How drunk and or horny would you have to be to commit rape?

[Paschendale]

Sexual desire and intoxication alone are not catalysts of a heinous crime like rape. The perpetrator's mentality is a huge factor. Men who believe that masculinity is superior to femininity think that they can control women. Men who think women owe them something force themselves on women. Men who think that women are weak abuse what power they can get over a woman. Men who think that "respecting women" means something different than respecting other men rape.

 

[RiverDad]

You are blurring issues here. Your little story addresses the issue about whether not all accusations of rape are legitimate and you provide evidence that, clearly in your mind, they are not.

No, that's not what I'm doing. I'm pointing to a two-party interaction which eventually culminates in rape. If the woman had rejected sex, then the rape could not have occurred.

This conversation however is about whether not you could get drunk or horny enough to commit rape. The assumption being that you actually raped someone.

Then why are you participating in this discussion? Can you link me to your comment where you directly answered the question in the affirmative or in the negative?

 

[opendebate]

Weeeeeeelllllll....... yes and no.

Let's review:

Women compete with other women for attention (from men and women) and status. One of the ways they compete with each other is through clothing and appearance. Dressing in an overtly sexualized manner is one way of drawing attention, particularly from men... but other women often get angry at a female in their circle who dress noticeably more "sexy" (or "slutty", or revealing) than is the norm... why? Well, they're *cheating* in the who-is-queen-bee competition... :mrgreen:

So in a sense, revealing clothing could be construed as "aggressive"... at least, within the context of how women typically compete for attention and status.

Human interaction is very complicated, and the lines between competition, aggression and violence can get blurry sometimes.

If there is aggression involved in the picture you paint here it would be towards the other women not any men that are present.

 

[Goshin]

If there is aggression involved in the picture you paint here it would be towards the other women not any men that are present.

Pretty much yes... just pointing out that what constitutes aggression, or even violence, is sometimes "in the eye of the beholder".


One could also point out that a certain type of man views atypically-sexy dress as "aggressive".... as in, a sign of sexual aggressiveness or openness to sexual activity. Some of them get really pissed if they find out it is "false advertising". Some small percentage of those might act on their frustration.



(It is highly probable that I will now be accused of "blaming the victim" by someone... when I have clearly done no such thing. I am continuing to examine Motive.)

 

[Removable Mind]

What are you saying, that women don't like being desired by men? That women only dress provocatively or act provocatively to please themselves. The problem here is when women draw the attention of the wrong man. All is good if they draw the attention of men that they desire and this attention works to inflate their ego, but there is no way of effectively controlling which men become aware of you.

Are you saying if a woman is standing in the middle of the street nude...that gives a man the right to force her to have sex? Would that behavior be a display of desire? Or subliminally asking some man to rape her? Or might there be some other reason for such a behavior by a woman/

What about mentally impaired girls and women who are raped?

I've read quite a few of your posts.

So you choose to believe that women cause their rapes...and attach the reason as being that they like or wanting to be desired. Or it was how she was dressed. Or she was drunk or high. Or she displayed a slutty swagger about her. And simply being at that right place at the wrong time around the wrong man is setting themselves up for rape.

I don't know about you, but I've been to mind reading school classes thousands of times. I've failed each and every time. How about you? How about every woman whose been raped by a man who she just happened to be around while wearing a provocative dress or gave look (intended or not) which isn't automatically giving such a man permission to engage in an act of violence against her, which also included forcing her to have sexual intercourse or possibly oral sex...or anal sex? Think her mind reading skills suck about the man's potential to be "the wrong kind of man"...or she was asking to be forcibly raped?

Even if a woman goes as far as saying that she's willing to have sex...then at any point past her verbal consent she said, "STOP"...and the man continues...that is RAPE!

It wasn't until around 1991 that spousal rape became a crime in Texas.

I'm sure that you would completely disagree with a law that prevents a spouse from forcing the other to have sex...because they are married.

Yes, there are bad men. Plenty of bad men. There is no justifiable reason for rape...even for bad men.

 

[RiverDad]

Are you saying if a woman is standing in the middle of the street nude...that gives a man the right to force her to have sex?

I thought I made my point clearly in a previous comment. The man is 100% criminally responsible for choosing to act on his impulse. The woman who does choose to walk around nude though is pretty damn stupid if she thinks that this doesn't increase the risk of rape/sexual assault.

So the issue becomes this - women can assert their right to attract attention, even the wrong kind of attention, and they run the risk of harm or they can refrain from fully exercising their freedom and thus lower their risk of harm.

