DH didn’t stop when I said stop

[bijouhibou]

First time having sex after post childbirth vaginal surgery. All was well - better than expected - until very near his climax and I said stop because I was uncomfortable. He said he was going to come, carried on then came about 5 seconds later. I was in great pain and brought tears to my eyes. He was v supportive afterwards but those 5 secs were awful.

I know it’s physically difficult for men to stop when the floodgates open, so to speak, but AIBU re: those 5 seconds?

JAPAB same here, it doesn't matter whether it is DP, DH, FWB, ONS etc to me, the outcome is still the same. I was curious tho, because there has been a lot of 'how is your relationship generally?' & 'has this happened before?' comments, which suggests that people are playing this down because it is OPs husband that did it

mathanxiety you make a fair point there!!

And then there would be the question of what was she wearing and had she sent mixed signals...

Scary thought really

But it's also hard for the OP to consider reporting what happened to the police as she does of course still love him (you can't just turn your feelings off) and he's her DCs' father. If it's a date rape, yes people might be a bit judgey but there won't be the same desire to bury it under the carpet.

It's totally the same crime, but no one wants to think the man they love is actually a rapist, hence the OP's refusal to accept it.

I can fully understand OP struggling to get her head round it, it isn't something that many want to consider. My question was more directed at the commenters saying it was a mistake because...

Although i do believe OP has some thoughts it wasn't right, because she said herself if a friend told her the same thing she would have reacted to it

But it's also hard for the OP to consider reporting what happened to the police as she does of course still love him (you can't just turn your feelings off) and he's her DCs' father. If it's a date rape, yes people might be a bit judgey but there won't be the same desire to bury it under the carpet.

It's totally the same crime, but no one wants to think the man they love is actually a rapist, hence the OP's refusal to accept it.

Which is understandable. And the posters who 'feel' it wasn't rape seem very invested because there's a marriage and children involved.
I'm guessing these posters would advise their daughters in the same way.
And if their sons behaved like this? Makes me shudder.

Queen that's what concerns me. Yep, OP is more emotionally invested in this than anybody else, it will of course be hard for her. But it concerns me that the overall message on this thread from many is that some things are okay if your husband does them. Which of course when you break it down into actions & consequences is incorrect in a legal sense.

I too worry to think what some posters are teaching their children. It's okay for a man to rape you if he is your partner & he loves you. It's okay for you to ignore your partner's withdrawal of consent as long as it is the first time you have done it & it 'only' lasts a few seconds. What a wonderful future our kids face

Sadly in a lot of cases the rapist is known to the victim. I believe that rape is even more damaging when commited by someone that is supposed to love and care for you. That's why it is so important to validate to a victim that rape is rape, no matter the relationship between the perp and the victim. That they CAN go to the police if they decide to. That is okay to feel confused, deeply hurt and degraded. To minimise rape is incredibly harmful.

There are no levels to rape. No mild, moderate or severe. Someone that is raped by a husband is no less a victim of rape compared to someone dragged off a street by a stranger. Rape is rape and No means No. Until this is universally accepted, women will continue either suffering in silence or seeing the perp get away with what he did to her, in a court of law.

The OP has the right to report her DH obviously, but none of us should pressure her to do so either. She has the right to decide not to report it as well. The whole process is so harrowing, and the conviction rate so low that it's understandable that the OP won't want to do that. The best way to get help and support is through Rape Crisis, they can help the OP to decide what she wants to do.

What she shouldn't do is allow her DH to minimise what happened. I was very disturbed by his attitude of surprise that she was still upset by it. For me, that would spell the end of the relationship regardless of whether I reported it. Because I have 2 DDs and I wouldn't want to give them the idea that rape is ever in any way an acceptable part of a marriage. My DM's minimising has been so damaging to DSis and me.

Totally agree with you, Lizzie

I am incensed with the rape apologists but would I advise op to go directly to the police despite knowing that the law is on her side ?

No. And that is because of the pervasive attitudes to rape within marriage amply demonstrated on this thread. Seems like nothing has really changed since 1991.

AnyFucker

Absolutely.

So many people getting it arse-backwards here: you wouldn't get a conviction so it can't have been a rape.

