Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Relationships

Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications of anyone posting here. If you need help urgently or expert advice, please see our domestic violence webguide and/or relationships webguide. Many Mumsnetters experiencing domestic abuse have found this thread helpful: Listen up, everybody

Original poster

Is THIS rape?

77 replies

wellisit · 22/08/2012 22:41

The whole unbelievable george galloway thing got me wondering, not for the first time, whether something I once went through was technically rape? I can't say it affected my life that much other than to make me grow up and feel a bit squirmy and ashamed/dirty when I think of it, but I can certainly see why it'd be a grey area and there's no way I'd seek a conviction even though I despise the twat.

You're in bed with a man, you want to be there up to now, he is between your legs, the moment has come so you say to him something like 'ok big boy, time to put a condom on then' and instead of putting one on, he just carries on without a word, plunges in and in literally ONE thrust, has come in you....hm.

It was worse than just disappointing. I didn't want his cum in me! I certainly didn't want to be pregnant, or take the risk of a disease. He wasn't a loving partner, little more than a one night stand.

I lay there feeling angry and squirmy for a while as he just went off to sleep and then gathered up my things and hurriedly left in the dead of night feeling dirty.

(He wasn't a teenager or anything, he was in his 40s, I mistakenly thought older men would be good in bed!)

Soooo, is that rape? I kinda think yes, as my consent ended the minute he didn't put a condom on, but certainly not as bad/damaging as what two of my friends have been through with work colleagues and minicab drivers. Or, am I just a dramatic silly girl?

OP posts:
BertieBotts · 23/08/2012 09:05

SPB I think it's a metaphor saying that once the man's penis is inside the woman, she has no right to change her mind.

Which is disgusting and wrong. You always have the right to change your mind.

Or I might be wrong about the metaphor Blush but either way you can change your mind. Always.

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 23/08/2012 09:07

Ah, thanks Bertie. Yes consent can be withdrawn at any time, of course.

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 23/08/2012 09:16

I mean seriously, WTF is wrong with people who come out with that stuff? Do they think they( if men) or their DPs would be unable to stop? What if they were hurt, or the phone rang, or the children fell out of bed? What if, in pre history, a wooly mammoth attacked the cave mid-deed? So if they are physically capable of stopping, why would they think they have any right not to stop if their partner, who has allowed them into their body, no longer wants them there.

Grrr!

ErikNorseman · 23/08/2012 09:23

You can withdraw consent at any time during the proceedings. It's scary that so few men know that.

ErikNorseman · 23/08/2012 09:26

Well I'm sorry to categorise rape, it's not something I would usually do, but in this case the rape was technical and the violation was different.

MrJudgeyPants · 23/08/2012 09:32

As a male, I would most certainly consider that to be rape. The man is having sex against the explicit wishes of the woman - how can it be anything other than a rape?

This idea that 'once you are in their house all is fair' is abhorrent. Supposing the female's consent extended to protected sex but the man started having unprotected anal sex with her - she must have legal redress.

As for the original incident, from a legal perspective (assuming a similar case ever went before a judge) I doubt that a court would ever make a conviction. I think what would help women would be if there was varying legal degrees of rape in the same way as there are varying degrees of violence against the person (Assault, ABH, GBH, wounding with intent to kill, manslaughter, murder etc.). At the moment, legally, all rape is rape ranging from a 16 year old having consensual intercourse with their 15 yo partner, a 65 yo having consensual intercourse with their 15 yo partner, the incident outlined in the O/P, right up to the rapist in the shadows scenario.

If there was a specific crime something along the lines of 'Having intercourse beyond the pre-agreed limits' (or however that best translates into legalese) these sort of crimes would be easier to prosecute, the law would work better and women would be more protected.

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 23/08/2012 09:35

A 16 year old and a 15 year old having consensusal sex isn't rape - we don't have statutory rape like that in the uk.

I think if both parties are over 13 and there isn't more than a two year age difference it is decriminalised.

OneMoreChap · 23/08/2012 09:36

There's a perfectly good defence: reasonable belief in consent.

See: www.rapecrisis.org.uk/Definitionofrape2.php

It wasn't a pop at ErikNorseman, by the way, but if you start weaselling about type of rape you're back to saying date rape is less serious than stranger rape and so on.

longjane · 23/08/2012 09:43

If you think it is rape it is rape

but if I was on the jury would i convict him of rape ?
no I would not

as if you wanted a condom on you should have put it on

OneLittleToddlingTerror · 23/08/2012 09:45

You wouldn't get a conviction, but I think it's rape. You've been violated. So the issue is a condom here. But what if he wants anal sex? Or S&M? If you have consented to safe sex, and went into bed with him, does it mean he's can do anything he likes in bed? I completely agree with what MrJudgyPants say. Especially since I'd be in the same attitude as you when I was younger and single. I'd not want to sleep with a casual without a condom.

CailinDana · 23/08/2012 09:47

Longjane - what was she supposed to do, hold the guy down and force it on him? She made it very clear through what she said and did that she expected him to use a condom and yet he still went ahead against her wishes and did exactly what he wanted.

