I guess sex without condom is rape nowadays.

Because he's Australia he's sexist? I certainly hope his co-workers didn't say such a thing. Our PM is female (and an atheist) after all. If they did indeed sat that, then they're pretty bigoted.

Er, like I said.  The rape charge was "holding a woman down and forcing her to have sex."  Then there is a molestation charge for "Having sex without a condom while the woman was asleep, after she had previously said she refused sex without a condom." (that should also be rape.)

I mean, I know you want to mindlessly defend the guy... but at least stay current with the facts... and not just the drivel his lawyer spouts to try and bias the witness pool.

She did say it.

To be fair, Australia does have that reputation whether it's well deserved or not. 

I don't see what atheism has to do with chauvinism though.

Edit: Actual quoute “He’s a classic Aussie in the sense that he’s a bit of a male chauvinist.

It's funny how everybody is defending him, when his own orginization doesn't want to do so.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-09-03/wikileaks-organizers-demand-julian-assange-step-aside/

If Wikileaks themselves don't think it's an international conspiracy?  Why the heck should anyone else?

@Kasz216, I know Atheism has nothing to do with it, I just put it there for people that didn't know.

I just find it funny, because both our PM and governor general are both women. As is the Premiere of NSW for example. Sure we have disparities within the work force in regards to upper management jobs and pay statistically. But that can be said about most countries and sexism certainly isn't something worldwide that has been completely fixed. But the world has come a long way and to say that a person is sexist because he's a typical Aussie is a bit absurd in this day and age. 

Its not like we're a theocracy that brainwashes its men into dominating women.

EDIT The less evidence there is, the more likely it is to be true! Don't you know thats how conspiracy theories work?

I guess... stuff like this isn't helping...

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=11046&page=2

We've got similar things in the US... but not THAT bad to my knoweldge.

And I live in Las Vegas... which has to be the most objectifying city in the USA.

That is pretty bad!

Can somebody clarify the charges slightly to me? I mean it says he 'used his body weight to hold her down' but to be honest that doesn't sound entirely unusual during consensual sex, if the man is on top then he pretty much is holding her down with his body weight.

Do the charges involve her telling him to stop of physically implying that she wanted him to stop?

Rape in Sweden is defined as...

"In sweden, you may not drug someone and have sex with them when they’re unconscious. You mat not use force to have sex with someone against their will. You may not use a weapon and threathen people to have sex with you. You may not rape your partner. You may not have sex with someone who is not of legal age to have sex if you yourself are older."

http://www.hannafriden.com/politik-samhalle/sweden-does-not-have-a-broader-definition-of-rape-assanges-charges-would-probably-have-been-the-same-in-the-us/

Only one of those would fit the bill.

From what I have read the definition of rape is very much broader in Sweden - it's one of his lawyers arguments against being extradited. What he is accused of apparently isn't rape in Britain.