Nope. You may not get a conviction because some people like to dilute or obfuscate the definition of rape, and others don't understand it, plus there is always the requirement to present actual evidence. It is still a rape.

No I wouldnt advise to report either.

Neither would I advise to end the marriage or re build it. That is for op to work out for herself.

The choice is always with the person involved. I never reported one of my rapes, even though i knew it was rape. But having people pooh pooh it & brush it aside would have done nothing for me long term in getting past it. By acknowledging this for what it is, it can give some strength & control back rather than just letting someone in OPs situation think they are over reacting

I haven't commented until now but I've read the whole thread. To me the OP's experience of the situation is paramount. She's said twice that she doesn't feel she was raped. Of course what she described fits the legal definition of rape, but she weighed up the situation in the light of her experience of him as a person and feels that was happened was horrible but not rape. And that alone makes it indefensible to try to pursuade her that it was. Furthermore there is nothing wrong with her feeling like this and people who support her are not rape apologists. Suppose your best friend noticed you'd left a ten pound note at their house that had fallen out of your purse and deliberately picked it up and put it in their bag with the intention of giving it back to you. Suppose they then forgot and only mentioned it when they remembered weeks later. Would it feel like a horrible betrayal? Probably. Would it leave your friendship slightly tainted? Probably. Does it fit the legal definition of theft? Absolutely. Would you call the police and see her in court? ....

Suppose your best friend noticed you'd left a ten pound note at their house that had fallen out of your purse and deliberately picked it up and put it in their bag with the intention of giving it back to you. Suppose they then forgot and only mentioned it when they remembered weeks later. Would it feel like a horrible betrayal? Probably. Would it leave your friendship slightly tainted? Probably. Does it fit the legal definition of theft? Absolutely. Would you call the police and see her in court? ....

No, it doesn't. She intended to give it back. That isn't theft.

Only that isn't a theft

That analogy doesn't in any way equate to what happened to the OP. Her OH didn't intend to stop, then forgot or couldn't. He ignored her. Big difference.

The thing is the thread has branched off slightly so without trying to push OP into anything...which nobody should be doing regardless...the discussion about definitions is ongoing.

I had a similar situation to op in my younger years. Not a husband but someone I was dating. I knew it was rape back then but didn't report it because I knew I would get accused of "leading him on, red blooded male, point of no return etc". I even carried on dating him for a while in a misguided attempt to normalise the situation in my own head ! I tried to raise the concept with him and he just laughed in my face. This was a "nice young man" woth prospects etc

I believe similar sexual assaults have hsppened to many, many women. There was a very long thread on here a couple of years back. A lot of women got support from it and the rape apologists on this thread would have been chased away with their ignorant tails between their legs.

It's depressing how there are still women trying to tell others it's no big deal.

Singing, some posters were claiming it wasn't rape before op, in her second post, said she didn't feel like she'd been raped. So they weren't supporting her, they were putting their own views onto her.
Posters like me were clearly stating it was rape by legal definations.
After my experience I can't say I 'felt' raped. I was in shock and felt emotionally frozen. My first instinct was not to report it.
So I don't know how you're supposed to feel when you've been raped?
The lack of violence would, i guess, leave you very confused.

That analogy is rubbish.

Unless you consider access to women's bodies to be on a par with owning chattels

And back to pre 1991 we go.....

What a weird analogy.

What would you do if that friend punched you on the nose, you say stop it hurts, friend continues for another 5 seconds whilst you are clearly in pain, just because they are enjoying themselves?

I guess you wouldn't say it was a relatively small incident and you should just forgive the otherwise lovely friend.

It doesn't matter if the analogy doesn't work. The point I was obviously making is that the victim's perception shouldn't be ignored. And the analogy does show the complexity. Anyone who's ever been charged with theft could say they intended to give it back but forgot.

I think people are getting a bit confused about their mens rea. In theft, the intention has to be to dishonestly deprive the other person, permanently, of their property. In rape, the intention has to be to penetrate someone without their consent. The test is two-fold: a) did penetration occur? b) was there a reasonable belief that it was consensual. Etc. Simple stuff.

Singingtherapy

That isn't complexity. It is just lying. It doesn't make it theft if the person did actually intend to give it back, which was the specified scenario here.