'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?

Funny how it's only women's rights issues that people refuse to support unless they are put forward in a docile, pleasing (submissive?) way.

This! I find this a lot of MN

If you can wrap your head around the idea that intelligent people can't get the hang of trains occasionally, surely you can understand that sex might occasionally be a little more complicated and therefore might quite possibly flummox someone, especially if they're both inexperienced, feeling under pressure to act things they don't feel, and have had a drink or two?

I have already said that i will accept that a minority of people may not grasp the concept of consent. I have also said that I don't think this is the norm at all and I don't believe these people should be engaging in sexual activity with others until they do grasp the concept.

Given it's not an option, or something that cannot be controlled by me, I can determine they may have sex and may well rape women. But in what world is that their victims fault? I'm sorry but "well I don't understand consent" shouldn't fly - that's not their victim's fault. Would you suggest that we say to the victim "well sorry but they didn't understand that you didn't want it so suck it up"?

More posters would disagree but don't want to stick their heads above the parapet. Surely you don't want that - a situation where other women disagree with what you are claiming is representative of women and can't say so?

You don't speak for all posters or all women so don't try and scare me into thinking being a feminist alienates people

FGS When has ANYTHING been achieved by NOT being militant??! The women here who have been raped are not chaining themselves to the railings for no reason! You HAVE to be militant. In the history of campaigning for women's rights, you MUST shout, get angry, you MUST keep going, you MUST stick with the end goal. WHY do we have votes, equal opportunities, maternity leave, laws against sex discrimination?? If you're wishy washy or compliant or understanding, balanced or reasonable fucking nothing gets done. We've done ALL that. For millennia. The people who are militant are doing us all a service. Because, eventually, finally, the militancy will get diluted down to the point of changing a law.

I've never been raped. Nothing like. I don't come from a personal position of violation and trauma. But without the women who are prepared to put it all on the line, I'd be nowhere. Argue about consent, passive sex, misread signals, grey areas all you like. You get no-where.

If you don't like the term rape apologist with all its connotations, think of another one. But don't shoot the people who are angry, who are calling it. WHEN the laws change and you actually get what you want, remember who did it.

Well said!

There are actual people who have been raped on this thread. Listen to them.

This with bells on.

Yeah well said Datun

The suffragettes were constantly bombarded with a barrage of shite from everyone, including the police, including other women (who i am sure would have said at the time 'you don't speak for me, im perfectly happy with the status quo), including the media.

Imagine the things said about them. Imagine if they had just rolled over and given up. They tried being nice and 'ladylike' and not offensive or militant or kicking up too much of a fuss. It didn't work.

Datun 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼

Anyone who says "we'll engage with you ladies if you were just nice, otherwise I'm not interested" can FOTTFSOFAFOSM. I shouldn't have to put on airs and graces to convince people that women matter. In fact, the kind of people who take this view probably have a very low opinion of women, if they think they have to speak a certain way to be taken seriously, and I'd rather not engage with them anyway

YY. Great posts.

That's just it - people shouldn't need to be persuaded nicely to view women as human beings.

"Also yes of course if a woman was lying motionless and quiet any normal man would at least ask if she's enjoying it."

Yes, if it's their first time together and she hasn't explained how she is.

Why would I want to make an excuse for men who can't be bothered? Why?? I'm a woman. I find disrespect of women disgusting.

I would rather dot every i and cross every t to make bloody sure that there are no situations where there was 'reasonable belief in consent'. Not because I want rapists to get away with rape or to offer their lawyer another line of fuckery defence but because I genuinely believe this happens and do not see how anyone who reads mumsnet can believe that it doesn't.

if in doubt ask
This rests on the assumption that there will always be some tangible sign that women don't want to proceed. The sad reality is occasionally women do their best to seem like they're enjoying sexual contact when they're not. That will affect what reasonable beliefs the man will hold about what they want. It will affect the presence or absence of doubt in his mind and without the presence of doubt, he can be forgiven for not verbally checking.

Many people on the thread have said that 'enthusiastic participation' should be the indication that consent is present, with verbal consent asked for if in any doubt. There's a problem with that when women fake enthusiastic participation, without perhaps realising that some men assume enthusiasm for what's happening now implies consent for penetration. You wouldn't believe people can be so clueless (on both sides) but it can happen. Vague guidelines aren't enough.

I'm saying this because I would like to be sure it didn't happen. Not because I'm interested in excusing lads who can't be bothered to respect women. If there was spelt-out, non-subjective, cast-iron consensus about they should be doing to obtain consent I would revel in being able to beat such men over the head with it, metaphorically speaking. Not least because my friends would have been just the sort to pretend they were having fun when they weren't. And please note, I am not talking about the situations that have been mentioned upthread when women freeze because they are being raped or during sexual contact that they've been coerced into.

