"A quarter of uk adults think that marital sex without consent is not rape."

Or, to put it another way - my friend was raped by her husband whilst in early labour.

He got her pregnant during consensual sex so by your reasoning he could have assumed she liked it.

Whowoudathunkit you are suggesting that consent is permanent when in a relationship.

It isn't.

If people all over the country were inadvertently committing any other serious crime in large numbers because they were literally unaware it was against the law, I wonder what the government response would be?

Good question. I assume that something would be done.

It is also a very interesting statistic because if people don't think it is a crime, isn't it very likely that the men are doing it? I think most people tend to assume that things they consider morally wrong are illegal. Also, using the word "rape" is a moral judgement. Even a person unaware that marital rape is illegal would use the word rape if they thought it wrong.

Likewise, a woman would be inclined to consider marital rape rape if it never happened to her - but would have more reason to consider it not so bad if her husband did it and she has to justify staying with him.

So this is grim ... not just because those people might sit on juries.

Nope, not engaging any further. @MNHQ could you deal with this one, please?

How is suggesting that consent is implied within the confines of an intimate relationship "rapey"?

If a strange man touches my backside while im out shopping is that an assault?

Of course it is!

If my husband does it, to me, its fine, I like it. I don't expect him to ask permission first!

Whats so difficult to understand about that?

If we could arrange for a group vomit receptacle that would be great, looks like we're going to need it.

Even as women, we don't always agree on what is/isn't abuse.

As neither a cult nor The Borg, there will always be difference of opinion. However, I think the law is (belatedly) quite clear on the issue of consent and sleep/unconsciousness albeit it isn't playing out that way in the courts. And the survey statistics might be pointing to some reasons as to why that is true while simultaneously highlighting some interesting generational differences.

As for the depiction of securing consent for sexual activity - it's like reading a re-write of Frank Furedi's Teaching consent, policing intimacy: Consent classes turn relationships into business transactions

The most striking example of the formalisation of consent is the idea of affirmative consent. Known in America as ‘yes means yes’ laws, affirmative consent demands that consent be explicitly expressed at every stage of a sexual encounter. From this perspective, the usual interactions associated with romantic and sexual encounters – eye contact, body language and other non-verbal signals – are no longer sufficient to signal consent. Instead, affirmative consent is arrived at through modes of engagement more typical of the business world than the bedroom.

www.spiked-online.com/2015/10/27/teaching-consent-policing-intimacy/

Furedi enjoys his turn of phrase too much to examine wider context and commonsense at times. Yes, there are differences for exchanges/relationships of different duration. In longer relationships, there are typically ground rules that can be revisited depending on circumstances and context. As for shorter transactions/relationships - I'm still pro the adults involved being in a sufficiently aware/conscious state to understand what's happening and engage in whatever prophylactic practices suit their needs. And, prophylaxis in this case might also involve avoiding unwanted contact or harm.

As a general note, sexual and fertility coercion are part of an overall pattern of coercive control in relationships that have that abusive dynamic.

I understand exactly what rape is. But lately, the media has been obsessed with sexual assaults.

If you define rape as penetration without consent, then it absolutely clear cut, isn't it?

But "rape" is such an emotive word. Did the people responding to the survey understand the legal denifition of the offence, or were they referring to their own understanding of the word.

For example, most people would agree that a woman who was jogging through a park and subsequently attacked by a stranger, beaten and seriously sexually assaulted was "raped". But when they as asked to consider the possibility that a husband having sex with his drunk wife, was guilty to the same level of culpability as the stranger in the park, most can't reconcile the two. That's the problem. It's not a misunderstanding of what the word rape means. It's the idea that all men are guilty to the same degree, regardless of circumstances.

I just don't think that most people are oblivious to the subtleties of human behaviour. And consequently are reluctant to label all "rapes" as "rapes" in the true sense of the word. I.E the stranger in the park v a couple in an intimate relationship.

Seems a bit like necrophilia to me, wanting to "intimately touch" people who're unconscious and thus incapable of consenting or participating in any way. I would prefer that anyone like that maintain at least a 10 foot distance from me at all times, which would make being in a relationship a bit challenging.

Now, to me, being in a sexual relationship with another person means some behaviour doesn't require consent. For example, touching the other person in an intimate way. Thats THE whole point of being in a relationship, otherwise it would just a platonic friendship

rapey

For the benefit of lurkers....consent doesn't have to be verbal. Enthusiastic participation is absolutely consent.
If your partner is withdrawn or doesn't seem enthusiastic maybe check before penetrating to avoid being reckless and unintentionally raping them.

If they are asleep leave them the fuck alone or at least wake them up and check they want to be touched.

I honestly think that we should be moving away from adversarial justice in rape trials because of the over reliance on rape myths by the defence and in juries. It's not getting better.
Totally agree.

Oh stop it. She wasn't hysterical, she was justifiably upset. You are the problem, your attitude is exactly what the issue is. Being asleep means you cannot consent to anything. Non-rapey partners will know that and check that you are awake before touching intimately.

Anyone that pretends it's impossible to have intimate relations with their partner due to consent, is lying. It's pathetic that anyone would suggest it tbh.

Considering it was only (inexplicably) made illegal in 1991 it's no wonder some are confused.

And for the sake of anyone distressed reading this - orgasm does not mean she consented.

Oh dear @whodathunkit even more scary if you do work in a related field

Ah, so we have been visited by one of the people who doesn't understand what rape is. I suppose that was inevitable.

If people all over the country were inadvertently committing any other serious crime in large numbers because they were literally unaware it was against the law, I wonder what the government response would be?

I can understand how the answers in the long term partner question came about.

Agreed - there is a legal difference (belated as it was in parts of the UK in re: the introduction of legislation relating to the concept of marital rape). Similarly - there's a difference in re: introduction of legislation about consent from drunk/unconscious women.

I'm still puzzling through bits of the data.

I can understand how the answers in the long term partner question came about.

I can understand in that situation the respondents may think there is a grey area between nagging on at a woman to make her give in and legitimate efforts to get a partner interested. Respondents of both sexes may well have had experience of this.

But sex when someone is drunk/asleep/changes her mind halfway through / removing a condom? How did any of them rationalise that?

The End Violence Against Women YouGov Survey and data tables are here (but I may be over-interpreting 'Long term partner" as a proxy for the questions about marriage) and they use "gender" rather than "sex" as demographic categories:

www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/major-new-survey-many-still-unclear-what-rape-is/

www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Data-tables-for-Attitudes-to-Sexual-Consent-research-report.pdf pdf

There was, of course, a sex/gender disparity in that question and the ones about the long-term partner.

I honestly think that we should be moving away from adversarial justice in rape trials because of the over reliance on rape myths by the defence and in juries. It's not getting better.

I think there needs to be some sort of massive public education campaign on consent and rape.

Not surprised. Not one tiny bit.