubt you can convict anyone in real life for that.
It also leaves the rapist to come back into the community as a new character.
If the rapist was to repeatedly do what he/she had done on a continuous basis, the only recourse would be to ban the IP address, thus ending any more emotional trauma to others.
If it was to be brought to the courts and charged, I can only guess that harrassment would be the only charge that would be feasible.



[QUOTE=anonymouse;290137](Cadence - I LOVE your avatar! :) ) Thanks

[usafmedic22]

Ok, so I have been on the fence about posting to this thread.....
I've got an associate's degree in Crimal Justice, and very close to my bachelors. In nothing that I've ever read or learned has anything given me any indication that this charge would hold up in court. I pity the prosecutor that takes on this case, as there are no legal benchmarks that would support it. Usually, prosecutors must have sufficent burden of proof to support an indictment, and must be able to explain the who, what, when, and where of the offense(s).
Even if the prosecutor was able to legally prove, through the ISP, what the IP address of the offender was, they would then have to prove who was sitting behind the keyboard on the other end. This alone, imo, would bring up the "beyond a reasonable doubt" issue, as the individual may not have an alibi, but any defense attorney worth their weight would be able to convince a grandy jury that there's enough doubt there to keep from even issuing the indictment.
In addition, there is way too much ambiguity in the definition of online rape. Convincing a grand jury of the definition would lie with the defense, and then the prosecutor could easily sway their opinion, because there are no previous cases or definitions to draw from.
This is just scratching the surface of the legal mess created if someone were to try and use online rape as the primary charge against someone. If it's an accessory charge in with child pornography or something like that, it may be easier to prove. Regardless, the legal system is tied up with enough bullshit right now as it is. There are criminals being released out on bond suitable for much lesser crimes because the municipality's jail is full and they don't want to pay to transport and fund their incarceration elsewhere. But that's a whole different topic...
Basically....it's BS. If you have issues with someone like this, contact the ISP with screen shots and they'll take their own actions, which would end it anyway. IMO there's no need to involve an already bogged down legal system with something as ill-defined and difficult to prosecute.

[Mishka]

This thread made me think of some info I've collected over time on the net. I hope this isn't wrenching the thread where you didn't want it to go, or in any way patronizing/preachy. I honestly don't mean it that way. Just friendly-like sharing.

Personal Internet Safety
Here are some personal tips for your safety that you can start using immediately.

Don't be a target for abuse. Be aware that while not everyone out there is a bully or a predator, you need to be able to spot them.


Tips For Your Safetywww. ou.edu/oupd/kidsafe/websafe .htm


1. Not everyone is what they seem. Use caution giving out your name, address, or phone # to someone on the net.

Suggested by a friend of mine:

a) People set up a secondary e-mail address through hotmail or any of the other free sites
People set up a secondary chat through yahoo... etc

This is a good way to get to know people... since it is not your main e-mail or chat...it can be deleted if there is harassment.

b) Spend real time chatting before giving out your number. If you have two phones... figure out which one can be disconnected more easily (less people know it) and is unlisted.

c) Women should contact men first if they use the phone. Learn how to use ID blocking.
2. Be careful about agreeing to meet someone. Can you verify who they are and where they're from or where they work? Do you know people who know them who can vouch for them? Also listen for inconsistencies in their stories and "google" them if you can.

3. If you're going to meet in person, make the meeting on your terms. Meet in a public place with plenty of lighting, use your own transportation, and consider making it a double date. Park out of site from the meeting place.


Keep well informed and a step ahead with these links:

Loads of tips and advice for parents, students, school projects, legal advice, etc:
www. bullying. co.uk/

Here's some more info recommended by Bullying Online:

"If you come across anything seriously inappropriate online contact Wired Safety at www. wiredsafety .org , or the Internet Watch Foundation at www. iwf.org .uk . These organisations are not concerned with material which you may not like, they are there to combat serious issues involving pedophiles. You should also report concerns about anyone your child is contacting on the internet to the police." (emphasis mine)


Where am I?

Know what identity theft is, how it's done, how to prevent it, and what to do if you're already the target of it:

www. usdoj.gov/criminal/fraud/idtheft .html

[anonymouse]

This thread made me think of some info I've collected over time on the net. I hope this isn't wrenching the thread where you didn't want it to go, or in any way patronizing/preachy. I honestly don't mean it that way. Just friendly-like sharing.

That's all solid, good information, Mishka, and thank you for posting.

Part of the point I tried to make is, those of us who could possibly be potential victims of online abuse actually have a large amount of power to protect ourselves and be insulated from predators. My main concern with laws made on behalf of those who potentially might be victims is, in my personal opinion, they create a kind of 'nanny state' that can only act after a crime has been committed. In other words, it's all well and good to have laws to deal retrospectively with online crimes of a personal nature, but they will never be able to erase the hurt caused by them. Far better to be forewarned and fore-armed.

anonymouse

[cariad]

I would love to have the opportunity of preparing a full argument in support of it being an assault upon a person, and that is a crime. Unfortunately it would take more time than I can realistically give to do so, just for the purposes of this discussion.

