TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

New crime of ‘gross negligence rape’ is put forward in Ireland ie even if the man thinks she consented it's still rape

bam_shackle

July 27, 2018
95 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/new-crime-of-gross-negligence-rape-is-put-forward-1.3577602
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title New crime of ‘gross negligence rape’ is put forward in Ireland ie even if the man thinks she consented it's still rape
Author

bam_shackle

Upvotes 95
Comments 40
Date July 27, 2018 8:23 AM UTC
(7 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/92aqja/new_crime_of_gross_negligence_rape_is_put_forward/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/new-crime-of-gross-negligence-rape-is-put-forward.897181
https://theredarchive.com/post/897181
Top posts by bam_shackle

Lose job for using the sl*t word in a private Whatsapp message

57 upvotes
April 4, 2018
/r/MensRights

Meet a girl on tinder, agree to date, pick her up, move in for kiss, she freaks out and runs away.... 3 years later man is convicted of sexual assault

45 upvotes
December 1, 2017
/r/MensRights

Never forgot David Reimer

43 upvotes
April 14, 2018
/r/MensRights

If a girl starts chatting with you at a social event don’t be gross and flirt back.

4 upvotes
September 15, 2018
/r/MGTOW

In Ireland new crime of ‘gross negligence rape’ is put forward i.e. even if you think she gave consent it's still rape

4 upvotes
July 27, 2018
/r/MGTOW

Comments

[–]EffinWhiteMale 58 points59 points60 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why are men held responsible for both, their own, and womens well being??? If women are so strong and independent why can't THEY be accountable for their own terrible decision making and/or regrets...

[–]Cristi_Tanase 28 points29 points30 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

insanity marches on... they start with a wrong law, they assume that women are too stupid and weak to say NO, and now they try to "fix" the mess by creating new stupid laws without changing the first law

when politics, feminism, male hating and the law shake hands... ultra stupidity assured

[+]geniice -9 points-8 points-7 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

insanity marches on... they start with a wrong law, they assume that women are too stupid and weak to say NO, and now they try to "fix" the mess by creating new stupid laws without changing the first law

Nope. This law covers the situation where the woman says no but the man claims he honestly belived that she consented. Its mostly cleanup to bring the law more in line with England and wales.

when politics, feminism, male hating and the law shake hands... ultra stupidity assured

A complaint that seems rather ironic given your missunderstanding of the law in question.

[–]Cristi_Tanase 12 points13 points14 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

so she verbally and phisically rejected the man and he continued? this is NOT what the article states

[–]geniice -5 points-4 points-3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If the man continued to believe she was consenting that would be the kind of thing covered under "an honest but unreasonable belief that a woman had consented to sexual intercourse".

So yes that is what the article states.

[–]Cristi_Tanase 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

it does not say she said NO, it say that he believes she consented and it may not be the case...

big difference, she does not have to say NO to not be a consent, this is part of YES MEANS YES... not NO MEANS NO!

Sweden also created "rape by mistake" on part of the man that believe he had consent but the woman did not say NO yet he is accused of rape!

[–]Clemicus 11 points12 points13 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

This is completely insane. They're looking at creating a lesser crime of rape when evidence relating to consent is lacking and changing the dynamics in rape cases. Putting aside the blatant bias against men.

Section 2(1) of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981 (the 1981 Act) provides that a man commits rape if: (a) he has sexual intercourse with a women who at the time of the intercourse does not consent to it: this is the conduct or physical element of the offence (the actus reus); and (b) at the time of the intercourse the man knows that she does not consent or is reckless as to whether she consents: this is the fault or mental element of the offence (the mens rea).

...

This is a gender specific offence; it may be committed only by a male against a female. Sexual intercourse means heterosexual vaginal intercourse; other kinds of sexual penetration are covered by rape under section 4 of the 1990 Act.

Info: http://www.lawreform.ie/news/issues-paper-on-knowledge-or-belief-concerning-consent-in-rape-law.834.html

PDF: http://www.lawreform.ie/_fileupload/FINAL%20VERSION%202018%2007%2026%201700%20IP%20Knowledge%20or%20Belief%20Concerning%20Consent%20in%20Rape%20Law_docx.pdf

Someone had the great idea of publishing pdf with mostly rasterized text (converting text into an image). Downside, you can't properly cross reference the document.

Edit:

Converted the pdf with Google Docs. It didn't convert all the text and has loads of gaps.

[–]Mode1961 9 points10 points11 points 7 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Mens Rea:

I'll just leave that there.

[–]Clemicus 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's Latin 😏

For 'Guilty mind'. But it does highlight something they refer to as reasonable belief in relation to consent. They'll probably be an increase in cases involving alcohol.

[–]Mode1961 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Exactly, Mens Rea is supposed to be a cornerstone of law that is largely being ignored in some cases.

[–]Clemicus 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah. Reducing accountability on one party, so it's almost non-existent and the other party is responsible not only for themselves but the other party.

In most situations there won't be evidence of consent. So whatever is presented at the courts will be based on how believable either party is and that will be weighed against belief that there was consent and the circumstances of such are believable.

It's going to be a nightmare. Oddly they haven't posted it to their Twitter timeline.

Sorry for any confusion.

[–]geniice -2 points-1 points0 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It's going to be a nightmare.

Been law in england wales for decades and hasn't caused problems. Really all it means is that if the defendent is going to claim that they belived the victim consented they need to provide a somewhat reasonable reason for doing so.

[–]Clemicus 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not to this extent and you could argue female on male rape could be classified as section 4 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Whereas this frames it as males as the perpetrator and females as the victims.

[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Mens Rea

reasonable person

[–]Mode1961 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

the intention or knowledge of wrongdoing that constitutes part of a crime, as opposed to the action or conduct of the accused.

