CAN A MAN BE A VICTIM OF RAPE?


Edited By: Asykobi

A favourite question for criminal law students is ‘can a woman rape a man?’ Curiously the answer is yes, no and maybe!
Physically, a woman cannot rape a man because of the how the offence is defined in law. Rape, in English law, requires a penis to be inserted into a woman’s vagina, anus or mouth without her consent and knowing that she does not so consent. This requirement has caused some criminologists to describe the law as being ‘phallo-centric’ or ‘phallo-genic’. Whilst inserting an object or another part of the body into one of the afore-mentioned orifices is a serious sexual assault, it is not classified as rape. Only men can commit the offence of rape as a principal. Interestingly, pre -operative male transgenders can commit the offence because they are still legally male, whereas post-operative female transgenders cannot commit the offence because they are still legally female.
A woman can legally rape a man however if she acts as an accomplice. So if X (a woman) assists Y (a man) to put his penis into Z’s mouth against her will, then X is as guilty of rape as Y is. Even where the woman is not proximate to the rape victim she could still be convicted as the law on conspiracy and aiding and abetting is flexible enough to cover all sorts of scenarios. The most obvious situation is where ‘geezer bird’ gang members are part of the posse encouraging a fellow gang member to take sexual liberties with a hapless victim.
If a man has sexual intercourse with a minor that would satisfy the definition of rape as children under the age of 16 cannot lawfully consent to sexual intercourse. However when a woman has sexual intercourse with a minor she is committing a serious sexual assault rather than raping her victim. 

If a man has sexual intercourse with a sleeping woman (even his wife) he technically rapes as her as consent can only be given when conscious in relation to that specific time. The only possible exception to this general rule would be where the parties have agreed that sexual intercourse may always take place whenever the woman is asleep. A woman who has sexual intercourse with a sleeping man (even her husband) technically commits a serious sexual assault for the same reason. She does not rape him however.
It is not apparent why the law focuses on the requirement that a penis is needed to commit the offense of rape. It is fairly easy to construct a theoretical argument where a woman could use her vagina to ‘rape’ a man. If she, for example, tied his arms and legs to a bed and then placed his penis in her vagina against his will, it is difficult to see why that is less offensive than the converse. The fact of an erection in those circumstances would be irrelevant, since a man’s erection is a physiological response to visual, emotional, intellectual or physical stimulation and not necessarily a consent to sex. Nor would his subsequent ejaculation be seen as a mitigating or exonerating factor in those circumstances. All of this is theoretically possible in the right circumstances and under the determination of a single-minded woman. Whether it is realistically likely is another story however.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

THE RIGHTS OF AN ILLEGITIMATE CHILD IN NIGERIA

Image
Edited By: Asykobi An illegitimate child has been referred to as a child born out of wedlock, while a legitimate child is an issue of wedlock. Plainly, a child born out of wedlock whose paternity has been acknowledged by his natural father is as much legitimate as one born in wedlock. That is not the case, however. A child born out of wedlock during a marriage is illegitimate under the Act, whether or not the child is acknowledged by the natural father; unless by custom, someone else has a prior claim to paternity of such a child. Where a child is born out of wedlock, the first question is who is entitled to the paternity of the child? The question is essential, particularly in a polygamous setting. The controversy as regards paternity has always been between the natural father and the mother’s father or the person who has paid the bride price on the mother. Customs vary. A majority of communities favor the claim of the man who had paid the bride price of the mother. This...
Read more

RIGHT OF AN ACCUSED PERSON UNDER THE NIGERIAN LAW

Image
Edited By : Asy'kobi Under the Nigerian criminal justice the constitutional right of an accused person is enshrined in Section 35 and 36 of the Constitution of  the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 such rights include, the right to be informed promptly in the language that he understands, the details and nature of the offence of the accused, the right to be given adequate time to prepare his defence, the right to defend himself in person or by legal practitioner of his own choice, the right to have an interpreter free of charge if he does not understand the language of the court, the right to have record of the proceeding kept and the right to have copies of this within seven days of the conclusion of the case, the right to remain silent during the trial, the right not to be tried and convicted twice for the same offence, the right to be presumed innocent until he is proved guilty and the right not to be charged for an unwritten offence. All these rights are aimed at ensurin...
Read more

IMMUNITY CLAUSE OF SECTION 308 OF THE NIGERIAN CONSTITUTION

Image
Edited by: Asy"kobi Meaning and limits of section  308 The provisions of section 308 of the Constitution came up for interpretation in the case of  Abacha vs. Fawehinmi,  wherein his lordship, Uwaifo, J.S.C., held thus: The immunity provided for does not apply to the person in question in his official capacity or to a civil or criminal proceeding in which such a person is only a nominal party. The immunity is to protect such a person from the harassment of his person while in office for his action done in his private capacity before or during his tenure in office. In fact in the present case, the suit is against the “Head of State and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces (General Sani Abacha) ” and it is in respect of his alleged action in his official capacity. The immunity provided for in the Constitution does not arise and does not apply. Also, in  Rotimi vs. MacGregor,  the then Military Governor of Western State, 1 st  appellant herein,...
Read more