Date rape can generally be defined as occurring whenever a man forces his date to have sex with him against her will. Some people expand this definition to include forced sex by any acquaintance, whether it be in the context of a date or not. Despite these simple definitions, however, there is a great deal of controversy over the precise legal and moral implications of date rape or acquaintance rape. The legal definition for date rape is extremely limited and it tends to place the burden of proof on the victim. A date rape victim will have a difficult time in court if the defense attorney can show a lack of evidence or can imply that the woman is loose or immoral in any way. Thus, in prosecuting a date rape case, it helps if the victim has visible bruises and is a "woman of shining character," because otherwise "the strict constructionist definitions of rape will prevail in court."
Whereas the legal view treats date rape as if it were a regular rape by a stranger, moral definitions tend to take other factors into account. For example, date rape raises a number of ethical questions regarding the line that divides normal courtship behavior from violent assault. Many offenders argue that they forced their dates to have sex with them because they believed that is how women like being treated. Despite this, however, it is obvious that there is a difference between mutual consent between partners and one person using force against the other. As noted by Susan Jacoby, "even the most callow youth can understand the difference between a halfhearted 'no, we shouldn't' and tears or screams." There are a number of other moral questions which are raised by the issue of date rape. For example, it is obvious that a rape has occurred if the man has used physical force; however, is it also rape if he has used coercion or threats or has gotten his date drunk in order to have sex with her? Because there are moral difficulties in defining d...