But in the context of a one night stand or first time sex, surely you would think the man would take the time to check?

I've known young women with babies who were conceived through consensual sex in the toilets of nightclubs and they didn't necessarily know the person's name. It defies 'surely you would thinks.' I'm not talking about the people who think much beforehand and who find out their sexual partner's name and go and look for a proper private place to have sex. I really wouldn't assume anything except about very casual sex between some people except that if a man doesn't want to rape someone, he will stop if he becomes aware of that. I wouldn't assume said men will 'surely' do anything that he ought to do off his own bat. If that's infantilising them I don't care - it's realistic. Some of them need telling.
'

"Apologist means means defender of not apologises for..."

Whichever. I'm defending passive women, not rapists. Some people were arguing that unless you can stick your tongue down a man's throat or stick your nails into his bum, you're being raped.

*marble upthread said 'Obviously both boys and girls need early and ongoing education about consent and abuse...There is a difference between proper, considered, sensitive sex and relationship education and victim blaming. The simplistic statements are, whether intentionally or not, victim blaming.'

Actually, many posters have said there is no need for education about consent because it is so simple and to suggest otherwise is to promote a rape myth. So why are you allowed to say it when no one is, marble :)

pink

I agree with you - it's not a woman's fault if a man doesn't understand issues of consent. I was under the impression that you had repeatedly insisted no one could get consent wrong.

Since people are occasionally going to have sex without grasping the crucial importance of being absolutely sure there is consent and without the desire to rape, I think education and clear guidelines about what constitutes consent is a must. Forgive if I'm wrong, but haven't you just spent most of the thread arguing this isn't necessary? Then you said ok it might happen but they shouldn't be having sex. Now you're saying ok he might have been a genuine fool but it's not the woman's fault. Well obviously it's not the woman's fault. I wasn't looking at this as culpability being the be-all and end-all. I was thinking about how to STOP IT HAPPENING!

Some people were arguing that unless you can stick your tongue down a man's throat or stick your nails into his bum, you're being raped.

Absolute bollocks.

As for all these women who thoroughly enjoy sex as their man pumps away into them whilst they lie there completely motionless with absolutely no signal that they having a nice time, every time they have sex......really?????

There is a world of difference between a woman who is 'inhibited' in bed and a woman who doesn't move a muscle or make a sound despite apparently having a great time. Every time.

If you're wishy-washy and compliant nothing gets done

You might find that not much gets done just because you're really angry and say fuck a lot.

Most things get done when people are firm, persistent and engaged. Militant isn't engaged.

You don't speak for all posters or all women so don't try and scare me into thinking being a feminist alienates people

You don't think you've isolated yourself from posters who would have posted on the thread but haven't because of the way alternative points of view are responded to? I know you have. If you and your cronies weren't so abusive, there would be posts on the thread instead of in my inbox.

And I have never said I speak for anyone. I don't. FFS.

"Absolute bollocks."

No, it's not bollocks. There are 34 pages so I can't copy the examples, but similar things were used as 'enthusiastic consent'.

"As for all these women who thoroughly enjoy sex as their man pumps away into them whilst they lie there completely motionless with absolutely no signal that they having a nice time, every time they have sex......really?????"

Um, yeah, it does happen. Sorry I'm crap in bed, can't really help it. It doesn't mean anyone who has sex with me is a rapist.

"There is a world of difference between a woman who is 'inhibited' in bed and a woman who doesn't move a muscle or make a sound despite apparently having a great time. "

I don't really know what you mean. I also didn't say inhibited women are necessarily having a 'great time' or having an orgasm, just that they may be enjoying it and have consented.

This is interesting
www.the-pool.com/news-views/latest-news/2016/43/men-can-t-tell-when-women-are-sexually-interested-in-them-and-neither-can-i?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1477322825

gwen if you are inhibited like that, how do you make sure your partners know you are up for it?

gwen

You must be crushing their self esteem though

No kissing, no touching, no sounds

I am not trying to be mean but i feel a bit sorry for your partner

I dont think anyone should perform and i am bad in bed as well

But dh would be gutted if he didnt think i was having a nice time

theere's a problem with that when women fake enthusiastic participation, without perhaps realising that some men assume enthusiasm for what's happening now implies consent for penetration

Then men should be told that saying yes please to one thing does not mean yes please to anything else you would like to do

Posts that people find offensive and full of victim blaming have been responded to strongly, slender. Not reasonable, thoughtful posts. Stop trying to tone police justifiable anger. If you and your "cronies" stopped promoting rape myths and whinging on about how terrible feminism is, people wouldn't call you rape apologists or misogynists.