MNHQ here - should we support the campaign to end ‘rough sex’ defences?

[JustineMumsnet]

Hello

As lots of you will already know because their campaign originated on Mumsnet, the group We Can’t Consent To This has been running a campaign to end ‘rough sex’ defences - and we’d like to know what you think about MNHQ signing up as a supporter of their
campaign.

Their aim is to end a situation in which defendants can claim that the death of or injury to a woman was caused by ‘consensual sex games gone wrong’.

They say:

‘We’ve now found 60 UK women who’ve been killed by men who claim a sex game gone wrong - and in the last 5 years the defence was successful in 7 of the 17 killings of a woman which reached trial, with the man being found not guilty or receiving a manslaughter conviction. We've found many more women injured in what the accused men claim was consensual sexual violence.
Yet more women tell us it’s now commonplace to be assaulted and abused by men they’re dating, with 38% of UK women under 40 reporting being assaulted - choked, slapped, gagged or spat on - in otherwise consensual sex. That equates to 3.6 million women under 40 in the UK who have experienced unbidden violence in sex - and we know that women over 40 experience this too.
We do not believe that women can consent to their grievous injury or death, and will campaign until claiming this is no longer a useful defence.’
We Can’t Consent To This is currently lobbying to tackle these ‘rough sex defences’ by adding amendements to the Domestic Abuse Bill that is going through Parliament, meaning that now is the time to get writing to MPs to encourage them to support the changes.

We'd love to get behind this campaign but as ever we said we’d ask you what you thought - so please let us know by adding your thoughts here or voting YANBU for ‘Yes please I’d like Mumsnet to support this campaign’ and YABU for ‘No, I don’t think Mumsnet should support this campaign’. (Apologies for using the AIBU metric for this but it’s the best way we have at the moment to get a snapshot survey of people who’ve read the OP.)

Big thanks

[Whatsnewpussyhat]

I'm hoping that the 4% who said no pressed the wrong button by mistake. If not can you explain why you object?

[BewitchedBotheredandBewildered]

Yes please.

[Ginkypig]

Yes.

I can't make it any clearer than that!

Women are being murdered and the justice system is obliterating their memory by allowing their murderers to sully their name under the "rough sex" defence and make them willing participants in their own deaths!

No mentally well person would ever give their Consent to sexual acts so severe it would result in life long mutilation and damage or death. I just can't believe that would ever happen.

Also like the letter posted above no woman under the influence of drugs or alcohol could have the capacity to ever legally consent to even mild sexual contact never mind the extreme violent acts that are described in some of the cases that have used this disgusting defence.

[2020times]

Please - the whole justice system is fucked and I don't know how to help

[thereinmadnesslies]

Yes definitely

[Madvixen]

A wholehearted yes from me please.

[DPotter]

100% with you. How do I help?

[Councilworker]

Please do support this. The rough sex defence essentially gives men a defence to killing women that they were intimate with that would be unavailable to them if they had killed anyone else in the same way. Frankly I don't understand how anyone could NOT support this

[ticktackted]

Yes!

[Applesandpears23]

Yes please do.

[rockingchaircandle]

Yes absolutely

[Cherrytangfastic]

Absolutely. Please do back it.

[CloudPop]

Yes - 💯

[DangerFrog]

Absolutely, yes.

[Jonsnowscodpiece]

100% yes.

[longwayoff]

You have to ask? Of course MN should support this.

[ScorpionQueen]

Yes, absolutely.

[CloudPop]

@Tappering that is just beyond belief. Appalling.

[WoollyFoolly]

Yes of course you should. I'm bemused that it's even in question, why would you not?

[TweetleBeetlesBattle]

100%, absolutely.

[SisterVanHelsing]

100%

[BIWI]

Yes.

I'd like the 9 people who disagreed to have the courage of their convictions and explain exactly why they think MN shouldn't support this.

[Tappering]

For those asking, I don't know if she ever received a response to her letter. But even if she did not, I think she articulated very well the reasons why rough sex should never be accepted as a defence for murder.

[BringbackLang]

Yes.

[JulesJules]

Yes, of course.
BTW, please fix the stupid android app. Have had to sign into MN via Google as the app doesn't have voting buttons. I'd be happy to pay for premium if the app wasn't so rubbish