當天出席該圓桌會議的律師公會代表極力批判上述條文。他們認為375(2)(f)條款的措詞模糊，可被某些婦女濫用，一些機構的上司如果跟女下屬產生情愫和發生性關系的話，那么在女方可在關系惡化后，以此條文來誣指男上司強奸。

True but I think the woman victim could have rejected the request for sex initially. If a woman wants a promotion or whatever gain, uses sex as a tool and may go back and sue the male boss, then it is not rape but back-stabbing. I think in this case, the law can still be there but require a higher standard of proof to convict. Otherwise, it can be abused. The onus pf proof have to come from women victims.

在375(2) (g)方面，律師公會代表認為，控方很難證明強奸犯在強奸受害者時，知道受害者正懷孕。

the victim could either spot a huge tummy/wearing maternity gown or mentioned that she is pregnant. I think since the rapists are criminals of the worst kind, as long as the victim spots a tummy or reported that she mentioned that she was pregnant, then it suffices. Lower the standard of proof on this one. Ok, it is double standard but I don’t think cruel people deserve equal rights under certain circumstances.

律師公會的代表也認為，雖然他們認同在一些失敗的婚姻里，一些丈夫經常通過暴力來逼使為妻者與他發生性關系，但是他們卻認為375A可被一些活在失敗的婚姻里的妻子所濫用，而指她們的丈夫強奸她們。這些律師代表認為，為人妻者很容易指責丈夫強奸她們，但是為夫者卻很難反駁，因為他們很難在婚姻強奸的指控里提出具體的證據來反駁。

have to have injury marks to show element of force, Yes, this is the most difficult situation to obtain proof. I still think the law should stay but the onus of proof should come from the victim. It is easier to proof then to deny.

However, all the above seems to apply to non-muslims only as Islam have their own sex laws.
I think more importantly is to have police personnel, hospital staff and lawyers trained to handle and assist rape victims. I heard that pre-judgments are form and victims are chided. A prostitute/sexually active unmarried female/sexy female dresser can still be a victim of rape if sexual activities (note: not only penetrative activities alone) are forced upon them. This is a part of narrow-mindedness of our society that must be righted.
DAP should suggest some form of government funding to set up rape victims assistance body to assist them in recovery physically and physiologically. I hope the government would not reject it just because it comes from DAP.