Nothing to do with a reasonable person.

[–]geniice 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Go look up Mens Rea in england and wales (where the ROI gets its legal system from).

[–]DavidByron2 -1 points0 points1 point 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

For rape mens rea is only an issue for the sex part not the consent.

IE if you didn't intend to have sex (just fell into a vagina) you're not a rapist but intent has never mattered for the consent part. It doesn't matter if you never intended to ignore consent or (irrationally) felt you had got consent.

[–]Mode1961 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Mens rea applies to consent because the person could believe they had consent.

[–]thrway_1000 17 points18 points19 points 7 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Soon it seems they'll just make sex illegal.

Archive -- https://web.archive.org/web/20180727093754/https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/new-crime-of-gross-negligence-rape-is-put-forward-1.3577602

[–]Cristi_Tanase 15 points16 points17 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

from ultra catholic puritans to ultra male hating feminism, nothing changed

[–]Vacant_a_lot 5 points6 points7 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Shit gets really dangerous in countries where those things overlap. At least for anyone who enjoys any of their mutual hatreds, like sex, porn, or violent media.

[–]Cristi_Tanase 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

true, very true

[–]genkernels 4 points5 points6 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well what this is doing is getting rid of the idea that the rapist has to know that what the rapist is doing is wrong. In the case of a conscious victim, there really isn't going to be much room for not knowing (or there shouldn't be, it is hard to know exactly how far this will be taken, but I suspect that will be fine). In the case of an unconscious victim, this closes an avenue of escape that probably shouldn't exist anyways. The problem is the case of drunk victims (and seriously, drunk sex is already incredibly legally dangerous).

The real issue with the law isn't the gross negligence provision, but that the law doesn't apply to both genders, as /u/Clemicus pointed out.

[–]DavidByron2 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty sure that you never did have to know that you were raping to be a rapist.

The mens rea of rape is just that you're having sex. If you didn't mean to have sex that's a defence.

ETA: well I guess not in Ireland.

[–]lifeonlockdown 3 points4 points5 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

For years, women have expected men to be able to read their minds, and now they're making it a crime if they can't?!?!?

wtf.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 7 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Can someone please make a sexual consent form for men to have their partners sign? I'm just going to carry these around.

[–]ThEGr33kXII 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Maybe an App? Use a voice recorder and record them saying they consent... Fucks sake... Why is this even a discussion. :-/

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

It's a discussion because it's a real issue. A voice recording wouldn't be legally binding, even if they stated their full legal name.

[–]Clemicus 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yeah and when consent can be changed days or weeks afterwards, written or spoken consent amounts to nothing.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Written consent would hold up, as it's a written contract, but verbal wouldn't.

[–]antilopes 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Consent can't be changed afterwards, but it may be reinterpreted or lied about. Lies can't be prevented but reinterpretation is very avoidable.
If you use any kind of pressure / coercion / inducement / deception then reinterpretation is on the table.
If sex would not have taken place without large amounts of alcohol or drugs then reinterpretation is on the table.

A contract requires X be given in return for Y.
Depending on the jurisdiction verbal is binding for nearly any contract. Property transactions and I think marriage are some of the few exceptions.
Proving verbal consent is often a problem. Recordings must obey single/dual party law, and the veracity of the recording itself could face a costly technical challenge. Uploading to a cloud server at the time or straight afterwards provides a secure time stamp and could avoid expensive challenging about editing.

Consent is a momentary state. It is not binding on even the future five seconds.

If you make a contract with a prostitute to do X in return for $Y then she can still refuse X at any point. You could sue for the return of your $Y or some portion of it, if she were ungracious enough to keep it.

A written consent form is a statement of intent and only proves consent existed at that point.
The legal advantage is substantial but the practical advantage is theoretical because most women presented with a form would freak out and not sex you, even is that is what they had been wanting. They sure as hell are not going to sign a rapey-looking form presented by what is now a creepy guy.

There is something profoundly anti-sexy about a potential lover who does not trust you not to complain to police about them. The obvious concern is that your past behavior has led to severe dissatisfaction and maybe even a formal complaint.
This possible motive would be very obvious to a jury too. It would not look good in court whether the form was signed by the accuser on the day or on a previous occasion, or if a form by some other woman was presented as evidence of the kind of person you are.

[–]ThEGr33kXII 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

What would? Even a signature can be forged... Do you need legal representation present?

Edit: I realise why it's a discussion, it was more a comment on how bad it is that it's come to this.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

  1. Printed name.

  2. Two forms of ID.

  3. Signed consent form.

  4. Digital proof with location tracking enabled on mobile device.

  5. Get rejected because the girl is bored AF.

[+]Vandechoz1 points 7 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

apps have been made, but were removed from the app stores

I assume they're available somewhere for sideloading, but I don't know where

[–]antilopes 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I guess they were removed because they would obviously be very attractive to rapists, creating a PR and maybe legal liability to anyone operating a server for them including the download facility by the app store.

A simple video clip showing the two of you interacting happily would be ideal. A vid of a friendly interaction at home when not too drunk, followed by one of her eating breakfast and smiling while you tease her about morning hair is not creepy.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

https://vimeo.com/183089808

[–]antilopes 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm curious about what kind of person posts a link to a video without any indication of what it is or how long it is.
But not curious enough to ever watch the videos and try to work it out.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 7 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well now it's going to be even easier for men to go to prison, not like it needed to be easier.

[–]geniice 1 point2 points3 points 7 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The number of cases this impacts in tiny since in most cases defence lawyers stick with the tried and tested option of in most cases it being really hard to prove a lack of consent beyond reasonable doubt.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 7 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Probably the same situation would have been conviction of regular rape before. So this would be an improvement.

ETA: well I guess not in Ireland.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter