Das Europäische Parlament fordert die EU auf, eine standardisierte, einwilligungsbasierte Definition von Vergewaltigung zu erstellen

The European parliament has called on the EU to draw up a standardised consent-based definition of rape, in what legislators described as a crucial step towards addressing the patchwork of laws, some of them insufficient, that now exist across the bloc.

On Tuesday, 447 of the parliament’s 720 MEPs voted to approve a report calling for a common definition of rape, centred on “only yes means yes”, prompting a loud round of applause in the chamber in Strasbourg.

Silence, lack of resistance, the absence of a ‘no’, previous consent, past sexual conduct or any current or previous relationship must not be interpreted as consent,” the parliament said in a statement following the vote.

A common definition would force member states that continue to include force or violence in their laws to align with international standards, said Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus, a Polish MEP who was one of the main drivers of the initiative.

“We can’t have the meaning of rape change as we cross from one border to another,” she said.

“We can’t have a situation where a rapist who has raped a woman in Germany can go to Hungary and isn’t prosecuted because the law is different. And that’s what this report is about.”

In recent years, the majority of EU member states have adopted consent-based definitions of rape in their criminal codes. However, eight countries, ranging from Italy to Hungary and Romania, remain outliers, still requiring victims to prove to some extent that they verbally resisted, were forced or physically fought back.

Tuesday’s vote showed that there is a “huge majority” in favour of consent-based rape legislation in the EU, said Evin Incir, a Swedish MEP who was one of the main campaigners in the lead-up to the vote. “Now the [European] Commission must take responsibility and promptly put forward a proposal.”

Whether the commission would do so remains to be seen; in 2023 several governments across the EU joined to block efforts to create a common definition of rape, arguing that it was an overstep of the EU’s remit.

Speaking to reporters after the vote, Scheuring-Wielgus and Incir, both from the parliament’s Socialists and Democrats group, defended the need to again try to reach a consensus among the 27-member bloc.

“Look, we often hear the question, ‘Why are we doing this? It didn’t work before,’” said Scheuring-Wielgus. “But times have changed.”

The issue of consent had burst into public view in 2024, said Scheuring-Wielgus. “The case of Gisèle Pelicot has shaken the whole world,” she said, referring to the French woman who became a global figurehead as she sought justice after it emerged that her husband had long been drugging her and inviting men to rape her while she was unconscious.

Pelicot’s case had laid bare the shortcomings of defining rape solely on force or resisting, rather than consent, said Scheuring-Wielgus. “Her courage to speak out has opened the eyes of even the most conservative opponents of this change.”

The French government later changed its sexual assault laws to include consent, a shift echoed in recent years in Finland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, said Incir.

A report published in 2014, based on interviews with 42,000 women across the EU, found that one in 10 women have experienced some form of sexual violence since the age of 15, and one in 20 have been raped.

Few of these victims ever receive justice, said Incir. “Unfortunately when we look at the figures, only 0.5% of rapes in Europe lead to conviction.”

While the European Commission said on Tuesday that it “welcomes” the move by lawmakers, Scheuring-Wielgus said she had the impression there was “no belief” that this was something that could be pushed through by the commission.

She vowed, however, that she and others would continue to demand action.

“If you look around the world, you can see that the EU is now the only place where we’re still fighting for women’s rights,” she said, pointing to the rollback of rights in the US and the Middle East.

“Europe and the EU can be a place where we fight robustly for women’s rights. And we are – and can be – an example for others.”

How should I make sure that the consent from my sex partner is well documented?

In simpler words, one can easily prove they had sex, but one can hardly prove their sex partner have consented that sex on that moment.

Maybe in some future, before having sex, we would have to go through some cognitive tests first, then write down a list about what is consented in this sex, and use a non-retractable public platform with ID check to document all these. And perhaps we would need a camera in the room to record it and make sure no protocol is violated.

That sounds pretty much like a porn shooting. They do have medical/healthy checks regularly, contracts signed and sex recorded.

Consent-based definition of rape? So just the definition of rape you mean.

I’ll just post this as a main comment before people start going crazy 😅

It’s worked fine in Denmark since 2020, and no, no more innocent people have falelsy been accused/convicted. Rape is still very hard to prove in court, but the difference it has made is that legally, physical violence isn’t ’needed‘ to convict someone as a rapist anymore.

Coercion, manipulation, having sex with someone incapable of consent, marital SA, is now considered rape instead of „just“ SA. No, we don’t sign contracts before fucking lol.

It’s made a bunch of legal rights way more easy to access for rape victims, and documenting (for science and statistics) the effects of „sex without consent“ / (which is now rape) can be used during education of police, sex education in schools, debunking myths surrounding victim blaming and much more.

-Including immediate access to emergency contact and care at the hospital, and trauma specialists, even if no physical injuries are present.

If in doubt, just ASK YOUR PARTNER: Example #1 for idiots: „hey, you don’t look comfortable, are you still enjoying this?“.
Stop and/or don’t initiate if Someone is unresponsive, drugged or unconscious, in a coma, starts crying, backs away when you try to kiss them, says: Ow it hurts, I changed my mind, I don’t feel well, etc.
It’s really not that hard.

Again: No we don’t sign contracts before sex 😂

One more example for idiots:
https://youtu.be/pZwvrxVavnQ?feature=shared

I like the idea. But I’m very sceptical about the implementation of this.

There’s no way to prove who said what unless you record the entire interaction until the consent is given. So it won’t change anything in practice.

I’m also highly sceptical that this law is going to be applied to men and women equally

Good initiative.

It seems wise to have a single definition of rape across all of EU, to avoid troubles, and I’m thinking especially about Erasmus students.

There are laws already against rape in all civilized EU country. Why waste resources on redefinitions?

Lmao this is a terrible idea

Silence, lack of resistance, the absence of a ‘no’, previous consent, past sexual conduct or any current or previous relationship must not be interpreted as consent,”

During sex mens brains and judgement are getting affected by these chemicals.

1.Dopamine
2.Oxytocin
3.Serotonin
4.Endorphins „feel-good“ chemical
5.Norepinephrine
6. Adrenaline

Call me crazy but i would say signals like saying something or resisting aka expressing displeasure is very important. Clearly.

People travel more and more within the EU, be it for work or leisure, so having laws regarding human interactions standardized is a good thing in my opinion. More important, we need to talk to our children, so we can break from „women are so emotional and they don’t know what they want, so they say no, but mean yes…“ . Yes means yes, no means no, and consent can be revoked at any moment, when entering intimate relationship with someone one should bear that in mind. And any normal adult can easily pick up if the other party is giving consent, if you are still not sure, walk away, if they are into you, they will chase you.

How about we standardise traffic laws first? Far less politically spicy, and very much needed

The only and main problem with consent law it is the “non explicit retreat of consent during sex” thing (or even after, in some case)

All the rest is obviously fair and fine, but that particoular will always be a legal blindspot