However addressing some of the points raised in this thread. The UK Criminal Code defines rape as

“sexual intercourse with a woman

(1) incapable of defending herself, where she did not consent;

(2) who was compelled by means of force or threats;

(3) who was brought to a state of defencelessness by the perpetrator.”

Clearly psychological force is as valid as physical force when examining the circumstances concerning rape, and this has been upheld in case law. Therefore the lack of physical force in a cyber offense should not be a prohibitive factor.

In response to EB et al - there is an involving understanding, which has been accepted by the European Court of Human Rights that there are two patterns of response by rape victims to their attacker - violent physical resistance and 'frozen fight'. The result of the latter is the victim, terrorised, often adopts a passive response model of submission, characteristic of childhood, or sought a psychological dissociation from the event, as if it were not happening to her. The relevance of this is that clearly a victim may not be capable of just closing the window.

The only remaining issue would be whether in the virtual rape scenario the victim is abused. I doubt if many of us here who have had internet relationships would not argue against the potency of such relationships. Within such a relationship, I would say there clearly is scope of abuse.

In my view, virtual rape should be crime of abuse, and if it is not, it will become so as test cases are brought for consideration and ultimately legislation is moved forwards. It is not a crime of rape since sexual intercourse has not taken place.


Additionally, I am curious to know how others feel if a rape were committed/attempted in an online environment. Should legal action be taken? Or would just simply banning that IP address be sufficient?

If it is a crime, there is an existence of a positive obligation to investigate and punish. Merely being prevented from using one particular site/server with one particular IP address seems to be laughable. That is akin to saying that a convicted abuser is not permitted to return to a particular area wearing a particular pair of shoes.

My thoughts,
cariad

edit: Just awarded self C- for logic. Having said that I believe it is a crime of abuse, not one of rape, the point about rape not needing physical force is irrelevant, however I am leaving it in since it is a truth not yet universally acknowledged. The point about 'frozen fight' is transferable. Although that it is a clear fallacy in my argument, the same logic does also apply to abuse.

[anonymouse]

In my view, virtual rape should be crime of abuse, and if it is not, it will become so as test cases are brought for consideration and ultimately legislation is moved forwards. It is not a crime of rape since sexual intercourse has not taken place.

I know it's an argument of semantics but it's the word 'rape' I struggle to accept. It's certainly true that real life rape isn't purely a physical thing and that the emotional trauma can be profound and long-lasting. However, this type of harm caused to the victim is the result of a sudden and unexpected physical assault. Is it possible to mentally assault somebody this quickly online? I don't believe so. When people are abused online, whether it's bullying or stalking, it's considered to be a crime when there is a pattern to the abuse. In other words, there is a time factor involved, and laws already exist to punish people who engage in patterns of abuse. :)

In a case where an individual believes they have been emotionally violated after a single encounter, I believe that person should be counselled to overcome their upset. If the person responsible for causing this upset is caught, I don't believe their reprimand should be severe unless it can be shown they habitually behave in this manner online.

anonymouse

[Guest 91108]

I think as more net laws come into legislation .... it won't be a matter of trying to decide... if it is this or that.
Abuse sometimes needs clarification.
And i do think it is possible to abuse someone severely enough in one instance. BTDT.

[anonymouse]

And i do think it is possible to abuse someone severely enough in one instance. BTDT.

I agree it's possible to thoroughly shock and offend somebody in one instance, and it's happened to me on several occasions. But, I'd never call that 'rape' and I wouldn't call it 'abuse', unless the individual who offended me persisted in doing so. That's when it becomes abuse, and existing laws can deal with that.

For the most part, I'm talking about one-off acts of offensive behavior that are shocking and deeply disturbing. Individuals that act in this way are certainly mentally unbalanced, but are they 'criminals'? It may well be that some of the perpetrators are simply immature teenagers (or adults) who aren't fully aware of the consequences of their actions.

However, I can imagine a case in which something grossly offensive happens unexpectedly in an otherwise trusting, online relationship. This has happened to me. After perhaps a year or so of a very enjoyable online kink relationship, this man unexpectedly revealed himself to be about as sick an individual as I've ever had the misfortune to encounter anywhere. I'm not going to mention exactly what he did but suffice to say, it made me physically sick and left me terrible shaken for many months. Should he have been punished? Probably, but on what charge?

In his defense I'll say that, though he deeply shocked and offended me, all he is really guilty of is expressing something he thought. There's an old saying - "There are no taboos in the human mind." This becomes especially apparent online, where people such as the aforementioned can give a voice to their thoughts.

People can think some pretty weird things, that's for sure, but should we allow governments to legislate and make laws about what we can think? I realize that once a thought manifests in text on the screen it's no longer a thought, but our best defense against objectionable text is the delete button. If the person sending it persists in trying to offend, intimidate, or whatever, it's abuse and existing laws are in place to deal with it. But as long as they're on one side of the screen and I'm on the other, it's never going to be a case for 'rape'.

anonymouse

[Ocean_Soul]

Until any online person or extension of your person is recognized as either its own being or an extension of someone else being able to call this “rape” is a bit far fetched.

