to think this is not an example of rape?

[hereidrawtheline]

I really do not mean this in a hostile way. But I know someone whose boyfriend says he was raped by a woman and I just cant get my head around it.

The circumstances were they were friends, she wanted more, he didnt. He told her so. Then one night they got high together and had pretty standard vaginal sex that she initiated by making the first move. He was by his own admission on top for at least part of the sex.

He then said the next day she raped him because she knew what his wishes were and she turned him on while in a drugged up state knowing he couldnt act on his principles.

Now I understand he regrets what happened and I dont personally think either of them are on a moral highground & also probably not top of the IQ charts - I say this because I have the wider picture of this guy generally drifting around doing bugger all while he smokes pot and rants about the man. All of which done singly is acceptable but when combined for years on end does somewhat detract from your intellectual appeal factor. So it is just as fair for a guy to regret sex as a girl, we are all susceptible to doing stupid things under the influence. I see that as unfortunate but not necessarily rape. I mean, if he had an erection and was on top its hard to call it that surely? Or am I being really sexist without realising it? Of course a man can be raped but like that??

Been bugging me for years actually this all happened many years ago & the guy went to rape support groups and everything.

So AIBU?

Dittany- this was penetration against someone's will- his.
The standard of being too intoxicated to give consent applies to women who then have intercourse, and so can equally apply to men.

That doesn't mean he'd get a guilty verdict or much sympathy. But I bet he feels pretty messed up about what happened-as a woman would in similar circumstances.

he could complain of being seduced, but not of rape.

Penetration with out consent is rape. Men are raped but usually by other men. Unless she plied him with something that gave him an erection while under the influence, rare but has happened.

This kind of commentary can make survivors of rape very angry.

He hasn't been raped because she didn't penetrate him with a penis. So the question is 'was he sexually assaulted'. I'd say no. He may have felt she took advantage of him but he was a willing participant. Did he come?

No. I think she certainly took advantage of him, but I don't think he was raped. Which is not to say that men cannot be raped, of course they can. But this example, as described, sounds like he was seduced. He went on top, he (excuse me for being graphic) thrust into her (I sound like an adult book ) she had no weapon (oh god this is getting worse) or threat to make him do so. He was off his face, she turned him on, they had sex, when sober he regrets it bitterly and feels she took advantage (she did!) Rape is a violent act, taking place against the persons will (or with them being so out of it they have no clue what's going on!) he was active in their erm 'union'. Not rape. Not nice, but not rape. imo.

Not rape, no penetration of him.

Possibly sexual assault by touching and the question would be regarding his consent which would be up to a jury to decide.

I think if he is prepared to tell people that this woman raoed him then he should be encouraged to report it to the police.

I think it is unfair to say that he was a participant and therefore this is not an offence - victims often appear to be participants in sexual offences for many and various reasons but it does not negate the fact that they have refused their consent - just because you feel unable to physically resist an offence does not make it any less of an offence.

Not rape in any way at all.

Hundreds of people go and get drunk or drugged out thier skulls each weekend for fun and consent to things they might not when sober/strieght its not rape.

it's not rape or sexual assault. he consented, all be it in a drugged up state.
but if you make the decision to get drugged up or pissed out of your mind, you are responsible for the decisions you make when you are in that state as you have put yourself in that state of your own free will, that goes for a man or woman.

It would have been helpful if the thread title had used the term 'sexual assault' rather than rape.

If the woman was touching him and performing sexual acts on him while he was incapable of consenting, then it may have been sexual assault. But no, technically can't be rape.

Hereidrawtheline used the word rape, because that's what he said happened, he didn't use the words sexual assault.

I'm astounded that anyone could believe that if you are assaulted when drunk or intoxicated then it is not rape?!

Surely that is the same as suggesting that wearing provocative clothing means 'she asked for it'?

If you are drunk or sober - no means no.

butshe wasn't performing acts on him while he couldn't consent.
in his own words she came on to him when she knew he couldn't act on his principles. that doesn't mean he was incapable of consent, it simply means he wouldn't have had sex with her when he was sober, but when he was drugged up of his own accord she tried it on and he didn't have the will power to say no.
he never said no or attempted to stop her.
i don't know if there's any bias here with regards to the genders involved as i'm a man, but i'd still say the same if the genders where reversed.
i.e. a man knowing that a woman wouldn't sleep with him sober, but when on a pissed up night out decides to make a move and they end up sleeping together because the woman is drunk and her principles and judgment have gone out the window.