To put this another way - I have the right to walk through the ghetto counting my big wad of bills at midnight and run the risk of being mugged or I can choose not to exercise that freedom to walk through the ghetto and take the long way around, keep the bills in my pocket, and thus lower the risk of being mugged/killed. If a thug mugs or kills me, he is 100% responsible for choosing to initiate the crime. Is that any solace to me though? I'd much rather avoid being mugged or killed even if it means that I have to choose to refrain from walking through the ghetto at midnight counting my big wad of bills.

Decisions come with consequences or risks. A woman can walk around nude but her decision to do so comes with a risk.

I've read quite a few of your posts.

So you choose to believe that women cause their rapes...and attach the reason as being that they like or wanting to be desired. Or it was how she was dressed. Or she was drunk or high. Or she displayed a slutty swagger about her. And simply being at that right place at the wrong time around the wrong man is setting themselves up for rape.

Then you missed the point underlying my comments. My argument is that too many women seem to operate on the principle that cause is divorced from effect. The feminist dogma of a woman never being responsible for any part of her own rape translates into women quite often making reckless choices which increase the risk to them. They operate in a world where they think that the SHOULD BE actually translates into the WAY IT IS. Clearly I'm not a woman, but my position if I were would be this - it's better to prevent a rape whenever possible and if that means curtailing some of my own freedom, then so be it. As a man I curtail my own freedom all the damn time in order to lower risk to my life. I don't walk through the ghetto at midnight flashing a big wad of bills even though I have full legal rights to do so.

Yes, there are bad men. Plenty of bad men. There is no justifiable reason for rape...even for bad men.

Thanks for setting me straight on that. I didn't realize that I had made an argument that excused men from deciding to rape women. Good mind reading on your part, or not.

 

[opendebate]

(It is highly probable that I will now be accused of "blaming the victim" by someone... when I have clearly done no such thing. I am continuing to examine Motive.)

Well I won't be one of them.

Pretty much yes... just pointing out that what constitutes aggression, or even violence, is sometimes "in the eye of the beholder".

So it is unreliable especially in this case unless it is blatant (meaning verbalized)

One could also point out that a certain type of man views atypically-sexy dress as "aggressive".... as in, a sign of sexual aggressiveness or openness to sexual activity. Some of them get really pissed if they find out it is "false advertising". Some small percentage of those might act on their frustration.

This is the whole problem. That men interpret a woman being open about her sexuality is somehow an invitation to **** her whether she invites you to or not. It is not. It is an effort to get attention and "possibly" to have sex with someone of her choosing. The mans frustration is his problem not hers. In what other arena do you hold anyone responsible for their behavior other than the person acting out the behavior?

Pointing a finger at the woman and assigning her the responsibility of protecting herself from rape won't protect anyone. It's like telling people not buy a house so no one will break in and rob them.

 

[RiverDad]

That men interpret a woman being open about her sexuality is somehow an invitation to **** her whether she invites you to or not. It is not. It is an effort to get attention and "possibly" to have sex with someone of her choosing. The mans frustration is his problem not hers. In what other arena do you hold anyone responsible for their behavior other than the person acting out the behavior?

Aren't we all in agreement on the bolded? Has anyone here argued differently? I must have missed that if someone did so.

 

[Removable Mind]

My argument is that too many women seem to operate on the principle that cause is divorced from effect. The feminist dogma of a woman never being responsible for any part of her own rape translates into women quite often making reckless choices which increase the risk to them.

"Cause"...which you think exists...that all women who are raped just didn't get until it was too late? Then the "Effect" dawns on them?

So arguing that - Failing to engage in "Common Sense Prevention" can result in the cause and effect event of being raped - should be the message to all women (and in particular, feminists) because they apparently have failed to understand the gravity of the risks. Or that they are neglectfully ignoring the risks. Or that they are simply in denial about the risks. Nice...

And I suspect that if you were a woman...that your position wouldn't be as you've describe in your post. Just a hunch, mind you.

 

[RiverDad]

And I suspect that if you were a woman...that your position wouldn't be as you've describe in your post. Just a hunch, mind you.

You may be correct. I didn't account for how women's brains are wired differently from men's brains.

 

[Goshin]

Well I won't be one of them.

Gracias.

This is the whole problem. That men interpret a woman being open about her sexuality is somehow an invitation to **** her whether she invites you to or not. It is not. It is an effort to get attention and "possibly" to have sex with someone of her choosing. The mans frustration is his problem not hers.

I have no argument with any of that.

