So Ken Clarke is getting torn apart and being asked to step down by Labour for what he said about rape on Radio 5 yesterday.
I listened to the interview and I am struggling to see what he actually said wrong.
He said not all rape is the same, some are worse than others but he did say they were all terrible and wrong. For example if a 17 boy has sex with a 15 yr old girl who consented to it, it is still rape. IF a woman on a drunken night out goes back to a fella's house and starts to make out but at the last minute says no, if he forces things it is again rape. Lastly if a bloke jumped a lady walking home and violently raped her that is classed as the same, they are all rape.
I think anybody can see that the examples are very different in severity and that is all he was trying to say. They are all rape and all wrong and all deserve imprisonment but surely the last example is the worst type by far.
Am I missing something, what did he actually say wrong to deserve the sack?
I listened to the interview and I am struggling to see what he actually said wrong.
He said not all rape is the same, some are worse than others but he did say they were all terrible and wrong. For example if a 17 boy has sex with a 15 yr old girl who consented to it, it is still rape. IF a woman on a drunken night out goes back to a fella's house and starts to make out but at the last minute says no, if he forces things it is again rape. Lastly if a bloke jumped a lady walking home and violently raped her that is classed as the same, they are all rape.
I think anybody can see that the examples are very different in severity and that is all he was trying to say. They are all rape and all wrong and all deserve imprisonment but surely the last example is the worst type by far.
Am I missing something, what did he actually say wrong to deserve the sack?
