Do you expect a new DP to ask before first penetration?

[OneMoreChap]

I was shocked to find that some people would think that because I have never said, in effect "May we proceed to coitus" I've possibly been having non-consensual sex.

I've asked girls if I may kiss them, and even women too. I've never asked "Can we have intercourse?"

I wonder what some women expect? Should consent be in writing - as otherwise you could change your mind?

Should it be witnessed? As it could have been under duress?

Surely, the premise should be "no means no"?

I'm just stunned, but then I'm 50+ and long time out of the dating/chasing game.

Dittany apparently you've been ed.
WTF?

OneMoreChap I don't think you've been subjected to any vitriol on this thread. I think people have been quite patient with your quite snotty OP.

"swallowedAfly FlamingoBingo that's the issue."

What are you talking about!? No one has ever said 'you must get verbal consent' just that it must be explicit.

FlamingoBingo

But I think the posters arguing with this are talking about when a woman doesn't actually say 'I'm not interested', even if she's making it very clear with her body language that she isn't.

No, I'm saying I've never asked if it was OK to proceed. I'm told I should have. Yes, I've had clear signals to proceed.

I was explicitly told that was not consent.

That's the issue for me.

Presumably plonkers do plonking?

I thought a plonker was another word for a penis as well.

Not sure where that gets up. Some bloke has hit Dittany with his penis over the internet? That doesn't sound like a very good thing to me

I hope this plonking craze doesn't take off on MN...

I haven't got the right apparatus for it, for a start

""I was explicitly told that was not consent."

Where were you told that?

Cite please."

I'd like a cite for this too, please.

It's all so silly isn't it.

"Look everybody crazzeeeee feminists want to stop sex! They say that all men have to get a form signed in triplicate before they're allowed to do it! They're all loons!!!!"

Why do people want to paint that picture, when it's clearly not the truth? That's the interesting question.

I know, and then, like someone further up, they say 'I'm leaving MN before I get sucked in'! How bloody narrow minded! I'm very glad I'm an open minded person who likes to learn and give myself the opportunity to change my opinion. It's a bit arrogant to think you already know it all and, therefore, won't listen to anyone else's arguments.

Fact is that minor coercion is still seen as normal in the UK amongst young people (and some older ones I'm sure) - begging, saying it'll hurt if he is left without an orgasm, not taking no for an answer and just keeping trying and trying until the girl gives in for a quiet life - and this approach shows that activity up as being wrong. But it's normal. Therefore this approach seeks to demonise normal sexual behaviour.

Also there is the old idea that women aren't really supposed to like sex and so if they're just lying there that doesn't necessarily mean anything is wrong, it's normal for women to behave like that when they have intercourse. The idea that women should be enthusiastically consenting goes against that idea as well.

Sardine I thought a plonker was a condom. Not sure whyanyobe would want to hit you over the head with a condom though Dittany.

Explanation OP? What is this 'ed' and did you get a signed, witnessed contract first?

What about the MENZ?

SAF

PLONK shows my age I suppose. It's a Usenet affectation. Rather than getting involved in repeated arguments that go nowhere. You can withdraw. If you want to make it abundantly clear to someone they've been KF'd you add tot he end of your post.

It's a bit whiny, I suppose. But since I was told - as a n00b - that I was for someone believing I'd mentioned another thread.

Cite: don't know how to link to individual messages, but here goes

WhenwillIfeelnormal Thu 03-Feb-11 21:20:48
FWIW folks, it was me who raised this issue on the other thread about there being no such thing as "implied consent" and posters are absolutely correct about the welcome law change.
...

I also said that we have spoken to our teenage son about always checking that a woman has consented and never assuming anything - as well as all the usual messages about "no" meaning "no".

I then asked following discussion with HecateQueenOfWitches in their post of Fri 04-Feb-11 09:43:57 where HQOW said:
I have never had a man gain my verbal consent.

I would have thought that consent was very easy to ascertain.

If you are kissing back, touching back, participating, then you are in agreement.

If you are lying there, doing nothing, then you're either very crap in bed or you don't want this. Either way, that is when they need to stop and make enquiries.

to which I responded in my post of Fri 04-Feb-11 09:49:05

I'd entirely agree with that and it's how I thought it should work; but that's now what's being questioned, and was apparently going to be made illegal.

I thought I was going crackers

Following that, I was told, nicely but firmly

WhenwillIfeelnormal Fri 04-Feb-11 09:53:33
You're not going crackers, but you are misinformed and for reasons best known to yourself, seem to be wilfully misunderstanding this, but again you are not alone.

The legislation has been in place for 8 years now - and we are clearly talking about first encounters

That seems fairly damned explicit to me; that's not how consent works

That enough of a cite for you?

And having re-read the whole thread no, Snuppeline, I have not coerced women into sex. Those partners I have had have been willing, and have been so on each occasion.

No, I still don't see where someone has said you have to actually ASK a woman, unless you are in any doubt at all that she might not be keen.

OK FlamingoBingo how do you parse

HQOW:I have never had a man gain my verbal consent.

I would have thought that consent was very easy to ascertain... explains

Me:I'd entirely agree with that and it's how I thought it should work

WhenwillIfeelnormal:
you are misinformed

I would say that 'I have never had a man gain my verbal consent' means 'I have never had a man gain my verbal consent'. Still no one has said you need to verbally say 'might I have sex with you please?'.

I think 'kill list' on that link is a quite unfortunate term OMC.

As AnyFucker said upthread, topic move fast, people's memories are short and we all have disagreements but still usually have the mutual respect and decency to continue to engage with each other. It's one of the things I like about this site.

I'm not sure that you haven't (possibly innocently) exaggerated the importance of verbal consent from the posts you quoted. Those of us who have been raped are pretty fed up with the continual complaints about rape legislation affecting men. Particularly since rape is so rarely prosecuted and victims are so frequently vilified. And this is the context you have waded into. You've been let off quite lightly in my view. Do a bit of research on the topic and you'll see that knee-jerk reactions by men about rape do considerable damage to the way actual victims are perceived by society.

Try posting on a less emotive topic. And pleas don't assume that Dittany has nothing valuable to say. She's highly informed and well respected on this site even by some posters who don't share her views.

WhenwillIfeelnormal what did you mean when you said I was misinformed, agreeing with HQOW.

FlamingoBingo I didn't think I needed verbal consent, but I am told you are misinformed - yes, there's no point in asking you what WWIFN means, which is why I've asked them.

Either I'm right, and verbal consent is unnecessary if your partner is appropriately engaged, or I'm misinformed.

My iPhone has a tendency to drop letters at the end of words. Don't judge me.

OneMoreChap - I'm struggling to stop myself thinking you are not very intelligent, which, I'm aware, is not very kind of me. But you have had several answers, from several posters to your question all saying the same bloody thing! Why are you still asking the question!

VERBAL CONSENT IS SOMETIMES NECESSARY UNLESS IT IS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS GIVEN BY A WOMAN ENGAGING FULLY AND EXCITEDLY IN THE ACT.

I can't be arsed to answer you any more so I'm bowing out of this thread.

No-one is saying that you've been having non-consensual sex ffs.

If consent is obvious, fine.
If it isn't obvious, check.
If you can't check (because the woman is asleep or too drunk to ask) it's rape.

In the context of the other thread, consent was far from obvious and the man should probably have checked. You are extrapolating the comments about that situation and trying to make a rule to apply to your entire historical sex life. That's unhelpful, pointless and deliberately contrary.

Hiding thread before I lose patience altogether.