In what other arena do you hold anyone responsible for their behavior other than the person acting out the behavior?

AHHhhhhh... NOW we get to the root of things.

I hold people responsible or accountable for all kinds of things. Actually, it isn't so much me, as just the world.

For instance....

I have every right to free speech. Theoretically, I can go to a biker bar at 2am and yell "HARLEY DAVIDSON SUCKS!" at the top of my lungs, and I SHOULD walk out untouched, for expressing my opinion.

Of course, that isn't likely. If I don't get killed, I'll be lucky if I get carried off in an ambulance.

Are the bikers in the wrong, for half-killing me over expressing my opinion? Yes, they are... but I should have known better, and that is what everyone will tell me also. :mrgreen:

Pointing a finger at the woman and assigning her the responsibility of protecting herself from rape won't protect anyone. It's like telling people not buy a house so no one will break in and rob them.

I assign EVERYONE the responsibility for protecting themselves from criminal assault... because you're the only one you can be sure will be there when the SHTF, and you're the one who is gonna hurt. Actually it isn't so much me assigning, as just reality... you can't fully depend on anyone but yourself to protect you from any negative consequence.

That's just life.

 

[opendebate]

AHHhhhhh... NOW we get to the root of things.

Indeed

I hold people responsible or accountable for all kinds of things. Actually, it isn't so much me, as just the world.

For instance....
I have every right to free speech. Theoretically, I can go to a biker bar at 2am and yell "HARLEY DAVIDSON SUCKS!" at the top of my lungs, and I SHOULD walk out untouched, for expressing my opinion.
Of course, that isn't likely. If I don't get killed, I'll be lucky if I get carried off in an ambulance.
Are the bikers in the wrong, for half-killing me over expressing my opinion? Yes, they are... but I should have known better, and that is what everyone will tell me also

So you are equating yelling "Harley Davidson Sucks" to a bunch of bikers to a woman wearing provocative clothing or drinking with friends? What is it she is shouting in a crowed room? Come **** me!! No. She isn't. The problem once again is what some men see as "the message" or the implication because of her dress or behavior. It's not the same.

I assign EVERYONE the responsibility for protecting themselves from criminal assault... because you're the only one you can be sure will be there when the SHTF, and you're the one who is gonna hurt. Actually it isn't so much me assigning, as just reality... you can't fully depend on anyone but yourself to protect you from any negative consequence. That's just life.

Of course we should all do what we can to protect ourselves. That's really not the point. The point is that we target the wrong person when we say a woman plays a role in her rape because of how she is dressed or behaves.

 

[NoC_T]

I just want the witch burnings to stop.

Of course, they were more convincing than the invention of sexless rape.

 

[danielpalos]

If only, we could find nice women of morals meet for modern times, who are willing to insist they should be able to girl friends, even in the most heterosexual of manners and fashions, not only for the sake of honesty as a moral in our modern Information Age times, but also for fun and practice.

 

[joko104]

The majority of people are not into sexual exotica - other than in fantasy.

 

[VanceMack]

These threads...they DO tend to be ridiculous. Its nice people want to present as such ideologues and pillars of virtue. Meanwhile...in the 'real world'...

People go to parties, get drunk, and do things they would not otherwise do on a regular basis.

"Date rape and acquaintance rape are forms of sexual assault involving coercive sexual activities perpetrated by an acquaintance of the rape survivor. The perpetrator is almost always a man, and though both men and women can be raped, women are most often the targets of this violence. It is difficult, because of a lack of research on the subject and the tendency for rape survivors not to report attacks, to come up with precise statistics on male survivors. However, men are raped by other men and are also victims of sexual violence. Date and acquaintance rape can happen to or be perpetrated by anyone. Incidences are very high: they comprise from 80-85% percent of all reported rapes. However, even these figures are not reliable. According to conservative FBI statistics, only 40% of all forms of rape are even reported (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network).

Date and acquaintance rape is quite prevalent on campuses. One in four college women has been raped; that is, has been forced, physically or verbally, actively or implicitly, to engage in sexual activity. A 2000 study revealed that ninety percent of college rape survivors knew their attacker before the incident (Bureau of Justice Statistics).

Some experts believe that one explanation for such high statistics is that young people, constrained for most of their lives by their parents and laws, are unprepared to act responsibly in a "free" environment. This "freedom" can lead to unrestrained drug and alcohol use, which then leads to sexually irresponsible acts, and then to rape."

http://ub-counseling.buffalo.edu/violenceoverview.shtml

How often do people get drunk or stoned and do something stupid? All the time. Too often. Way too often.