I don't think gender is relevant to the perceeived consent. I don't think you have to say no for consent to be withheld.

If the gender was reversed it would be rape as penetration has occurred when consent was not explicit.

Difficult to judge on this example because the actual man in question can't say exactly what level his consent was at - my last response was more in response to the statements that if someone is intoxicated then they are entirely responsible for what happens?

even if the gender was reversed it wouldn't be rape because there is no sign that he didn't consent to the act and due to his full and active participation in the sexual act without an attempt to stop it she had no reason to believe he was not consenting.

the fact is he did consent, just in a drugged up state, that in no way invalidates the consent as he willingly put himself in a drugged up state where he was liable to do things and consent to things he might not otherwise have done when sober.

It's not rape.

He had said in the past he wasn't interested, but clearly went along relatively willingly at the time. We all change our minds sometimes.

Many of us have had sex that we regretted whilst drunk or high, but to accuse the other person of being a rapist is not on, when the bottom line is that it was down to a failure of will power on one's own part, rather than force or coercion on the part of the other person.

This might seem harsh, but perhaps he has difficulty taking responsibility for his own behaviour.

hi all just checking in this morning.

violethill as cocolepew said I used the word rape because that is what I had a hard time understanding, and I am quoting him. He always said he was raped - that word. And that is what I couldnt understand.

I know the guy I am talking about can not come on here and put his side forward - but I will just say I have put the story across in the exact same way he put it to me. It stuck in my mind because I could never totally understand it. I really havent been thinking of it every day since then but last night I couldnt sleep, I had heard something via the net about his girlfriend and it got me thinking about it all over again.

I have to say I never felt he was raped. He always seemed a little bit proud to point out it had happened to him and not just to women. But I am very "equal" as far as I can be in my judgements and of course I have a son of my own! I just felt he was using the word for ulterior motives, to be very "new man" and sensitive. I can of course stand to be corrected but this was my honest knee jerk reaction.

I do not doubt he regretted it and as I said in my OP I think neither of them were doing very well morally. I am sure she was hoping they would get it on when they got high together. But also it was a bit foolish of him to get high alone with her knowing she wanted him. They both lost inhibitions and had sex.

I think it is - he wasnt it a fit state to consent and she knew that so morally it is wrong. Women have argued this over being drunk for years and its such a difficult area.

well anyway now it isnt just me fretting over ethical grey matter. I think it is worth examining actually as it is all very tied up with the definition of rape - which could do with some clarifying.

prettyfly do you still think that bearing in mind she was not in a fit state either - so it could have and likely did seem to her that he had just changed his mind?

I don't think consent is that easy to establish - regardless of gender - which only changes the offence - there is no requirement for force/coercion for rape or sexual assault. There is also nothing to suggest that a victim cannot participate in an offence for it to remain an offence - it would certainly make the issue of consent way harder to establish but it does not remove an obligation for consent to be clear and positive.

This example can;t be judged on the facts given by the op.

Consent has to be clear and positive - not checking, not asking or being unsure as to whether someone consents to a sexual act leaves you open to an allegation of rape/sexual assault.

For example, if a woman got very very drunk and passed out and her boyfriend had sex with her while she was in this state - where she could not give her consent would be rape - even if she would have consented had she been asked.

That's interesting hereidrawtheline. Sounds as though his motives for playing the 'rape' card were very naive, and about making some kind of political and social point, rather than genuinely telling his own personal experience.

This thread has given me a slight fit of the shivers because years ago a man accused me of a similar thing. Mercifully he didn't complain to the police, just told some mutual friends and aquaintances, who then told me.
BTW it's not the OP's friend as there are some substantial differences in the circumstances. I had only met him on the night in question, so there was no prehistory of me fancying him or planning to have him, while we were both v drunk it was actually him who initiated the sex. And it wasn't great sex but it wasn't that bad either.
And I think the reason he said thouse things about me was more to do with me not wanting a 'relationship' the next day.