It depends. You're giving the best possible type of rape: a short, low-violence, non-consensual sexual encounter; or encounter that is coerced in some nature.
Now, take a look at the Pakistani Grooming Gangs in the UK. Children were being treated as sex slaves and 'child prostitutes' for years on end. And after all that the children were treated as racial and religious inferiors, while being lambasted by government institutions.
Rape can also destroy your life, cost you your job, become unemployable, ruin your reputations, break up your family, and get you locked in prison if stuff goes awry. Especially if it is particularly violent, or protected by law enforcement, socially acceptable, or done to children which leave long lasting damage.
Rape can also be done violently by an abusive boyfriend, or under threat of the above by coercive effort, or be combined with confinement and torture. Even in the best case, it does often cause serious psychological trauma.
This is why we consider rape to be "grievous bodily harm", justifying lethal force in order to prevent it from happening.
You can stand there and say that's not the case because women are just valued; but there is no sex distinction in the event that the victim is a man. Lethal force is just as necessary. A co-worker of mine was male, was actually raped on his way back from work. The 3 men that attacked, beat him violently, kidnapped him a short distance, raped him, then sodomized him with a crowbar, and proceeded to bludgeon him within an inch of his life, and left him to die. He was discovered barely alive the following morning unable to call for help by a local. Legally, we understand that lethal force is absolutely required to stop such an extreme attack, and it is not often done just because someone is horny, but as a way of brutalizing and degrading a victim to the most extreme possible extent.
Your creation of a false dichotomy is, frankly, unhelpful. The worst version of something terrible, being compared to the best version of something terrible, is a dishonest contrast.
Especially if it is particularly violent, or protected by law enforcement, socially acceptable, or done to children which leave long lasting damage.
The 3 men that attacked, beat him violently, kidnapped him a short distance, raped him, then sodomized him with a crowbar, and proceeded to bludgeon him within an inch of his life, and left him to die.
Well sure, but you're also adding plenty of crimes other than rape in that too. That's not just rape anymore, it's brutal assault + pedophilia + kidnapping + murder attempt. Remove the rape part in your example, and anyone would still be scared for life after such an event.
Sure 5 minutes of rape is "very optimistic", but even if it's longer, if it's "just" rape and nothing else, it would still be the better choice.
Since when is it "just rape"? At any police stop, the chance you'll get charged with one crime is pretty remote, because criminal acts come in piles because that's how criminal behavior works. If you're going to break the law, you're not going to regard each law, you're going to disregard all of them.
A false allegation is not one thing either. It's a false police report, it's slander, it's libel, it's perjury, it's doctored evidence, it's conspiracy, it's fraud.
This is a false dichotomy to get the result OP likes, and it's silly.
It depends. You're giving the best possible type of rape: a short, low-violence, non-consensual sexual encounter; or encounter that is coerced in some nature.
Now, take a look at the Pakistani Grooming Gangs in the UK. Children were being treated as sex slaves and 'child prostitutes' for years on end. And after all that the children were treated as racial and religious inferiors, while being lambasted by government institutions.
Rape can also destroy your life, cost you your job, become unemployable, ruin your reputations, break up your family, and get you locked in prison if stuff goes awry. Especially if it is particularly violent, or protected by law enforcement, socially acceptable, or done to children which leave long lasting damage.
Rape can also be done violently by an abusive boyfriend, or under threat of the above by coercive effort, or be combined with confinement and torture. Even in the best case, it does often cause serious psychological trauma.
This is why we consider rape to be "grievous bodily harm", justifying lethal force in order to prevent it from happening.
You can stand there and say that's not the case because women are just valued; but there is no sex distinction in the event that the victim is a man. Lethal force is just as necessary. A co-worker of mine was male, was actually raped on his way back from work. The 3 men that attacked, beat him violently, kidnapped him a short distance, raped him, then sodomized him with a crowbar, and proceeded to bludgeon him within an inch of his life, and left him to die. He was discovered barely alive the following morning unable to call for help by a local. Legally, we understand that lethal force is absolutely required to stop such an extreme attack, and it is not often done just because someone is horny, but as a way of brutalizing and degrading a victim to the most extreme possible extent.
Your creation of a false dichotomy is, frankly, unhelpful. The worst version of something terrible, being compared to the best version of something terrible, is a dishonest contrast.
Well sure, but you're also adding plenty of crimes other than rape in that too. That's not just rape anymore, it's brutal assault + pedophilia + kidnapping + murder attempt. Remove the rape part in your example, and anyone would still be scared for life after such an event.
Sure 5 minutes of rape is "very optimistic", but even if it's longer, if it's "just" rape and nothing else, it would still be the better choice.
Since when is it "just rape"? At any police stop, the chance you'll get charged with one crime is pretty remote, because criminal acts come in piles because that's how criminal behavior works. If you're going to break the law, you're not going to regard each law, you're going to disregard all of them.
A false allegation is not one thing either. It's a false police report, it's slander, it's libel, it's perjury, it's doctored evidence, it's conspiracy, it's fraud.
This is a false dichotomy to get the result OP likes, and it's silly.