 

[Gipper]

Some men think that women are ONLY good for sex, or being a maid.

Cooks. You forgot cooks.

 

[Goshin]

Indeed


So you are equating yelling "Harley Davidson Sucks" to a bunch of bikers to a woman wearing provocative clothing or drinking with friends? What is it she is shouting in a crowed room? Come **** me!! No. She isn't. The problem once again is what some men see as "the message" or the implication because of her dress or behavior. It's not the same.



Of course we should all do what we can to protect ourselves. That's really not the point. The point is that we target the wrong person when we say a woman plays a role in her rape because of how she is dressed or behaves.

Ah, and now we get to this. As expected.

First of all, I didn't equate anything with anything. I gave a personal example of me doing something that would be lawful, and moral, and which by all rights I ought to be able to do and walk away unscathed... except we all know I would not.

I said nothing comparing it to how a woman might dress. Nor did I compare it to a woman drinking with friends. Nor did I say a woman "plays a role in her own rape," whatever that means.


My point was there are some things which, regardless of LAW or SHOULD or OUGHT, stand a good chance of putting you in The Hurt Zone.


Does this mean it is your fault you got hurt? No. Not if you had a lawful right to do what you were doing, where you were doing it, and a reasonable expectation that civilized company would not violate your person because of it.

But that doesn't mean it won't happen, because not everyone is civilized.


Sure, anything can happen at any time... you can be victimized by a criminal without having done ANYTHING personally to make yourself a target. But there are things you can do to RAISE or LOWER your likelihood of being victimized... and there are certain things you can do that *darn near guarantee* you will be assaulted, like my personal example above.


I don't make these rules, the world made them. Legally, you have every right to walk up to Hector the Crip and his homies and say "You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny." Free country, free speech, right? But we all know that really would not be a good idea right, legality schmegality, if you rub Hector the wrong way he may dice you like a zucchini.


You can give people advice like that, about ORDINARY assault and mayhem, and they don't freak out. They accept it. They don't try to claim you're "blaming the victim" for advising them not to talk **** to Hell's Angels or Crips, nor to walk through the hood with a bank bag in your hand at 2am.


But HEAVEN FORBID we suggest to any woman that she might need to modify ANY behavior she wishes to engage in, no matter how much it might increase her risk! When we do that, we're Blaming The Victim (tm).


I'm not really worried about short skirts or cleavage. There's plenty of that around anyway. What bothers me is the things I hear about young women going off "partying" (ie booze, drugs) with people they barely know. It is a really bad idea, and from what I hear from my buddy the Campus Police Chief, it is how a lot of rapes occur to women in that age group.


But never mind, heaven forbid we try to talk a little sense here, women must be free from even MILD CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM of anything they choose to do even if it as stupid as getting ****faced wasted among people you barely know.


We now return to your regularly scheduled programming on The Oxygen Network. :mrgreen:

 

[CLAX1911]

These threads...they DO tend to be ridiculous. Its nice people want to present as such ideologues and pillars of virtue. Meanwhile...in the 'real world'...

People go to parties, get drunk, and do things they would not otherwise do on a regular basis.

"Date rape and acquaintance rape are forms of sexual assault involving coercive sexual activities perpetrated by an acquaintance of the rape survivor. The perpetrator is almost always a man, and though both men and women can be raped, women are most often the targets of this violence. It is difficult, because of a lack of research on the subject and the tendency for rape survivors not to report attacks, to come up with precise statistics on male survivors. However, men are raped by other men and are also victims of sexual violence. Date and acquaintance rape can happen to or be perpetrated by anyone. Incidences are very high: they comprise from 80-85% percent of all reported rapes. However, even these figures are not reliable. According to conservative FBI statistics, only 40% of all forms of rape are even reported (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network).

Date and acquaintance rape is quite prevalent on campuses. One in four college women has been raped; that is, has been forced, physically or verbally, actively or implicitly, to engage in sexual activity. A 2000 study revealed that ninety percent of college rape survivors knew their attacker before the incident (Bureau of Justice Statistics).

Some experts believe that one explanation for such high statistics is that young people, constrained for most of their lives by their parents and laws, are unprepared to act responsibly in a "free" environment. This "freedom" can lead to unrestrained drug and alcohol use, which then leads to sexually irresponsible acts, and then to rape."

Date & Acquaintance Rape: Overview, Counseling Services Website - University at Buffalo

How often do people get drunk or stoned and do something stupid? All the time. Too often. Way too often.

