Outline

Claire isn't advocating the creation of a tort. I think she's trying to find a middle ground within criminal law between the approach of Canada, which may over-criminalize such 'misunderstandings', and the approach of jurisdictions which refuse to recognize non-forcible rape at all. This doesn't preclude preemptive education, but we get plenty of that in high school and college and it's barely taken seriously, i think precisely because non-forcible rape is often chalked up to a simple misunderstanding. However, to call non-forcible rape a misunderstanding is oversimplified because in many instances the perpetrator may understand perfectly well the signals being given, but may know that that he (or she?) can pretty much get away with it. I have no idea how criminal law should deal with that problem. I think this will be a good topic to grapple with.

-- VishalA? - 01 Apr 2008