What really bugs me about the current laws is how sex is portrayed as something that a man "inflicts upon" a woman. As if women were totally passive during courtship and never wanted sex. This doesn't reflect my personal life experiences with women at all. And, on the legal side of things, things are definitely moving in a certain direction. And that direction is more acts being considered rape / harassment. The laws will get harsher in the future and changes will come rapidly.

In Germany, a "no means no" legislation was only introduced a few years ago - but already, the same people who pushed for that legislation are pushing for "yes means yes" now. And, as I've always said, after yes means yes comes "enthusiastic consent" and after that comes legislation in which a woman can retroactively withdraw her consent even weeks or months after sex - because what if she felt pressured to enthusiastically consent? It's a rabbit hole that actively encourages abuse of the law at this point.

What I'm mot pissed about is all of these celebrities right now that are getting in trouble and ADMITTING it, so they are guilty. Yet what is their punishments for sexual assault and rape? They voluntarily submit themselves to rebah. They will go and fix themselves, as they say.

If they were normal people, they would be in jail or prison already. But no, some rich Weinstein gets to just go to rehab.

I totally agree with what you mention. Especially the false accusations. Rape laws are a giant mess.

I also like to add that intoxication is not an excuse to claim rape when giving consent. Waking up the following morning and changing your mind on the night before because you had too much to drink should not be considered rape. That should be considered "not being able to handle your alcohol" and that person should be banned from drinking. (Unless you have fainted and someone takes advantage of you than yes that's rape)

Sorry iv been completely smashed multiple times and I can still say no to things. That's just my opinion.

But why?

Lets say person X is raped by Y. If my idea was implemented and it was proven to not be rape, then it would simply be tossed out. An example might be where both parties got extremely wasted and be considered legal (albeit slightly immoral) intercourse

now if the person simply lies and has evidence proving they had intention to do so, then they’d be given a punishment. Otherwise, I believe this makes rape a more serious subject where people don’t automatically judge the accuser or accused

As with the rape itself, that would be a case of innocent until proof of the contrary. The court "believing" something shouldn't be sufficient to send anyone anywhere. 

Unfortunately the justice system isn't based on truth. It's based on who can tell the more convincing story.

The only problem with the way it's done now is that men and women don't come forward quick enough so an examination can be taken, tearing, bruises, dna etc. Without any of that it's basically impossible to prove a rape without witness'. 

lets say X is raped by Y, but there isnt hard enough evidence to make the claim. maybe its a situation where its his word against hers, and he might have some people lie about an alibi. then out of fear of receiving jail time and Y trying to push for it. X would remain silent. this would also have people who are assaulted by someone who is an influential figure, politician, or famous person be much more reluctant to speak up. imagine if it happened with a police officer? how tough would it be to speak up when you know doing so will have the entire police force at your back, and could possibly forge evidence against you? 

Edit: it can also be used by the attacker as leverage against the victim. just imagine after an assault if the attacker says "if you ever say anything about this, ill deny the whole damn thing and make them throw your ass in jail!". how reluctant would a sexually assault victim be to speak up then? 

For reasoreasons that should be obvious, the integrity of criminal justice requires transperancy and Law and Order needs to remain a public affair. We already have laws in place that shield people against defamation. The only logical outcome to your proposal is a system that protects sexual abuse. Anyone can make a claim about anything. We will not live in a world were only sexual offences are protected against public openness.

A perfect example: a teacher is accused of raping a student. The parents have the right to know this may have happened where the send their child.

Claiming that false accusations somehow outweight or are more numerous than actual incidences is shameful. I thought you had ideas on how we could cub this insane epidemic. You just seem to want to protect them to cover for a few nutjobs.

I take the position that says your priorities seem backwards. Where are your ideas for laws to curb actual rape and sexual harassment. The solution to you issue already exists and its called anti-defamation.

No hard feelings and don't take it personal. I just know rape is a huge problem and I think when people start taking it seriously, even instances of lying will go down as people learn to respect reality.

Until that day, I will not support any effort that may be utilized to further conceal perps.

I tend to disagree.  I know several rape victims who were assaulted as kids.  There is a whole psychological aspect to this that everyone is just ignoring.  Incest is EVEN worse for these young kids and adults.  Time can not be a protection for someone committing rape in my opinion. 

Woah read what I said, I didn't say anyone should be protected. I said as time goes by, it becomes harder and harder to prove. How do you physically prove that someone raped someone 20 years ago without witness'?