I guess I don't understand why it's important that a person is dating the victim of their sexual assault. Rape is rape be it after our during a date, or babysitting, helping somebody move furniture, fixing someone's sink.

What I am really asking is what changes when the victim and aggressor are dating? What is the validity of the term date in front of rape?

 

[VanceMack]

I guess I don't understand why it's important that a person is dating the victim of their sexual assault. Rape is rape be it after our during a date, or babysitting, helping somebody move furniture, fixing someone's sink.

What I am really asking is what changes when the victim and aggressor are dating? What is the validity of the term date in front of rape?

The validity is (or should be) that it brings home the REALITY regarding rape. When people discuss rape the discussion trends to the idea of the unknown assailant leaping from behind trees, dragging victims down dark alleys, or sneaking in late at night through windows. Those DO occur...they are BY FAR not the norm. The vast majority of sexual assaults involve people that KNOW each other. As was stated, the large majority of instances involve alcohol. They are in every way the types of incidents the president spoke of that one time a few months ago when he gave that one talk and pretended it was really really really important and then ignored it ever since.

When discussing things like the presence and use/abuse of alcohol in rape cases, people can go ahead and be flippant with comments like "how drunk and horny would you have to be before you committed a rape" if they want. As was clearly shown...90% of victims know their attackers...and in a large number of those assaults, alcohol or other drugs were involved. It is a reality and one if actually ADDRESSED may go a long way to reducing those tragic numbers.

 

[CLAX1911]

The validity is (or should be) that it brings home the REALITY regarding rape. When people discuss rape the discussion trends to the idea of the unknown assailant leaping from behind trees, dragging victims down dark alleys, or sneaking in late at night through windows. Those DO occur...they are BY FAR not the norm. The vast majority of sexual assaults involve people that KNOW each other. As was stated, the large majority of instances involve alcohol. They are in every way the types of incidents the president spoke of that one time a few months ago when he gave that one talk and pretended it was really really really important and then ignored it ever since.

I understand that most rapes are committed by someone you know, most murders are caused by someone you know. I still don't get why it gets a social name because the victim is dating their assailant. Is that any different than if the assailant was the victim's father, or a platonic acquaintance, a co-worker? Or is all off that considered "date rape"

When discussing things like the presence and use/abuse of alcohol in rape cases, people can go ahead and be flippant with comments like "how drunk and horny would you have to be before you committed a rape" if they want. As was clearly shown...90% of victims know their attackers...and in a large number of those assaults, alcohol or other drugs were involved. It is a reality and one if actually ADDRESSED may go a long way to reducing those tragic numbers.

I wouldn't say that alcohol and drugs are any more than a common factor. Trust seems to be the key element that must exist.

 

[joko104]

The validity is (or should be) that it brings home the REALITY regarding rape. When people discuss rape the discussion trends to the idea of the unknown assailant leaping from behind trees, dragging victims down dark alleys, or sneaking in late at night through windows. Those DO occur...they are BY FAR not the norm. The vast majority of sexual assaults involve people that KNOW each other. As was stated, the large majority of instances involve alcohol. They are in every way the types of incidents the president spoke of that one time a few months ago when he gave that one talk and pretended it was really really really important and then ignored it ever since.

When discussing things like the presence and use/abuse of alcohol in rape cases, people can go ahead and be flippant with comments like "how drunk and horny would you have to be before you committed a rape" if they want. As was clearly shown...90% of victims know their attackers...and in a large number of those assaults, alcohol or other drugs were involved. It is a reality and one if actually ADDRESSED may go a long way to reducing those tragic numbers.

Many people believe in their slogans the way a religious zealot shouts "PRAISE JESUS!" The more you disagree and the more you show how wrong they are, the more insulting, furious and dug-in they become.

The notion that there are substance abuse factors, that people can reduce their risks in regards to sexual assaults, and that all sexual assaults are not the same just as there are other types and different levels of violent assaults is too complex and doesn't perfectly fit the most simplistic slogan they have declared as an absolute truism - when its so simplistic to the point of virtual worthlessness.

What you posted in that message are known facts and realities. NOTHING more infuriates slogan-zealots.

 

[RiverDad]

I understand that most rapes are committed by someone you know, most murders are caused by someone you know. I still don't get why it gets a social name because the victim is dating their assailant. Is that any different than if the assailant was the victim's father, or a platonic acquaintance, a co-worker? Or is all off that considered "date rape."