Why are you blaming the OP for that?

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 23/08/2012 09:47

Um longjane, she said "time for a condom" and he penetrated her immediately afterwards. the op doesn't carry any blame for that.

OneLittleToddlingTerror · 23/08/2012 09:48

longjane that's so unfair. So if you went into the guys bedroom, and he kept going ignoring your plea for a condom, then it's ok? Or is it just because you don't believe in condoms? How about if the man insists on anal sex? Is it all fair game just because you are in his bed?

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 23/08/2012 09:55

To my mind, the reason why a jury might not convict is if they thought , say,there was reasonable doubt that the guy had heard the Op about the condom. If he stood in court and said "yes I knew she wanted to have sex but only with a condom but I went ahead anyway" I would hope they would see it as sex without consent and therefore rape.

OP Sorry if we are detailing your thread with general posts, I can stop and go back to a support thread if you want?

pumpkinsweetie · 23/08/2012 09:56

You asked him to put a condom on before sex but instead of getting one, he just entered you and came!
I would call it rape if you did not want unprotected sex but in the eyes of the law it would be assualt

larrygrylls · 23/08/2012 10:05

As long as you specified clearly that he should put a condom on before sex, it is definitely rape both morally and legally. You have NOT consented to sex at the moment when he entered you (as he was not wearing a condom). I do believe (unlike some) that there exist grey areas in consent but I do not see this as one of them. I suspect a jury would convict if the facts presented clearly enough (which would be the problem).

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 23/08/2012 10:40

p21 onwards in this link re Assange:

www.judiciary.gov.uk/Resources/JCO/Documents/Judgments/assange-approved-judgment.pdf

The legal point on p21:
section 74 (sexual offences act 2003): ...A person consents if he agrees by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice

From p24 The question of consent in this part of the Assange case (Offence 2) is to be determined by reference to s74...it would plainly be open to a jury to hold that if AA had made clear that she would only consent to sexual intercourse if Mr Assange used a condom, then there would be no consent if without her consent he did not use or removed or tore the condom. His conduct in having sexual intercourse without a condom in circumstances where she had made clear she would only have sexual intercourse if he used a condom would therefore amount to an offence under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.

Offence 2 has been designated "sexual molestation" by the Swedish authorities and so the UK High Court only has to find if such conduct would be an offence in the UK.

It isn't UKHC's place in this case to define what kind of offence it would be in the UK, but it ceratinly would be a sexual offence and I believe from the way UKHC are using the consent definition, the OP's situation would be prosecuted as rape.

dequoisagitil · 23/08/2012 11:00

Consent to one act is not consent to all acts. I'd say it was rape. He put you at risk.

I'm sorry that happened to you.

longjane · 23/08/2012 11:39

CailinDana

from what she said on here

"I just assumed we'd use a condom to be honest, "
she did ask she assumed

and she said she was
"pretty sure I got one out of my purse and held it up, put it on the bedside table and so on...."

again this was where she could have put one on

so whatfrom she said their was no discussion she just assumed and thinks she got one out for him to use
but she did help him put it on

this is why i would not convince the bloke because in what she said she did not make it clear that is what she wanted to happen

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 23/08/2012 11:41

Glad to see so much support for the OP.

I am a bit Shock at the people saying contraception should be sorted before you get into bed etc. When, then? I have always insisted on safe sex and worked on the assumption that the man doesn't want to get me pregnant/potentially catch something as much as I don't want to get pregnant or catch something, so he will assume he'll be wearing a condom too and would only prompt him to put it on if he didn't move to get one when it came to having sex. Obviously not all men feel that way, but I've never felt the need to discuss it long beforehand as if putting a condom on was some kind of weird and specialist practice.

dequoisagitil · 23/08/2012 11:42

Her words "time for a condom then" are the giveaway. Hmm

I know, it was hard to spot [/sarcasm].

ElephantsAndMiasmas · 23/08/2012 11:44

Assuming he had functioning hands longjane I think you are out of line to suggest that because she left it to him to actually put the condom on his own penis, she didn't make it clear that she wanted him to use one.

Krumbum · 23/08/2012 11:46

Longjane the op has said she spoke aloud telling him to put a condom on. That is very clear. He chose to ignore her, this assault could have been very damaging to a person plus it leaves them open to sti's including those that can kill you and pregnancy which again can kill you.
I would convict this man because he did rape. The op had no chance to ask him to stop because he came instantly but in most circumstances that wouldn't be true and carrying on when someone has asked you to stop definately is rape. If you take your view a step further could he have had anal sex with her because if you consent to penetration you must consent to all penetration?
It is rape.

almapudden · 23/08/2012 11:51

I think MrJudgeyPants makes a good point - this wasn't rape in the 'stranger in a dark alley' sense, which would make a jury much less likely to convict if it ever went to court, but it was non- consensual (and therefore still rape). The law should have ways of recognising that.

Trills · 23/08/2012 11:53

The law should have ways of recognising that

The law recognises that non-consensual sex is rape. Juries should be educated about what the law actually is, and make their decisions based on that, not what they perceive it to be after watching too much Midsomer murders.