According to Mackinnon, a scholar of violence against women believes that rape occurs because women resist. The male is the dominant in the action and the female is the submissive. If the female were to accept the assertiveness of the male, then what would be considered rape otherwise would become sex (208). Based on this one has to assume that men, because they are the aggressor, cannot be raped by another woman.
What happens when the woman becomes the aggressor and the man says no? The image itself is hard to imagine. And even if this was the case, people are reluctant to call it rape. The idea that a man can’t stop a woman from having sex with him or the thought that he would want to, is beyond many people, both men and women alike. Consider this, a woman gets drunk and goes to a room in an attempt to sleep it off. A man follows her into the room a little later and decides to take advantage of the situation. The girl is too inebriated to say no or fight back, however it is still considered rape because just because she was unable to say no, it does not mean that she consented. What would happen if the roles were reversed and it was the male taken advantage of in his drunken state? Honestly, nothing. More than likely, even if the male did feel violated, he would not report it to anyone. And even if he did come forward, is there actually a real chance that he will be heard or believed? And what if two women were involved? Can a woman rape another woman? Technically, neither would be considered rape if no biological (penile) penetration was done to the victim.
To me if sex if forced on someone who says ‘no’ or isn’t competent enough to consent, it should be considered rape, no matter what sex or gender of the aggressors or victims are. I am honestly interested in getting feedback on this topic. I want to know where some people stand on this and why.