'It might not have been rape, she might have had sex and regretted it afterwards'

[BravoHopeful]

This statement makes no sense. If you had consensual sex and the next day regretted it, why on earth would you go through the whole horrible experience of reporting it to the police and everything that follows? You would just move on and put it behind you.

It's always trotted out as a likely explanation in 'date rape' type cases. But it makes no sense whatsoever. AIBU?

I don't think you're trying to trick men. I think you may be so sure that men would exploit any firm guidelines that you're reluctant to give any. Which is silly IMO because clarity can only be a good thing.

So you do think I'm trying to trick men by being "reluctant to give guidelines"

If grown men with brains in their heads need guidelines on a woman consenting to sex, i don't think they should be having sex. Let's not infantilise men shall we?

Why do feminists resist spelling out what the specific expectations are in such a situation?

Why is up to women to hold mens' hands when it comes to consent? Figure it out for yourselves.

I agree seeking consent doesn't ruin the moment.

Comforting why are you so determined to blur the lines.

It is, or it should be fairly obvious if your partner isn't into sex.

Sex is a two way thing, mutual enjoyment, unless of course you're a rapist that doesn't actually care about his partners comfort and enjoyment.

But if he's taken it before without asking and there were no repercussions then its reasonable to assume it again.

Fuck me, do people really think like this?

Comfort you do actually have seriously warped thinking.

No it isn't reasonable to assume that you can take something that doesn't belong to you.
It is a crime.

My do might enjoy eating beans on toast.
If I cook beans on toast without first checking they want it, is it reasonable to assume they will eat it?

If they refuse then going along with your reasoning it appears it would be fine to force them to eat it..... Ok then .....

Maybe there were no repercussions because the car owner would be scared of what the prick of a friend might do to him if he raised his voice to object. Maybe the friend had bullied him into submission and the car owner thinks that he must have done something wrong to deserve his car being taken.

These are all thing women who are raped by their partners feel.

pinky I think you are assuming some of this posters might care what women who have been raped feel, when it's actually quite clear that isn't a factor in how they view things.

I had hidden this thread and now wish I'd kept it hidden.

He told me it was my fault as he raped me, some days I can see that for the pile of crap it is, other days it nags at me constantly. It scares me how many people think like him. I can only hope it comes from being naive rather than genuine belief that men should be allowed to do whatever they like and that the consequences should all befall the woman.

It's interesting that a few of the posters on this thread who are claiming confusion is the main problem (and feminists are at fault for not explaining clearly what consent looks like) are male. Frankly I'd run a mile if I met any of you.

Clearly - please can I rename you ClearlyNotMyFault. Because it wasn't.

And has it occurred to you that no innocent man would say something like that? I cannot conceive of a situation during consensual sex where a man could ever want to uttertthose words. The mere fact that he did to me screams that he knew exactly what he was doing, exactly how wrong it was, and was getting an additional kick out of fucking with your mind.

A man can't be expected to check his sexual partner is ok before he puts his cock in. It spoils the moment.

Marblefireplace I'm so glad you've just said that and I totally agree. In my experience it's totally normal in a healthy sexual relationship for a man to use similar phrases to those before intercourse. Like you say, if she says no, or falls silent, that's a good que to stop.

It's also normal if the women seems uncomfortable, quiet, still, like she's in pain, to ask her if she's ok, check she's liking it.

It's not difficult, it's not awkward. Why don't people get it?

What are people doing that they think there could be any confusion?

But if he's taken it before without asking and there were no repercussions then its reasonable to assume it again.

I think (really fucking hope!) that comfort has got this analogy a little bit mixed up in their minds, thinking that the above is representing previous consensual sex. Of course previous consensual sex would be taking the car with the owners permission.

Unless what they are saying is that if you have raped someone before and there were no repercussions, its ok to do it again

If you regualrly borrowed your friends car with their permission, i think most people would agree that you would have to be a bit of an arse to then just go round their house and take it without asking. And especially if you knocked at the door and when they answered it they were so out of it drunk that they could barely stand up or talk.

And yet..............

Even if comfort has got it mixed up, previous consensual sex doesn't mean always consensual sex.

I might have sex with my husband on Monday but be too tired on Tuesday. So on Tuesday he checks if I actually do want sex before going ahead anyway.

I genuinely don't understand all this twisting and turning trying to somehow excuse men who, at the very least, couldn't give a shit if their partner is ok, and at the very worst are rapists.

If the mood is ruined, or a man doesn't get the sex he wants, that is no big deal. However if a woman is raped, then that's a pretty big deal. So on balance it makes more sense to say that men should be very very careful about where they put their penis. It really isn't complicated.

Presumed consent is a legal get out clause, not a logical standard. You have the right to say no to sex at any time, no matter how many times you have had sex with the person previously. Arguing that a person had previously let another person "take it without repercussions" and then can reasonably expect that he can do it again is arguing for the right of men to rape women on multiple occasions.

For the women out there who genuinely believe a man can accidentally rape a woman, life must be terrifying. Not only are they under threat from rapists, they're under threat from all other men who can't be trusted to just be decent and behave with some respect in a sexual situation. What a horrible way to live.

Even if comfort has got it mixed up, previous consensual sex doesn't mean always consensual sex.

Yes exactly. Reading again I'm not entirely sure what they meant.

Sparrow, the more I read women prepared to defend really bad male behaviour, the more I suspect that sadly that many of them are in fact being subjected to repeated sexual abuse by their partners and what we're seeing is in fact a form of Stockholm syndrome. The only way they can cope with being repeatedly abused by the man they love is to repeatedly tell themselves that it isn't abuse because abuse is what happens down a dark alley at knife point.

Even when it does happen down a dark alley with threats people still default to why the woman was there, what was she wearing, was she drunk etc. Sadly there are many people of both sexes who are more than happy to believe that you only get raped if you do something to provoke it.

Well, I've had my 19 years of punishment for provoking it, if I had gone to the police and he'd been caught and convicted he'd have been able to move on with his life but mine would still have ended that night.

Some woman do consent to it then regret it the next day and cry rape, to me thats utterly disgusting and it has happened a few times.

Just when the threads start winding down

Up pops another one