At the second reading of the Crimes Amendment Bill (No 2), Ms Bradford proposed changes to the way rape was defined, to include rapes by men on men, women on women, women on men, the use of objects, and anal and oral rape.
The Bill says only women can be raped. Men are not considered to be victims of rape, no matter how brutal the attack - and women cannot rape.
The amendment was rejected. I find this simply incomprehensible. What possible reason could there be for retaining such an outdated and sexist definition of 'rape' in our laws?