Harassment is probably a better generalization of what happens online. I don’t believe “what happens online should stay online” should be extended to anything beyond fantasy and roleplay. I imagine if I were to utter death threats or sexually harass a coworker I would be just as guilty if I did it outside the internet. I think this is what ID had in mind anyway.

If a game is this real to someone and they are truly hurt by a virtual rape on Second Life I’m sure they would be just as happy accepting a virtual conviction of the virtual assailant. Expecting real world action is nothing more than a self benefiting double standard.

[cariad]

I know it's an argument of semantics but it's the word 'rape' I struggle to accept.

I fully agree - is why I suggested it should be a act of abuse not of rape. As you say, a question of semantics, but which can sometimes be helpful and sometimes misleading. (Just to further muddy the waters, were 'virtual rape' to be considered to rape, then there should certainly not be any doubt that male is real - which is a hotly argued topic.)


However, this type of harm caused to the victim is the result of a sudden and unexpected physical assault. Is it possible to mentally assault somebody this quickly online?

'Traditional' rape does not have to be sudden or unexpected, and is quite often not. But then since I have already said that I believe it would be an act of abuse rather than of rape, that is irrelevant.


When people are abused online, whether it's bullying or stalking, it's considered to be a crime when there is a pattern to the abuse. In other words, there is a time factor involved, and laws already exist to punish people who engage in patterns of abuse. :)


Which only leaves the question of whether 'virtual rape' is bullying. It is not something I have experienced, nor have I spoken to anyone who has, but I would err on the side of it being bullying.


In a case where an individual believes they have been emotionally violated after a single encounter, I believe that person should be counselled to overcome their upset. If the person responsible for causing this upset is caught, I don't believe their reprimand should be severe unless it can be shown they habitually behave in this manner online.

anonymouse

Whilst on the matter of symantics, I have to pick up your use of the word 'should' in 'that person should be counselled'. That makes it sound like a punishment for the victim. Yes, they should be offered it, but effective counselling is challenging and often painful for the counsellee, and should only be undertaken voluntarily and when the person is ready. Will go with 'they should be offered counselling', which I suspect is what you meant anyway.

And as for punishement - well that is whole new can of worms.

Suspecting we are having a heated agreement,
cariad

[Hime]

I think that virtual stalking/harassment should be a crime -- as in, sending repeated abusive emails, "following" a person from one site to another and harassing them, posting personal photos or information about a person with threatening content... it should at least be a civil offense.

I'm not sure what "virtual rape" means, but if it is a one-time thing, there is the option to close the window, block the person on AIM/MSN, turn off the computer, etc. It's only when it's repeated harassment that it becomes a serious problem.

I have had a couple of experiences with guys who kept trying to drag online conversations into uncomfortable territory, including explicit sexual material. Luckily, both times I explained that I wasn't happy with where the chat was going and that was enough to stop them -- although this one guy was all "I'm sorry, you seemed like a very sensual person from your facebook profile..." :rolleyes:

[anonymouse]

Whilst on the matter of semantics, I have to pick up your use of the word 'should' in 'that person should be counselled'. That makes it sound like a punishment for the victim. Yes, they should be offered it, but effective counselling is challenging and often painful for the counsellee, and should only be undertaken voluntarily and when the person is ready. Will go with 'they should be offered counselling', which I suspect is what you meant anyway.

And as for punishment - well that is whole new can of worms.

Suspecting we are having a heated agreement,
cariad

lol - Not at all, cariad :) It's a very interesting debate about a slippery subject. You quite rightly picked me up on 'should be counselled'. That implies something far more forceful than I meant. What (I think) I'm trying to say is that, just as some people behave far more aggressively that society deems acceptable, so too some people are much more sensitive than the average person. In other words, just as some people can be extreme and unreasonable in one direction, so too can others have extreme reactions that could be considered unreasonable when compared to the common community reactions to the same thing.

I also wonder about the motivations of people (not here, of course) who are pushing to create a law for 'online rape'. Are they really interested in protecting people from online abuse, or is it merely the thin edge of a censorship wedge?

~Handing the can of worms to somebody else...~

anonymouse

[cariad]

*catches can, muses on how society could establish a norm for sensitivity and quickly looks for someone else to pass can to*

cariad

[ceegee{Benz}]

hands are tied here chuckles
I have enough on my plate with the anniversary of my own rape coming up :(

[cariad]

ceegee, wishing you healing strength and peace.

Has to be someone else to take it on...

cariad

[ceegee{Benz}]

ceegee, wishing you healing strength and peace.



cariad

smiles ty.
Is 18 years this year..... and every year it slowley gets better. but the actual day is hard.
I can still remember the day...date...time...weather conditions..what I was wearing...the events before and after etc etc like it was yesterday.

hugz

[cadence]

Oh, I was going to post something, but I think I'll wait till someone else takes the can.
My debating skills still need a little work, and if I had the can I would probably drop it, trip on it, fall down and hit my head.
I've already fallen down the stairs once this week. :o

And ceegee my heart goes out to you and wish you only the strongest, stoic thoughts on your anniversary date.