Coerced sex IS rape

I don't understand why anyone would want to change the definition of rape to include sex after 'cajoling'. There is no 'grey area' IMO.

There is sex that is consensual, which may involve foreplay of many many kinds. And there is rape.

If a woman doesn't want to have sex, and doesn't consent, don't have sex with her.

Several of us on this thread are describing situations where we might be happy with some foreplay, but we're not yet sure if we want sex. That is normal, surely? Consent is a continual process, it's not like we have to decide at the beginning 'yes, I will definitely consent to sex in half an hour after you rub my feet'. We get to decide at the time. That does not make what happens in the intervening time 'coersion'.

The only people in whose interests it would be to blur the line between 'coersion' and 'consent' are rapists.

Aren't we playing semantics here? Coerce means to compel by force So if you coerce someone into having sex, you are compeling them by force, which is obviously rape.
EatsBrainAndLeaves - is that what you meant by coerce?

Eats,

If I substituted going out for dinner for sex, would you find persuasion so unreasonable? For instance, if you really fancied a meal out but your partner/friend said they were tired but then you reminded them of how much they enjoyed it before and that they would have a good time once they were there. If, at that point, they smiled and said "go on then, let's go", would you regard them as having been coerced?

Coerced sex is rape.

By definition, persuasion and cajoling are NOT coercion. All you need is a dictionary. Persuasion is a way of changing someones mind. If I persuade you to come for a run with me, do you feel coerced into it? If you substitute anything else for sex, you will see how ridiculous equation coercion with cajoling or persuasion is. They are just completely different words with different meanings. Pestering is in the middle. If you feel threatened by it, it could just about fall into a grey area. If not, again not rape.

And, to say this thread is "about women" is disingenuous. Rape is a crime for which people (normally men) go to jail (and rightly so). Changing the definition to include persuasion or cajoling would affect men a lot.

Yes, I think a court would. I am not a lawyer. But threatening physical violence to someone in order to make them consent is obviously rape, so is threatening them in terms of withdrawing financial support etc.

I don't know you personally and don't want to get into it. You know how you feel.

No-one has the right to make you have sex against your will.

Yes I would agree that all of those situations you describe are rape FeministDragon. Whether a court would agree is another issue.

I suppose I was looking at from a personal perspective where I have had sex despite not really wanting to which is not the same at all.

It's not rocket science, is it?

If what you say/do to your partner is likely to make them feel turned on and happy, you are probably on the right lines. Congratulations!

If what you say/do to your partner is likely to make them feel upset/shite/nagged at, you are probably not. Back to square one for you.

We all surely know when we're turned on and when we're not.

Simply being pestered for sex is not the same as forced sex, no. With the former, the person being pestered has the option to leave. Obviously, if there are threats of violence as another poster has pointed out, the situation is different.

Fat fingers. Phone.

In all types of relationships whether those are heterosexual, gay or lesbian or any other kind you choose.

I am quite sure that persuading cajoling and pestering for sex goes on in all types of sexual relati

Treats- that would be covered under the legal definition by the woman not having the freedom to make the choice, so that wouldn't be consent.

whistle - any scenario you could imagine, surely?

Threats of physical violence
Threats to leave the person/withdraw financial support for children
Threats to 'pay them back' if they don't consent

Please can you give an example of someone being coerced into sex which amounts to rape. I'm just finding it hard to
imagine the type of scenario.

treats - that's rape, IMO. If someone consents through fear, that is rape.

Whining and sulking are in the same category, as bertie has already said.

Saying 'might you feel in the mood if I give you a massage' is foreplay.

They really do not resemble each other. The idea that they do is a rape myth spread by rapists. IMHO.

What Doctrine of Snatch and LRD said.

I think there's a whole category of coerced sex that is equal in seriousness to rape, but isn't rape. Someone could consent to sex because they're fearful of the consequences of saying no, for example. Is there a separate criminal offence that would cover that scenario?

If not, then I would be happy to see it classified and prosecuted as rape, because it's just as bad.

I think - with the whining and sulking scenario - it's not the same. You still have a free choice that you're not going to indulge the wanker.

I think coerced sex is rape.

I would never refer to persuasion as 'coersion', though.

There are a minority of people who can't tell the difference, or claim they can't tell - they're just doing the old, standard thing of twisting the truth, IMO. You know when you are being coerced and when you are consenting, and there cannot be any grey area.