they show a change in thinking, but practically, they are of no use. She claims that homosexual rape is almost never reported because of the disgrace attached to it, and that only men rape. Therefore, there should be no cases with male victims and female defendants, although, she adds, that if a woman were to commit a rape, she should be punished. Estrich also implores that men behave reasonably and to impose criminal penalties for those who do not. It is reasonable that a man in the 1980s should be one who understands that a womans word is deserving of respect, whether she is a perfect stranger or his own wife.(Estrich 97) She feels that the man of today should understand that no means no.In holding a man to a higher standard of reasonableness, the law would signify that it considers a womans consent to sex significant enough to merit a mans reasoned attention and respect. It would recognize that being sexually penetrated without consent is a grave harm; and that being treated like an object whose words are not even worthy of consideration adds insult to injury. In effect, the law would impose a duty on men to open their eyes and use their heads before engaging in sexnot to read a womans mind, but to give her credit for knowing it herself when she speaks it, regardless of their relationship. (Estrich 98)Estrich further claims that in law, consent should be defined to mean no means no. She concludes that whether rape is sex or violence, simple or aggravated, it is a sexual violation, of the most personal, most intimate, and most offensive kind Simple rape is real rape. (Estrich 104)In her essays, MacKinnon provides proposed changes in laws as well. Her changes do not directly modify rape law, but they amend what she sees as a social injustice. She asks that the First Amendment no longer protect, social dominance.(MacKinnon 109) MacKinnon begs that the victims of the protected speech of Nazis, Klansmen, and pornographers be...
