1-TITLE OF THE ARTICLE:"Of  PACS from gay marriage: zeal late of the neo-convertis"(Du PACS au mariage gay:le zèle tardif des neo-convertis)

2-MY COMMENT THAT INCLUDE THE FULL TEXT OF THE WORK

"On 14 November 2002 on the Italian newspaper" CORRIERE DELLA SERA (Pag.14, publishing of Argentina),I read an article announcing the launch the "White Book" of the UK government, which became law seeks to reform the penal code regarding sexual crimes, such as those of discrimination Gay, abuse sexual,violations, pedophilia, rape and generally and others.The ambitious project staff and even claim change the moral Victorian putting side the current legislation which dates back to that time and is considered "archaic, incoherent and discriminatory."
Article among many other comments rivaival the ghost of OSCAR WILDE, speaks of "protect the people"(so called the document)and has to be assigned to a particular company "along liberal and compassionate."
The project seems to have originated in connection with a case of violation of "appointment" according to this writer.British today call is violation of "Date rape",and taken to a friend footballer acquaintance for many years with which he was going to cinema but preferred throwing them on the sofa and love:voluntarily or raped? Some similarity relations with the unions circumstantial and  PACS?
Done just this book reflects my concepts of sexual violation in a written my work, and by its publication I hope to put a little light and at the same time make a contribution on this topic.
These concepts I developed at not precise date in the 2002.The original manuscript I did in the Spanish language because these thoughts I have come to mind while listening to the radio comments of journalists feminist activists in a country that uses this language.The version for publication and legalization I did in my language: Italiano.The manuscript circulating before publication.
VIOLATION:PSYCHIC CONCEPT

The intention of this work is developing a concept of sexual violation by the scientific point of view.

Leaves out of this analysis violations sex with physical violence because they belong to medicine called organic.
Here climb the emphasis on psychosocial aspects but from a purely optical psichiatrica.Unti the moment the concepts of violation had as a focus anatomical aspects,moral,legal,etc.,but did not take account of a psychiatric closely and for this, in my opinion, without consideration of freedom of choice in human sexuality.
Sexual Violation: Concept Psichiatry.-
Must protect women(1)(without neglecting men) of acts sexual and loving abuse.(Even when they are not exercised with violence)
Violations are erotic and sexual acts against the will of someone in a relationship lovingi.But when the will sex loving raped? Obviously not when not entire the consent conscious and explicit of one of the participants in the relationship.But why consent conscious and explicitly when there are non violence? Here we need to make a small ECR: the state of love, both in its erotic aspects as sexual,always involves a certain degree of "alteration" of the consciousness in the sense more strictly biological-psychiatric,and for this one will weakening of varying degrees according it is a courtship,seduction or there is a physical sexual contact.
Thus the consent must be conscious and explicit, and therefore must be before any act of seduction or erotic game at least, and not only during sexual intercourse.
I think this post to ensure the freedom of choice sessuale.And it is precisely freedom what in the final ratio is the difference between consent and taxation,which actors first step of an infringement-violation.
But now this is useful dwell for a moment and analyze somme concepts of violation(without violence)worked recently.
These usually focus on moral and social-politcs aspects ignoring or leaving those in the background those psychiatric and social,who are behind the freedom of choice.
More specifically I would like to dwell in materialistic-utility and feminist approaches that have dominated the landscape of concepts theoretical of sexual violation non-violent(and more)after the war.
The first claim under the equality of the sexes,that basically has never been such, not distinction the role of the woman than the man during sexual violation.
But for social, educational, biological asepcts,the degree conditioning of both sexes,translated thus in an alteration of Conscience(which in varying degrees always entire during the approach sexual),as the individual freedom at the time of chice(this is in sexual act or previous approaches) must be evaluated in a different form.
The woman is more vulnerable,man less conditional  and therefore freedom of that is diminished.Ed this is that the limit between consent and the violation must be the lucidity of the conscience.Ed also why we should be mediation of the explicit consent,perhaps non verbal but always a step before the seduction.
If it were not so,should be considered violation without regard to breach the legal standardization may present a lower level of responsibility that when others involved aggravating as the feminist argument too waved the "dependency ratio".
This replaces the second aspect, namely the utility materialistic Even if the dependency ratio (workplaces, social, legal, etc.) can be most serious, it should not be the first nor the priority.

Both in the first as the second design what is a priority and ensure a truly free consent, and therefore there is need for a state of total lucidity of the conscience.
If the consent should be back to the seduction and is not explicitly not be free because the conscience is not lucid.
In sum sexual act is voluntary, free, when there is conscious and explicit consent without regard to sex, the relationship of dependency or other influences of all kinds.
---------------------------------------------------------
POST-DATA:
Here I use for the first time in sexology terms of daily use with an intentionality scientist-Psychiatrics.This nomenclature was all defined by me without prior exist

A)FLIRT,TEMPTATIONS AND SEXUAL ACT are different degrees in growing exponentially, in that order, the same loving act.

FLIRT:Not necessarily suggests physical contact,can contain or not proposals loving and even sexual contact,but it contains no mandatory.For example take the hand,petting corporal zones not erogenous,embrace,etc.(physical contact not erogenous)

SEXUAL ACT: contains physical contact with the explicit intention of ending up in a sexual act, what necessarily involves contact with the intention also clear, to cut in areas corporal erogene.Non inevitably involves penetration.

B)LOVING,EROTICISM AND SEXUALITY it must differentiate.

LOVING:involves a sentiment that has a higher degree of mental elaborating on the attraction between two human.Contains abstract aspects influencied for education,social context,etc.,and it does not necessarily imply what is sexual or erogene.

EROTICISM: Without exclude higher levels of love,always involves the sensitivity(Sensuality),but not necessarily sexual intercourse,and the physical contact(vuoyerismo for ess).

SEXUALITY:even if we have to distinguish of genital because is influenced by the loving and eroticism, always contains. Not necessarily implies sexual intercourse with penetration.

OF SEXOLOGY I HAVE BEEN CONCERNED FOR THE LAST TIME.