Gbaji, you have now made it perfectly clear that, on top of being a misogynist ignoramus, you know absolutely nothing about physiology, forensics, or the psychopathology of rapists. Rape isn't about violence, it's about power, it's about control. It's about taking someone's power away and subjugating them to your will, and the idea that such a thing cannot be accomplished without leaving signs of physical trauma is absurd.
Aside from the various coercive methodology that can be used to accomplish such an end without leaving marks, there's also the fact that even if violence were involved, some women just don't bruise easily. I should know, I am one of them. I don't have a lot of surface capillaries. As I have mentioned before, my husband and I dabble in consentual S&M. I have taken an intense flogging with a braided elk-skin cat-o-nine-tails and come away with nary a mark.
And that doesn't even address the idea of psychological coercion or the threat of violence.
Example: a man walks into the home a woman shares with her children in the early evening, when the kitchen door is still unlocked, which means there's no sign of B&E. He finds the woman finishing up the dishes at the sink and herds her into the bedroom, and tells her if she doesn't get undressed and perform ******** on him, he'll go shoot her children who are still watching TV in the living room unaware of what is going on. You think that she will put up a struggle with her children's safety at stake? **** no. Afterward, he orders her to spread her legs, and because the physiological effects of fear are often the very same as those of arousal, her body provides vaginal lubrication, which means that there are no signs of vaginal trauma. He might be completely tender and behave as though he's making love to her. If he hits the right physical buttons, she might even have an ******.
That doesn't mean she hasn't UNQUESTIONABLY been raped. And if she knew the guy (for instance, he's a coworker she invited over for dinner, instead of just someone who walked in) it qualifies as "date rape."
Another example, since you are so hung up on date rape. A guy takes a woman out to dinner. They're having a good time. They go parking in the middle of nowhere, and make out a little. He pressures her for more, she doesn't want to give it and tells him she would like to go home. He says if she doesn't put out, she has to walk home. It's the middle of the night and she's out in the middle of nowhere. Walking home would be extremely dangerous. She might injure herself walking in the dark, she might get hit by a car not watching for pedestrians on a deserted road, she might get lost, depending on the weather, exposure might be a very real danger, or she might just encounter someone who is more interested in killing her than raping her. How is she supposed to be able to "get up and leave the room"? So yes, she might "choose" to submit, because what choice does she actually have? That doesn't mean that coercion wasn't used. It was still rape.
So I say again, with utmost sincerity, Gbaji, f[/b]u[b]ck you. Your pretensions at intellectualism have been laid bare for the world to see. Now go back to your cave and work on making fire.
Edited, Thu Aug 18 08:02:13 2005 by Ambrya
"Is it wrong for me to long for the simpler days of yesteryear when performers weren't so confusing? Jagger, Bowie...you KNEW they were women. But nowadays, this internationally ranked cheerleading coach just can't figure it out. Neil Patrick Harris? You confuse me. I HEAR you're ***, but there you are on my TV playing a normal, womanizing, cardigan-wearing straight. That's confusing. And then I heard a rumor you're not actually a doctor. So much sneaky *** deception!" --Sue's Corner