There must not be much happening in Norway today; that is, unless some of the real news from Norway is not translated into English.
You know, I rather like this idea--it appears to happen only in Norway, though--of having the guilty party not only pay a civil penalty (imprisonment), but also reimbursing the victim in some way; from all the "crime news" I've read from Norway, it seems to be the practice.
You can't rape a man.
I cannot imagine the pain and suffering that poor man endured.
The horror...the horror....
How is it possible to rape a man?
I need a Norwegian nanny......
I hate it when that happens.
What kind of wussie boy girlie man would report this event to the authorities in the first place?
Whatever happened to a firm but polite: "Madame, if you do not cease this unseemly behavior immediately I shall be forced to deal with you quite harshly!"?
This guy will never again be able to:
A) Play in a live poker game;
B) Join an organized sports league;
C) Begin any conversation with the phrase "Did you see the (blank) on her?"
The concept of reimbursing the victim is as old as the Vikings. When a man had committed a crime, such as a murder, back in Viking days, he was exiled, and had to give all of his possessions to the family of the slain.
Make sure your speakers are on.
(NOTE: Dialogue may not be suitable for younger viewers)
Don't................................Stop.............................Don't......................Stop.......................Don't.............Stop...........Don't.........Stop.......Don't.....Stop.....Don't...Stop..Don't..Stop.Don't stop, Don't stop, Don't stop!!!
Isn't this a violation of a womans' right to choose?
You're in for it now!
What amazes me most about this story is; the "victim" also gets $6400 ! I used to think our country was best.... but now I wonder.
According to court testimony, the January 2004 sexual assault took place when the 31-year-old man, whose name was also withheld, fell asleep on a sofa in the apartment the woman shared with her boyfriend.
In court, he testified that he woke up because the woman was performing oral sex on him. The woman at first denied any sexual contact, but later changed her story, admitting contact but claimed it was consensual.
The court said a legal amendment from 2000 defines such undesired sexual contact as rape, and it was being punished as such.
The man said the incident left him with insomnia and virtually no interest in sex. He also described it as a breach of trust between friends that crushed his faith in people.
What's missing from the summary is that the other guy in the room was taking pictures. And the victim is a married man.
I guess that explains why the incident was reported. Once the wheels of justice were set in motion, a rape conviction was the only possible outcome under the gender-neutral law.