OSLO, June 6 (Reuters) - Norway strengthened its rape laws on Friday by criminalising sex without explicit consent, joining a growing list of countries to widen the definition of sexual attacks. Up to now, prosecutors have had to show that an attacker used violence or threatening behaviour, or had sexual intercourse with someone who was unable to resist, to secure a conviction for rape.
Under the new law passed by parliament, anyone who has sex with someone who has not consented to it by word or deed could be convicted of rape, even without violence. Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Iceland have all introduced consent-based rape laws in recent years. Sweden changed the legal definition of rape in 2018 to sex without consent - a change that officials said resulted in a 75% rise in rape convictions. Denmark followed in 2020 by passing a law that widened the circumstances that could constitute rape.
In this context I can fully recommend this article by the wonderful Aella. Rape - as with many other things - being a spectrum is something that seems so obvious in retrospect but so outlandish as an initial thought because it’s hard to conceptualize when legislation usually calls for or assumes just some kind of boolean “consent yes/no” state.
I wish the world wasn’t so complicated.
Didn’t Aella go off the right-wing deep end or am I thinking of the wrong person?
Haven’t seen any indicators in the stuff I’ve read, but these days that’s not enough for me to give a confident “no”.
After a short search, it might have been Shoe0nHead that I was thinking of, but the info I saw on her didn’t even seem consistent about her beliefs, ranging from raging alt-right figurehead to libertarian Trump disliker.
Who the fuck knows anymore? I’m not gonna risk getting served alt-right nonsense to find out more.
Shoe’s a populist socdem, which isn’t the majority of her content that’d be her having no respect for identity politics.