sex while asleep

[silver999]

my partner woke me up by having sex with me, I was really shocked at what was happening and not sure what to do or think about what has happened.
I told my friend but she just laughed about it, any advice? thanks.

Yes, we criticise the law but it's ahead of us here. I have to believe the strengthening of our rape & sexual assault laws will help people realise it's wrong - a crime - to help yourself to another person's body, even when that person is your partner.

The way rape victims and their families are treated in this country - is appalling.

Its a broken system for those who enter it. It doesn't matter how many laws we change until the system itself improves and support for victims is improved - there is little chance of an increase in conviction rates.

TeaJunky thats a brilliant post - I sometimes wake my DP up with a BJ

As do I & he loves it. But if he woke me with more than some gentle stroking/kissing I would be livid.

Why can't you understand that everyone has different levels of what is acceptable in a relationship? Just because you share a life/bed with someone it doesn't mean that your desires will merge in to one & you will want what they want!

Sexuality is individual, as are needs, wants & desires. I have some stuff I like to do while having sex/in the build up, but I don't want to do it all the time, or for it to become the norm. I also wouldn't want dh to wake me by doing those things.

Would it be OK for dh to make me do it all the time/everytime because he enjoys my response to it? Would it be OK for him to force me to do it everytime just because in the past I have done it & enjoyed it? Does it follow that I should have to do it all the time, even when I don't want to?

I totally agree it depends on context, the relationship and the fact that consent is there, in the loving relationship that you have

Three rape myths in one posts. Wow.

*Rape depends on context
*Rape depends on the relationship
*Rape depends on previous consent

No it doesn't. Rape depends on there being consent BEFORE any one individual act. Irrespective of past consent.

Today I consented to a large supermarket taking money from my account. Does that mean they can do so tomorrow, just because I consented today?

Last month I consented to a man I barely know to come into my house to fix a window, does that mean he can come in any time, because I had consented before?

SO WHY IS SEX DIFFERENT????

I'm not going to say that unless there was non-consensual sex

Then you need to say it, because there was sex with no consent here...and by your own admission, that is rape.

different name for this... what are you saying - that there was non-consensual sex in the scenario I was asked to talk about or in the OP's post?

By the way I don't think that anything I have said is an expression of the myths you mention. The premis in the myths is that a rape has happened, that there has been non-consensual penetration. The OP has said that his partner was having sex with him when he was asleep.

The difficulty is if we accept that consent is given by a series of signals that are 'reasonable' for the person acting on them to assume that it was consent, then it is not rape - it could be a whole range of things including unacceptable behaviours, but it is not rape.

Without knowing actually what went on it is impossible to accurately conclude it is rape per se with the information given. I think it is irresponsible to send the OP a message 'you have been raped, sorry :(' as a complete conclusion. Asking many more questions of the OP yes, leaping to the conclusion you have defined no.

However I go back to a point I made earlier - if you DO want to widen the definition of rape to include things that happen in sex due to misunderstandings, immaturity, consent withdrawn mentally, but not physically (i.e. no communication of the withdrawn consent), over enthusiasm etc then you will have to accept that this is a greying up of definitions.

That would explain low conviction rates, small sentences, some transmutation of charges to more minor ones, it could lead to higher reporting rates, and also to a more paranoid approach to sex across the board.

I think these are all dangers and consequences of being too willing to project onto the OP here.

Sorry if you don't agree with me.

I think the OP has probably run off because of this ideological battle rather unfairly started around the request for understanding. That's sad.

OP's post!

Re the myths, I wasn't answering your posts, I was answering lucyellensmumnamechange

I totally agree it depends on context, the relationship and the fact that consent is there, in the loving relationship that you have

Sorry, to assume consent is NOT enough.

Oh I see.. well that sentence was to do with the scenario garlicbutter mentioned about the hands around neck etc... in which there was no statement of non-consensuality, which was my point.

Sure many people would jump to that conclusion because it sounds more like the cartoon of rape. I think that would be a mistake.

FFS!

OP was asleep. What 'series of signals' could there possibly be from an unconscious person? We DO know enough about the OP's situation to conclude he was raped/sexually assaulted - his partner had sex on him without his consent. What's irresponsible is downplaying what has happened to him to some sort of misunderstanding.

The reason there's such a low reporting rate and conviction rate for rape is because people don't believe victims, just like you are not believing the OP.

OP - I was pissed off at the drip feeding but guess what? I believe you

Oh dear.
I think it is just a reasonable to say that you are not believing the OP in that they have not (maybe 'yet' maybe not) concluded they were raped, and you have not waited for their conclusion so that you can believe it!

My understanding is that rape is also defined as penetration which is not what is being alleged.

Signals that are easy to misinterpret CAN be given when someone is asleep - I have seen it plenty of times!

garlicbutty - you are close to seeing violence as the definer of rape not consent. I think that view is not correct.

