Ms. magazine  -- more than a magazine a movement

SIGN UP FOR MS. DIGEST, JOBS, NEWS AND ALERTS

FEMINIST WIRE NEWSBRIEFS

ABOUT
SEE CURRENT ISSUE
SHOP MS. STORE
MS. IN THE CLASSROOM
FEMINIST DAILY WIRE
FEMINIST RESOURCES
PRESS
JOBS AT MS.
READ BACK ISSUES
CONTACT
RSS (XML)
 
feminist wire | daily newsbriefs

March-22-07

South Australian Court Makes Controversial Rape Ruling

The Court of Criminal Appeal in South Australia cleared the record of a man who had been found guilty by a jury of raping a woman. The 54-year-old defendant allegedly offered to give a woman a ride, then forced her to perform fellatio and have sex with him, according to the woman. The jury found him guilty of forced intercourse, but not of forcing oral sex. At the appeals level, the court ruled 2-1 that the decision was "illogical" and "unacceptable" because intercourse in one encounter cannot be both consensual and nonconsensual. The appeals court erased the defendant's criminal record.

This decision has caused uproar among women's groups who fear that the lines between consensual sex and rape will be weakened in the legal system. Said Yarrow Place Rape and Sexual Assault Service Director Vanessa Swan, "If someone says yes to a single sex act and then says no to a second, continuing should be considered rape. Anyone with common sense would think that, but the difficulty is translating common sense into the law," Australia News Limited reports. funny pictures funny images funny photos funny animal pictures funny dog pictures funny cat pictures funny gifs

The State Government has pledged to consider new laws that would deem sex as rape, even if consent is withdrawn at anytime throughout the act.

Media Resources: Australia News Limited 3/20/07; Feministing.com 3/22/07


© Feminist Majority Foundation, publisher of Ms. magazine

If you liked this story, consider making a tax-deductible donation to support Ms. magazine.

 

 

Send to a Friend
Their
Your
Comments
(optional)


More Feminist News

10/31/2014 Federal Judge Exempts Another Catholic University from Birth Control Coverage - A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Ave Maria University, a Catholic university in Florida, does not have to comply with federal rules meant to ensure that covered employees can exercise their right to obtain birth control at no cost. The Affordable Care Act requires all new health insurance plans to cover all FDA-approved contraceptives - such as the pill, emergency contraceptives, and IUDs - without charging co-pays, deductibles or co-insurance. . . .
 
10/31/2014 Women of Color in Tennessee Are United in Opposition to Amendment 1 - Just days before the general election in Tennessee, a coalition of community leaders, clergy, and advocates led a press conference encouraging women of color to vote no on Amendment 1, a dangerous and far-reaching measure on the state's ballot. SisterReach, a grassroots organization focused on "empowering, organizing, and mobilizing women and girls in the community around their reproductive and sexual health to make informed decisions about themselves," organized the press conference "to call attention to the unique concerns Black and poor communities throughout Shelby County and across the state of Tennessee face on a daily basis" and to emphasize how the upcoming election "could further limit [black women's] reproductive, economic, political, and social autonomy." "We assemble today to impress upon black women and women of color, many of whom are heads of households, to get out and vote," said SisterReacher Founder and CEO Cherisse Scott at the event. SisterReach has been educating voters about the particularly dangerous impact of Amendment 1 on women of color. . . .
 
10/30/2014 Medication Abortion Access Threatened by Oklahoma Court Ruling - An Oklahoma state district court judge has refused to block a state law restricting medication abortion, clearing the way for the law to go into affect on November 1. The Oklahoma Coalition for Reproductive Justice, together with a local abortion clinic in Tulsa, challenged HB 2684 in September, arguing that the law was an unconstitutional restriction on non-surgical abortion in the earliest weeks of pregnancy. . . .