Because rape is a crime that is different from assault and murder. With murder we have a dead body. With assault we have physical evidence on injury. With rape we have evidence of sex taking place. Such evidence doesn't indicate a crime. A crime only occurs when consent is absent but sometimes even absent consent a crime doesn't occur.

A stranger rape is far more clear cut than a date rape. The level of violence can be higher, there is no relationship between the two people. When two people are dating or in a relationship, sexual consent is often implied. A woman wakes a man with a handjob. He clearly didn't give permission, so technically she's committing sexual assault. A man caresses his sleeping girlfriend and is also guilty. Plenty of people don't find these activities objectionable and don't consider them crimes. So date rape can arise in relationships which are already intimate and extend down to relationships which are just beginning. This is not only a first date definition.

Furthermore, the sex lives of couples are complicated. Everything is not neat and clearcut. There is rough play sometimes, there is forced sex, there is drunk sex, there is guilt sex, there is obligation sex, there is pressured sex. You name it. Sometimes it's OK, sometimes it's forgiven, sometimes it becomes a crime. For it to become a crime, all it takes is for the woman to decide it is a crime.

It's rape in that it meets the definition of sex without consent, but many times date rape is of a different nature than stranger rape but they share the lack of consent condition. This also applies to marital rape, which is even more complicated than date rape.

 

[herenow1]

Once again, everyone according to the poll says no. I'm actually skeptical that most rapes involve alcohol since many go unreported. I believe just as many happens this way. This video may be a chessy depiction of rape, but sometimes you gotta bring those ''ABC'' afterschool specials back. I'm dating myself as I saw it as a teen. I think the mindset of this guy is the mindset of a classic rapist.He asks how was it at the end, completely oblivious,thinking she really wants it. 90% of rapes are by somebody you know, not always someone you are dating.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3pzt7NWsB7w

 

[CLAX1911]

Because rape is a crime that is different from assault and murder. With murder we have a dead body. With assault we have physical evidence on injury. With rape we have evidence of sex taking place. Such evidence doesn't indicate a crime. A crime only occurs when consent is absent but sometimes even absent consent a crime doesn't occur

Rape is assault, it's called sexual assault, there really is no legal term called rape.

A stranger rape is far more clear cut than a date rape.

I must be missing something, but I thought rape was pretty clear cut. Either you raped somebody or you didn't. Not sure why it matters what you were doing when it happens.

The level of violence can be higher, there is no relationship between the two people.

That actually isn't true, the midst violent calls police go on are domestic disputes, they often involve sexual assault.

When two people are dating or in a relationship, sexual consent is often implied. A woman wakes a man with a handjob. He clearly didn't give permission, so technically she's committing sexual assault.

yes she could be.

A man caresses his sleeping girlfriend and is also guilty.

Guilty of what? It wouldn't be sexual assault. Rape isn't a legal term. It wouldn't be lewd conduct unless she is sleeping in a public place and he is caressing her breasts or genitals.

Plenty of people don't find these activities objectionable and don't consider them crimes. So date rape can arise in relationships which are already intimate and extend down to relationships which are just beginning. This is not only a first date definition.

Is it still forcing sex on somebody without consent? If so it's just like any other form of rape.

Furthermore, the sex lives of couples are complicated.

Consent is never complicated, sex lives are irrelevant.

Everything is not neat and clearcut.

Consent is.

There is rough play sometimes

If it's consensual it's clearly not rape.

there is forced sex

Yeah that is called rape no matter how you justify it.

there is drunk sex, there is guilt sex, there is obligation sex, there is pressured sex.

It's only rape of there is no consent. Rape it's not drunk, guilt, obligation, or pressured sex unless it is fine so without consent. So this is irrelevant.

You name it. Sometimes it's OK, sometimes it's forgiven, sometimes it becomes a crime. For it to become a crime, all it takes is for the woman to decide it is a crime.

No, it's a crime of there is no consent.

It's rape in that it meets the definition of sex without consent

That is the only definition.

but many times date rape is of a different nature than stranger rape but they share the lack of consent condition.

Every single rape is of a different nature than every other one. They share the one condition that makes it rape. So again what difference does it make the relationship between the victim and assailant?

This also applies to marital rape, which is even more complicated than date rape.

It's not complicated at all. Sex with out consent. What is the difference between "stranger rape" and "date rape" if the crime is the same, sex without consent? The victim and the assailant knowing each other has no real bearing whatsoever on the fact that rape is sex without consent.

You really didn't explain what makes date rape different. You attempted to muddy the waters but law is clear cut.