I would start from the premise that this is ALWAYS 100% wrong - no excuses. Context only comes into play when you decide how to deal with it afterwards. How do YOU feel, how does your partner react, is the relationship normally loving, or is this a facet of abuse?

Going on the number of women who deem this totally acceptable and even admit doing it themselves, it would seem inappropriate to shout "Leave the rapist bastard" in many cases. In the OPS case, where no contraception was used, and the partner laughed it off....well, I would have a different view.

I do think some of the posters on here need to work on their self-respect and think hard about why they think it is OK for a partner to use their body whilst they are asleep.

I'll use that as an illustration. I think that some posters need to work on their self-respect and think hard about why they use terms like 'use your body' when their partner may be expressing love.

WorriedBetty - I found your reponse to the scenario garlic's posited last night disturbing. I now see that you simply didn't read the line:

"He squeezes. "Mmph!" you go, prying at his hands"

Now, if you were being strangled would the fact that you are unable to call out due to, I dunno, the hands squeezing your neck mean it was a-ok? He touched her neck, she thought what? but didn't say anything because she didn't know what was coming. That was not some sort of invitation to undertake strangluation and rough sex, it was not agreed, it was not consent, it was utterly vile and the fact you are denying this is unbelievable.

Sorry, but you are adding to the scenario. That is absolutely the perfect illustration of what is so dangerous about getting this wrong.

The line I quoted, if you would care to scroll up, in right there in garlic's post, and clawing at someone's hands is an extremely clear indicator of distress, as is the fact that she was shaken afterwards. Putting your hands on someone's neck is not the same as telling them "you're going to squeeze, would you like to try it?"

But expressing love should be about mutual enjoyment surely? You love your partner and want give them pleasure. How can you give pleasure to someone who is asleep? It is surely a completely selfish act?

Just to respond to portofino I guess the reason I/dh do this is it has been discussed - dh loves being woken like this, after gentle foreplay as do I - but we both know that as we have talked about it. It's very occasional and we both find it pleasurable.

And we both know bugger off I'm knackered means an immediate stop. In the context of our relationship it is fine. That doesn't mean at some point Dh or I couldn't decide we didn't want it any more. Then it wouldn't be fine. Nor would it be fine if the other just carried on while you didn't wake up.

In the case of the OP - where the OP didn't want/like sex while asleep and where things the OP didn't want to happen - ie unprotected sex - then it isn't fine at - then yes I think it's rape.

I just dont think every case of sex initiated while sleeping can be called rape. Nor do I think telling people that something they want, have talked about and like is rape is helpful.

And yes I know exactly what the difference between consensual and non consensual sex is.

portofino wouldn't want to be too graphic - but yes you can give pleasure to someone sleeping - it would totally selfish however if they didn't wake up and enjoy it.

I don't want to say much more other than to say it is def mutually pleasurable in our house.

wb are you writing a novel?

Has anyone posted the legal definition of consent?

75Evidential presumptions about consent

(1)If in proceedings for an offence to which this section applies it is proved—
(a)that the defendant did the relevant act,
(b)that any of the circumstances specified in subsection (2) existed, and
(c)that the defendant knew that those circumstances existed,the complainant is to be taken not to have consented to the relevant act unless sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue as to whether he consented, and the defendant is to be taken not to have reasonably believed that the complainant consented unless sufficient evidence is adduced to raise an issue as to whether he reasonably believed it.
(2)The circumstances are that—
(a)any person was, at the time of the relevant act or immediately before it began, using violence against the complainant or causing the complainant to fear that immediate violence would be used against him;
(b)any person was, at the time of the relevant act or immediately before it began, causing the complainant to fear that violence was being used, or that immediate violence would be used, against another person;
(c)the complainant was, and the defendant was not, unlawfully detained at the time of the relevant act;
(d)the complainant was asleep or otherwise unconscious at the time of the relevant act;
(e)because of the complainant’s physical disability, the complainant would not have been able at the time of the relevant act to communicate to the defendant whether the complainant consented;
(f)any person had administered to or caused to be taken by the complainant, without the complainant’s consent, a substance which, having regard to when it was administered or taken, was capable of causing or enabling the complainant to be stupefied or overpowered at the time of the relevant act.
(3)In subsection (2)(a) and (b), the reference to the time immediately before the relevant act began is, in the case of an act which is one of a continuous series of sexual activities, a reference to the time immediately before the first sexual activity began.

So, in summary, if you have sex with someone whilst they are sleeping, you have to provide solid evidential reasons to show that they were consenting. An assumption, or 'signs' that the sleeping person gave whilst asleep is not evidence of consent.

If I were writing a novel it would be a bad one arab lovers indeed!

I seriously dislike being told how DH and I should conduct our enjoyable sex life.

I like it - DH likes it - but despite this - apparently we should stop - hmm.

Me I don't fancy bondage - but that doesn't mean other people shouldn't be allowed to try it if they both want to.